Sachin Tendulkar v Virat Kohli - who is better ODI batsman?

[velu]

25 minutes ago, sandeep said:

What are you doing here?  You missed your shift at the temple building job-site for thala.  He's going to have plenty of time to make personal appearances there soon. May want to establish yourself as one of the regulars.

 

as per his kundli  he might retire completely by 2020  

[rtmohanlal]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

I don't want to argue with you, you are stuck in your preconceived notions. Sachin is and was never a better odi player than Kohli period.

 

A guy who scores just 1 hundred against best odi team in his generation in their back yard in 5 tours cannot be best in anything period.

yes.... because you can't ...... That is why you come with 'Sachin is and was never a better odi player than Kohli period.' sort of plain emotion binded statements. There in lies your utter sense less ness even in basic logic for a start, that is  placing  emphasis solely  on this '100' mark  with  out taking into  matter the   importance of context  at all. 

GOAT Viv Richards(as per general perception)  never scored a '100' vs the 2nd best team of his time Pakistan 'in Pakistan'. As per your logic he can never be considered  the GOAT(considering the fact that Windies was the best team of Viv's period & hence performance against the 2nd best team is the criteria) .

 

But thinks don't work that way because of these things. 100+ in one dayers can't be as that lengthy in general when compared  to those 100s in tests.As every body knows because of the  unlimited time period  nature of test cricket, 100s scored in tests can be mammoth even in the range of 200s.Secondly str: rate too matters a lot in one dayers. Naturally a well scored  say 80(90 balls ) can  be worth more than a 100 base on the context.

 

[rtmohanlal]

1 hour ago, sandeep said:

Tldr - Sachin outshone his peer batsmen by large margin. Virat has done well, but so have others in his peer group.  Warner, Amla, AB, Rohit, Babar etc.

 

If anybody in the current era has a claim to surpass Sachin in ODIs, its AB.  Not Virat.

AB's problem was that he was no where as good as Kohli when it came to chasing. And he was not that good as Kohli in pressure situations too. But one thing for sure,in str: rate he rivals Kohli. If we take tests too into account it gets lot closer because AB has much balanced record than Kohli with much larger sample size too. So over all , it is very close.    

[sandeep]

1 hour ago, rtmohanlal said:

AB's problem was that he was no where as good as Kohli when it came to chasing. And he was not that good as Kohli in pressure situations too. But one thing for sure,in str: rate he rivals Kohli. If we take tests too into account it gets lot closer because AB has much balanced record than Kohli with much larger sample size too. So over all , it is very close.    

Totally agree that AB's statistics have a soft underbelly of choking.  Very similar to Amla btw.  

 

But sheer numbers make AB's dominance in ODIs, especially over the last few years, the best since IVAR.

[putrevus]

7 hours ago, Laaloo said:

And hence the higher average and also a better strike rate. It's so simple yet it eludes Putrevus for some reason.

It does not elude me , I cannot accept a player as all time best when he scores solitary hundred against the best team of his generation in five tours.

 

It is not just the average of Kohli which makes him better, it is consistency which makes him better., Sachin faced new ball as an opener so most of time he was not subject to reverse swing.

[putrevus]

How in world did Sachin outshine his peers? In what way Sachin outperformed his peers either in tests or Odis. His 100 100s while great is due the most number of matches. There is no way Sachin has outshined his peers.He has got most following and that is reason why no one dares to talk down.

[rtmohanlal]

2 hours ago, putrevus said:

It does not elude me , I cannot accept a player as all time best when he scores solitary hundred against the best team of his generation in five tours.

 

It is not just the average of Kohli which makes him better, it is consistency which makes him better., Sachin faced new ball as an opener so most of time he was not subject to reverse swing.

then what should be your no: of 100s  against the best team in five tours to be considered as an all time best?

Ha ha ... BTW now comes another changing of goal post... 'not subject to reverse swing'.... So let's neglect all other advantages  Kohli  enjoys in his era  & consider only those of Sachin......  don't know whether to cry or laugh....

