Virat Kohli vs AB de Villiers - Who is the better Test batsman?

[WengerOut]

May God have mercy on your everlasting soul.

Thanks man. I know i am against SA fans , Pak fans and so called "non-biased" Indian fans. I need all the prayers.

 

[Ab Fan]

Nope. Smith and AB were brilliant in the last world cup. Kohli went missing. You can make a case for Kohli being marginally ahead in Odi's because he is brilliant in Odi's on a day to day basis. But he was playing his second world cup, in decent batting conditions, and plenty of experience behind him. He didn't account for much.

AB has played plenty of tough knocks in all sorts of conditions- swinging, seaming, spinning and flat. <B>AB is not well behind Kohli, as a test player he is ahead. He is a better player vs the best attacks out there.</B>So is Smith. In tests, there is no way i am taking Kohli over either guys.

AB is a legend and far greater than stats suggest. Thats why stats can sometimes be deceiving. I love Younis Khan for example, but i would be silly to suggest that he is in the same league as Ponting or Lara in tests even if his stats are up there. AB is already a legend.

AB is ahead as a test player because he has played around 50 tests more. Kohli will topple him when he reaches that much matches.

In odis, AB is behind Kohli because the latter has the ability to take the game by scruff of its neck unlike the former and has already played many legendary knocks. Both are ATGs in odis and are comparable.

In tests, Smith is ahead of Kohli but way behind Kohli in LOIs. 1 WC doesn't change much.

As for Kohli's knocks in swinging conditions:-

100 at Jburg in 2014
Two fifties at Jburg again in 2018
Brilliant hundred in NZ
2013 CT final

 

[WengerOut]

AB is ahead as a test player because he has played around 50 tests more. Kohli will topple him when he reaches that much matches.

In odis, AB is behind Kohli because the latter has the ability to take the game by scruff of its neck unlike the former and has already played many legendary knocks. Both are ATGs in odis and are comparable.

In tests, Smith is ahead of Kohli but way behind Kohli in LOIs. 1 WC doesn't change much.

As for Kohli's knocks in swinging conditions:-

100 at Jburg in 2014
Two fifties at Jburg again in 2018
Brilliant hundred in NZ
2013 CT final

No need to take the pain and list out stats. Haters will just state their opinions as facts without putting out their own proof.

 

[Protea Fan]

AB is a better player in test,its not even up for debate at the moment, though kohli can easily surpass him in future

 

[JattMaula]

No need to take the pain and list out stats. Haters will just state their opinions as facts without putting out their own proof.

These selective facts mentioned by Ab fan are worthless. If anybody is willing to weed out the worthless innings from really good then everyone will see that kholee fgoes missing in test when it's most challenging.

 

[WengerOut]

These selective facts mentioned by Ab fan are worthless. If anybody is willing to weed out the worthless innings from really good then everyone will see that kholee fgoes missing in test when it's most challenging.

Actually it is the other way round

1) When Kohli fails, then test become "Challenging, swinging , great bowling",.
2) When he succeeds, then pitch is flat , opposition not good etc

Ironically , England features in both.

 

[Ab Fan]

No. I am arguing he is better than AB.

You cant really say he is already better but he should surpass him in future.

 

[hk031992]

Did you ever look at the stats that i posted ? And no , AB does not have many good scores in swinging or seaming pitches.

Yes, and they all referred to baby De Villiers, not AB De Villiers. AB has plenty of good scores on seaming and swinging wickets, this is not debatable.

 

[hk031992]

No need to take the pain and list out stats. Haters will just state their opinions as facts without putting out their own proof.

Haters? Seriously? I was respectful and complimentary towards Kohli. I respectfully pointed out where i disagreed. Not everyone is a hater just because they disagree with you.

 

[WengerOut]

Haters? Seriously? I was respectful and complimentary towards Kohli. I respectfully pointed out where i disagreed. Not everyone is a hater just because they disagree with you.

Seriously i did not have you in mind when i said that bro. It was about general behaviour in PP.

 

[WengerOut]

Yes, and they all referred to baby De Villiers, not AB De Villiers. AB has plenty of good scores on seaming and swinging wickets, this is not debatable.

In that respect , Kohli's Eng series was at the foetal stage of his career. And he had scored against AUS in 2013 series at home also. Regarding AB, I am against the "many good scores in swinging/seaming" . I have followed him from start and he does not have many. He is still a damn good batsman . But his fans reverting to extraordinary phrases just to make him otherworldly is not called for.

 

[WengerOut]

You cant really say he is already better but he should surpass him in future.

Currently Kohli is better. Obviously you cant compare overall with one guy at fag end of the career and other at the peak. Like many have said , Kohli should surpass him.

 

[hk031992]

Seriously i did not have you in mind when i said that bro. It was about general behaviour in PP.

Alright mate, no worries. It was good debating with you. Look forward to more debates in the future.

 

[Savage]

Kohli will have to win a series in three of these countries to be mentioned anywhere the likes of AB. NZ, AUS, Eng and SA.
He has a good enough team to do so.

lol we are comparing Kohli with AB devilliers not Bradman/Sachin/Lara .

He doesn't need to win away series in NZ,AUS and England to overtake or "to be mentioned anywhere the likes of AB".

Right now Ab devilliers is ahead mainly because he has played lot more games than Kohli.

 

[hk031992]

In that respect , Kohli's Eng series was at the foetal stage of his career. And he had scored against AUS in 2013 series at home also. Regarding AB, I am against the "many good scores in swinging/seaming" . I have followed him from start and he does not have many. He is still a damn good batsman . But his fans reverting to extraordinary phrases just to make him otherworldly is not called for.

its not extraordinary. I have followed the guy too and i have seen many cases where he has scored important runs in tough conditions. The counter attacking innings he played in the first two tests vs India were the main difference between the two sides. He took on a rampaging Johnson on a tough wicket where Smith and Amla struggled badly. AB was the only one who looked like he had the reflexes and skill to take him on, scoring 90 of the 206 runs that SA scored in that innings. He has scored runs in tough SA conditions, England, Aus, everywhere really.

