"Virat Kohli at No. 3 shapes more ODI wins than AB de Villiers" : Daryl Cullinan

[Chrish]

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...liers-Daryl-Cullinan/articleshow/48400191.cms

CHENNAI: Daryl Cullinan, one of South Africa's notable batsmen in the modern era, has huge admiration for AB de Villiers but feels Virat Kohli is a bigger match-winner in ODIs than the South African captain. He is currently in Chennai on a commentary assignment for the ongoing A tri-series.

In an exclusive interview to TOI, he said he was not too hopeful about South Africa's future.

Excerpts...

How do you see South African cricket's future?

I am not very hopeful. Coaching at the grassroots level sometimes are not the best. Then there is the whole transformation process that is affecting our cricket. Don't get me wrong, it's part of the puzzle, but the push to get black players in also affects the process. On the whole, South Africa is on the decline because excellence is not the criteria these days, opportunity is.

Still, the best batsman in world cricket at the moment is probably a South African - AB de Villiers?

Absolutely. He is a fantastic cricketer and if you take all three formats, it's a fact that he is the best. It's almost a little freakish the way he moves from one format to the other. My only grievance against AB is that he bats a little lower down the order in ODIs. I think that is where Virat Kohli scores over AB.

Do you mean Kohli is more dangerous than AB in limited overs cricket?

It has a lot to do with where Virat bats. He is batting at No, 3 in ODIs, where he is getting more overs to bat. And look at where AB is batting, No. 5, sometimes 6. I think AB's reluctance to come up the order hurt us badly in the World Cup semifinal, where he came in to bat in the 26th over and it turned out to be a 43-over game.

I have been consistently harping on the fact that AB has to come up the order. Virat, on the other hand, is setting up games for India consistently in limited overs cricket. He is batting through the difficult period and getting those runs, so I feel Virat is more prepared to take the pressure of batting at No. 3 than AB.

There's a series coming up between India and South Africa in a month's time...

It will have huge following but if South Africa are to trouble India, they have to do it with pace. No point getting three spinners here, it has to be Dale Steyn, Morne Morkel and the others coming to the party.

 

[Chrish]

Bit surprising he says he is not optimistic about their future

 

[marlonbrowndo]

south african cricket has the best future....

 

[Cricfan4eva]

Amla and AB and are here for another 2-3 years atleast. Maybe even up until 2019 WC.

Sent from my ASUS_Z008D using Tapatalk

 

[AlphaFighter]

Ab is more destructive and talented than Kohli

Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk

 

[zabalestmsm]

Kohli used to set up games for India! Currently he aint the same! And if u take all three formats into account then AB de Villiers aint the best, its Joe Root for me. AB de Villiers is yet to deliver in T20Is. And regarding the future of RSA cricket, i think he is a bit factual as they arent producing great young FC batsmen who can be in line to replace Amla, Kallis, de Villiers etc in future. No good young FC bowlers as well to be in line to replace Philander and Steyn!

 

[angrypathan]

south african cricket has the best future....

Which explains why their U19s got smashed by Bangladesh U19s home and away. Cullinan is right, their future is not promising.

 

[Mamoon]

The way de Villiers hides down the order and makes hay of the old ball, most prominently in the 2013 CT semifinal where Anderson was swinging it both ways under black clouds and he decided to send a bowling all-rounder ahead of him (only to get a duck later on) separates him from other great ODI batsmen of the past.

He is PP's darling, but his reluctance to bat at 3 or 4 is a significant shortcoming of his.

 

[AlphaFighter]

The way de Villiers hides down the order and makes hay of the old ball, most prominently in the 2013 CT semifinal where Anderson was swinging it both ways under black clouds and he decided to send a bowling all-rounder ahead of him (only to get a duck later on) separates him from other great ODI batsmen of the past.

He is PP's darling, but his reluctance to bat at 3 or 4 is a significant shortcoming of his.

The thing is on song, he is absolutely breath taking and devastating.

 

[ChachaCricket]

5k+ runs at 3/4.

 

[MMHS]

Sometimes, I feel these South Africans over analyze the game & often gets caught off guard in crunch moments. For a batsman of AB's caliber should always bat at 3, if not opener. What 'll happen - he 'll struggle for few matches but then definitely 'll adjust his game. SAF is very good ODI side - where ever AB bats, they 'll win lots of easy encounters, but they 'll keep struggling in mental battles & I believe AB at 3 'll serve them much better in crunch matches.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

ABD should bat up the order.

And Kohli in full flow is unlike ANY ODI batsman I have seen (I never saw Viv play so can't comment).

He simply starts, sets up, guides and finishes the game ALL BY HIMSELF.

Now he doesn't do it but he used to. NZ series where we lost 0-4 was the series where he got out at crucial moments and didn't finish. After that the England tour started and ....

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

ABD is still the world's best ODI bat (far ahead of anyone else right now).

 

[Stallion__]

Kohli's chasing ability is amazing.

Have already won so many matches for India and he still isn't even halfway into his career.

Anderson has taken his cover drives and inside out lofts to the spinners out of his game, which used to play so naturally and gracefully.

Kohli vs AB used to be a tough question before India's Engand's tour, but its easier to answer these days.

 

[Mamoon]

5k+ runs at 3/4.

