Virat Kohli versus Steve Smith - Tests

[Tusker]

Although the difference in avg is almost 8+ points but the difference between Kohli and Smith in Test runs right now as of today is just 420 runs with Kohli having played one less inng.

Smith - 5551 in 106 inngs at 61.00
Kohli -- 5131 in 105 inngs at 53.44

Currently in the ongoing Tests Kohli is not out batting on 156 and the difference might further reduce. However he may not get a chance to bat again in this Test and will resume this rivalry only next month in SAF.

Link:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...atches;size=100;template=results;type=batting


Who do you think will break out and get ahead of the other ?
[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION]
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]
[MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION]

 

[Mamoon]

Smith is clearly better at the moment, but he is going to decline earlier than Kohli, who will certainly beat him as far as longevity is concerned.

However, Smith has also outmatched him in head to head so far. Nonetheless, Kohli’s best years in Tests are ahead of him and he can bridge the gap - and surpass Smith - in the next few years.

 

[Ab Fan]

In tests solely, Smith.

Overall, Kohli.

 

[babajee]

If Kohli can win India games in SA and England next year then the gap will be much narrower.

As of now, however it is still quite a big gap between the two.

 

[Tusker]

Smith is clearly better at the moment, but he is going to decline earlier than Kohli, who will certainly beat him as far as longevity is concerned.

However, Smith has also outmatched him in head to head so far. Nonetheless, Kohli’s best years in Tests are ahead of him and he can bridge the gap - and surpass Smith - in the next few years.

Interesting observations . Yes Fitness is a big factor in this ... Age difference between them is just 6 months but yes Kohli appears to be far more fitter than Smith. Interesting times ahead.

 

[Proactive_]

Smith by MILES.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Obviously Kohli will go ahead. Australian players have shorter careers compared to Indian players. They either go out of form soon or they just quit. Mr.Cricket Hussey was averaging like 80 plus at one point of his career. Finished with a par average of 50.

 

[Buffet]

Currently, Smith is clearly ahead.

 

[Proactive_]

Kohli has averaged less than 40 in 8 out of 21 series.

For Smith it is 4 out of 19 and two of them are at the beginning of his career when he played as a spinner.

Delving further, Kohli averages <20 in 4 Test series. Smith: 0.



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...s=1;template=results;type=batting;view=series

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...s=1;template=results;type=batting;view=series

Not to mention that the gulf in away averages is astronomical.

There is no competition.

 

[logicsupreme]

Not sure why Kohli is compared to Smith in Tests. Smith is clearly superior. What happens in the future who knows but over the course of 60 test matches Smith is much better not just better. He was much better when Aus went to India and he's been much better generally period. A difference of 8 runs is massive and is an accurate representation of the two in tests.

 

[GrandMaster]

Smith. Kohli's own granny won't place him ahead.

Lame thread..

[MENTION=8061]topi[/MENTION]c - it’s Smith at the moment.Seriously? This thread will be bumped a number of times in coming years.

 

[Chrish]

If Kohli has the godly series in SA like recent home series or the one in Australia, then it will change everyone's mind. But until then, it's unquestionably Smith who has piled up runs everywhere barring BD which no one cares about anyways.

You have to be a troll or one-eyed patriot to no see that.

 

[Ahmad Shah]

steve smith is the real deal in test cricket

virat kohli is just poor man's steve smith

 

[dravidthewall]

Smith at the moment .Interesting to see both averages after 100 tests.Overall good race between smith and kohli

 

[Chrish]

Also, whenever India dished out sporting tracks in recent series, fact remains Kohli failed (i.e. SA and Australia). Smith on the other hand came out ahead with flying colors against much better bowlers like Ash and Jadeja (albeit those dropped catches).

Kohli's ability to convert and his scoring rate is pretty impressive, but he is clearly rung below Smith ATM.

 

[Hasan123]

Smith is ahead for now but Kohli can surpass him. Kohli has to improve in England. He needs more games in NZ and South Africa so we can judge him in those conditions. Everywhere else he has a decent average as far as I know without looking the stats.

Kohli will finish as the better batsmen overall, but who will finish as the better test player is a difficult one to call atm.

 

[Tusker]

Kohli has averaged less than 40 in 8 out of 21 series.

For Smith it is 4 out of 19 and two of them are at the beginning of his career when he played as a spinner.

Delving further, Kohli averages <20 in 4 Test series. Smith: 0.



http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...s=1;template=results;type=batting;view=series

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...s=1;template=results;type=batting;view=series

Not to mention that the gulf in away averages is astronomical.

There is no competition.