BTW .... not at all a surprise because you have already placed  Kohli ahead of Sachin based on the future  'best performances' of Kohli. Again no wonder because as per you Sachin was 'sheer lucky' to enter in to the team at just 17 years & 212 days of age.

Edited October 31, 2018 by rtmohanlal

[Laaloo]

2 hours ago, putrevus said:

It does not elude me , I cannot accept a player as all time best when he scores solitary hundred against the best team of his generation in five tours.

 

It is not just the average of Kohli which makes him better, it is consistency which makes him better., Sachin faced new ball as an opener so most of time he was not subject to reverse swing.

And I cannot accept a player as great when it's ridiculously easy to score runs. And tell me in the 90s how many batsman exactly scored runs against McGrath and Warner or akram/waqar. Facing the new ball is still tough regardless of the powerplays. Even more tougher when you have players at the other who can't strike at a good rate.

 

If you say Sachin didn't face reverse swing, then j can say Kohli comes in when the initial swing is gone and the openers have given a good start and there is now reverse swing so it's easier to score runs. If you can't understand this, I suggest you start watching Odis more closely. Every Tom dick and Harry is scoring runs.

 

Sachin on his last legs before the Advent of the batting powerplay and two new balls had similar or better stats than most Cricketers today. If you can't see this, then I can't help you.

[rtmohanlal]

16 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

And I cannot accept a player as great when it's ridiculously easy to score runs. And tell me in the 90s how many batsman exactly scored runs against McGrath and Warner or akram/waqar. Facing the new ball is still tough regardless of the powerplays. Even more tougher when you have players at the other who can't strike at a good rate.

 

If you say Sachin didn't face reverse swing, then j can say Kohli comes in when the initial swing is gone and the openers have given a good start and there is now reverse swing so it's easier to score runs. If you can't understand this, I suggest you start watching Odis more closely. Every Tom dick and Harry is scoring runs.

 

Sachin on his last legs before the Advent of the batting powerplay and two new balls had similar or better stats than most Cricketers today. If you can't see this, then I can't help you.

It seems the agenda is to  make others accept  'Mr:Putrevus  as an expert analyst' than   'what  Sachin was as a  batsman'

[Global.Baba]

Forget all the stats etc but I saw both Kohli and Sachin bat and Sachin was at a different level.

 

Sachin and even Lara were at a different level altogether.

 

Also Kohli’s 100s In Eng and even Aus were head and shoulders above his team mates and he is the best in the world right now but might be controversial to say but the quality of the knocks were sub par compared to Sachin’s knocks.

 

You will only get what I am taking about if you watched cricket in both eras.

Edited October 31, 2018 by Global.Baba

[Mariyam]

Sachin. Sachiiiiiin makes a much better chant than Kohli.

 

And Sachin was a better ODI batsman too.

Edited October 31, 2018 by Mariyam

[rkt.india]

13 hours ago, sandeep said:

Tldr - Sachin outshone his peer batsmen by large margin. Virat has done well, but so have others in his peer group.  Warner, Amla, AB, Rohit, Babar etc.

 

If anybody in the current era has a claim to surpass Sachin in ODIs, its AB.  Not Virat.

Sachin has not outshone any of his peers, TBH.  His biggest strength was his longevity and not outshining others.   There are plenty of batsmen who averaged in 40s during his time as well.  In fact, Dhoni, Hussey outshone him for a considerable period of time from mid 2000s.    

Edited October 31, 2018 by rkt.india

[rkt.india]

14 hours ago, mishra said:

I think you got the answer there.  What happened with Kalu and Jayasurya was, they showed you dont have to be Sachinesque type to score boundries by placing it between two fielders. You can simply be pich hitter and take adavantage by hitting the ball in air and get exactly similar S/R in first 15 overs as long as your wicket doesnt matter to team.

So you had Afridi.

 

But that doesnt mean you will succeed against good/ATG bowlers. You can only do pinch hitting against likes of bowlers who were mediocre.

 

Modern day odi cricket has 3 sessions of pinch hitting.

 

Now I dont want to open a thread of Bhumrah vs Kapil. You can open it.

