Why do some Test greats struggle in White-Ball cricket and vice versa?

[mominsaigol]

I've always found it strange how some Test cricketers are considered all-time greats in red-ball cricket—like Steve Smith, Joe Root, Younis Khan, and Rahul Dravid—yet are merely average in white-ball formats.

Root, Smith, and Dravid aren’t bad ODI players by any means, but they are nowhere near as dominant as they are in Test cricket.

On the flip side, you have players like David Warner and Virat Kohli, who are white-ball gems but relatively poor in Test cricket—except in certain conditions and against specific oppositions.

One key trend I’ve noticed is that, during the one-ball ODI era, a great Test batter was often either:

A) A naturally good ODI batter (e.g., Ricky Ponting, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis)

B) A poor ODI batter altogether (e.g., VVS Laxman)

However, since the introduction of the two-new-ball rule in ODIs, it has become possible for players to be white-ball greats(Kohli, David Warner) while struggling in Test cricket. This is a stark contrast to the past, where ODIs were more of a shortened version of Test cricket and are now perceived as an extension of T20 cricket.

This shift highlights how ODIs have evolved from a middle-ground format between Tests and T20s to an extension of T20 cricket itself. The ability to adapt across formats is now more specialized than ever.

Would love to hear others' thoughts.

 

[Devadwal]

I've always found it strange how some Test cricketers are considered all-time greats in red-ball cricket—like Steve Smith, Joe Root, Younis Khan, and Rahul Dravid—yet are merely average in white-ball formats.

Root, Smith, and Dravid aren’t bad ODI players by any means, but they are nowhere near as dominant as they are in Test cricket.

On the flip side, you have players like David Warner and Virat Kohli, who are white-ball gems but relatively poor in Test cricket—except in certain conditions and against specific oppositions.

One key trend I’ve noticed is that, during the one-ball ODI era, a great Test batter was often either:

A) A naturally good ODI batter (e.g., Ricky Ponting, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis)

B) A poor ODI batter altogether (e.g., VVS Laxman)

However, since the introduction of the two-new-ball rule in ODIs, it has become possible for players to be white-ball greats(Kohli, David Warner) while struggling in Test cricket. This is a stark contrast to the past, where ODIs were more of a shortened version of Test cricket and are now perceived as an extension of T20 cricket.

This shift highlights how ODIs have evolved from a middle-ground format between Tests and T20s to an extension of T20 cricket itself. The ability to adapt across formats is now more specialized than ever.

Would love to hear others' thoughts.

Hahahaha . Virat is poor in test cricket ? Hahaha

 

[mominsaigol]

Hahahaha Virat is poor in test cricket ? Hahaha

So someone deleted my message yet didn't delete your troll message. Hypocrisy at its finest.

 

[RidiculousMan]

I've always found it strange how some Test cricketers are considered all-time greats in red-ball cricket—like Steve Smith, Joe Root, Younis Khan, and Rahul Dravid—yet are merely average in white-ball formats.

Root, Smith, and Dravid aren’t bad ODI players by any means, but they are nowhere near as dominant as they are in Test cricket.

On the flip side, you have players like David Warner and Virat Kohli, who are white-ball gems but relatively poor in Test cricket—except in certain conditions and against specific oppositions.

One key trend I’ve noticed is that, during the one-ball ODI era, a great Test batter was often either:

A) A naturally good ODI batter (e.g., Ricky Ponting, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis)

B) A poor ODI batter altogether (e.g., VVS Laxman)

However, since the introduction of the two-new-ball rule in ODIs, it has become possible for players to be white-ball greats(Kohli, David Warner) while struggling in Test cricket. This is a stark contrast to the past, where ODIs were more of a shortened version of Test cricket and are now perceived as an extension of T20 cricket.

This shift highlights how ODIs have evolved from a middle-ground format between Tests and T20s to an extension of T20 cricket itself. The ability to adapt across formats is now more specialized than ever.

Would love to hear others' thoughts.

Smith and Joe cannot be considered Average in White ball. Specially in One Day format which I presume is the main point in you creating this thread.

That main point though I agree with. There are plenty of players who are better in Test Cricket than One Day and vice versa.

Simple answer is different formats require different skillsets and approach. I'm going to talk about batters only here. Generally batters who are slow starters and can't force an issue are more likely to be not great One Day batters. On the other hand batters who don't have patience and good defense are more likely go be not great Test batters.

In T20 Cricket things and skills are even more clear cut as I don't believe you even need to perfect the traditional skillset of Test and One Day in order to succeed in T20. Prime recent example is Sky.

 

[ChennaiFan]

...This is a stark contrast to the past, where ODIs were more of a shortened version of Test cricket and are now perceived as an extension of T20 cricket.

Yes, this seems to the case of modern ODI's. Batsmen have become used playing big shots in T20s and they are comfortable playing them in ODI's too. As you alluded to, the two balls rule also helps the current batsmen.

When only one ball was used, ODI's used to be harder with spinners playing bigger role. Good Test batsmen negotiated the spin and swing better than the average Test batsmen.

