You are not saying anything original here. People have made this logically fallacious argument countless times & they are not prepared to apply the reverse logic because it is inconvenient.
If Kohli & other legendary modern batsman cannot be compared to the great batsmen of the 70’s & 80’s because of better pitches, smaller boundaries, better helmets, better bats, batting-friendly rules, then the same logic applies to the bowlers as well.
I am ready to accept your nonsense argument if you are ready to apply the reverse logic.
The reverse logic is that the likes of Lillee, Thompson, Marshall, Holding, Imran, Wasim etc. are not comparable to Starc, Cummins, Rabada, Shaheen, Bumrah, Boult, Hazlewood etc. because those old era bowlers played in an era where bats were thin, boundaries were huge, pitches were better for bowlers, helmets were not durable, rules were not batting-friendly.
You cannot have it both ways. If you have to discredit Kohli & other modern batsmen for XYZ reasons then you have to discredit the old era bowlers for the same XYZ reasons.
Great players are great in every era. They have qualities that make them stand out. Viv would be Viv in any era & Kohli would be Kohli in any era, but if you are going to come with a nonsense argument to prove otherwise then please apply it consistently.