Well if there is no competition please explain how Kohli finds himself in touching distance from Smiths run tally. This is where excuses will come in handy

 

[Napa]

Although the difference in avg is almost 8+ points but the difference between Kohli and Smith in Test runs right now as of today is just 420 runs with Kohli having played one less inng.

Smith - 5551 in 106 inngs at 61.00
Kohli -- 5131 in 105 inngs at 53.44

Currently in the ongoing Tests Kohli is not out batting on 156 and the difference might further reduce. However he may not get a chance to bat again in this Test and will resume this rivalry only next month in SAF.

Link:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...atches;size=100;template=results;type=batting


Who do you think will break out and get ahead of the other ?

[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION]
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]
[MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION]

They are both freaks, and if you ignore everything else they the fact that Smith is 7 months younger also counts in his favor.

However, Indian batsmen tend to age better, so as Mamoon says, Smith may decline earlier. Also there are doubts about his technique, and this may become critical as the years go by.

 

[dauntless]

Steve smith is clearly better and it's not even close! Steve is going to rule test cricket.I don't see virat challenging him in near future.

 

[cricketjoshila]

At this point in time Smith is better.But Aussies seem to peak soon and then lose momentum.Gilly avgd 60 at one point in his career.So did Hussey.Hayden 58.But all of them ended with a avg of just about 51-52 or less.

Then again avg isnt everything.

Sangakkara avgs 7 points ahead of Viv Richards, but no one will even put Sanga in the same shelf as Viv let alone call Sanga better.Infact there are various such examples.

 

[MMHS]

Although the difference in avg is almost 8+ points but the difference between Kohli and Smith in Test runs right now as of today is just 420 runs with Kohli having played one less inng.

Smith - 5551 in 106 inngs at 61.00
Kohli -- 5131 in 105 inngs at 53.44

Currently in the ongoing Tests Kohli is not out batting on 156 and the difference might further reduce. However he may not get a chance to bat again in this Test and will resume this rivalry only next month in SAF.

Link:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...atches;size=100;template=results;type=batting


Who do you think will break out and get ahead of the other ?

[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION]
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]
[MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION]

Smith will finish as better Test batsman. He is likely to fade away with age, but like most Aussie greats, he might retire by 35 - by that time he is so much a head already that it's difficult for anyone to catch him. Root, Kohli might cross him by volume, but he already averages 80+ in wins

 

[cricketjoshila]

Smith will finish as better Test batsman. He is likely to fade away with age, but like most Aussie greats, he might retire by 35 - by that time he is so much a head already that it's difficult for anyone to catch him. Root, Kohli might cross him by volume, but he already averages 80+ in wins

Win is a team stat not a individual one.

 

[MMHS]

Win is a team stat not a individual one.

He averages 61+ overall & 71+ as Captain and his stats are quite balanced, apart from WI (which is surprisingly normalized by BD & SRL); but guy averages 80+ against IND, 60+ in India, which indicates he isn't weak against spin either. That's the performance of an all-round player. The amount of Test AUS plays, if he can continue for just 3/4 years like this; he'll cross 10K Test run at 60+ average.

Stats in win is a team record indeed, but if someone's stats in result match (take win & loss both) is higher than drawn match, it suggests guy doesn't feast on soft runs.

 

[Tusker]

Smith will finish as better Test batsman. He is likely to fade away with age, but like most Aussie greats, he might retire by 35 - by that time he is so much a head already that it's difficult for anyone to catch him. Root, Kohli might cross him by volume, but he already averages 80+ in wins

Thats why I made this thread ... he isnt very far ahead of Kohli in terms of runs like people make it out to be ... difference is less than 400 runs.

 

[Buffet]

He averages 61+ overall & 71+ as Captain and his stats are quite balanced, apart from WI (which is surprisingly normalized by BD & SRL); but guy averages 80+ against IND, 60+ in India, which indicates he isn't weak against spin either. That's the performance of an all-round player. The amount of Test AUS plays, if he can continue for just 3/4 years like this; he'll cross 10K Test run at 60+ average.

Stats in win is a team record indeed, but if someone's stats in result match (take win & loss both) is higher than drawn match, it suggests guy doesn't feast on soft runs.

Not that I think Smith scored soft runs, but

Smith in result match - average 56
Smith in drawn match - Average 101

 

[JattMaula]

What an insult to Smith.

 

[MMHS]

Thats why I made this thread ... he isnt very far ahead of Kohli in terms of runs like people make it out to be ... difference is less than 400 runs.

But, average is almost 10+ gap, when both at their prime and Smith is actually younger. If this gap remains similar for just 2/3 years, even a sharp decline by Smith won't close the gap much, because VK is also will be 30+ then.