Most of them have come in the earlier years. In the last 3-4 years when he has been at his absolute peak, he has predominantly batted at number 5 and although he's still devastating, South Africa tends to chase the game too much because of their reliance on de Villiers.

A batsman like him should not be restricting himself to 20-25 overs only.

 

[Mamoon]

The thing is on song, he is absolutely breath taking and devastating.

Yeah, no one can compete with him on that front in modern day cricket.

 

[ChachaCricket]

Most of them have come in the earlier years. In the last 3-4 years when he has been at his absolute peak, he has predominantly batted at number 5 and although he's still devastating, South Africa tends to chase the game too much because of their reliance on de Villiers.

A batsman like him should not be restricting himself to 20-25 overs only.

Ah so this is what you meant all along.

 

[IndianWillow]

AB has to bat at #3 or #4. A batsman like him should be getting 35-40 overs to play with, not 20. If AB walks in at #3, I think a ODI triple ton (and a team 500) is a real possibility.

 

[Mamoon]

Ah so this is what you meant all along.

de Villiers was dismantled by Asif in South Africa in 2007. Since then he has been reluctant to bat up the order.

 

[Red Devil]

de Villiers was dismantled by Asif in South Africa in 2007. Since then he has been reluctant to bat up the order.

But he was batting at #4 quite regularly up until 2014, and also batted at #4 in half the matches at the World Cup.

 

[Haroon786]

Kohli vs AB has only ever been a question in ODIs, with AB comfortably ahead in Tests and now in front in ODIs too. Like everyone else has suggested, if AB wants to win ICC trophies he has to bat up the order. Opening is too risky because if Amla and AB are both taken out early then SA don't really have much left in their batting order; no 3 or 4 would be perfect as it enables him to play the bulk of the 50 overs most of the time as well as being able to adapt to the situation of the game which he is great at doing.

 

[Mamoon]

But he was batting at #4 quite regularly up until 2014, and also batted at #4 in half the matches at the World Cup.

Maybe in Kallis' absence. I don't have the numbers, but what I have observed over the last few years that in general, he doesn't get to bat more than 20-25 overs. Even if he bats at 4, SA's top order of Amla, de Kock, du Plessis, formerly Kallis etc. is stable enough not to lose early wickets.

I would prefer a top 7 of Amla, de Kock, de Villiers, du Plessis, Rossouw, Duminy and Miller.

With this batting order, SA will be able to chase and post big totals against most teams.

 

[Mamoon]

Kohli vs AB has only ever been a question in ODIs, with AB comfortably ahead in Tests and now in front in ODIs too. Like everyone else has suggested, if AB wants to win ICC trophies he has to bat up the order. Opening is too risky because if Amla and AB are both taken out early then SA don't really have much left in their batting order; no 3 or 4 would be perfect as it enables him to play the bulk of the 50 overs most of the time as well as being able to adapt to the situation of the game which he is great at doing.

Playing du Plessis at 3 is a negative move, because like Amla, he's a steady accumulator who can play anchor very well. Their strike rates are great but they are one paced.

Unless de Kock fires, these two occupy the crease for long periods of time and bat with handbrake on, in the hope that the likes of de Villiers as well as Rossouw and Miller will fire later on.

 

[Haroon786]

Playing du Plessis at 3 is a negative move, because like Amla, he's a steady accumulator who can play anchor very well. Their strike rates are great but they are one paced.

Unless de Kock fires, these two occupy the crease for long periods of time and bat with handbrake on, in the hope that the likes of de Villiers as well as Rossouw and Miller will fire later on.

I think du Plessis has the ability to go aggressive as exemplified by his record in T20s, but he just doesn't to ensure that SA don't lose early wickets.

The caveat with batting AB at 3 is that if the ball is doing a bit then he will struggle particularly against a decent bowler, so while he will get more overs to bat, I wouldn't expect him to average 90 @140 batting at 3.

 

[Stallion__]

Kohli vs AB has only ever been a question in ODIs, with AB comfortably ahead in Tests and now in front in ODIs too.

Yes, comparison had been in ODIs only but still its not like AB has been as good in tests as he is in ODIs. Its from Pakistan series onward that he established himself as one of the best in that format as well. Before that, we have Sanga, Kallis, Clarke, Amla, Cook, YK, Trott, Chanderpaul all ahead of him.

The caveat with batting AB at 3 is that if the ball is doing a bit then he will struggle particularly against a decent bowler, so while he will get more overs to bat, I wouldn't expect him to average 90 @140 batting at 3.

I think he is still their best player of quality pace bowling. Usually in ODIs, we don't see any assistance for the bowlers these days, and on the rare day if conditions favor bowling, they can shuffle the batting order if they want, or else playing AB at the top still seems to be the most viable option. He has got unreal ability and its strange the way he has been under-utilized so far.

Batting at number 3, he don't need to have SR of 140. It would have more than one advantages.

-) He is going to play maximum number of balls

-) If he gets going, the game would be finished in first half of the match

-) The opposing captain will have to bowl out his best bowlers earlier, since they can't afford AB get his eye in. So even if he gets out, others will have to face lesser overs from the better bowlers

-) SA still have players down the order who can do the finishing job, like Miller, Duminy, Rossuw etc, even if gets out in the range of 30-35 overs, SA can manage the innings

-) While chasing, its even more important to let him bat higher, because we have seen situations in WC, where he was the lone man standing while rest of the batting line choked up, so if he is there early, its more likely that he won't run out of partners.