 

[kron]

So someone deleted my message yet didn't delete your troll message. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Smith is far from average in odi

He is an atg in odi. Legend
Infact better than kohli who scores useless runs. But overall body of work goes to virat in odi

Having said that, I would still say smith the odi player is still better than Virat the test player

So it’s a bad comparison imo

 

[kron]

O

Smith and Joe cannot be considered Average in White ball. Specially in One Day format which I presume is the main point in you creating this thread.

That main point though I agree with. There are plenty of players who are better in Test Cricket than One Day and vice versa.

Simple answer is different formats require different skillsets and approach. I'm going to talk about batters only here. Generally batters who are slow starters and can't force an issue are more likely to be not great One Day batters. On the other hand batters who don't have patience and good defense are more likely go be not great Test batters.

In T20 Cricket things and skills are even more clear cut as I don't believe you even need to perfect the traditional skillset of Test and One Day in order to succeed in T20. Prime recent example is Sky.

odi Is by far the easiest format hence useless Virat does well
Even there he chokes in key finals lmao in odi world cups
He only did well in champions trophy

I never rated this guy

In tests barring 3 years he has been useless

Averages now soon will be 43 at this rate.

So bad in tests. So many weaknesses. Very poor.

 

[mominsaigol]

Smith is far from average in odi

He is an atg in odi. Legend
Infact better than kohli who scores useless runs. But overall body of work goes to virat in odi

Having said that, I would still say smith the odi player is still better than Virat the test player

So it’s a bad comparison imo

@Everyone

First God sakes, when I meant average i didn't mean they were bad players. I even clarified up above that their not bad players (dravid, smith, root) however their clearly no where near as good as they are in test cricket.

Root is very average in odi cricket. He's a superior version of babar azam in that he gets 50's freqently, woll occasionally het a century and accumulates well but he isn't exactly a dominant odi force.

Same with smith.

On current form Williamson is better then these 2.

Stop nitpicking and understand that I was comparing the formats and not claiming their horrible odi players.

 

[mominsaigol]

O

odi Is by far the easiest format hence useless Virat does well
Even there he chokes in key finals lmao in odi world cups
He only did well in champions trophy

I never rated this guy

In tests barring 3 years he has been useless

Averages now soon will be 43 at this rate.

So bad in tests. So many weaknesses. Very poor.

Please educate people , hopefully an Indian who lives in Brisbane can educate other Indians

 

[BouncerGuy]

Some players are GOD gifted to excel naturally in all formats. It is not necessary to be good in everything. Be very good in what you think you do best. Simple

 

[BouncerGuy]

STAY ON TOPIC GUYS.... NO PERSONAL REMARKS

 

[Nikhil_cric]

"White ball formats" is quite a misleading phrase.

Got to distinguish ODIs from T20's..

Steve Smith was a very good #3 for the most part in ODIs, only behind Ponting for an Australian #3 and maybe on par with Dean Jones.

It was in T20's that he was very mediocre.

 

[mominsaigol]

"White ball formats" is quite a misleading phrase.

Got to distinguish ODIs from T20's..

Steve Smith was a very good #3 for the most part in ODIs, only behind Ponting for an Australian #3 and maybe on par with Dean Jones.

It was in T20's that he was very mediocre.

Dean Jones is way better then smith in odi.

Steve smith had a purple patch phase where in 2015 he was massively > kohli as well. Infact it 2015 Steve smith > any era kohli on odi except for 2016 kohli who's better.

But after that he was just okay. From 2016 to 2021 he was mostly an England and India basher but was poor against other teams.

Post 2021 he was crap in odi.

In tests he's always been dominant. It was only after wtc 2023 where he fumbled a bit but leave it to India to help him regain form, his last bashing before his form slump was vs India, and him regaining form was vs India as well lol.

 

[kron]

@Everyone

First God sakes, when I meant average i didn't mean they were bad players. I even clarified up above that their not bad players (dravid, smith, root) however their clearly no where near as good as they are in test cricket.

Root is very average in odi cricket. He's a superior version of babar azam in that he gets 50's freqently, woll occasionally het a century and accumulates well but he isn't exactly a dominant odi force.

Same with smith.

On current form Williamson is better then these 2.

Stop nitpicking and understand that I was comparing the formats and not claiming their horrible odi players.

The word average mediocre and the term you used like he isn’t a bad player should never be associated with a player like smith
He is the goat test playeR

And one of the best odi players of all time too.

He won 2 world cups too. He was the reason they won in 2015. That alone for me puts him above kohli easily.
Don’t give a crap about kohli soft runs vs crap teams and messing up in key finals

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Dean Jones is way better then smith in odi.

Steve smith had a purple patch phase where in 2015 he was massively > kohli as well. Infact it 2015 Steve smith > any era kohli on odi except for 2016 kohli who's better.

But after that he was just okay. From 2016 to 2021 he was mostly an England and India basher but was poor against other teams.

Post 2021 he was crap in odi.

In tests he's always been dominant. It was only after wtc 2023 where he fumbled a bit but leave it to India to help him regain form, his last bashing before his form slump was vs India, and him regaining form was vs India as well lol.

OK but my point was any player who has done well in 2 formats cannot be included here.

Being good at 3 formats is increasingly rare.