 

 

how? looks like you forgot PP used to be 15 overs back then and now only 10.  we used to have 5 players outside the circle then after 15 not you have 4 from 11 to 40 overs and 5 from 41 to 50 overs.  Batsmen are just more confident about stroke making now and more audacious.

[rkt.india]

14 hours ago, sandeep said:

For all of Virat's statistical achievements, there exist the likes of Rohit, Warner, Amla and even Babar Azam in his peer group, who are putting up similar big numbers.   Sachin, not unlike Viv, was putting up monster numbers that were head and shoulders ahead of his peer group.  That's one way to compare across eras.  

 

But agenda ooncha rahe hamaara.

Lara, Ponting, Hayden, Clark, Sarwan, Sanga, Ganguly, mark waugh were doing that as well during SRT's era.  

[Global.Baba]

10 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Sachin has not outshone any of his peers, TBH.  His biggest strength was his longevity and not outshining others.   There are plenty of batsmen who averaged in 40s during his time as well.  In fact, Dhoni, Hussey outshone him for a considerable period of time from mid 2000s.    

Dhoni and Hussey were finishers/middle order batsmen. They get a lot more chances to finish games which make them standout and also finish as notout which bloats their average. Can’t compare them with Sachin.

 

Same as back in the day it was ok if an opener had -3 to -5 difference in average to a middle order batsman in test cricket because of the conditions and new ball.

 

early era of new ODI rules and Sachin hits a 200 against a very strong attack despite being a patta, shudder to think what he would have accomplished in the modern game.

[rkt.india]

12 hours ago, rtmohanlal said:

AB's problem was that he was no where as good as Kohli when it came to chasing. And he was not that good as Kohli in pressure situations too. But one thing for sure,in str: rate he rivals Kohli. If we take tests too into account it gets lot closer because AB has much balanced record than Kohli with much larger sample size too. So over all , it is very close.    

Neither was SRT.  AB was just more audacious, product of his time.  AB and SRT are comparable.  Kohli is just better than both.

[velu]

3 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

 

early era of new ODI rules and Sachin hits a 200 against a very strong attack despite being a patta, shudder to think what he would have accomplished in the modern game.

 

beg to differ ..

 

sachin scored his 200 against 

 

steyn 

parnell

van der marve

langaveldt

duminy + kallis

[rkt.india]

3 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

Dhoni and Hussey were finishers/middle order batsmen. They get a lot more chances to finish games which make them standout and also finish as notout which bloats their average. Can’t compare them with Sachin.

 

Same as back in the day it was ok if an opener had -3 to -5 difference in average to a middle order batsman in test cricket because of the conditions and new ball.

 

early era of new ODI rules and Sachin hits a 200 against a very strong attack despite being a patta, shudder to think what he would have accomplished in the modern game.

Not really, in fact, opening the batting in ODIs has always been the more favored and the best position for anyone to bat.  There is a reason many batsman started doing well when they moved to opening from middle order. SRT himself is a big example of that who was just an average batsman in middle order turned into a monster when he started opening the batting.  middle order and batting in middle overs has always been difficult.  There is reason you can count very few good or very good middle order batsman likes of Dhoni, Hussey, Bevan and Yuvraj to some extent while there have been many good to very good openers in ODIs.  Regarding pitches, pitches in ODIs have always been flat even in 90s they were flat.  We scored 376 again NZ in late 90s, 373 against SL in 99 wc in England. 

[rkt.india]

17 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

 

 

early era of new ODI rules and Sachin hits a 200 against a very strong attack despite being a patta, shudder to think what he would have accomplished in the modern game.

kaun sa new ODI rules?

[rtmohanlal]

33 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Neither was SRT.  AB was just more audacious, product of his time.  AB and SRT are comparable.  Kohli is just better than both.

SRT  was almost as good as Kohli in  chasing, if any  only slightly lesser. As over all batsman SRT is still ahead. The reasons ,I have clarified thru several of my earlier posts.So not bothering to repeat those.

Edited October 31, 2018 by rtmohanlal