 

[Haroon786]

Yes AB only really came into his prime since the 2010 UAE series against Pakistan, but since then he's been amazingly prolific in both Tests and ODIs, probably also has the best numbers of the last 5-6 years as well.

I agree that AB batting up the order in ODIs has overwhelmingly more advantages than disadvantages and that it should be out to immediate effect, but that isn't to say that there are no cons to the move. Moving to 3 will mean that AB won't simply be able to just come in and blaze away since more likely than not he will be responsible for the bulk of the scoring. The risk of the move may not be as high as for example as was moving Steven Smith to 3 in Tests for Australia but SA will have to potentially compromise for an even bigger strength if the move doesn't work.

 

[Red Devil]

Maybe in Kallis' absence. I don't have the numbers, but what I have observed over the last few years that in general, he doesn't get to bat more than 20-25 overs. Even if he bats at 4, SA's top order of Amla, de Kock, du Plessis, formerly Kallis etc. is stable enough not to lose early wickets.

I would prefer a top 7 of Amla, de Kock, de Villiers, du Plessis, Rossouw, Duminy and Miller.

With this batting order, SA will be able to chase and post big totals against most teams.

AB isn't being underutilized at #4/5, he's been asked to come in and accelerate in the latter part of the innings and he's been doing exactly that and doing it splendidly.

South Africa's game-plan in ODIs is pretty simple: The top-order sets a platform for AB and the rest of the lower-order and their job is to get them to a big total, and they do succeed more often than not.

In the end, AB batting at #4/5 is working very well for the team, why would they want to change that?

 

[Stallion__]

In the end, AB batting at #4/5 is working very well for the team, why would they want to change that?

Working well?

Hapless WI is the only team against whom it works well.

Lost to Aus 4-1 before WC, and lost to Pakistan and India in WC despite having better team on paper.

There is a reason they haven't been breaking into top 2 of ODI rankings when they have match-winners in the team.

 

[Red Devil]

Working well?

Hapless WI is the only team against whom it works well.

Lost to Aus 4-1 before WC, and lost to Pakistan and India in WC despite having better team on paper.

There is a reason they haven't been breaking into top 2 of ODI rankings when they have match-winners in the team.

Working well in a sense that their batting has been delivering the goods and they have been putting good totals on the board quite regularly.

Since 2014, they have scored 300+ more times than any other team.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

The way de Villiers hides down the order and makes hay of the old ball, most prominently in the 2013 CT semifinal where Anderson was swinging it both ways under black clouds and he decided to send a bowling all-rounder ahead of him (only to get a duck later on) separates him from other great ODI batsmen of the past.

He is PP's darling, but his reluctance to bat at 3 or 4 is a significant shortcoming of his.

i agree that your best batsman should be in the top 4 but no one cares about the great michael bevan or dhoni batting at 6 or sometimes 7! he has a finisher role in the team and a pretty reliable top order except amla (who chokes in big matches). And why shouldnt he make use of the old ball the way he churns out runs at the rate he is doing right now. The fact remains that he is the best odi batsman in the world currently and it is a myth that he chokes in big games

 

[anuk]

kohli is a complete odi batsman. abdev for all his ability hasn't really stamped his authority and won games on his own back like kohli has. i guess this comparison is like ponting v tendulkar- one guy can win games and the other guy racks up the useless numbers

 

[IndianWillow]

kohli is a complete odi batsman. abdev for all his ability hasn't really stamped his authority and won games on his own back like kohli has. i guess this comparison is like ponting v tendulkar- one guy can win games and the other guy racks up the useless numbers

An ODI opener can rarely finish off matches, so comparing Kohli and Sachin without context does not make any sense. Winning is also a team thing, one player can never win matches. The "useless numbers" comment is baseless.

 

[Mamoon]

I would disagree that SA have done well. Aggregate scores don't tell the whole story, when you look at their record against the best teams. de Villiers' individual statistics for the last couple of years are simply phenomenal, but SA haven't won many crunch matches against big teams.

Amla is a bottler and du Plessis is not world class, while de Kock has not been consistent other than the Indian series in 2013 and is far from the finished article.

Surely, it is de Villiers' responsibility to promote himself up the order and grab the game by the scruff of its neck, which he has not been able to do so because the top order often fails against the better bowling units, leaving him too much to.

He is not a choker though - in the last World Cup, he put those allegations to rest while Amla only strengthened them.

I don't think finisher is the right role for him - he has finished very few matches for South Africa, especially in run chases. Can't compare him to Dhoni and Bevan, two best ODI finishers of all time. In fact, even Mathews is a more accomplished finisher than de Villiers, who often throws his wicket away and fails to take his team home.

 

[ExplicitAI]

AB is the superior batsman, but I'd rather trust Kohli more to chase down a total.

 

[anuk]

An ODI opener can rarely finish off matches, so comparing Kohli and Sachin without context does not make any sense. Winning is also a team thing, one player can never win matches. The "useless numbers" comment is baseless.

was talking about tendulkar the test batsman.