A better example than Steve Smith would be Alastair Cook who was good only at Test cricket or Michael Bevan who was an excellent one day batsman alone.

 

[kron]

Dean Jones is way better then smith in odi.

Steve smith had a purple patch phase where in 2015 he was massively > kohli as well. Infact it 2015 Steve smith > any era kohli on odi except for 2016 kohli who's better.

But after that he was just okay. From 2016 to 2021 he was mostly an England and India basher but was poor against other teams.

Post 2021 he was crap in odi.

In tests he's always been dominant. It was only after wtc 2023 where he fumbled a bit but leave it to India to help him regain form, his last bashing before his form slump was vs India, and him regaining form was vs India as well lol.

No version of kohli is better than peak version of smith in odi and definitely not tests

In t20 sure ok. I will give kohli that.

 

[kron]

OK but my point was any player who has done well in 2 formats cannot be included here.

Being good at 3 formats is increasingly rare.

A better example than Steve Smith would be Alastair Cook who was good only at Test cricket or Michael Bevan who was an excellent one day batsman alone.

agreed it’s rare
Hazlewood might be the one that has won all 3 titles or is it Cummins?
But yea it’s hard to dominate in all 3

 

[mominsaigol]

OK but my point was any player who has done well in 2 formats cannot be included here.

Being good at 3 formats is increasingly rare.

A better example than Steve Smith would be Alastair Cook who was good only at Test cricket or Michael Bevan who was an excellent one day batsman alone.

Sir, Dil Khush rakhnei kei lyei, Why don't you rewrite my OP and choose your own players? If you wish chatgpt can help. Ya free mein aap ko deepseek dil wa doon?

So sorry Sir, Bevan, Cook zindabad. Smith bad.

 

[DTrump]

How many bats are equally good in both formats? Tendulkar, Richards, De Villiers. Can add in Lara and Punter but it is a small list.

Kallis was a mediocre odi batsman btw.
Warner and Kohli have a better test record than Gooch and Gower- Not saying they are better but it is a stretch to call them average.

Most have a preferred format. The great Marshall never cracked odi.

Roy, Zaman, etc have benefitted from 2 new balls. Still need skill to do well in odi. Look at Allen and Jfm. Struggling badly.

Don't think odi are an extension of T20s. Maybe in India and Pakistan where pitches are ridiculously flat. England back in the day as well but post pandemic ball is doing a lot more there.

 

[Hitman]

How many bats are equally good in both formats? Tendulkar, Richards, De Villiers. Can add in Lara and Punter but it is a small list.

Can add Greg Chappell. Didn't play enough ODI matches, but did really well is whatever he played.

 

[kron]

McGrath goat in tests
Goat in odi too

 

[Sachin fan]

Hahahaha . Virat is poor in test cricket ? Hahaha

He averages 46 in tests, we have 10-15 batsmen who have been better than him in our history. He is barely above average, someone who had a test purple patch of couple of years.

 

[Sachin fan]

OK but my point was any player who has done well in 2 formats cannot be included here.

Being good at 3 formats is increasingly rare.

A better example than Steve Smith would be Alastair Cook who was good only at Test cricket or Michael Bevan who was an excellent one day batsman alone.

So no player before 2007 can be included? Lol.

 

[Mobashir]

Couldn't

I've always found it strange how some Test cricketers are considered all-time greats in red-ball cricket—like Steve Smith, Joe Root, Younis Khan, and Rahul Dravid—yet are merely average in white-ball formats.

Root, Smith, and Dravid aren’t bad ODI players by any means, but they are nowhere near as dominant as they are in Test cricket.

On the flip side, you have players like David Warner and Virat Kohli, who are white-ball gems but relatively poor in Test cricket—except in certain conditions and against specific oppositions.

One key trend I’ve noticed is that, during the one-ball ODI era, a great Test batter was often either:

A) A naturally good ODI batter (e.g., Ricky Ponting, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis)

B) A poor ODI batter altogether (e.g., VVS Laxman)

However, since the introduction of the two-new-ball rule in ODIs, it has become possible for players to be white-ball greats(Kohli, David Warner) while struggling in Test cricket. This is a stark contrast to the past, where ODIs were more of a shortened version of Test cricket and are now perceived as an extension of T20 cricket.

This shift highlights how ODIs have evolved from a middle-ground format between Tests and T20s to an extension of T20 cricket itself. The ability to adapt across formats is now more specialized than ever.

Would love to hear others' thoughts.

Couldn't have taken Worst examples even by trying.

Smith, Root poor in ODI's,
Kohli Warner poor in Test.
Kohli is easely the best asian test batsman having debuted after 2010. Warner one of the best test openers of his generation.
Smith, even with the lack of ODI's played, has played some legendary odi knocks.

 

[pakistani pride]

Younis Khan for is the biggest example. He was terrible in ODI cricket, yet played so many games for Pak.

 

[mominsaigol]

Couldn't

Couldn't have taken Worst examples even by trying.

Smith, Root poor in ODI's,
Kohli Warner poor in Test.
Kohli is easely the best asian test batsman having debuted after 2010. Warner one of the best test openers of his generation.
Smith, even with the lack of ODI's played, has played some legendary odi knocks.