We'll agree to disagree.

 

[Mr.Q]

The latter ones will start supporting whoever does better at that particular time and not just AB or Smith.

IMO, AB is a 8/10 in tests and 9/10 in odis while Kohli, IMO, has potential to be a 9/10 in tests(that can change depending on how he performs) and a 9.5/10 in odis.

Smith is a 9.5/10 in tests and a 7/10 in odis. Others are behind the three.

True. There will always be that something because of which Kohli ain’t good enough . Like you said it’s hard to predict how far Kohli will go in tests. He seems to have massively improved his batting in test cricket and if he continues like this, he’ll stamp his name on some of those ATG records.

And he’s definitely the best when you consider all three formats of the game.

 

[soso_killer]

lol we are comparing Kohli with AB devilliers not Bradman/Sachin/Lara .

He doesn't need to win away series in NZ,AUS and England to overtake or "to be mentioned anywhere the likes of AB".

Right now Ab devilliers is ahead mainly because he has played lot more games than Kohli.

What does he need to do? Score meaningless runs with no impact on matches or series?

 

[Sidilicious]

What does he need to do? Score meaningless runs with no impact on matches or series?

Has ABD won a series in India?

 

[soso_killer]

Lol, when did this happen?

SA has won...what, 2 test matches in India is the last 18 years?

SA is the only team to have whitewashed India in India, not even the great Aussies could do that.
Apart from our last tour, we've always blanked India by 300+ runs in their conditions on a regular basis in every tour.

 

[soso_killer]

Has ABD won a series in India?

He has played some great knocks and won matches (drawn a few series) in India, and in all conditions.
Kohli needs to that .

 

[WengerOut]

He has played some great knocks and won matches (drawn a few series) in India, and in all conditions.
Kohli needs to that .

You need to have bowlers. The one match he performed in India was won mainly by that Steyn spell. Kohli scored all those runs in Aus and still lost. He scored in SA and still lost because of incompetency from other batsmen. One man is not enough. You can shift the goalpost from winning away series to drawing .

 

[BreadPakoda]

SA is the only team to have whitewashed India in India, not even the great Aussies could do that.
Apart from our last tour, we've always blanked India by 300+ runs in their conditions on a regular basis in every tour.

You won 2 tests in 18 years, right?

 

[Dead Ball]

People acting as if ABDV just scored his 40th test century in an away test in difficult conditions.

Its his first ton in 14 tests.

 

[HuzaifaE]

Great knock by AB, love his counter attacking innings. That being said, he's being compared to someone who has an absolutely outrageous batting record since taking over captaincy, has completed a great SA tour where he looked a cut above the rest and has a tour of Australia with four tons under his belt - all while improving and improving in the format as time goes on and before he enters his 30s. AB is adding to his final hurrahs here, Kohli should no doubt be able to pull ahead by the time he puts up his boots.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Huh? AB rarely if ever has a bad series vs a strong test attack. Unlike Kohli recently vs Aus in home conditions or the dreadful batting vs England. Kohli is an excellent test batsmen, no question, and i would gladly take him over any of our (meaning Pak's) current batsmen but he is seriously vulnerable outside of the off stump relative to other great batsmen, especially in comparison to AB. AB is a better test player and i maintain that without any hesitation. If i can only have one player in my test team, De Villiers is an easy pick.

In Odi's, Kohli may well be ahead. Keep in mind though that AB batted extremely well in the last world cup and its only his team mates that let him down a little and NZ were just outstanding in the semi's. Not AB's fault. Kohli was far from great in the last world cup. Kohli is obviously ahead in bilaterials.

Overall (tests+odi's combined), i take AB without even the slightest bit of hesitation. He is a more versatile batsmen, is clearly better vs the best attacks, and is just better. Kohli fans like Mamoon will always make excuses to downplay AB while overrating Kohli but facts are facts.

Not that i think Kohli is bad at all. He is probably #1 in Odi's despite his WC disappointment last time around. He is still one of the better guys in tests. He just isn't as brilliant as some Pak fans make him out to be.

2 bad series? That's such an arbitrary criteria to say that ABD is "in a different league all together". That's like me saying "Kohli is better because he hasn't gone without scoring a century for long while ABD went century-less for almost 3 years since Feb/Mar 2015" or "in the games played together ABD averages 41 while Kohli averages 48".

Kohli scored against a better Ozzie attack in Australia where he has IIRC 5 centuries. One poor series that too in India where he has scored multiple double centuries doesn't mean he cannot play against the Ozzie attack. Any way, it was the Ozzie spin attack that against which Kohli failed, that too Jason Krezja. Such things happen in tests, Kohli has played better spin bowlers than Krezja with ease and dominated them.

 

[Savage]

What does he need to do? Score meaningless runs with no impact on matches or series?

Same could be said of lara and Tendulkar.They both lost majority of away series in their career unlike AB.That doesn't mean they are not better than AB.

Heck,I'd say Lara's performance in Sri lanka(2001) and Sachin in Australia(1999) is better than any away series performance by AB devilliers.Sachin and lara Teams were whitewashed 3-0 in Australia and Sri Lanka respectively but still both Sachin and Lara were given Man of the series.

 

[Adijazz1706]

2 bad series? That's such an arbitrary criteria to say that ABD is "in a different league all together". That's like me saying "Kohli is better because he hasn't gone without scoring a century for long while ABD went century-less for almost 3 years since Feb/Mar 2015" or "in the games played together ABD averages 41 while Kohli averages 48".