 

[Scrolln]

ABDV is better.

VK may be slightly better at chasing but ABDV has proved himself to be a much better clutch/pressure player over the years.

 

[IndianWillow]

was talking about tendulkar the test batsman.

Test match wins are large dependent on bowler abilities. Meaningless to compare players from different teams based on this factor. Had Sachin played for a team like Australia, don't you think his matches won/matches played ratio would be much higher?

 

[marlonbrowndo]

I would disagree that SA have done well. Aggregate scores don't tell the whole story, when you look at their record against the best teams. de Villiers' individual statistics for the last couple of years are simply phenomenal, but SA haven't won many crunch matches against big teams.

Amla is a bottler and du Plessis is not world class, while de Kock has not been consistent other than the Indian series in 2013 and is far from the finished article.

Surely, it is de Villiers' responsibility to promote himself up the order and grab the game by the scruff of its neck, which he has not been able to do so because the top order often fails against the better bowling units, leaving him too much to.

He is not a choker though - in the last World Cup, he put those allegations to rest while Amla only strengthened them.

I don't think finisher is the right role for him - he has finished very few matches for South Africa, especially in run chases. Can't compare him to Dhoni and Bevan, two best ODI finishers of all time. In fact, even Mathews is a more accomplished finisher than de Villiers, who often throws his wicket away and fails to take his team home.

Amla i agree is a big big choker but i think du plessis is extremely underrated. I rate his knock in the semi final as the 3rd best o this world cup ( in a losing cause unfortunately). 2 early wickets and trent boult bowling beautifully with an inexperienced rossouw in front of him. He was gonna get a 100 if not for the rain. David Miller i feel is also a clutch player and has immense talent.

 

[Buffet]

Kohli has probably finished more games for India, but AB is surely the best ODI batsman right now. Comparing AB with the likes of Dhoni or Bevan is unfair if you are going to talk about finishers. Most gun batsmen are not gun finishers.

I think AB should bat higher for sure. He has skills to control the inning and it will make a whole lot sense for the best ODI batsman to bat more overs. If he was a gun finishers then it would have been a trade off but that's not the case here. I don't think that it's a great idea for him to not face more overs. I don't think that he is getting used optimally.

 

[Mamoon]

Amla i agree is a big big choker but i think du plessis is extremely underrated. I rate his knock in the semi final as the 3rd best o this world cup ( in a losing cause unfortunately). 2 early wickets and trent boult bowling beautifully with an inexperienced rossouw in front of him. He was gonna get a 100 if not for the rain. David Miller i feel is also a clutch player and has immense talent.

du Plessis is a fine player, but the general rule of thumb in ODIs is to have your best batsmen at the top and that is why de Villiers should be coming ahead of du Plessis, who could serve well at number 4.

 

[SL_Fan]

Not hopeful about SA cricket's future? Apart from the quota system bs got to be one of the best setups out there after the restructure. As for AB number 4 is prolly the way to go I reckon. Faf has been doing pretty well at 3 for SA (over 1.5k runs at 3 at an ave of 48 and a sr of 82).

de Kock
Amla
Faf
AB

That's a solid top 4.

 

[Mamoon]

It is understandable. Players like de Villiers, Steyn, Amla, Philander, Morkel, Duminy, du Plessis and Tahir are all 30+, and will retire in quick succession.

The new players apart from de Kock and recently Rabada (still very new at this level) haven't set the world alight. They have the right system but they'll lose their best ever batsman and best ever bowler in the next few years.

Such players don't come around often, regardless of how good the system is.

 

[anuk]

Test match wins are large dependent on bowler abilities. Meaningless to compare players from different teams based on this factor. Had Sachin played for a team like Australia, don't you think his matches won/matches played ratio would be much higher?

not really sure. he never really had a good 4th innings knock (except for that knock against england but sehwag settled that game) even when he was in a position to close the game out.

let's not make this thread about tendulkar. his inability to close games out is widely accepted.

 

[Buffet]

It is understandable. Players like de Villiers, Steyn, Amla, Philander, Morkel, Duminy, du Plessis and Tahir are all 30+, and will retire in quick succession.

The new players apart from de Kock and recently Rabada (still very new at this level) haven't set the world alight. They have the right system but they'll lose their best ever batsman and best ever bowler in the next few years.

Such players don't come around often, regardless of how good the system is.

System must be doing something right to produce cricketers to make the team as the second best team in over all performance in the last 23 years. Not to forget that SA started in early 90s and from the get go team was a good one.

So yah, gun players calling it a day should have a short term impact, but a good system will ensure that the team remains good over longer periods.

 

[Syed1]

System must be doing something right to produce cricketers to make the team as the second best team in over all performance in the last 23 years. Not to forget that SA started in early 90s and from the get go team was a good one.

So yah, gun players calling it a day should have a short term impact, but a good system will ensure that the team remains good over longer periods.

SA have always produced an excellent side but that hasn't translated into victories in major international tournaments.. Massive underachievers.


And as the saying goes:

"If you aren't first, you might as well be last"

 

[Anfield]

Everyone has some weaknesses.. Virat batting first is an average batsman, it's the second innings of the match that brings the monster out of him ABDV still has amazing stats when batting in first 4 but but it's at the later stage of an innings when we see him at his very best.