Smith is exceptionally good in Test - can't explain how, but guy knows how to score and he scores key runs under pressure - I believe, he'll cross 950 ranking points, which is a function of quantity & quality and guy is No. 1 probably for 3 years now, should be there for another 2/3 years. If we don't compare relative era, only DG Bradman had such consistent pick.

 

[MMHS]

Not that I think Smith scored soft runs, but

Smith in result match - average 56
Smith in drawn match - Average 101

True, I didn't notice that because he had been part of very few drawn matches. But, 85 average in win is extremely commendable.

 

[cricket.mad]

If Kohli can win India games in SA and England next year then the gap will be much narrower.

As of now, however it is still quite a big gap between the two.

Did smith won them series in India,uae and SL?

 

[dravidthewall]

200 for kohli

 

[dravidthewall]

Lol even commentrator discussing abt smith vs kohli as test batsman

 

[cricketjoshila]

BD must not be waived away cavalierly.In Asia and esp at home they will give most teams a tough competition.

 

[Chrish]

Ability to go big is a gift that very few in the history have been able to possess. He is certainly unique in that regard.

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Although the difference in avg is almost 8+ points but the difference between Kohli and Smith in Test runs right now as of today is just 420 runs with Kohli having played one less inng.

Smith - 5551 in 106 inngs at 61.00
Kohli -- 5131 in 105 inngs at 53.44

Currently in the ongoing Tests Kohli is not out batting on 156 and the difference might further reduce. However he may not get a chance to bat again in this Test and will resume this rivalry only next month in SAF.

Link:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...atches;size=100;template=results;type=batting


Who do you think will break out and get ahead of the other ?

[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION]
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]
[MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION]

I think Steve Smith is nearing or at a peak.

Smith will almost certainly decline when his reflexes are gone, and it might be quite steep while Kohli is a little more technically solid, so I think Kohli will end up covering the gap a little.

 

[Protea Fan]

Smith is still superior but kohli is quality and he can catch whichever player with the this kind of form

Irrespective of the bowlers and conditions to scoring dady hundreds consistently you need some serious skill and temperament,when you look at the history only few had done it so give credits where its due

 

[CricketAnalyst]

At this point in time Smith is better.But Aussies seem to peak soon and then lose momentum.Gilly avgd 60 at one point in his career.So did Hussey.Hayden 58.But all of them ended with a avg of just about 51-52 or less.

Then again avg isnt everything.

Sangakkara avgs 7 points ahead of Viv Richards, but no one will even put Sanga in the same shelf as Viv let alone call Sanga better.Infact there are various such examples.

Plenty of people will. (Esp Test Cricket alone).

It's better not to assume that personal opinions just cannot be contradicted because you will be outraged if someone does so.

 

[Napa]

Ability to go big is a gift that very few in the history have been able to possess. He is certainly unique in that regard.

Are you saying that about Smith or Kohli? Normally, I would not expect you to speak well of Kohli, but he just scored a double century so I wondered.

 

[Tusker]

But, average is almost 10+ gap, when both at their prime and Smith is actually younger. If this gap remains similar for just 2/3 years, even a sharp decline by Smith won't close the gap much, because VK is also will be 30+ then.

Smith is exceptionally good in Test - can't explain how, but guy knows how to score and he scores key runs under pressure - I believe, he'll cross 950 ranking points, which is a function of quantity & quality and guy is No. 1 probably for 3 years now, should be there for another 2/3 years. If we don't compare relative era, only DG Bradman had such consistent pick.

Kohli does score too and when he does he scores big daddy hundreds. Smith has ONE single double hundred compared to Kohli's 6. And Kohli has actually matched Smith over the last 2+ yrs. But Kohli does fail horribly a few times which combined with the difference in Avgs gives the perception that Smith is faar away and far better from Kohli.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...5;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

From that link you can see that he has made more runs in less inngs but 2 less not outs is what brings their avgs closer.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Plenty of people will. (Esp Test Cricket alone).

It's better not to assume that personal opinions just cannot be contradicted because you will be outraged if someone does so.

Please link me to a few opinions among the cricketing world that puts Sanga in the league of Viv Richards.

 

[Proactive_]

Well if there is no competition please explain how Kohli finds himself in touching distance from Smiths run tally. This is where excuses will come in handy

Because Virat Kohli has played 21 out of his 63 Tests against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and WI. 7 of them at home That's 1/3rd of his career.

For Smith it is 10. Just 2 of them at home.

There is nothing to see here. Kohli is not in the same ball park.

 

[Tusker]

Because Virat Kohli has played 21 out of his 63 Tests against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and WI. 7 of them at home That's 1/3rd of his career.

For Smith it is 10. Just 2 of them at home.