Kohli scored against a better Ozzie attack in Australia where he has IIRC 5 centuries. One poor series that too in India where he has scored multiple double centuries doesn't mean he cannot play against the Ozzie attack. Any way, it was the Ozzie spin attack that against which Kohli failed, that too Jason Krezja. Such things happen in tests, Kohli has played better spin bowlers than Krezja with ease and dominated them.

Kohli avged 9 when Oz had Lyon and O'Keefe, what does Krejza have to do with it?

 

[Mamoon]

What's your take on AB inning today?

Outstanding innings, easily one of his finest.

This is the Kohli era, but all formats considered, de Villiers has the strongest claim of being the second best batsman of this decade. Smith runs him close, and he is better than him in Tests, but de Villiers is way ahead of him in Limited Overs.

 

[Mamoon]

Lol. Its AB who is leagues ahead of an overrated test player like Kohli. There is no comparison here. The Kohli fan boyism is amazing. Anyone who has actually seen them bat knows Virat is like a high schooler compared to Kohli.

de Villiers is a mental midget compared to Kohli. The latter's mental game is at a completely different level, and this is why at 29 he is already one of the greatest batsmen to play the game, and this is why he is also a very good captain unlike the failure that de Villiers was.

Kohli has already matched him as a Test batsman and he is only halfway in his career. By the time he retires, he will leave him in his dust.

You are hung up on Kohli's failure in England, conveniently ignoring how a young de Villiers was schooled by Asif to the point where he had to run away from his opening position. Both are top class batsmen and both are ATGs, but Kohli is better. He is already better in Limited Overs, and he will be easily better than him in Test cricket by the time he is done.

Yes Kohli does look like a "high schooler" compared to de Villiers at his best, but every batsman does. However, batting is not just playing breathtaking shots 360 degrees.

 

[Bilal7]

The latter ones will start supporting whoever does better at that particular time and not just AB or Smith.

IMO, AB is a 8/10 in tests and 9/10 in odis while Kohli, IMO, has potential to be a 9/10 in tests(that can change depending on how he performs) and a 9.5/10 in odis.

Smith is a 9.5/10 in tests and a 7/10 in odis. Others are behind the three.

Smith is a 9.5 in tests? Really, eh? He has a ridiculous average of 82 in Australia, West Indies and New Zealand. However, his average in England, South Africa, Sri Lanka, UAE and Bangladesh is barely over 40.

People should stop getting overexcited regarding Smith. He is a fantastic batsman and the best in the world at present but he is not already an ATG in test cricket.

Coming to the ABD vs Kohli debate, de Villiers is a better batsman than Kohli in ODIs and test cricket. There is no doubting that. What Kohli can or can't do in the future is irrelevant; as of now he is not on the same level as ABD in any format that matters.

 

[babajee]

de Villiers is a mental midget compared to Kohli. The latter's mental game is at a completely different level, and this is why at 29 he is already one of the greatest batsmen to play the game, and this is why he is also a very good captain unlike the failure that de Villiers was.

Kohli has already matched him as a Test batsman and he is only halfway in his career. By the time he retires, he will leave him in his dust.

You are hung up on Kohli's failure in England, conveniently ignoring how a young de Villiers was schooled by Asif to the point where he had to run away from his opening position. Both are top class batsmen and both are ATGs, but Kohli is better. He is already better in Limited Overs, and he will be easily better than him in Test cricket by the time he is done.

Yes Kohli does look like a "high schooler" compared to de Villiers at his best, but every batsman does. However, batting is not just playing breathtaking shots 360 degrees.

Kohli is the greatest batsman to have ever held a bat.

 

[Bilal7]

People acting as if ABDV just scored his 40th test century in an away test in difficult conditions.

Its his first ton in 14 tests.

Has Kohli ever scored a better test hundred? No. Will he ever score a better test hundred? Probably not.

The ball was reversing for miles and ABD was absolutely fantastic. Amla and Elgar set it up for him and he played one of the iconic innings of this decade.

 

[Dead Ball]

Has Kohli ever scored a better test hundred? No. Will he ever score a better test hundred? Probably not.

The ball was reversing for miles and ABD was absolutely fantastic. Amla and Elgar set it up for him and he played one of the iconic innings of this decade.

Kohli has just entered his peak in tests while ABDV is on his last legs. Their respective test stature won't even be up for debate once they have played similar number of tests. If Kohli's knock in SA just a couple of months back or his fourth innings in Adelaide are anything to go by, he will play better knocks as he enters his peak.

I will acknowledge the greatness of this knock though. It was awesome to watch and arguably his best in a test career where he has mostly played second fiddle to Amla, Kallis or Smith.

Makes you think how good he could have been had he been more invested in tests during his peak.

 

[shaz619]

ABDV is better for me

 

[VijayTamilan]

Kohli scored an arguably better ton (153), away from home right in South Africa, just a month ago.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Kohli is the greatest batsman to have ever held a bat.

AB + Amla < Kohli batting left-handed with a blindfold on

 

[JattMaula]

Kohli scored an arguably better ton (153), away from home right in South Africa, just a month ago.

But we lost. So it was impactless inning.

 

[Ab Fan]

AB's 5 best test innings IMO:-

126*, PE 2018
33, Adelaide 2012
217, Ahmedabad 2008
106*, Perth 2008
174, Headingley 2008

He has some high quality low scoring innings like 65 vs India recently, 83 in NZ or 91 at Centurion but they misses out from top 5 for me because big knocks requires lot more of patience and temperament and that was missing here.

 

[HydratedTurnip]

But we lost. So it was impactless inning.

And if India had won, that pitch would've been termed by people like yourself and a few others in this forum as the flattest pitch ever in SA, where 153 was par for course for a FTB like Kohli, who can't possibly play swing n seam since he failed THAT one time in England

 

[hk031992]

de Villiers is a mental midget compared to Kohli. The latter's mental game is at a completely different level, and this is why at 29 he is already one of the greatest batsmen to play the game, and this is why he is also a very good captain unlike the failure that de Villiers was.