Just to dwell on my initial point. Kohli Averages 38 when batting first.

27 vs Aus
24 vs Eng
38 vs NZ
26 vs Pak
26 vs SAF
38 vs SL.

 

[Scrolln]

Everyone has some weaknesses.. Virat batting first is an average batsman, it's the second innings of the match that brings the monster out of him ABDV still has amazing stats when batting in first 4 but but it's at the later stage of an innings when we see him at his very best.

Just to dwell on my initial point. Kohli Averages 38 when batting first.

27 vs Aus
24 vs Eng
38 vs NZ
26 vs Pak
26 vs SAF
38 vs SL.

What matters more is his overall average against these teams. Many batsmen will have more 'balanced' stats than VK in this regard, but VK will win you more games with his gun chasing. So what's the point?

What worries me more is his bottling in crunch matches.

 

[Anfield]

What matters more is his overall average against these teams. Many batsmen will have more 'balanced' stats than VK in this regard, but VK will win you more games with his gun chasing. So what's the point?

What worries me more is his bottling in crunch matches.

Point is like you mentioned the overall average and overall impact. It doesn't matter if someone is gun at number 3 or number 5. If you can tilt the match from that position then it doesn't matter where you bat. (like some people here are saying)

 

[IndianWillow]

not really sure. he never really had a good 4th innings knock (except for that knock against england but sehwag settled that game) even when he was in a position to close the game out.

let's not make this thread about tendulkar. his inability to close games out is widely accepted.

Yeah, Sachin had a 4th innings weakness. But so do many other great batsmen. I don't generally see this as a problem because test matches are mostly won in the first innings. A first innings lead of 100 is enough to get your win+draw probability to around 75%. A first innings lead of 200 takes that figure to 90%. In short, fourth innings stats are highly overrated and many of the top knocks in the 4th innings happen in dull draws, dead rubbers, easily won positions or lost positions where the batsman plays with nothing to lose. A match winning knock in a 250+ fourth innings chase is a commendable knock, but these knocks are far and few between.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Kohli used to set up games for India! Currently he aint the same! And if u take all three formats into account then AB de Villiers aint the best, its Joe Root for me. AB de Villiers is yet to deliver in T20Is. And regarding the future of RSA cricket, i think he is a bit factual as they arent producing great young FC batsmen who can be in line to replace Amla, Kallis, de Villiers etc in future. No good young FC bowlers as well to be in line to replace Philander and Steyn!

Joe Root is nowhere near DeVilliers as a T20 player.

 

[Anchorman]

I love how people come up with statements like Kohli and AB is only a contest in ODIs. Can someone please enlighten me with what AB has done in the T20I arena that makes him so far and ahead of Virat? Sure, T20s are the least important of the three formats but it seems like AB's meaningless IPL performances have deluded people into thinking that he is not just good at T20s, but in fact he's the BEST at them. He may be good in domestic T20s (still averages less than Kohli) but when it comes to the international arena, Kohli not only beats him, but absolutely obliterates him.

After 56 innings, AB has a mammoth Afridi-esque average of 22 at a SR of 124. Meanwhile, Virat Kohli averages 46 in 26 innings at a SR of 131.

Before people bring up the lame argument that Kohli has played the majority of his T20Is on flat decks and that AB would be averaging 285 on the same decks, take this into account. Kohli and AB have both played World cups in SL and Bangladesh.

AB averaged 22 at a SR of 130 at the 2012 WC in SL.
Kohli averaged 46 at a SR of 122 at the same WC.

AB averaged 32 at a SR of 163 in 2014 WC in BAN. Let it be known he couldn't even dispatch a long-hop from Ashwin when the going got tough.
Kohli averaged 106 at a SR of 129 in 2014 WC in BAN.

What was Kohli's performance in crunch matches in that tournament? 36* against Pakistan, 54 against defending champions West Indies, 23 against Aus (only failure of the tourney), 72* in the SF against SA (showing AB how its done), 77 in the final.

Now I get that people will respond with things like they both have different roles in the team. I would like to counter this by saying that AB is THAT ridiculously good at T20s then why doesn't he come up the order and own the innings like Kohli does. I haven't seen him carry SA in T20s like Kohli has for India.

I find it EXTREMELY ironic that the majority of PakPassion absolutely despises the IPL, yet unconsciously puts so much weightage on IPL performances, because those performances are the only basis on which you can say that AB is a better batsman in T20s than Kohli. AB is a domestic T20 bully. For RCB, he can dispatch Steyn for 25+ runs in an over or single-handedly chase down 200, but when he wears the green of SA and the going gets tough, he can't even dispatch a long-hop from Ashwin for a 6.

 

[Stallion__]

I love how people come up with statements like Kohli and AB is only a contest in ODIs. Can someone please enlighten me with what AB has done in the T20I arena that makes him so far and ahead of Virat?

No one says that AB is a better T20 player than Kohli. Many consider that as a mickey mouse format, so they talk about only two formats while discussing a player.

Kohli is a much better T20 player at international level and thats where AB's batting number blunder is exposed, but then again, not even Kohli, AB isn't best T20 player in his own team. That honor would go to Duminy.