Kohli is a circus clown in test cricket. Their 2 versions of kohli

The first one who avgerages 55 in his 20's. The other who avg 20+ in his 30's and dropped his avg to 46, probs will drop to 45-44 eventually.

As soon as kohli turned 30, I repeat 30 which is considered a batters prime, he fell off hard. He has only scored 3 test centuries in 6 years despite playing sufficient test cricket.

When he was 29 and was at 27 test centuries fans were 100% convinced he'd break sachin's century tally, however at present he can't even score 800 runs to get to 10K test runs.

Kohli is the biggest case of falling off extremely hard in test cricket.

I never said smith and root were poor in odi. I said they were avg. Smith avg 40 In odi and only 12 centuries. He's not that good in odi. He had a post 2015 purple patch where he was > kohli in odi cricket and won a tournament for his country. Beyond that he's been an Indian basher in odi mostly.

And root was carried by an op team. Once that team left, his poor comvrrsion rate was exposed.

Warner is a htb. He has 44 avg at home but is considered a poor man's sehwag in test.

Fix your cricketing takes

 

[Nikhil_cric]

So no player before 2007 can be included? Lol.

I didn't say anything about that. No need to twist my words. Thank you

 

[mominsaigol]

He averages 46 in tests, we have 10-15 batsmen who have been better than him in our history. He is barely above average, someone who had a test purple patch of couple of years.

Kohli went from the guy who was destined to surpass sachin to a guy who is an insult to below 50 avg test batters like Mahela, Sehwag etc etc.

No clue how someone can fall off so badly.

 

[shaz619]

The sentiment might be different elsewhere but in England we consider Joe Root an ATG across formats, he was a key part of the 2019 WC winning squad & team which had to rebuild after the 2015 WC humiliation. Root is also a stand up guy who is willing to change how he plays irrespective of his own strengths/comforts. He didn’t make the England T20I team due to the talent down here but anywhere else he makes the squad majority of the time.

Younis Khan for the era he played in wasn’t terrible, he is rightly criticised for underperforming however. Having said that, he did play some memorable knocks in key wins overseas, this is often overlooked. And while he did have success at the top order, I think in ODI’s during that period, against the softer ball, Younis would have been much better suited at number 5/6 and he would have really milked the spinners especially. Interestingly, be batted down the order during the 2009 T20 WC and played a key role putting on competitive totals during the tournament, the kind of job he did there should have been replicated in ODI’s with a consistent role down the order. I honestly think in this day and age he would be a 45+ averaging batsman and I know many will disagree but he has a case for an all format great and he has a trophy to back him up. Look at Babar expected to surpass every Pakistani batter in LOI’s but in ODI’s he is only known for that knock against NZ in 2019, there are so many performances from Younis I can recall and yes, he obviously is done now and Babar still got time; but it doesn’t look good for him.

 

[mominsaigol]

The sentiment might be different elsewhere but in England we consider Joe Root an ATG across formats, he was a key part of the 2019 WC winning squad & team which had to rebuild after the 2015 WC humiliation. Root is also a stand up guy who is willing to change how he plays irrespective of his own strengths/comforts. He didn’t make the England T20I team due to the talent down here but anywhere else he makes the squad majority of the time.

Younis Khan for the era he played in wasn’t terrible, he is rightly criticised for underperforming however. Having said that, he did play some memorable knocks in key wins overseas, this is often overlooked. And while he did have success at the top order, I think in ODI’s during that period, against the softer ball, Younis would have been much better suited at number 5/6 and he would have really milked the spinners especially. Interestingly, be batted down the order during the 2009 T20 WC and played a key role putting on competitive totals during the tournament, the kind of job he did there should have been replicated in ODI’s with a consistent role down the order. I honestly think in this day and age he would be a 45+ averaging batsman and I know many will disagree but he has a case for an all format great and he has a trophy to back him up. Look at Babar expected to surpass every Pakistani batter in LOI’s but in ODI’s he is only known for that knock against NZ in 2019, there are so many performances from Younis I can recall and yes, he obviously is done now and Babar still got time; but it doesn’t look good for him.

Bro most people are nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking. And most of these people are Indians so go figure.

The point wasn't that root is poor in odi cricket. He's very good, point is hes no where near his test self in odi.

Players who were equally good in odi and test include Ponting, Sachin, Viv, and many others.

Also side note, I'm not really including t20 in this list

 

[nish_mate]

Sunny G, ATG test opener
Below avg odi

Graeme Smith to a
degree
Mike Atherton
Michael Bevan
Dilshan

 

[charlie007]

He averages 46 in tests, we have 10-15 batsmen who have been better than him in our history. He is barely above average, someone who had a test purple patch of couple of years.

Actually, it would be premature to categorize Virat the Test batsman to be called average just yet. Yes, it is correct that he has regressed massively over the last 5+ years compared to his heights of performance but that doesn’t make him an average player overall in Tests. Perhaps, it would be good to wait out the Test verdict until he retires. For context, Kohli averaged over 55 runs an innings after 81 Tests which 99% of past and current players would gladly take.
He’s an ATG in both T20I and ODIs undisputably.