Kohli has already matched him as a Test batsman and he is only halfway in his career. By the time he retires, he will leave him in his dust.

You are hung up on Kohli's failure in England, conveniently ignoring how a young de Villiers was schooled by Asif to the point where he had to run away from his opening position. Both are top class batsmen and both are ATGs, but Kohli is better. He is already better in Limited Overs, and he will be easily better than him in Test cricket by the time he is done.

Yes Kohli does look like a "high schooler" compared to de Villiers at his best, but every batsman does. However, batting is not just playing breathtaking shots 360 degrees.

mental midget who scored runs in the last world cup while Kohli the great failed to score? And no, Kohli has not matched him as a test batsmen yet. ABDV is on another level in tests vs strong attacks, so there is no way Kohli has matched him in tests.

 

[jnaveen1980]

ABDV is a veteran test batsman given when he made his debut. Kohli is one generation after. Fact that they are even comparable. Is a huge tribute for Kohli. Kohli is just getting started. By the time he hangs ups his boots he will leave everyone behind. It is his hunger that separates him from others.

 

[Buffet]

In the test format, Kohli has some way to go to over take AB.

 

[Sadevdesai]

These types of comparisons are useless .... there will always be a counter argument to anything one says on the topic, and the issue remains unresolved !!!!!

 

[Bilal7]

ABDV is a veteran test batsman given when he made his debut. Kohli is one generation after. Fact that they are even comparable. Is a huge tribute for Kohli. Kohli is just getting started. By the time he hangs ups his boots he will leave everyone behind. It is his hunger that separates him from others.

There is no comparison. The only ones making one are some deluded Kohli fans. His competition is with batsmen like Smith, Root, Kane, Pujara and Azhar.

 

[Oligochaetes]

There is no comparison. The only ones making one are some deluded Kohli fans. His competition is with batsmen like Smith, Root, Kane, Pujara and Azhar.

Same as Amla, while talking about AB's batting average (just 47.27 in South Africa). we should consider the much tougher home conditions he has to bat in.

Look at the home averages of current top batters
Joe Root - 59.46
Kane Williamson - 56.04
Steve SMith - 77.25
Kohli - 63.50

If AB had such lovely batting home conditions he would average much higher in tests, probably closer to 58, rather than 50.66.

 

[Hitman]

Kohli already has 21 (11 away from home) centuries in 122 innings, ABD has 22 centuries (7 away, 2 neutral) in 187 innings, LOL.

 

[Ab Fan]

Same as Amla, while talking about AB's batting average (just 47.27 in South Africa). we should consider the much tougher home conditions he has to bat in.

Look at the home averages of current top batters
Joe Root - 59.46
Kane Williamson - 56.04
Steve SMith - 77.25
Kohli - 63.50

If AB had such lovely batting home conditions he would average much higher in tests, probably closer to 58, rather than 50.66.

AB has got so many low scoring high quality innings now:-

83 at Hamilton 2012
33 at Adelaide 2012
91 at Centurion 2014
65& 80 in India series 2018
71* Durban 2018

 

[JattMaula]

And if India had won, that pitch would've been termed by people like yourself and a few others in this forum as the flattest pitch ever in SA, where 153 was par for course for a FTB like Kohli, who can't possibly play swing n seam since he failed THAT one time in England

Dont assume things about me. I rate every pitch when the match is still alive. Pitch when kholee scored 150 was not flat but inning was impact less cause low IQ captain/coach can't select players properly.

 

[Ab Fan]

Smith is a 9.5 in tests? Really, eh? He has a ridiculous average of 82 in Australia, West Indies and New Zealand. However, his average in England, South Africa, Sri Lanka, UAE and Bangladesh is barely over 40.

People should stop getting overexcited regarding Smith. He is a fantastic batsman and the best in the world at present but he is not already an ATG in test cricket.

Coming to the ABD vs Kohli debate, de Villiers is a better batsman than Kohli in ODIs and test cricket. There is no doubting that. What Kohli can or can't do in the future is irrelevant; as of now he is not on the same level as ABD in any format that matters.

Smith average in test cricket is 63 now. In the last 4 years, he is averaging 70 along with many clutch knocks as well as series defining performances. He deserves a 9.5/10 for what he has done till now. If he has a rough patch, that rating might get reduced. But he is easily the best test batsmen in the world.

Coming to Kohli and AB debate, Kohli just had a brilliant series in SA and over the course of two series, he avgs 55 and 60 in places like Aus and SA. He also averages 70 I think in NZ. Failing in one country doesn't mean much.

He is on his way to become an ATG in tests.
40 hundreds is there to be taken. Over their career, AB is better and rightly so.But Kohli will surpass him.

 

[soso_killer]

You won 2 tests in 18 years, right?

4 in 18 years. Won 4, lost 6 and drew 3.
Prior to the 2015 tour South Africa enjoyed a 4 - 3 lead since the turn of the Millennium. That's what you call bullying a team in their den, in foreign conditions at that.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...anval1=span;team=3;template=results;type=team

 

[Adijazz1706]

4 in 18 years. Won 4, lost 6 and drew 3.
Prior to the 2015 tour South Africa enjoyed a 4 - 3 lead since the turn of the Millennium. That's what you call bullying a team in their den, in foreign conditions at that.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...anval1=span;team=3;template=results;type=team

Just add India's stats in SA for a comparison to be made, not that it will be close but just for kicks

 

[soso_killer]

Same could be said of lara and Tendulkar.They both lost majority of away series in their career unlike AB.That doesn't mean they are not better than AB.

Heck,I'd say Lara's performance in Sri lanka(2001) and Sachin in Australia(1999) is better than any away series performance by AB devilliers.Sachin and lara Teams were whitewashed 3-0 in Australia and Sri Lanka respectively but still both Sachin and Lara were given Man of the series.