 

[Anchorman]

No one says that AB is a better T20 player than Kohli. Many consider that as a mickey mouse format, so they talk about only two formats while discussing a player.

Kohli is a much better T20 player at international level and thats where AB's batting number blunder is exposed, but then again, not even Kohli, AB isn't best T20 player in his own team. That honor would go to Duminy.

If you conduct a poll on PakPassion, I bet you would find that over 80% of the people would say that AB is better T20 player than Kohli. I completely agree that T20 is a mickey mouse format but when you compare two players, you compare them across all formats even if you give ODIs and Tests more weightage.

People can say :
AB > Kohli in ODIs
AB > Kohli in Tests

But how far ahead is Kohli in T20Is? Numbers suggest he's twice the player so surely that counts for something.

 

[Sachin136]

Unfortunately many people do think de Villiers is a better T20I player than Kohli due to two reasons

- de Villiers has a few destructive innings in ODIs so people assume he can be like that in T20s as well
- de Villiers has done fairly well in the IPL (not as well as Kohli overall though) and that is subconsciously counted as a T20I for some people

 

[Stallion__]

Kohli vs AB is not a comparison in T20 format imo. Kohli should be compared with more consistent players like Hales, Morgan, Duminy, Guptil, Jayawardene, Pietersen etc.

AB is an under-achiever in T20s.

 

[Anchorman]

Unfortunately many people do think de Villiers is a better T20I player than Kohli due to two reasons

- de Villiers has a few destructive innings in ODIs so people assume he can be like that in T20s as well
- de Villiers has done fairly well in the IPL (not as well as Kohli overall though) and that is subconsciously counted as a T20I for some people

This part is especially ironic as IPL is genuinely despised across Pakistan and even on PP, you'll ALWAYS have people popping in on match threads and calling it a tamasha league in which all the matches are fixed etc. They claim to never watch IPL, yet I've seen people clamor on about how awesome AB - the t20 player is, which leads me to believe they do watch A LOT of the IPL.

Not only do they watch it, they unconsciously give it more weightage than internationals, highlighted by the fact that so many believe that AB is a better T20I player when they have no evidence to back that up. If anyone doesn't believe me, seriously, go out on the street and start asking around who's a better T20 player between the two and you'll get an overwhelming majority calling for AB.

I don't even mind people saying it. But those who do label him as a better T20 player should actually come out and openly say that they value IPL performances more than internationals specifically World Cups.

 

[Anchorman]

Also, AB has had an opportunity to play in a T20 World Cup in his own country, something that Kohli has not had the luxury of doing so far. His performance? Average of 12 in 5 innings.

Statistically, his best T20 WC was in the West Indies. Averaged 38 with a SR of 122. That's undeniably great. How much did his performance help the team? Didn't make it to the SFs. Finished bottom of their group in the Super 8s.

He also had a decent WC in England. Averaged 37. What did he do when his team needed him the most in a SF clash? Bowled for 1.

AB has been called a bottler for many years and a major part of why he has been given this label has been his performances in T20Is. He has never choked that much in ODIs and is rightly not called a choker anymore in that format but the fact still remains that he is yet to shake off the bottler tag in the T20I arena.

 

[IndianWillow]

Also, AB has had an opportunity to play in a T20 World Cup in his own country, something that Kohli has not had the luxury of doing so far. His performance? Average of 12 in 5 innings.

Statistically, his best T20 WC was in the West Indies. Averaged 38 with a SR of 122. That's undeniably great. How much did his performance help the team? Didn't make it to the SFs. Finished bottom of their group in the Super 8s.

He also had a decent WC in England. Averaged 37. What did he do when his team needed him the most in a SF clash? Bowled for 1.

AB has been called a bottler for many years and a major part of why he has been given this label has been his performances in T20Is. He has never choked that much in ODIs and is rightly not called a choker anymore in that format but the fact still remains that he is yet to shake off the bottler tag in the T20I arena.

People wear tinted glasses. I have never heard anyone claim that Dhoni is an excellent T20 player because he is not one. Dhoni's ODI exploits have not enabled him to mask his weakness in T20s. But somehow AB has this fearsome reputation in T20s though his records suggest otherwise.

 

[#GreenRoars]

ABDV is better.

VK may be slightly better at chasing but ABDV has proved himself to be a much better clutch/pressure player over the years.

What matters more is his overall average against these teams. Many batsmen will have more 'balanced' stats than VK in this regard, but VK will win you more games with his gun chasing. So what's the point?

What worries me more is his bottling in crunch matches.

Point is like you mentioned the overall average and overall impact. It doesn't matter if someone is gun at number 3 or number 5. If you can tilt the match from that position then it doesn't matter where you bat. (like some people here are saying)

If talking about average of both players vs top teams in chasing & matches won.
ABDV averages higher than the Kohli.
ABDV averages 101 while Kohli 97. Not a big difference though.

 

[Itachi]

Lol. Root is getting compared to abcd.... What the world has come into.

Sent from my Coolpad 8297L-I00 using Tapatalk

 

[sivaji]

Kohli has probably finished more games for India, but AB is surely the best ODI batsman right now. Comparing AB with the likes of Dhoni or Bevan is unfair if you are going to talk about finishers. Most gun batsmen are not gun finishers.