 

[Sachin fan]

I didn't say anything about that. No need to twist my words. Thank you

You clearly said all 3 formats are needed. How many t20s were played before 2007?

 

[Jazx]

I've always found it strange how some Test cricketers are considered all-time greats in red-ball cricket—like Steve Smith, Joe Root, Younis Khan, and Rahul Dravid—yet are merely average in white-ball formats.

Root, Smith, and Dravid aren’t bad ODI players by any means, but they are nowhere near as dominant as they are in Test cricket.

On the flip side, you have players like David Warner and Virat Kohli, who are white-ball gems but relatively poor in Test cricket—except in certain conditions and against specific oppositions.

One key trend I’ve noticed is that, during the one-ball ODI era, a great Test batter was often either:

A) A naturally good ODI batter (e.g., Ricky Ponting, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis)

B) A poor ODI batter altogether (e.g., VVS Laxman)

However, since the introduction of the two-new-ball rule in ODIs, it has become possible for players to be white-ball greats(Kohli, David Warner) while struggling in Test cricket. This is a stark contrast to the past, where ODIs were more of a shortened version of Test cricket and are now perceived as an extension of T20 cricket.

This shift highlights how ODIs have evolved from a middle-ground format between Tests and T20s to an extension of T20 cricket itself. The ability to adapt across formats is now more specialized than ever.

Would love to hear others' thoughts.

Virat in Test not the same as he in ODIs but not poor as well. Not an all time great but still a great Test batsman.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Virat Kohli
Azhar Ali (except CT 2017)
Adam Voges
Rohit Sharma

 

[mominsaigol]

Virat in Test not the same as he in ODIs but not poor as well. Not an all time great but still a great Test batsman.

Bhai, i swear you guys just don't read properly.

Again please read the sentence Carefully.

Kohli is a gem in whiteball cricket but Realtively Poor in test cricket.

^^ Do you guys know what Realtively even means?

 

[Jazx]

Bhai, i swear you guys just don't read properly.

Again please read the sentence Carefully.

Kohli is a gem in whiteball cricket but Realtively Poor in test cricket.

^^ Do you guys know what Realtively even means?

@Devadwal Here's why you should brush up on your English skills as well. It'll stop you from laughing like a deranged maniac.

Ohkay got it bhai.
But don't even use the word poor with such an excellent batsman

 

[mominsaigol]

Ohkay got it bhai.
But don't even use the word poor with such an excellent batsman

Kohli has been a clown in test cricket for 6 years. He's had occasional good innings and maybe a few peak moments specifically 2023 test and his bgt 100 in 2024 however overall he's been avg 20+ for 6 years in a row now.

Unless the team is Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan or WI, no team from Sena would accept him and if India was a nepotism country which bias kohli and rohit beyond belief, he'd have been booted out by now.

I can only see him maybe replacing Aussie openers khawaja and konstas in test cricket due to shortage of opening talent in Australia but otherwise he doesn't replace the jam packed middle order. And that is if kohli is willing to open.

Their 2 versions of kohli in test cricket. The one from age 20-29, who avg 55(2nd highest in his era after Steve smith who avg 61, with 27 test centuries)

And kohli from age 30 to present who's consistently avg 20+ for 6 years, has mustered 3 test centuries in 6 years and overall is a total loser. That 46 avg is not reflective of his actual current caliber in test cricket cause atm he makes someone like bavuma look world class

 

[DeadlyVenom]

We have increasingly high standards due to the stats we have at our disposal and I think we nit pick too much.

For a test batsman I have the following rates

40-42 - decent
42-45 good
45-50 + very Good
50+ excellent
52+ - top tier
Not much difference between excellent and top tier

There are of course exceptions for some players but overall it's ok banding I think.

For ODi
37-40 good
40-42- v good
42-45 - excellent
45+ top tier

 

[Devadwal]

You clearly said all 3 formats are needed. How many t20s were played before 2007?

Seeing you username my only advice to " Don't try to use social media toxicity ( Sachin( Rohit) , Virat and dhoni pathetic fans bases) here .

I know where its coming from.

 

[mominsaigol]

We have increasingly high standards due to the stats we have at our disposal and I think we nit pick too much.

For a test batsman I have the following rates

40-42 - decent
42-45 good
45-50 + very Good
50+ excellent
52+ - top tier
Not much difference between excellent and top tier

There are of course exceptions for some players but overall it's ok banding I think.

For ODi
37-40 good
40-42- v good
42-45 - excellent
45+ top tier

Your metric for odi only applies for players who played in the one ball era preferably around 1990 to 2012.

And before that even 40 was next to impossible achieve except for a few like Viv Richards, mainly due to those razor thin bats and stupidely unfair boundary circles, wides and unlimited bouncers.

Current era is useless, Imam is no where near the gold standard for odi batting. Now adays odi stats are completly useless outside tournament stats preferably world cup.

 

[mominsaigol]

I didn't take your view seriously. I just laughed whenever i see your brainless Post .

I didn't take your view seriously

Says the guy who hates an entire country thanks to me . Thank god I have the screenshot where you admitted it.