Firstly Kohli is no Lara or Tendulkar. Let's get that straight.
AB has underachieved in Tests, even then he has had impact knocks.
The 33 he scored of 245 balls against Australia is an impact knock of the highest. I rate that knock than any hundred he has scored because that helped advance the team's course.

Australia were so mentally and physically knackered after they toiled for two days. All the third Test needed was for someone to grab the match and series by the throat. Amla dully delivered the best knock that has ever been played in Australia. It's all thanks to AB and Faf.

There's a reason I don't rate AB's 90 against Johnson. It was an impact less knock. Australia won by 200+ runs and two days to spare. I already know AB is the most talented bat I've ever seen, hence I'm always harsh on him. However as stated before, there have been better match winners and impact players. Over the next two years he has to rectify that. He has a hell of a task with this brittle batting unit. But he must simply do it, no excuses. He played alongside Smith, Kallis and Amla and did not have the impact he is having now. Why didn't he play similar knocks before (especially the scintillating hundred he just scored)? He would be a great already.

Yes I rate and value consistency. Scoring in all conditions, against different bowlers. But I want more from great players. I want impact knocks. It doesn't have to be a scintillating hundreds, but guts. Duds like Matthews and Dumminy have such knocks. Even an honest bloke like Faf has an impact knock. Kohli is superior to any of the players I've mentioned, surely it's not out of the relms of possibility for him to play similar knocks to these guys. He has a massive opportunity to be the first out and out great from India with the team he has. Instead of being a statistical anomaly. We already have seen what he is capable of in ODI's. No player has ever dominated SA in SA to that extent. He was brilliant, his stocks have risen. I definitely rate him above Amla now. Winning series away has that impact on me. India didn't just win, they destroyed.

Dravid has a higher average than Amla. But there is no way in hell I'd have him in my team ahead of Amla. Dravid wouldn't have scored a 100 in a session to win us a series in Australia. Dravid wouldn't score a hundred at 80, and another one at second dig of 300 balls to take us within 10 deliveries of winning a series in India. Or standing up every time the #1 ranking is on the line.
Same way I rate Martyn ahead of Clarke.
Great players have that x-factor, and I'm very demanding and taxing on them. Else why do we call them great? What's the point?

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

4 in 18 years. Won 4, lost 6 and drew 3.
Prior to the 2015 tour South Africa enjoyed a 4 - 3 lead since the turn of the Millennium. That's what you call bullying a team in their den, in foreign conditions at that.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...anval1=span;team=3;template=results;type=team

Aus vs sa in sa.This is what i call bullying a team in their own den.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Aus vs sa in sa.This is what i call bullying a team in their own den.

SA in Aus is the same so they get cancelled out

 

[soso_killer]

Aus vs sa in sa.This is what i call bullying a team in their own den.

Yeah, to smithereens at that. Then again SA conditions aren't alien to the Australians. Which should put into perspective SA dominance in India. To consistently win there by 300+ or an innings is incredible.
SA and Australia bullying each other away must come to a stop though.

 

[soso_killer]

Just add India's stats in SA for a comparison to be made, not that it will be close but just for kicks

It will be a humiliation though, even India's margin of victories in SA have been marginal.

Anyway we're digressing a bit. There debate stemmed from excuses about bowling attacks, I take exceptions to that.
Australia have a larger economy than South Africa, not only can they support their fringe players (as opposed to SA losing them) they have facilities and resources to improve them and later join the Australian team as stronger better players. The likes of Starc (including nothing players like Marsh) are capable of taking sabbaticals from the IPL at will etc. to either take a break from the game or hone their skills in the county championship. We don't enjoy similar luxuries.
We have produced the worst spinners of all cricketing nations over the last 30 years. We must address transformation issues. But we're not making excuses, we're competing.

 

[Adijazz1706]

It will be a humiliation though, even India's margin of victories in SA have been marginal.

Anyway we're digressing a bit. There debate stemmed from excuses about bowling attacks, I take exceptions to that.
Australia have a larger economy than South Africa, not only can they support their fringe players (as opposed to SA losing them) they have facilities and resources to improve them and later join the Australian team as stronger better players. The likes of Starc (including nothing players like Marsh) are capable of taking sabbaticals from the IPL at will etc. to either take a break from the game or hone their skills in the county championship. We don't enjoy similar luxuries.
We have produced the worst spinners of all cricketing nations over the last 30 years. We must address transformation issues. But we're not making excuses, we're competing.

Maharaj is good, unless he plays SC players in SA who'll take him to task

 

[Sidilicious]

4 in 18 years. Won 4, lost 6 and drew 3.
Prior to the 2015 tour South Africa enjoyed a 4 - 3 lead since the turn of the Millennium. That's what you call bullying a team in their den, in foreign conditions at that.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...anval1=span;team=3;template=results;type=team

A 4-6 record is not bullying a team! Its competing. Which I will give to you. SA have been the only team to compete in India over the last 2 decades. India's record since the turn of the millenium is 3-7. 1 fewer victory and 1 more loss. Not a HUGE difference.

For SA - their W/L against India since 2000 is 1.22

When you compare Australia in South Africa, thats a bullying.

Australia in SA - 11 wins, 5 losses
SA In Australia - 5 wins, 7 losses

SA W/L against Aus is 1.8 !
Thats what you call a proper bullying

And Aus has an overall W/L record of 0.933 against India.

The only bullying I have seen so far is Aus against SA. And its going to get worse with Rabada not playing )


A com

 

[Sidilicious]

It will be a humiliation though, even India's margin of victories in SA have been marginal.