There is nothing to see here. Kohli is not in the same ball park.

And AUS have lost to SL and BD . WI recently beat Eng. Next excuse.

 

[Proactive_]

And AUS have lost to SL and BD . WI recently beat Eng. Next excuse.

It doesn't change the fact that they are the weakest Test teams, and Smith has hardly played against them at home like Kohli has.

 

[Tusker]

It doesn't change the fact that they are the weakest Test teams, and Smith has hardly played against them at home like Kohli has.

Smiths avg vs BD = 29.75
vs SL = 41.16
in UAE (where Pak were recently whitewashed by SL)= 43.5

Weak teams indeed

 

[Bengaluru]

Smith has a terrible technique and relies purely on excellent hand eye coordination to keep scoring runs. Kohli on the other hand has an almost flawless technique. The difference is, the technique will improve with age once Kohli goes into his early 30s but Smith's hand eye coordination will decline with age. Even though at the moment the stats might not look like it, once bother players retire it will become obvious that Kohli > Smith.

 

[Proactive_]

Smiths avg vs BD = 29.75
vs SL = 41.16
in UAE (where Pak were recently whitewashed by SL)= 43.5

Weak teams indeed

43.5 average away from home in UAE against Yasir Shah is bad?

Also, Smith was the highest run scorer for Aus. in the SL series. What a failure!

Send this SL attack to Australia for a 3 match series and I would be surprised if Smith doesn't score more than 700 runs. Funny that you left out WI, a team Kohli has played in multiple series now and Smith in just 3 matches in which he averaged 100+.

 

[Tusker]

43.5 average away from home in UAE against Yasir Shah is bad?

Also, Smith was the highest run scorer for Aus. in the SL series. What a failure!

certainly nothing to suggest that these are Avges against Weakest test teams like you claimed especially given the numerous losses that Aus have suffered.

Send this SL attack to Australia for a 3 match series and I would be surprised if Smith doesn't score more than 700 runs. Funny that you left out WI, a team Kohli has played in multiple series now and Smith in just 3 matches in which he averaged 100+.

LoL we will see when that happens... Kohli has done that already. And I did mention WI whom you claim to be a weak team that recently beat Eng and Pak. So shall we exclude the WI runs for both then ?

 

[Proactive_]

certainly nothing to suggest that these are Avges against Weakest test teams like you claimed especially given the numerous losses that Aus have suffered.

They are the weakest teams according to their performances over a period of time in both home and away conditions. Their W-L ratio illustrates that. Obviously performances against better bowlers of better teams ranks more than performances against the weaker bowlers of weaker teams, right? For instance, Smith scored more in 1 innings in England against Anderson and Broad than what Kohli could do in 10. Obviously counts for something, right?

LoL we will see when that happens... Kohli has done that already. And I did mention WI whom you claim to be a weak team that recently beat Eng and Pak. So shall we exclude the WI runs for both then ?

So only because they've beaten Eng and Pak, they've become consistent strong teams? That's not how ratings work pal. These teams are ranked at the bottom of the ladder

There is no comparison. Smith averages in the mid 50s away from home. Kohli barely 45. He should compete with Williamson and Root first. Smith is miles above.

 

[Tusker]

They are the weakest teams according to their performances over a period of time in both home and away conditions.Their W-L ratio illustrates that.

Thats not how you decide weak teams. Weak teams NEVER win anything. Like BD of old. These teams are not like that. Yes they are not top tier teams but certainly not minnows by any stretch of imagination.

Obviously performances against better bowlers of better teams ranks more than performances against the weaker bowlers of weaker teams, right? For instance, Smith scored more in 1 innings in England against Anderson and Broad than what Kohli could do in 10. Obviously counts for something, right?

And so does Kohli vs Aussie bowlers in Aus and SA in SA. Losing matches against WI an SL costs more which is why Aus find themsleves so far away from the top. So you cant just brush them as useless opposition.

So only because they've beaten Eng and Pak, they've become consistent strong teams? That's not how ratings work pal. These teams are ranked at the bottom of the ladder

See above.

There is no comparison. Smith averages in the mid 50s away from home. Kohli barely 45. He should compete with Williamson and Root first. Smith is miles above.

Away avg is in favor of Smith but Kohli has a decent away avg but there is no comparison when it comes to big hundreds.

 

[Proactive_]

Thats not how you decide weak teams. Weak teams NEVER win anything. Like BD of old. These teams are not like that. Yes they are not top tier teams but certainly not minnows by any stretch of imagination.

That's nonsense. Weak is a relative term and the three teams I posted are obviously the three weakest test teams at the moment. Saying that weak teams are the ones that can't win anything is quite a stretch.