Anyway

The thing is, ive offered to debate you multiple times, properly in a 1 on 1 setting. No outsiders, insults or any of that.

these were the topics.

1) Bumrah vs Mcgrath
2) Smith vs kohli in test cricket
3) Kohli's overall stature in test cricket
4) Agha vs Rizwan
5) Travis Head's overall status and the overall implications of what hacks and tulla's really are.

^^ Not only do you run away 24/7, but I dont think you're actually capable of debating.

As I said, you're one of the weakest posters here even amoung your own Indian peers. The others make me think about logical arguments. In your case it's child play.

As I said you're my bunny. It's really not that hard to smack you daily.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Your metric for odi only applies for players who played in the one ball era preferably around 1990 to 2012.

And before that even 40 was next to impossible achieve except for a few like Viv Richards, mainly due to those razor thin bats and stupidely unfair boundary circles, wides and unlimited bouncers.

Current era is useless, Imam is no where near the gold standard for odi batting. Now adays odi stats are completly useless outside tournament stats preferably world cup.

Yeah you are right. There are some exceptions like Imam but we are talking about all time greats in the thread so it applies to majority of the players of the past who fall into ATG category.

 

[Devadwal]

I didn't take your view seriously

Says the guy who hates an entire country thanks to me . Thank god I have the screenshot where you admitted it.

Anyway

The thing is, ive offered to debate you multiple times, properly in a 1 on 1 setting. No outsiders, insults or any of that.

these were the topics.

1) Bumrah vs Mcgrath
2) Smith vs kohli in test cricket
3) Kohli's overall stature in test cricket
4) Agha vs Rizwan
5) Travis Head's overall status and the overall implications of what hacks and tulla's really are.

^^ Not only do you run away 24/7, but I dont think you're actually capable of debating.

As I said, you're one of the weakest posters here even amoung your own Indian peers. The others make me think about logical arguments. In your case it's child play.

As I said you're my bunny. It's really not that hard to smack you daily.

First go and learn basics things about cricket .

What is DLS and DRS ?

Everyone know my English is weak but my cricketing knowledge is way better than you.

 

[mominsaigol]

First go and learn basics things about cricket .

What is DLS and DRS ?

Everyone know my English is weak but my cricketing knowledge is way better than you.

My cricketing knowledge is way better than you.

No it isn't. Were you right about Rizwan > Agha? Or Kohli > Smith in test?

Ive given you 5 topics. Choose anyone, and we can debate in an appropriate thread. But at the end of the day you're a village boy going to against a future PHD holder

 

[mominsaigol]

Yeah you are right. There are some exceptions like Imam but we are talking about all time greats in the thread so it applies to majority of the players of the past who fall into ATG category.

Maybe so, but Viv Richards is undoubtedly top 3 best odi batters of all time possibly top 1, despite his stats not reflecting it due to eras.

Lots of batters especially sachin would have struggled in that era later in in their careers since to survive in that era you needed pitch perfect timing + very quick reactions.

Most batters including sachin who adopted a late cut approach later on in his career would have been toast in that era had he tried it.

1960-1984 and current era post 2012 doesn't really apply to the standard that you have set.

It only applies to 1985 to 2011 really.

 

[mominsaigol]

First go and learn basics things about cricket .

What is DLS and DRS ?

Everyone know my English is weak but my cricketing knowledge is way better than you.

Everyone know my English is weak but my cricketing knowledge is way better than you.

Thanks for confession no 1. We'll get more confessions out of you soon dw. Ill extract it them eventually.

Confession no 2 is Steve smith > kohli in test cricket

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Maybe so, but Viv Richards is undoubtedly top 3 best odi batters of all time possibly top 1, despite his stats not reflecting it due to eras.

Lots of batters especially sachin would have struggled in that era later in in their careers since to survive in that era you needed pitch perfect timing + very quick reactions.

Most batters including sachin who adopted a late cut approach later on in his career would have been toast in that era had he tried it.

1960-1984 and current era post 2012 doesn't really apply to the standard that you have set.

It only applies to 1985 to 2011 really.

Viv has 47 average in ODI, which puts him in my top tier category and 50 in test, which makes him an excellent test bat. I think thats fair.

 

[mominsaigol]

Viv has 47 average in ODI, which puts him in my top tier category and 50 in test, which makes him an excellent test bat. I think thats fair.

I'm aware, however viv is No 1 odi batsmen of all time. That 47 avg clearly doesn't reflect how good he is, since he'd be avg 70+ in this era. I only said top 3 cause rankings are always subjective

Dude was a freak of nature.

Anyway we can agree to disagree. I believe your ranking is more applicable to 1985 to 2012 imo rather then all eras. But it's still a good metric.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I'm aware, however viv is No 1 odi batsmen of all time. That 47 avg clearly doesn't reflect how good he is, since he'd be avg 70+ in this era. I only said top 3 cause rankings are always subjective

Dude was a freak of nature.

Anyway we can agree to disagree. I believe your ranking is more applicable to 1985 to 2012 imo rather then all eras. But it's still a good metric.

He would have excelled in this era but unsure if average 70+.

Remember pacers have became more professional, more cunning and fitter than in the previous era too. Standard of fielding is a lot higher than back in the day.