Anyway we're digressing a bit. There debate stemmed from excuses about bowling attacks, I take exceptions to that.
Australia have a larger economy than South Africa, not only can they support their fringe players (as opposed to SA losing them) they have facilities and resources to improve them and later join the Australian team as stronger better players. The likes of Starc (including nothing players like Marsh) are capable of taking sabbaticals from the IPL at will etc. to either take a break from the game or hone their skills in the county championship. We don't enjoy similar luxuries.
We have produced the worst spinners of all cricketing nations over the last 30 years. We must address transformation issues. But we're not making excuses, we're competing.

Sa in India - 4 wins, 6 losses
India in SA - 3 wins, 7 losses

How is 1 fewer victory, and 1 more loss a humiliation?

A humiliation is what Aus hands to SA every time. Aus have a W/L of 2.2 in SA

2.2!! )

 

[WengerOut]

Sa in India - 4 wins, 6 losses
India in SA - 3 wins, 7 losses

How is 1 fewer victory, and 1 more loss a humiliation?

A humiliation is what Aus hands to SA every time. Aus have a W/L of 2.2 in SA

2.2!! )

Rain saved them from getting an epic Phainty on the easiest pitch in Bangalore 2015.

 

[soso_killer]

Maharaj is good, unless he plays SC players in SA who'll take him to task

Historically. Maharaj is a new edition, he hasn't won matches for us in Asia as of yet.

 

[Sidilicious]

Rain saved them from getting an epic Phainty on the easiest pitch in Bangalore 2015.

Yeah. Given their performance [MENTION=132982]soso_killer[/MENTION] 's arrogance is really funny. Its not like they have considerably outplayed India. Sa have been the only team to consistently compete in India. I will give them that. But other than the series in 2001, India has also properly competed in SA every series.

His arrogance is really surprising. Especially given how disdainfully Aus treat them in SA.

 

[soso_killer]

A 4-6 record is not bullying a team! Its competing. Which I will give to you. SA have been the only team to compete in India over the last 2 decades. India's record since the turn of the millenium is 3-7. 1 fewer victory and 1 more loss. Not a HUGE difference.

For SA - their W/L against India since 2000 is 1.22

When you compare Australia in South Africa, thats a bullying.

Australia in SA - 11 wins, 5 losses
SA In Australia - 5 wins, 7 losses

SA W/L against Aus is 1.8 !
Thats what you call a proper bullying

And Aus has an overall W/L record of 0.933 against India.

The only bullying I have seen so far is Aus against SA. And its going to get worse with Rabada not playing )


A com

Australia and South Africa bully each other home and away. The only time they had a measure of us was when they had a great team. In return they never played a great SA team. The only time they did we blanked them 4-0 and never played a Test for 20 years after.

Regarding India, when a team alien to your conditions has a 4-3 record over a 15 period is not bullying then I don't know what does. The margin of victories as well. It's not as if they were smash and grab. They were comprehensive humiliations. India shouldn't be competing with South Africa in India, they should be competing with Pakistan and simply destroy SENA countries. The likes of England have won a series there, unacceptable.

 

[Sidilicious]

Australia and South Africa bully each other home and away. The only time they had a measure of us was when they had a great team. In return they never played a great SA team. The only time they did we blanked them 4-0 and never played a Test for 20 years after.

Regarding India, when a team alien to your conditions has a 4-3 record over a 15 period is not bullying then I don't know what does. The margin of victories as well. It's not as if they were smash and grab. They were comprehensive humiliations. India shouldn't be competing with South Africa in India, they should be competing with Pakistan and simply destroy SENA countries. The likes of England have won a series there, unacceptable.

1) SA have been bullied at home by Aus, and SA has not done anywhere near the same to Aus. Aus holds a greater W/L record against you home and away. That is not bullying!!!

2) Alien conditions or not, India has only lost 2 series at home this millennia. 3 if you include 2000 (when SA won). How many have SA lost at home? I vaguely remember 5 series!!!

3) Whatever the win margin may be, the fact is Sa has competed marginally better in India, than India has in SA. If you actually only look at this millennia, starting 01 Jan 2001, you have a W/L record of 0.33 in India. India on the other hand has a W/L record of 0.42 in SA. Its only your 2-0 win in 2000 which makes your W/L better.

 

[soso_killer]

Sa in India - 4 wins, 6 losses
India in SA - 3 wins, 7 losses

How is 1 fewer victory, and 1 more loss a humiliation?

A humiliation is what Aus hands to SA every time. Aus have a W/L of 2.2 in SA

2.2!! )

South Africa have won a series there, a whitewash. Drawn twice as well. That's the big difference, not sporadic victories with no barring on the series. Comparing SA and India is silly really. I was merely giving the original poster a dressing down who not only came up with arbitrary parameters but incorrect stats. SA have bullied India since readmission (would have been worse in the 70's and 80's), their comfortable W/L ratio suggest that. I don't know what the OP was trying to raise.

 

[Sidilicious]

South Africa have won a series there, a whitewash. Drawn twice as well. That's the big difference, not sporadic victories with no barring on the series. Comparing SA and India is silly really. I was merely giving the original poster a dressing down who not only came up with arbitrary parameters but incorrect stats. SA have bullied India since readmission (would have been worse in the 70's and 80's), their comfortable W/L ratio suggest that. I don't know what the OP was trying to raise.

Again, as I said, SA has competed better than any other team in India on a consistent basis. But your claim was that SA has bullied India in India. Which is factually incorrect.

 

[soso_killer]

Yeah. Given their performance [MENTION=132982]soso_killer[/MENTION] 's arrogance is really funny. Its not like they have considerably outplayed India. Sa have been the only team to consistently compete in India. I will give them that. But other than the series in 2001, India has also properly competed in SA every series.

His arrogance is really surprising. Especially given how disdainfully Aus treat them in SA.