And so does Kohli vs Aussie bowlers in Aus and SA in SA. Losing matches against WI an SL costs more which is why Aus find themsleves so far away from the top. So you cant just brush them as useless opposition.

I never said they are "useless" I said they are the weakest in the current Test scene which is a fact.

Away avg is in favor of Smith but Kohli has a decent away avg but there is no comparison when it comes to big hundreds.

Smith has a 199, 192 and 178* and a double hundred in England. Overall 6 scores of 150+ to Kohli's 8.
Only 2 out of Kohli's 150+ scores are away from home, for Smith it is 3.

 

[MMHS]

Kohli does score too and when he does he scores big daddy hundreds. Smith has ONE single double hundred compared to Kohli's 6. And Kohli has actually matched Smith over the last 2+ yrs. But Kohli does fail horribly a few times which combined with the difference in Avgs gives the perception that Smith is faar away and far better from Kohli.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...5;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

From that link you can see that he has made more runs in less inngs but 2 less not outs is what brings their avgs closer.

In future, Kohli can close the gap, but at present that gap is much wide. In history of game, after Bradman (& a guy with 1 innings), only 3 other past batsmen has 60+ (but <61) average and their total volume was 2K, 2K & 4.5K. This guy Smith is head & shoulders above anyone in his generation so far.

 

[shah_1]

An epic series against SA can close the gap

 

[Smudger]

Smith averages 85 in wins while king kohli averages 58 in wins.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Kohli just needs numbers. He has kind of.a game that will keep him in good stead for many many years. I doubt Smith can continue this for very long with his unorthodox technique. Don’t forget how Hussein’s was glorified to pull down other legends as he had much crazier numbers than smith.

 

[Smudger]

Kohli just needs numbers. He has kind of.a game that will keep him in good stead for many many years. I doubt Smith can continue this for very long with his unorthodox technique. Don’t forget how Hussein’s was glorified to pull down other legends as he had much crazier numbers than smith.

There is difference when a guy has 21 tons with 3 against no 1 and no 2 bowlers in their own backyard where king kohli averaged 4. Smith is rightly glorified. He has 941 ranking points. No 5 on all time test list. Has king kohli ever reached 900 points or tendulkar for that matter

 

[Justcrazy]

Smith is currently far ahead of a lot of great batters. If he gets another couple of hundred in this Ashes , he will reach carer high rating only second to Bradman

 

[Ab Fan]

I see this fab four turning out to be fab two now.

Root and Williamson are clearly not at same level to these two.

 

[Tusker]

In future, Kohli can close the gap, but at present that gap is much wide. In history of game, after Bradman (& a guy with 1 innings), only 3 other past batsmen has 60+ (but <61) average and their total volume was 2K, 2K & 4.5K. This guy Smith is head & shoulders above anyone in his generation so far.

There isnt a Gap in terms of runs thats what I have been saying ... its the not outs. Today was another chance to remain not out by declaring which would have upped his avg a bit. Right now the difference after todays inngs is just 333 runs. Thats not a big gap at all in terms of runs but Smith has almost twice the no.of not outs which lifts his avg. If we do a Runs per inngs then it becomes :

5551/106 = 52.36
5218/105 = 49.69

Not a big difference.

 

[Tusker]

That's nonsense. Weak is a relative term and the three teams I posted are obviously the three weakest test teams at the moment. Saying that weak teams are the ones that can't win anything is quite a stretch.

I never said they are "useless" I said they are the weakest in the current Test scene which is a fact.

Well then why were you trying to play down runs against these teams like how people exclude minnows ? Keep in mind that Kohli never gets to play Pakistan on UAE pitches.

Smith has a 199, 192 and 178* and a double hundred in England. Overall 6 scores of 150+ to Kohli's 8.
Only 2 out of Kohli's 150+ scores are away from home, for Smith it is 3.

You keep harping about Away performances as though home matches dont count. The noticeable difference is mainly in terms of Avg not so much runs.

here is another example ( Vs the top team )

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...7;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Difference in runs is less than 500 but the difference in Avg is huge - 10 points.

Even better example is vs the other teams that you call "Weak"

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...n;team=2;team=6;template=results;type=batting

Kohli has 140 more runs but Smith still has a better Avg.

And BTW Kohli consistently has to play on difficult pitches at home something that Smith rarely does.

 

[jnaveen1980]

There is difference when a guy has 21 tons with 3 against no 1 and no 2 bowlers in their own backyard where king kohli averaged 4. Smith is rightly glorified. He has 941 ranking points. No 5 on all time test list. Has king kohli ever reached 900 points or tendulkar for that matter

Kohli is 895 points. Besides i am talking about future. Having a huge spike in your career will not guarantee that you will have the same spike when you retire. That is why i brought Hussey's example who was averaging 88 in Tests at one point. Moyo had one superlative year. That is all he needed to cross 900 plus points. Your career is defined by entire length of your career. Not 1 or 2 years.