It's hard to tell how good he would have been.

And the final paragraph is fair enough. I don't think there will be a solely ODI ATG in modern era anyway since the standard is diluted so agree it's more suited for certain older eras.

 

[mominsaigol]

He would have excelled in this era but unsure if average 70+.

Remember pacers have became more professional, more cunning and fitter than in the previous era too. Standard of fielding is a lot higher than back in the day.

It's hard to tell how good he would have been.

And the final paragraph is fair enough. I don't think there will be a solely ODI ATG in modern era anyway since the standard is diluted so agree it's more suited for certain older eras.

Viv also faced really tough bowlers.

Jeff Thompson, Richard Hadlee and Dennis Lillie are comfortably > 99% of bowlers today, and one of viv's centuries in odi's comes against hadlee i believe.

And the standard of fielding is only higher for Sena + India. It's definitely worse for the rest pak, Afg(ik they didn't exist back them but pointing out how their poor in fielding), Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and current WI.

Maybe no 70+ but I'm sure he'd avg 60+ atleast. Most batters in his era avg 35 round about in his era with very few reaching 40 but none of them had the same sr as viv.

 

[shaz619]

Bro most people are nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking. And most of these people are Indians so go figure.

The point wasn't that root is poor in odi cricket. He's very good, point is hes no where near his test self in odi.

Players who were equally good in odi and test include Ponting, Sachin, Viv, and many others.

Also side note, I'm not really including t20 in this list

That’s fair enough, I was just giving the perspective from these shores, and here Rooty is a legend tbh and has done amazingly in Tests & ODI’s for the England team; spearheading the WC triumph in 2019, not a lot more you can ask for. Even though he is better in Tests he was a very very good ODI player, I can see the argument that he was equally good, but again that’s a personal opinion given my knowledge of English cricket and its demands/requirements.

Yeah ignore the rat vermin, they are ugly, that’s why they talk that way to. Hateful species.

 

[Jazx]

Kohli has been a clown in test cricket for 6 years. He's had occasional good innings and maybe a few peak moments specifically 2023 test and his bgt 100 in 2024 however overall he's been avg 20+ for 6 years in a row now.

Unless the team is Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan or WI, no team from Sena would accept him and if India was a nepotism country which bias kohli and rohit beyond belief, he'd have been booted out by now.

I can only see him maybe replacing Aussie openers khawaja and konstas in test cricket due to shortage of opening talent in Australia but otherwise he doesn't replace the jam packed middle order. And that is if kohli is willing to open.

Their 2 versions of kohli in test cricket. The one from age 20-29, who avg 55(2nd highest in his era after Steve smith who avg 61, with 27 test centuries)

And kohli from age 30 to present who's consistently avg 20+ for 6 years, has mustered 3 test centuries in 6 years and overall is a total loser. That 46 avg is not reflective of his actual current caliber in test cricket cause atm he makes someone like bavuma look world class

If you are calling him a clown, than what we call the current pak batters. No brother, kohli can get into any other current test sides easily be it aus, eng or any other. Form may vary but class remains the same.

 

[nish_mate]

Younis Khan

 

[mominsaigol]

If you are calling him a clown, than what we call the current pak batters. No brother, kohli can get into any other current test sides easily be it aus, eng or any other. Form may vary but class remains the same.

Form may vary but class remains the same.

Yeah class of 20

 

[Justcrazy]

GOOD IN TEST NOT IN OD

Steven Smith , Younis Khan, Justin Langar , Sunil Gavaskar , Dilip Vengsarkar , Carl Hopper , Virender Sehwag , Michael Slater , Dale Styen

GOOD IN OD NOT IN TEST

Yuvraj Singh , Michael Bevan , Roger Twose , Dhoni ,

 

[Justcrazy]

We have increasingly high standards due to the stats we have at our disposal and I think we nit pick too much.

For a test batsman I have the following rates

40-42 - decent
42-45 good
45-50 + very Good
50+ excellent
52+ - top tier
Not much difference between excellent and top tier

There are of course exceptions for some players but overall it's ok banding I think.

For ODi
37-40 good
40-42- v good
42-45 - excellent
45+ top tier

In OD strike rate also matters.

 

[Justcrazy]

Everyone know my English is weak but my cricketing knowledge is way better than you.

Thanks for confession no 1. We'll get more confessions out of you soon dw. Ill extract it them eventually.

Confession no 2 is Steve smith > kohli in test cricket

If we look at stats , then Smith is ahead of Kohli.
There is nothing wrong with that , Smith is not bad in OD , he averages almost 44 with strike rate of @ 87 .

In OD though Kohli has played more impact innings.

 

[Sachin fan]

Seeing you username my only advice to " Don't try to use social media toxicity ( Sachin( Rohit) , Virat and dhoni pathetic fans bases) here .

I know where its coming from.

Or you know, people can look at actual stats and numbers instead of their feelings. Its hilarious you are being so aggressive about a batsman who averages 46 in tests. Yes he had some great series but so did people like Laxman, Azhar Sehwag, etc.

 

[Buffet]

Only handful of players have a really great output in both formats. Skill sets are different for longer and shorter formats. There is an overlap but you need different skill sets.

