Jump to content

Sachin Tendulkar v Virat Kohli in Tests


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Even those bowlers hav had many bad days

Specially wasim waqar when tampering is easily caught, also they both hav e said tendulkar never faced them at peek

Irrelevant. Every sportsman has good days and bad days. Doesn't change the fact that Wasim/Waqar's bowling >> Anderson, Broad, etc. Whether they got the advantage by tampering or not, is irrelevant to the difficulty faced by Tendy. 

And yes, he didn't face them at their absolute peak in tests. He did, however, in ODIs. Including some pitches where Kohli would struggle to break out of single digits, like in Toronto. 

 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

So u mean rabaada, starc are any less:hysterical:

One swallow does not make a summer. Facing greater # of great bowlers makes the runs more valuable. simple logic, really.

And Tendy has both faced and demolished Steyn in his own backyard too. 
Virat has not done it facing Donald-Pollock, on pitches where 300 is a tough ask. Tendy has. 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Malinga is gr8 in LOI and he destroyed him 

Malinga is good, but by no strech is he a 'great' bowler. neither did he 'destroy' Tendulkar. 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Johnson, morkel , boult , southee figures wud have been far higher had they played in previous generation

Not necessarily. None of them have the requisite control (Morkel) or pace (which does not just mean horizontal speed) to matter. 
They'd be mostly in the Caddick-Fraser etc. category. 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

So how do u guarntee kohli wud have been a failure against them

Kohli made runs against ajmal who troubled tendulkar big time 

Nobody is garanteeing anything. i am saying Tendulkar's resume is more stellar. If i face the world grandmaster in chess and draw him, while you never face a grandmaster, it means my resume >> yours. Same logic applies. 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

he avg 50+ , how is that less consistent

Look at his avg overseas

Consistency is not about average. That much, should be basic.

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

He avg 59 in India, its not east to score in india as well now considering the pitches we are giving

BS. This is the kind of pitches where players like Tendulkar, Azharuddin, Ganguly and Sidhu have proven to be Kohli's BAAP. Its clear you never watched tests back in the day, best not comment. All the above have scored runs against far better spinners that this current Indian lineup (which is ordinary against spin) will struggle to break 100 against on those pitches. 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Nz- 72

Aus- 62

SA- 55

All except NZ have far worse attack and OZ pitches till mid 2000s didnt give roads for pitches either. 

28 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Wait for the end of england tour now

 

Ru kidding me he is not consistent , look at his age n no of 100s

You clearly do not know the meaning of the word 'consistent' as it is applied to cricket. 

 

Here is some homework for you:

50,50,0,50 has the same average as 150,0,0,0. 

 

Who, in cricketing terms, is 'more consistent' ? 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Stan AF said:

The Gulf in bowling class between the present era and the previous ones is huge....Its almost astronomical...

 

Walsh Ambrose Bishop ..

Pollock Donald, Steyn & Kallis

Mcgrath Lee Warne Gillespie ...

Akram Waqar Shoaib Saqlain

Murali Vaas

 

These are top 10 bowlers who would average in the top 20s. Let alone even the second rung of bowlers from the teams had names like Mitchell Johnson, Damien Fleming, Makhaya Ntini, Lasith Malinga,Morne Morkel, Michael Kasprowicz, Mcdermott, Lance Klusener, Daniel Vettori, Umar Gul....

 

I don't think any batsman ever had to consistently face the best of the bowling world as Tendulkar did and still score more against them. His runs are more than worth its weight in Gold.

 

 

missed out Bond,Imran,Hadlee ,Shultz,Merv Hughes,Bruce reid,Qadir,Qasim,Danny Morrison ..some people feel that just because a batsman avg: 50 in an easy era, he would automatically avg: the same in a much difficult era.They need not forget that how ever talented & mentally strong  a batsman be, it all takes just one  unplayable ball for the batsman to discontinue thru the rest of the inns.

And when the bowling standard is much higher a batsmen is bound to receive much more no: of such balls on the avg: thru out.

 

To put it practically, a Rohit sharma is able to score 200s for fun in one day cricket. He has the temperament to play such long at mammoth str: rates .But   the same batsman can't withstand a new ball spell in tough bowling conditions.

Edited by rtmohanlal
Link to comment

Kohli at the moment is a much better player than Sachin, especially in these conditions.

 

That passage of play when Curran, Anderson and Stokes made rest of the batsmen hop around, I dont think Sachin would have survived either. Kohli almost did not as well, but then hung on and made it his own.