I think AB should bat higher for sure. He has skills to control the inning and it will make a whole lot sense for the best ODI batsman to bat more overs. If he was a gun finishers then it would have been a trade off but that's not the case here. I don't think that it's a great idea for him to not face more overs. I don't think that he is getting used optimally.

The problem is that he will get a run a ball hundred by the 25th over and an opening batsman is less likely to last till the 40 overs to unleash himself on the opposition. Then the rest of them have to do the hitting out of the park stuff to get a good total. The team would become too reliant on AB. The way right now is that the top order performs and then AB comes in and smash them all over.. or the top order fails and AB comes and consolidates and get the team to a decent total. If AB opens, the chances of him going crazy like he did against WI is less likely because the team is far away from a decent position and he wouldn't want to throw away.

If SA had someone like Hussey or Bevan, then he could come earlier and play his natural game.

 

[sivaji]

What has Kholi done in WC? He has choked big time. He might be a good chaser in useless bilateral and no-one cares tri series played when most of the world is sleeping.

 

[sivaji]

Amla i agree is a big big choker but i think du plessis is extremely underrated. I rate his knock in the semi final as the 3rd best o this world cup ( in a losing cause unfortunately). 2 early wickets and trent boult bowling beautifully with an inexperienced rossouw in front of him. He was gonna get a 100 if not for the rain. David Miller i feel is also a clutch player and has immense talent.

Amla is like Kholi and Sachin. big choker

 

[sivaji]

I think du Plessis has the ability to go aggressive as exemplified by his record in T20s, but he just doesn't to ensure that SA don't lose early wickets.

The caveat with batting AB at 3 is that if the ball is doing a bit then he will struggle particularly against a decent bowler, so while he will get more overs to bat, I wouldn't expect him to average 90 @140 batting at 3.

Lol AB struggling against any decent bowler. maybe haven't watch him handle Johson, Harris etc.. ok whatever lol

 

[sivaji]

Yes, comparison had been in ODIs only but still its not like AB has been as good in tests as he is in ODIs. Its from Pakistan series onward that he established himself as one of the best in that format as well. Before that, we have Sanga, Kallis, Clarke, Amla, Cook, YK, Trott, Chanderpaul all ahead of him.

I'm afraid it's not right. AB announced himself in 2008.. He scored a double hundred in India, a big hundred in England to win the series, then a hundred in Australia while chasing 400. He averaged over 60 that year and since then he has been terrific.

 

[Stallion__]

I'm afraid it's not right. AB announced himself in 2008.. He scored a double hundred in India, a big hundred in England to win the series, then a hundred in Australia while chasing 400. He averaged over 60 that year and since then he has been terrific.

One decent year and he became better than the rest??

Even in that year, many other players have done better than him.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...8;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting

See the rankings after at the end of 2008

http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/datespecific/test/?stattype=batting&day=31&month=12&year=2008

 

[Prince_]

Kohli is a big match player and he usually shows tremendous grit and determination in pressure cooking situation while our beloved and pp favorite ABCD is only good at minnow bashing.

 

[Haroon786]

Lol AB struggling against any decent bowler. maybe haven't watch him handle Johson, Harris etc.. ok whatever lol

The SA vs Aus series last year was perhaps the sole occasion but even then two out of the three pitches played on were more flat type wickets rather than the traditional SA pitches you expect to get.

 

[JibranAnsari]

I think that its pretty obvious that ABDV is a bigger match winner , look at his number of centuries in chases.

 

[soso_killer]

Kohli used to set up games for India! Currently he aint the same! And if u take all three formats into account then AB de Villiers aint the best, its Joe Root for me. AB de Villiers is yet to deliver in T20Is. And regarding the future of RSA cricket, i think he is a bit factual as they arent producing great young FC batsmen who can be in line to replace Amla, Kallis, de Villiers etc in future. No good young FC bowlers as well to be in line to replace Philander and Steyn!

LOL, I'm sure you follow SA domestic circuit religiously to opine on the matter.
And no SA don't have players to replace ATG on a whimp just like any other country. Australia still haven't replaced the likes of Gilly, McGrath, Warne and we're approaching 10 years into their retirements, then there's Ponting. Most importantly S. Waugh who was the last all-around bat Australia produced, 11 years later no one is good enough to be mentioned in the same sentence as him.
Australia have far better resources and infrastructure than South Africa, yet have struggled. It's close to impossible replacing great players.

 

[Haroon786]

T20Is don't matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

[soso_killer]

Cullinan was never the sharpest tool in the box (which explains his mental disintegrations).
Faf is not dynamic enough to come in and score quick runs, hence the #3 position is the only viable position for him (unless he opens which is occupied anyway).
So AB can only bat at 4 at the earliest which isn't a problem as he is dynamic enough to score quickly.
A bit stupid to mention the WC as well, it's like Cullinan has zero knowledge of the match situation. The pitch was swinging violently initially (1st 20 overs or so) so quick runs were not the issue but survival, Russouw and Faf did a great job. The 43 overs comment thus becomes useless as AB himself would have had to consolidate the innings, and it's questionable if he would have done any better I must add. Faf and Russouw were definitely upping the tempo it's as if they were stagnant.
While I agree AB should bat no lower than 4, I don't mind flexibility either, we had NZ on the ropes in their pursuit of quick wickets with their main bowlers running out of overs.
Even McCullum wasn't shy of thanking the rain in his post match conference, someone needs to remind Mr Cullinan of that.