It's not surprising , but rather expected, that a great player in one format won't be that great in another format. In rare cases, we can have a player who can be great in both formats. Talking about Test and ODI here. It will be even more rare to see anyone doing great in three formats.

 

[mominsaigol]

If we look at stats , then Smith is ahead of Kohli.
There is nothing wrong with that , Smith is not bad in OD , he averages almost 44 with strike rate of @ 87 .

In OD though Kohli has played more impact innings.

No one denies that Kohli is significantly > smith in odi and t20. Literally no one. I'm not biased towards Smith even if he's one of my fav's.

 

[mominsaigol]

Or you know, people can look at actual stats and numbers instead of their feelings. Its hilarious you are being so aggressive about a batsman who averages 46 in tests. Yes he had some great series but so did people like Laxman, Azhar Sehwag, etc.

Kohli from 2012 to 2019

2012= 49 avg
2013= 56 Avg
2014= 44 Avg
2015= 42 Avg
2016= 75 Avg
2017= 75 Avg
2018= 55 Avg
2019= 68 Avg

Kohli from 2020

2020= 19 Avg
2021= 28 Avg
2022= 26 Avg
2023= 55 Avg
2024= 24 Avg
2025= 11 Avg (Granted only 2 test played in 2025 so far)

with the eexceptionof 2023, he's been below Bavuma level in test cricket.

What's funny is that he played more tests in 2021 and 2024 then he's played in any other year excluding 2018.

He played 11 tests in 2021 and 10 in 2024 which is more then some countries entire wtc cycles.

In comparison to Steve Smith

2014= 81 Avg
2015= 73 Avg
2016= 71 Avg
2017= 76 Avg
2019= 74 Avg
2021= 53 Avg
2022= 58 Avg
2023= 42 Avg
2024= 33 Avg
2025= 77 Avg

Nor including 2018 and 2020 cause he barely played any tests in this period, like 2 innings only. In 2018 he was banned and in 2020 he disnt play much due t9 covid.

Smith only declined a bit during 2023 and 2024 but bounced back quickly.

Kohli on the other hand

 

[mominsaigol]

Kohli from 2012 to 2019

2012= 49 avg
2013= 56 Avg
2014= 44 Avg
2015= 42 Avg
2016= 75 Avg
2017= 75 Avg
2018= 55 Avg
2019= 68 Avg

Kohli from 2020

2020= 19 Avg
2021= 28 Avg
2022= 26 Avg
2023= 55 Avg
2024= 24 Avg
2025= 11 Avg (Granted only 2 test played in 2025 so far)

with the eexceptionof 2023, he's been below Bavuma level in test cricket.

What's funny is that he played more tests in 2021 and 2024 then he's played in any other year excluding 2018.

He played 11 tests in 2021 and 10 in 2024 which is more then some countries entire wtc cycles.

In comparison to Steve Smith

2014= 81 Avg
2015= 73 Avg
2016= 71 Avg
2017= 76 Avg
2019= 74 Avg
2021= 53 Avg
2022= 58 Avg
2023= 42 Avg
2024= 33 Avg
2025= 77 Avg

Nor including 2018 and 2020 cause he barely played any tests in this period, like 2 innings only. In 2018 he was banned and in 2020 he disnt play much due t9 covid.

Smith only declined a bit during 2023 and 2024 but bounced back quickly.

Kohli on the other hand

Kohli even in prime was no where close to prime steve smith lol

 

[Justcrazy]

Kohli even in prime was no where close to prime steve smith lol

I think he was in his best for against Australia where he scored multiple hundreds.

 

[kron]

Kohli from 2012 to 2019

2012= 49 avg
2013= 56 Avg
2014= 44 Avg
2015= 42 Avg
2016= 75 Avg
2017= 75 Avg
2018= 55 Avg
2019= 68 Avg

Kohli from 2020

2020= 19 Avg
2021= 28 Avg
2022= 26 Avg
2023= 55 Avg
2024= 24 Avg
2025= 11 Avg (Granted only 2 test played in 2025 so far)

with the eexceptionof 2023, he's been below Bavuma level in test cricket.

What's funny is that he played more tests in 2021 and 2024 then he's played in any other year excluding 2018.

He played 11 tests in 2021 and 10 in 2024 which is more then some countries entire wtc cycles.

In comparison to Steve Smith

2014= 81 Avg
2015= 73 Avg
2016= 71 Avg
2017= 76 Avg
2019= 74 Avg
2021= 53 Avg
2022= 58 Avg
2023= 42 Avg
2024= 33 Avg
2025= 77 Avg

Nor including 2018 and 2020 cause he barely played any tests in this period, like 2 innings only. In 2018 he was banned and in 2020 he disnt play much due t9 covid.

Smith only declined a bit during 2023 and 2024 but bounced back quickly.

Kohli on the other hand

That is so bad for kohli lmao

 

[kron]

If you are calling him a clown, than what we call the current pak batters. No brother, kohli can get into any other current test sides easily be it aus, eng or any other. Form may vary but class remains the same.

Lmao no he cannot
He wouldn’t make West Indies team