 

The only other Indian batsman who can stand upto a lethal spell of English swing bowling is Dravid.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, shortbread said:

Kohli at the moment is a much better player than Sachin, especially in these conditions.

 

That passage of play when Curran, Anderson and Stokes made rest of the batsmen hop around, I dont think Sachin would have survived either. Kohli almost did not as well, but then hung on and made it his own.

 

The only other Indian batsman who can stand upto a lethal spell of English swing bowling is Dravid.

Kohli gave two chances before he crossed 50. Sachin has plenty of chanceless 100s in England, against similar/better bowling lineups. 

Sachin is far, far better than Kohli in swinging conditions and a few 'i got dropped a zillion times and scored a ton' centuries from Kohli wont change that.

Link to comment
18 hours ago, shortbread said:

Kohli at the moment is a much better player than Sachin, especially in these conditions.

 

That passage of play when Curran, Anderson and Stokes made rest of the batsmen hop around, I dont think Sachin would have survived either. Kohli almost did not as well, but then hung on and made it his own.

 

The only other Indian batsman who can stand upto a lethal spell of English swing bowling is Dravid.

you are free to consider any one of them as better than the other.But  the 2nd para as  reasons  for the same makes me wonder as to whether to laugh or cry.  There is a reason as to why Sachin proved to have 40+ avg: in all countries he played in for such a lengthy  time period

Link to comment

Those who are talking about bowlers of the past, they are actually governed by psycology.

 

Our attachment with historical players will always be greater than present ones..Those players will always seems much much bigger. The longer they are in historical time the legendary they will become.

 

 

Blv me akrams and mcgraths all wd hv been hammered in modern day t20s .Its the mindset of the batsman that has evolved .

 

Bowlers are the same ..I dont agree that suddenly all the bowlers in the world gone down compared to past. Who knows styn or anderson wd be as good as or even better than malcom and akram if born in that era

Edited by PSB_Zone
Link to comment

Kohli can definitely finish as the greatest Indian batsman of all time, if he manages to win test matches for India outside, something Tendulkar didn't manage to do. In fact, Kohli has already done better than Tendulkar in 4th innings. Tendulkar was a great front runner, he was excellent when the pressure of winning or saving the game was not there, has an average of 66 in 1st innings, very high average in 2nd, slightly lower in 3rd and terrible 4th innings average for someone of his class. Kohli thrives under pressure and that may eventually put him ahead of Tendulkar. 

Edited by zep1706
Link to comment
1 hour ago, PSB_Zone said:

Those who are talking about bowlers of the past, they are actually governed by psycology.

 

Our attachment with historical players will always be greater than present ones..Those players will always seems much much bigger. The longer they are in historical time the legendary they will become.

 

 

Blv me akrams and mcgraths all wd hv been hammered in modern day t20s .Its the mindset of the batsman that has evolved .

 

Bowlers are the same ..I dont agree that suddenly all the bowlers in the world gone down compared to past. Who knows styn or anderson wd be as good as or even better than malcom and akram if born in that era

We are talking about tests though and those are all time great bowlers. Kohli hasn't faced many bowlers of that class. But Anderson is as good as anyone's ever been in England and Tendulkar himself struggled against Anderson. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, UnknownGenius said:

Let's also not forget that Tendulkar played in absolute flat pancake pitches which were easy for batting. Today's batsman face much tougher pitches with games regularly over

 

Not like back then on flat pitches when one team scores 600/6 declared and the other 547 or something

 

Tendy's numbers are over-inflated sue to flat easy wickets

1990s had the toughest pitches, there were only 3 players worldwide who averaged more than 50, Tendulkar averaged 58 in the 1990s, the next best was Lara I think who averaged 52-53, it was Tendulkar's best phase. He was actually unlucky because India played so few tests in those days, only 6-7 tests a year on average. Now they play 10-11 tests a year. 

Link to comment

There are so many top test bowlers and would be top bowlers even in the 2010s decade.

 

On the one hand people say that batting conditions are easier now and on the other hand the bowlers are not lauded for bowling efficiently in their difficult conditions.  Can't work both ways.

 

Any current bowler would have averaged much lower in the 80s and 90s. 

 

Some examples of top test attacks of the 2010s 

 

-- Steyn, Philander, Morkel  2013 in SA

-- Ashwin, Jadeja, Shami  2016 and 17 in India.