They have though, visit SA margin of victories against India in India. The likes of Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka should not come to SA and win by an innings or 200+ runs on a regular basis. South Africa have been allowed to do that on a regular basis in Asia with no spinners at that. I could be wrong here, but how many matches since readmission have Sri Lanka, India and Pakistan combined won in SA by an innings or 200+ runs? How many have South Africa won by similar margins in India alone? That should put into perspective the bullying SA have dished out.

 

[Savage]

Firstly Kohli is no Lara or Tendulkar. Let's get that straight.
AB has underachieved in Tests, even then he has had impact knocks.
The 33 he scored of 245 balls against Australia is an impact knock of the highest. I rate that knock than any hundred he has scored because that helped advance the team's course.

Australia were so mentally and physically knackered after they toiled for two days. All the third Test needed was for someone to grab the match and series by the throat. Amla dully delivered the best knock that has ever been played in Australia. It's all thanks to AB and Faf.

There's a reason I don't rate AB's 90 against Johnson.It was an impact less knock. Australia won by 200+ runs and two days to spare. I already know AB is the most talented bat I've ever seen, hence I'm always harsh on him. However as stated before, there have been better match winners and impact players. Over the next two years he has to rectify that. He has a hell of a task with this brittle batting unit. But he must simply do it, no excuses. He played alongside Smith, Kallis and Amla and did not have the impact he is having now. Why didn't he play similar knocks before (especially the scintillating hundred he just scored)? He would be a great already.

Yes I rate and value consistency. Scoring in all conditions, against different bowlers. But I want more from great players. I want impact knocks. It doesn't have to be a scintillating hundreds, but guts. Duds like Matthews and Dumminy have such knocks. Even an honest bloke like Faf has an impact knock. Kohli is superior to any of the players I've mentioned, surely it's not out of the relms of possibility for him to play similar knocks to these guys. He has a massive opportunity to be the first out and out great from India with the team he has. Instead of being a statistical anomaly. We already have seen what he is capable of in ODI's. No player has ever dominated SA in SA to that extent. He was brilliant, his stocks have risen. I definitely rate him above Amla now. Winning series away has that impact on me. India didn't just win, they destroyed.

Dravid has a higher average than Amla. But there is no way in hell I'd have him in my team ahead of Amla. Dravid wouldn't have scored a 100 in a session to win us a series in Australia. Dravid wouldn't score a hundred at 80, and another one at second dig of 300 balls to take us within 10 deliveries of winning a series in India. Or standing up every time the #1 ranking is on the line.
Same way I rate Martyn ahead of Clarke.
Great players have that x-factor, and I'm very demanding and taxing on them. Else why do we call them great? What's the point?

That knock was impactless because SA didn't win.But his performance in that series vs Australia(2014 where SA lost) is still better than his performance in England(2012 where SA won).

Like someone said earlier,One player doesn't win the series,team does.By using same logic,Shouldn't Ponting be much better than Lara/Sachin. Ponting performance is already comparable with Sachin/Lara and his Team dominated away from home.But still not many rate him over Sachin/Lara.

IN 2013 Kohli scored more runs in SA than any other SA batsmen.Did India win?NO
IN 2014 Kohli scored more runs in AUS apart from Smith.Did India win?NO
Just recently,Kohli was highest run scorer in SA(201).Did India win?NO

In 3rd Test vs SA(2018),Kohli was India's best batsmen which helped India won that match.But no sane person would rate that performance over Adelaide knock(2014) which experts like Ian chappell regards as best knock he's ever seen in 4th innings.

Your logic is akin to AB devilliers(or any other SA player) is not ODI ATG because he failed to win WC while Kohli already has WC.But that doesn't mean AB performance in WC is inferior to Kohli.

Kohli has a team to win away series in AUS,NZ and ENG.But still Kohli batting brilliantly doesn't guarantee Away series win at all.SA won away from home with the help of Steyn,Amla,Smith,Kallis not just because of Ab devilliers.

While some insecure Kohli fan gets carried away from all the away success he's had but they completely ignore his away performance in England and Home performance against Australia where team desperately needed him to perform and he was simply destroyed.

Kohli is brilliant but to overtake AB he has to now perform brilliantly in Aus,ENG and NZ series.Series win in those country would definitely make his performance extra special.But that away series win would depend on Team India not Kohli.

 

[soso_killer]

1) SA have been bullied at home by Aus, and SA has not done anywhere near the same to Aus. Aus holds a greater W/L record against you home and away. That is not bullying!!!

2) Alien conditions or not, India has only lost 2 series at home this millennia. 3 if you include 2000 (when SA won). How many have SA lost at home? I vaguely remember 5 series!!!

3) Whatever the win margin may be, the fact is Sa has competed marginally better in India, than India has in SA. If you actually only look at this millennia, starting 01 Jan 2001, you have a W/L record of 0.33 in India. India on the other hand has a W/L record of 0.42 in SA. Its only your 2-0 win in 2000 which makes your W/L better.

Conversely, we've bullied Australia in Australia. I've seen them dish out slabs to avoid any form of humiliation. In either case, 3 series wins in a row in such a difficult and intimidating place to tour is good enough for me. Not even the Windies bullied Australia in three consecutive series like South Africa has. Good luck to any team coming anywhere close to what we've accomplished over there. I'm very happy with our record against Australia considering we've played them at their strongest. Over the last 30 years they are way stronger than they were in the 80's, we would have thrashed. Beating minnows doesn't do no good.

2) India have lost to SA, England and Australia at home. Again shouldn't be happening, I could forgive a loss to Australia (great team). But shouldn't be losing a series to SA and England, unacceptable. We don't allow Asian teams to come here and win series or draw them for that matter.

3) SA haven't competed marginally better, we whitewashed a series and drawn twice. India has lost all their tours to South Africa, bar 1.
Again this is not being boastful but stating facts and addressing the the original OP. I don't know why you saw it necessary to get yourself involved.