 

[Chrish]

I see this fab four turning out to be fab two now.

Root and Williamson are clearly not at same level to these two.

Not Williamson’s fault that his team don’t play enough tests.

The guy scored two hundreds against SA not long ago

 

[Chrish]

Kohli vs Root is much more interesting comparison.

 

[Smudger]

Kohli is 895 points. Besides i ïam talking about future. Having a huge spike in your career will not guarantee that you will have the same spike when you retire. That is why i brought Hussey's example who was averaging 88 in Tests at one point. Moyo had one superlative year. That is all he needed to cross 900 plus points. Your career is defined by entire length of your career. Not 1 or 2 years.

Smith averages 61 after 57 tests and has 21 hundreds. Hussey averaged 88 after 12 tests. 57 tests is not a small samlle size.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Smith averages 61 after 57 tests and has 21 hundreds. Hussey averaged 88 after 12 tests. 57 tests is not a small samlle size.

Dravid average 58.75 after 105 tests.

 

[Proactive_]

Well then why were you trying to play down runs against these teams like how people exclude minnows ? Keep in mind that Kohli never gets to play Pakistan on UAE pitches.

Neither has Smith bashed the likes of WI and SL at home. The difference in matches the two have played against these teams is significant and yet Smith has a better run count and average.

You keep harping about Away performances as though home matches dont count. The noticeable difference is mainly in terms of Avg not so much runs.

here is another example ( Vs the top team )

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...7;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Difference in runs is less than 500 but the difference in Avg is huge - 10 points.

Even better example is vs the other teams that you call "Weak"

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...n;team=2;team=6;template=results;type=batting

Kohli has 140 more runs but Smith still has a better Avg.

And BTW Kohli consistently has to play on difficult pitches at home something that Smith rarely does.

I don't know what is your point here. Smith's stats are better, easily. The difference in runs is still significant. In the first table it's almost 500 runs at just 1 innings extra.

Also Kohli has hardly been consistently at home either. He averaged in the 30s against SA, had just one 50+ score in the series against NZ and averaged 9 against Australia. That's anything but consistent.

 

[BaankeJi]

Smith is miles ahead as of now. Kohli himself is doing great but such is the scale of Smith's performance that Kohli's performance looks small in comparison.
That being said, Kohli has just started scoring heavily and difference between the two is lesser in recent performances. If both continue doing what they are doing, Smith will end up ahead but gap will be much smaller.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Head to head, there is no comparison right now. Kohli averaged 9 in his last series against them.

Initially, I thought Kohli would be able to close that gap and possibly take the #1 spot but Smith continues to widen that gap. He's not just scoring runs but very impactful runs. Kohli has improved statistically but hasn't had Smith level impact yet on test cricket.

 

[Tusker]

Neither has Smith bashed the likes of WI and SL at home. The difference in matches the two have played against these teams is significant and yet Smith has a better run count and average.

You might want to check his stats properly ...

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;home_or_away=1;template=results;type=batting

The only team that he doesnt get to play is SL so far. In their place he did play Pakistan and they promptly obliged with buffet bowling of the eat all you want variety.

I don't know what is your point here. Smith's stats are better, easily. The difference in runs is still significant. In the first table it's almost 500 runs at just 1 innings extra.

465 run difference over 75 inngs is significant ?

Also Kohli has hardly been consistently at home either. He averaged in the 30s against SA, had just one 50+ score in the series against NZ and averaged 9 against Australia. That's anything but consistent.

Kohli had to deal with difficult pitches in atleast half the matches ( One match was washed out ). Whereas Smith had a mediocre series against both SA and NZ at home avging in the mid 40s with just one single 100 and ending up losing series to SAF that was playing without Steyn.

 

[MMHS]

There isnt a Gap in terms of runs thats what I have been saying ... its the not outs. Today was another chance to remain not out by declaring which would have upped his avg a bit. Right now the difference after todays inngs is just 333 runs. Thats not a big gap at all in terms of runs but Smith has almost twice the no.of not outs which lifts his avg. If we do a Runs per inngs then it becomes :

5551/106 = 52.36
5218/105 = 49.69

Not a big difference.

Actually Run/Innings is an stats which hardly anyone notices, because there are few factors in it. In Cricket, standard stats are Average, SR and conversion.