-- Rabada, Philander, Morkel, Ngidi 2018 in SA

-- Bumrah, Shami, Bhuvi  2018 in SA

-- Boult, Southee,  Wagner  2014 in NZ

-- Broad, Anderson, Stokes  2018 in Eng

-- Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins, Lyon in Australia

-- Johnson, Harris, Starc 2014  in Australia

-- Anderson, Broad, Woakes  2014 in England

 

 

No batsman of any era would find it easy against them in the conditions I mentioned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
On 8/3/2018 at 7:09 AM, Muloghonto said:

A. Because except for Steyn, none of the fast ones were capable of tying Walsh's shoelaces, day in, day out, nevermind the likes of Donald, Waqar,Wasim, McGrath, Ambrose, etc. All of whom Tendy faced. 
And Tendy pretty much faced two of the greatest spinners ever, who are not comparable in performance to anyone since them: Warne and Murali. And utterly destroyed them. 

SRT never destroyed Murali, in fact it was the Lankan who had a mental stranglehold over Sachin. Lara however destroyed both. 

Link to comment
On 8/3/2018 at 8:59 AM, Number said:

Always felt that even if Kohli averages 60 SRT in pure batsmanship will always be ahead. But after his innings in SA against Rabada Philander I felt Kohli is entering Sachin's league. 

However right now Kohli is in his prime. I will reserve my judgement for 2-3 years and then conclude.

But no doubt he is the best of post Sachin Lara era.

I think Steve Smith takes that one. Better test batsman and 3 50+ scores in QF/SF/F of a WC..something that has never been done before. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, express bowling said:

There are so many top test bowlers and would be top bowlers even in the 2010s decade.

 

On the one hand people say that batting conditions are easier now and on the other hand the bowlers are not lauded for bowling efficiently in their difficult conditions.  Can't work both ways.

 

Any current bowler would have averaged much lower in the 80s and 90s. 

 

Some examples of top test attacks of the 2010s 

 

-- Steyn, Philander, Morkel  2013 in SA

-- Ashwin, Jadeja, Shami  2016 and 17 in India.

-- Rabada, Philander, Morkel, Ngidi 2018 in SA

-- Bumrah, Shami, Bhuvi  2018 in SA

-- Boult, Southee,  Wagner  2014 in NZ

-- Broad, Anderson, Stokes  2018 in Eng

-- Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins, Lyon in Australia

-- Johnson, Harris, Starc 2014  in Australia

-- Anderson, Broad, Woakes  2014 in England

 

 

No batsman of any era would find it easy against them in the conditions I mentioned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

McGrath in Aus in late 90s v Starc in Aus in 2010s in tests.

 

Whom would you prefer to face?

 

Those bowlers are good, it's simple scenario. A batsman will find it more difficult against a good bowler on bowling friendly pitch than on a flat pitch.

 

Facing Bhuvi in swinging conditions is not same as facing him on flat pitch. Quality of bowler doesn't matter here.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, UnknownGenius said:

Let's also not forget that Tendulkar played in absolute flat pancake pitches which were easy for batting. Today's batsman face much tougher pitches with games regularly over

 

Not like back then on flat pitches when one team scores 600/6 declared and the other 547 or something

 

Tendy's numbers are over-inflated sue to flat easy wickets

90s was the toughest decade for batting. Only 4 batsmen averaged above 50, SRT (58), Lara (52), Steve Waugh (50)....4th one was Gooch but he played for less than half the decade. Aravinda de Silva averaged 46 and Sanga considers him the greatest Sri Lankan batsman of all time. 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

There are so many top test bowlers and would be top bowlers even in the 2010s decade.

 

On the one hand people say that batting conditions are easier now and on the other hand the bowlers are not lauded for bowling efficiently in their difficult conditions.  Can't work both ways.

Sure can. Quality of batting AND bowling can be brought down collectively by making the pitch flatter or when you have slow wickets where the ball stops and the pitch is soft but doesn't break apart. Seen this plenty of times through the eras to objectively say that it is quite possible and has been that both bowling and batting is at a lower level. 

 

Also, sports is not linear, it does not improve over time linearly. Its not like every decade, the average player is better than every decade preceeding it. There are golden generations. mid 70s-mid 80s had the WI-AUS golden generation. late 80s through 90s was the golden generation of cricket i've seen because virtually every team was equal or better than its counterpart in the 2000s-2010s period. 

 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Any current bowler would have averaged much lower in the 80s and 90s. 

Not necessarily. Forget the 80s, look at 90s. Anderson is your Angus Fraser. Can swing it ferociously when conditions suit him but zero, zilch, zip, without it. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Some examples of top test attacks of the 2010s 

 

-- Steyn, Philander, Morkel  2013 in SA

Crappier than most RSA attacks of the 90s, simply because Donald-Pollock is a better combo than Steyn-Philander/Morkel with the new ball, with the old ball the likes of RSA spinners and 4th-5th pacers were better than they are through the 2000s. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Ashwin, Jadeja, Shami  2016 and 17 in India.