 

[Savage]

Rain saved them from getting an epic Phainty on the easiest pitch in Bangalore 2015.

unfortunately India also missed good batting practice in that test.It would've been very difficult for SA bowlers to stop India's batting line up on that pitch.

 

[jnaveen1980]

There is no comparison. The only ones making one are some deluded Kohli fans. His competition is with batsmen like Smith, Root, Kane, Pujara and Azhar.

Yes there is comparison. ABDV did not score a 100 in 3 years. Kohli has been scoring 100 for fun. And can you tell what the ICC ranking is? Kohli no.2 in Test. no.1 in ODI no.6 in T20. ABDV no.7 in tests no.2 in ODIs, no.32 in T20. Let me say who deluded is. Someone who is bent on being Anti Kohli.

 

[Bilal7]

Kohli has never played an innings as good as the one ABD played a couple days ago. AB did it against a fantastic attack, with the ball reversing and he grabbed the game by the throat. Granted, Kohli still has a lot of cricket left in him but this is exactly why comparing him to a veteran like de Villiers is pointless, as of now.

unfortunately India also missed good batting practipce in that test.It would've been very difficult for SA bowlers to stop India's batting line up on that pitch.

Well, had South Africa been at full strength in that series and batted first at Mohali and Nagpur, we would have seen what we saw Australia do at Pune.

 

[Bilal7]

Yes there is comparison. ABDV did not score a 100 in 3 years. Kohli has been scoring 100 for fun. And can you tell what the ICC ranking is? Kohli no.2 in Test. no.1 in ODI no.6 in T20. ABDV no.7 in tests no.2 in ODIs, no.32 in T20. Let me say who deluded is. Someone who is bent on being Anti Kohli.

Cricket did not start being played three years ago.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Cricket did not start being played three years ago.

3 years is a sizable number of years in one's career. Almost 1/4th of his career. So it is a legit comparison.

 

[Bilal7]

3 years is a sizable number of years in one's career. Almost 1/4th of his career. So it is a legit comparison.

And the remaining 3/4 of his career? Kohli was a nobody in test cricket when ABD was battling it out against MJ at his peak, on hostile pitches. I repeat, there is no comparison here. Compare Kohli with Smith instead. They've played for a similar number of years.

 

[Princejain191]

Kohli has never played an innings as good as the one ABD played a couple days ago. AB did it against a fantastic attack, with the ball reversing and he grabbed the game by the throat. Granted, Kohli still has a lot of cricket left in him but this is exactly why comparing him to a veteran like de Villiers is pointless, as of now.

I have said above in this thread that AB's achievements make him better in tests and it is pointless to compare them given the different stages in their test careers they are in.

About the inning - ball wasn't reversing miles. It was reversing. That is why I said that your statement was ignorant to the reality. The major threat was after first 45 mins of tea on day 2. Elgar and Amla were defensive then but as long as the wickets remained, it was fine. They played out the entire second session.

Also, it got remarkably easier as the innings progressed and especially when new ball was taken. I rate this inning from AB high, not because of the pitch, but because of the situation his team and the series was in. Wicket was pretty flat on day 3 - first session, when Maharaj and Philander scored 30-odd each too.

I would actually rate Virat's 141 in Adelaide higher than this. So he has played a better knock IMO. And to counterattack Johnson, Lyon, Harris, Siddle attack at home on an unarguably tougher pitch than this was an amazing effort. His 119 in Johannesburg and 153 in Centurion are comparable too. Ball was reversing a lot more in centurion than what AB faced here actually, also we were 0-1 down and he kept us in the game single-handidly. But you would have different opinions of course.

 

[VijayTamilan]

Kohli has never played an innings as good as the one ABD played a couple days ago. AB did it against a fantastic attack, with the ball reversing and he grabbed the game by the throat. Granted, Kohli still has a lot of cricket left in him but this is exactly why comparing him to a veteran like de Villiers is pointless, as of now.



Well, had South Africa been at full strength in that series and batted first at Mohali and Nagpur, we would have seen what we saw Australia do at Pune.

Kohli's 153 can arguably be said to be a better innings because it was an away innings, against a fantastic attack, on a similar pitch. It boggles my mind that a near-identical innings that was played only 2 months ago is forgotten by you.

You can also talk about his 104 vs SL, or his 81 at Vizhag vs England (the same match where he scored a 167), but let's just stick to the 153 in a series where he outscored every single batsman - including an AbD who'd claimed to be in the form of his life.

 

[Ab Fan]

Kohli fans are comparing Kohli to AB on current form.

Non-kohli fans are comparing their overall career.

Obviously, overall career, AB wins while on current form, it is Kohli.

 

[jnaveen1980]

And the remaining 3/4 of his career? Kohli was a nobody in test cricket when ABD was battling it out against MJ at his peak, on hostile pitches. I repeat, there is no comparison here. Compare Kohli with Smith instead. They've played for a similar number of years.

Hostile pitches? lol Dude SA pitches are where he grew up. When they play against AUstralia they serve a slow pitch to them like in the last test. One of the slowest pitch. Moment Starc pitched the ball, it took ages to get to batsman. I even registered in the commentary thread. SA vs Australia is like India vs Srilanka. You play similar cricket ball, on similar pitches, used similar attacks. You should hardly have any issues facing each other. Australia rarely produced great swing bowlers in the last decade of so. I still remember how Sreesanth got him caught behind repeatedly. Sreesanth has dismissed ABDV 5 times. out of which 4 times caught behind. He is not as efficient player against genuine swing bowling as you seem to suggest.

 

[Savage]

Well, had South Africa been at full strength in that series and batted first at Mohali and Nagpur, we would have seen what we saw Australia do at Pune.

South Africa did batted first in that test and still couldn't capitalize as they were bowled out for just 214 runs.In response,India were already 80/0.