Hind side of an attempt to remain NO is reduced scoring opportunity - if VK tried to remain NO (or declared early), may be his run/innings would have suffered then. I think, remaining NO is one of the biggest credit in cricket (if not being purposefully selfish), so it should be factored in stats. Also, Smith's average in Win is almost 3 times than loss, which probably indicates the value of his run - guy has been instrumental in his teams' success.

 

[giri26]

Smith is way ahead of Virat in tests at the moment. Virat will get there soon. But at the moment it is Smith. Sometimes stats are not everything.

 

[Tusker]

Actually Run/Innings is an stats which hardly anyone notices, because there are few factors in it. In Cricket, standard stats are Average, SR and conversion.

Hind side of an attempt to remain NO is reduced scoring opportunity - if VK tried to remain NO (or declared early), may be his run/innings would have suffered then. I think, remaining NO is one of the biggest credit in cricket (if not being purposefully selfish), so it should be factored in stats.

Thas true if the not outs are when batting in the Top Oder and not while chasing small totals. When they come while batting in the lower order then it is misleading. Smith has 6 such not outs which is why it props his overall avg.

Also, Smith's average in Win is almost 3 times than loss, which probably indicates the value of his run - guy has been instrumental in his teams' success.

That suggests a weak team. You get Smith cheaply half the match is won. Its not Kohli's fault that he plays for a stronger batting unit. However look at their 4th inngs stats its a big difference. Smith has not played an inngs like the Adelaide 141.

17 inngs 737 runs at 61 - Kohli
19 inngs 553 runs at 32 - Smith

 

[ind_win]

Due to the two bad series - one in Eng and one in Ind Vs Aus - his figures have taken a hit. And he has to 'repair' these two figures over the next year. And only then he can come into consideration, is what I think. Smith has been having 4-5 good years. While Kohli, to his credit, pulled back the difference quite a bit and if he could continue like this for another 1-1.5 years he will definitely overtake Smith. What Kohli needs now are impactful runs rather than centuries alone, in overseas conditions. And for that to happen, bowlers and Pujara, Rahane are key for India. Hope that happens. Long overdue for India, an overseas series win in SA, Aus, Eng.

 

[Sidilicious]

Head to head, there is no comparison right now. Kohli averaged 9 in his last series against them.

Initially, I thought Kohli would be able to close that gap and possibly take the #1 spot but Smith continues to widen that gap. He's not just scoring runs but very impactful runs. Kohli has improved statistically but hasn't had Smith level impact yet on test cricket.

Pretty much this.

Kohli can catch up though, if he has a couple of impactful series away, and scores consistently in the next round of away series in SA, Eng, NZ and Aus. Kohli doesn't need to average in 60s to match Smith. Something in the 55-58 range with impactful and consistent series would do it.

That would mean scoring against Rabada, Steyn, Philander, Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins, Anderson, Broad, Boult and Southee in their own backyard. If he can do that in 3 out of the 4 series - average 50+ and have a few impactful innings (doing it in England is mandatory) he will equal Steve Smith.

I am taking into account that Steve Smith does not have to play against Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins at home. Though, that is slightly offset by the fact that Kohli does not have to play against Ashwin and Jadeja at home.

 

[Proactive_]

You might want to check his stats properly ...

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;home_or_away=1;template=results;type=batting

The only team that he doesnt get to play is SL so far. In their place he did play Pakistan and they promptly obliged with buffet bowling of the eat all you want variety.

Kohli has played 7 Tests at home against the weakest 3 at home. Smith just 3. That's 500 runs worth of difference right there at least.

465 run difference over 75 inngs is significant ?

A batsman averaging a respectable 46.5 would take 10 innings/5 Tests to close the gap so yeah it is indeed significant.

Kohli had to deal with difficult pitches in atleast half the matches ( One match was washed out ). Whereas Smith had a mediocre series against both SA and NZ at home avging in the mid 40s with just one single 100 and ending up losing series to SAF that was playing without Steyn.

Steyn-less SA? This was what the Steyn-less SA were doing with the Aus team:

Compare Smith's performance with the Test. Has Kohli ever in a Test match home or away stood out like this? I don't think so.

 

[Tusker]

Kohli has played 7 Tests at home against the weakest 3 at home. Smith just 3. That's 500 runs worth of difference right there at least.

So Pakistan is not a Weak team lol ? A team that lost multiple tests to WI , ZIM and then subsequently whitewashed by SL ? They havent even been able to draw a test in AUS in last 10-15 yrs.

A batsman averaging a respectable 46.5 would take 10 innings/5 Tests to close the gap so yeah it is indeed significant.

For starters Kohli does not Avg 46.5 ... and the Gap isnt always linear or static. One good or bad series and the Gap suddenly changes.