Sure. But Kumble on a 90s crumbler alone is a harder task than these three combined. You either did not watch or dont remember the pitches we served in the 90s when Kumble was at his pomp (before his surgery), when he could bowl the flipper like a spitting cobra. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Rabada, Philander, Morkel, Ngidi 2018 in SA

Yes, this is a better attack. But not a whole lot better than Donald-Pollock-DeVilliers-Kallis,either. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Bumrah, Shami, Bhuvi  2018 in SA

Pffft. In empiric terms, they'd not make the WI 4th string in the 80s, neither the Pakistan's first line attack in the 80s post Akram's emergence. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Boult, Southee,  Wagner  2014 in NZ

Also a good attack, but RSA attack in the 90s was similar. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Broad, Anderson, Stokes  2018 in Eng

Caddick, Gough, Fraser. The same attack of the 90s effectively. Nuff said. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins, Lyon in Australia

Massively inferior to McWarne-Gillespie-Lee/Fleming. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Johnson, Harris, Starc 2014  in Australia

Same as above. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

-- Anderson, Broad, Woakes  2014 in England

Pfft. 

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

No batsman of any era would find it easy against them in the conditions I mentioned.

Plenty of batsmen of the earlier eras would murder the English/Aussie/Kiwi attack. 

 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

McGrath in Aus in late 90s v Starc in Aus in 2010s in tests.

 

Whom would you prefer to face?

 

You have to compare the best pacer of that era with the best of this era.

 

McGrath late 1990s

Steyn  early 2010s

Rabada late 2010s

 

I won't be able to pick.

 

16 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Those bowlers are good, it's simple scenario. A batsman will find it more difficult against a good bowler on bowling friendly pitch than on a flat pitch.

 

Facing Bhuvi in swinging conditions is not same as facing him on flat pitch. Quality of bowler doesn't matter here.

 

That applies to most pure swing bowlers and spinners of any era.

 

Link to comment
42 minutes ago, express bowling said:

There are so many top test bowlers and would be top bowlers even in the 2010s decade.

On the one hand people say that batting conditions are easier now and on the other hand the bowlers are not lauded for bowling efficiently in their difficult conditions.  Can't work both ways.

Any current bowler would have averaged much lower in the 80s and 90s. 

Some examples of top test attacks of the 2010s 

- Steyn, Philander, Morkel  2013 in SA

-- Ashwin, Jadeja, Shami  2016 and 17 in India.

-- Rabada, Philander, Morkel, Ngidi 2018 in SA

-- Bumrah, Shami, Bhuvi  2018 in SA

-- Boult, Southee,  Wagner  2014 in NZ

-- Broad, Anderson, Stokes  2018 in Eng

-- Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins, Lyon in Australia

-- Johnson, Harris, Starc 2014  in Australia

-- Anderson, Broad, Woakes  2014 in England

No batsman of any era would find it easy against them in the conditions I mentioned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dude, Understand the difference first. The bowlers in 1990s played in almost every tour irrespective off conditions, irrespective of surface and other criterias and what not. This applies to every top bowler from every country. They were that good because they were that Good. They were single handed matchwinners. End of story.

 

To drive home my point, Understand the fact that Ashwin/jadeja were not picked up in 2014tour and they were dropped. Simply because of the fact they were not effective and they couldn't cause enough damage in overseas tours.

 

Same thing applies to Stuart Broad/James Anderson in Indian wickets (2016 tour). Anderson had a decent tour in India in 2012 but it was Swann/monty who did the most damage to india in 2012. Broad/Anderson were pretty much ineffective in 2013/2017 Ashes tours to Australia. A Nathan Lyon would do effectively good damage in Indian wickets compared to Johnson/starc/Harris or for that matter even Philander or Rabada.

 

Heck Australians are losing repetitively in england meaning they aren't that good to trouble english batsmen. Same thing vice versa applies to australian bowlers in english conditions.

 

Among all the bowlers you mentioned here only Steyn would be considered an all time test great. Rest all are good but not all time greats like from the 90s/. They still have some time to go to be called all time greats.

 

Whereas in the 90s you had bowlers who have taken 300+ test wkts at miserly averages. mcgrath(500+), walsh(500=), ambrose(400+), wasim (400) waqar (350+) warne (700) kumble(600) murali(800) pollock (400+), donald (300+) etc..i could go on.. They performed in most countries and won matches in maximum conditions.

Edited by Stan AF
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...