 

[Buffet]

The problem is that he will get a run a ball hundred by the 25th over and an opening batsman is less likely to last till the 40 overs to unleash himself on the opposition. Then the rest of them have to do the hitting out of the park stuff to get a good total. The team would become too reliant on AB. The way right now is that the top order performs and then AB comes in and smash them all over.. or the top order fails and AB comes and consolidates and get the team to a decent total. If AB opens, the chances of him going crazy like he did against WI is less likely because the team is far away from a decent position and he wouldn't want to throw away.

If SA had someone like Hussey or Bevan, then he could come earlier and play his natural game.

Here is the way I see it.AB going crazy against the likes of WI with a solid platform is great to see but pretty much meaningless in big scheme of things. Goal should be to win more crucial games against better teams. SA can win by 200 runs or 50 runs against WI and it won't matter.

AB should surely bat no lower than 4. Surely, few times he will get out cheaply and SA will be in trouble but when you have one of the best ODI batsman in history then he should face more deliveries. There is no point in him facing only 20 overs. AB is good enough to play according to situation. He is also great at strike rotation. Probability of SA doing better will be higher with AB facing more deliveries because he is simply far better than other SA batsmen when it comes to ability to play at different pace.

Hussey and Bevan are luxury. I am not asking AB to play going crazy kind of game by coming earlier. He can play normally and still it will help SA.

 

[IndianWillow]

Here is the way I see it.AB going crazy against the likes of WI with a solid platform is great to see but pretty much meaningless in big scheme of things. Goal should be to win more crucial games against better teams. SA can win by 200 runs or 50 runs against WI and it won't matter.

AB should surely bat no lower than 4. Surely, few times he will get out cheaply and SA will be in trouble but when you have one of the best ODI batsman in history then he should face more deliveries. There is no point in him facing only 20 overs. AB is good enough to play according to situation. He is also great at strike rotation. Probability of SA doing better will be higher with AB facing more deliveries because he is simply far better than other SA batsmen when it comes to ability to play at different pace.

Hussey and Bevan are luxury. I am not asking AB to play going crazy kind of game by coming earlier. He can play normally and still it will help SA.

Protecting the best batsman of your team (behind other lesser players) is at best a defensive strategy. In some cases (as in the case of Dhoni who was a great finisher) some exceptions may be made.

 

[Mamoon]

Protecting the best batsman of your team (behind other lesser players) is at best a defensive strategy. In some cases (as in the case of Dhoni who was a great finisher) some exceptions may be made.

Although Dhoni is one of the best ODI batsman ever, it is debatable if he, for any prolonged period of time, has been the best batsman in his team, since he has played all of his career in the presence of Tendulkar and Kohli.

If you take out the likes of Tendulkar and Kohli out of India, it would be foolish for someone like Dhoni (in his prime) to bat lower down the order and leave himself too much to do.

That is what is happening with de Villiers at the moment, other than Amla, there are no batsmen in South Africa that can be considered equal or even superior to him no matter what aspect you consider, so there is very little justification for de Villiers to restrict himself to 20-25 overs only.

 

[Bhaijaan]

At "#4 tonight.

Gutsy effort so far in a tesne chase under lights.

Something ABD could not dream of.

 

[Mobashir]

At "#4 tonight.

Gutsy effort so far in a tesne chase under lights.

Something ABD could not dream of.

You meant nightmare off?

 

[sivaji]

Haha failed on his face today.

Problem for SA is that there is no one that can bat from no 5 to no 7. Duminy, Miller have done absolutely nothing in those positions. Russow, Faf were failures in those positions. AB is the only one who could bat from no 3 to no 7 so it make more sense to promote others in the order and station AB at no 5. It's not a competition to show off which batsman can do what at what position. Then AB could even open and show them what he could do. Each team is different and having AB at no 5 helps SA more than him coming up the order. Heck even AB wants to bat higher up but has to make sacrifice for his team's benefits. What a great character he is.

 

[Hawkeye]

Kohli is a bigger bottler than even Amla in World Cups, and its starting to spread to bilaterals too, where he used to be good specially in India.

Bad bump by freelance.

 

[MMHS]

Haha failed on his face today.

Problem for SA is that there is no one that can bat from no 5 to no 7. Duminy, Miller have done absolutely nothing in those positions. Russow, Faf were failures in those positions. AB is the only one who could bat from no 3 to no 7 so it make more sense to promote others in the order and station AB at no 5. It's not a competition to show off which batsman can do what at what position. Then AB could even open and show them what he could do. Each team is different and having AB at no 5 helps SA more than him coming up the order. Heck even AB wants to bat higher up but has to make sacrifice for his team's benefits. What a great character he is.

May be putting a batman with 55/99 stats at 3 'll make the life of Rossuw, Faf, Miller, Dumini at 4, 5, 6 & 7 much easier. I think, AB (or the lap top that is calculating the combination value) has got it wrong - you must play your top players in top 3. I am sure Amla, Coock, AB, Rossuw, Faf, Miller, Dumini will be a much better line up than AB batting at 5/6.