Ricky Ponting even after starting many years after Tendulkar had at one point almost caught up with Tendulkar by 2006/07. So Iam talking more than 3000 runs worth of difference at avg of 50

Steyn-less SA? This was what the Steyn-less SA were doing with the Aus team:

Compare Smith's performance with the Test. Has Kohli ever in a Test match home or away stood out like this? I don't think so.

Just one match here and there doesn't make a difference. Even in this match it was bad batting that led to Aus collapse. Look at SAF inngs how much they made and the 2nd inngs collapse. Imagine what might have happened if Steyn was there.

Kohli bats in a much stronger batting unit therefore rare for everyone to shoot themselves in the foot.

 

[Ab Fan]

Not Williamson’s fault that his team don’t play enough tests.

The guy scored two hundreds against SA not long ago

I understand that but that is how it is turning out to be. Williamson isn't having luxury of as many runs and matches as those three and he is not a great limited over player ( good enough though) either.He has been and will continue to be overshadowed by Smith and Kohli in longer run.

I rate his performance vs SA in recent times very highly.

 

[R0H1T]

I understand that but that is how it is turning out to be. Williamson isn't having luxury of as many runs and matches as those three and he is not a great limited over player ( good enough though) either.He has been and will continue to be overshadowed by Smith and Kohli in longer run.

I rate his performance vs SA in recent times very highly.

For people who bash Kohli excessively, for his record against England, they need to check Smith's record in the 3 tests where it swung in England! He was looking no better today with the pink ball doing all sorts of things under the light, also before you bring up Pune check the number of lives he got en route to his hundred, the best player on that track was Rahul in the first innings before he lost his head & his wicket!

 

[WengerOut]

For people who bash Kohli excessively, for his record against England, they need to check Smith's record in the 3 tests where it swung in England! He was looking no better today with the pink ball doing all sorts of things under the light, also before you bring up Pune check the number of lives he got en route to his hundred, the best player on that track was Rahul in the first innings before he lost his head & his wicket!

Kohli was woefully out of form that series that even Stuart Binny and Bhuvi performed better than him battingwise. Now we all know Virat us better than them. If anything , Kohli need to learn how to grind out innings when not in form. ATM , when he is not in form , he has atrocious returns ( England and Australia home series) .

Smith performance in England cam be taken contextually by looking at the general score card. Yes he performed well and credit to him. But it is not the swinging conditions as many of them are portraying.

At the moment Smith is ahead coz of the sheer volume of runs .

 

[Ab Fan]

For people who bash Kohli excessively, for his record against England, they need to check Smith's record in the 3 tests where it swung in England! He was looking no better today with the pink ball doing all sorts of things under the light, also before you bring up Pune check the number of lives he got en route to his hundred, the best player on that track was Rahul in the first innings before he lost his head & his wicket!

Smith record in those 3 tests in England is the only thing which can be said as a question mark in his career.

He had one of the best ever series in India by an overseas batsmen equivalent to Amla ( 2010) and Cook(2012) in last 10 years.

Scoring big hundreds away from home and at a consistent basis isn't easy. It requires lots of mental concentration. You have to understand that.

 

[ManFan]

For people who bash Kohli excessively, for his record against England, they need to check Smith's record in the 3 tests where it swung in England! He was looking no better today with the pink ball doing all sorts of things under the light, also before you bring up Pune check the number of lives he got en route to his hundred, the best player on that track was Rahul in the first innings before he lost his head & his wicket!

Fortune favors the brave. Sachin got 5 lives in SF but went on to make MOM 85. KP was dropped twice and lucky to survive Lee's hostile spell but went on to make 150+ and secure the Ashes. The margins are very close in cricket so when a chance comes, you have to hold on to it.

 

[R0H1T]

Smith record in those 3 tests in England is the only thing which can be said as a question mark in his career.

He had one of the best ever series in India by an overseas batsmen equivalent to Amla ( 2010) and Cook(2012) in last 10 years.

Scoring big hundreds away from home and at a consistent basis isn't easy. It requires lots of mental concentration. You have to understand that.

And yet he batted first in 3 tests & under less pressure, the last two tests had much better batting tracks. When under pressure, not the second innings at Pune as Aus had a huge lead, he failed 3~4 times.

Now compare that to the runs Kohli scored against England, albeit in India, under pressure virtually all the time. For anyone who says that Smith is a level above Kohli, on current form, needs to look at the kind of (big) innings Kohl;i has played under pressure in the last year or so.

Fortune favors the brave. Sachin got 5 lives in SF but went on to make MOM 85. KP was dropped twice and lucky to survive Lee's hostile spell but went on to make 150+ and secure the Ashes. The margins are very close in cricket so when a chance comes, you have to hold on to it.

Doesn't change my opinion of Kohli, or that of Smith.