King Kohli vs Sir Viv in ODIs

[Straight Drive]

(1)Viv was well ahead statistically in terms of average and SR . He was the best and there were no one being even close to him statistically as well as subjectively.

 

(2) As far as destruction of bowling atatcks, VIV was the top destructive batsman of his era. Nobody matched him. There was no competition between how he destroyed the bowling atatcks and how the next best of his era destroyed. Whereas, Virat has clear competition in this aspect. Rohit Sharma, ABD, Gayle, Guptill have been more destructive than him when they played those big knocks. 

 

(3)None of the other players in that era had a highest score than his. Viv's 181 iirc is the best of that era. Now Rohit Sharma, Guptill, Sehwag, Sachin all had higher scores than Virat.

 

(4) The lack of helmets on those uncovered wickets was something many cricketers of today can only think of. With the lack of protective gear and still attack the way he did was just amazing batting.

 

Virat is not as distinctly ahead as Viv was to the next leading batters of this era. The difference between Viv and contemporaries is too huge than difference between Virat and contemporaries. 

 

What is Virat good at than Viv:

(1) Number of hundreds.

(2) Fitness in terms of the matches he plays and how easily he adjusts to the formats. Never know whether Viv could have been so match fit with games in all format sin such short notice, and all the effort Virat puts in field.

 

 

[surajmal]

KK is on pace to be the GOAT. Only haters and internet trolls will disagree. 

[rkt.india]

10 hours ago, Vk1 said:

Absolutely... Never saw him bat but going by the records and opinions Viv is on another level.

Viv was ahead of his time that does not mean he was better than modern batsmen. 

[Vilander]

10 hours ago, Vijy said:

Tuk-Tuk Dhoni

Career strike rate of 88.4. Close to 10k at 51+

 

If thats tuk tuk every one is hand rikshaw.

[rkt.india]

13 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

(1)Viv was well ahead statistically in terms of average and SR . He was the best and there were no one being even close to him statistically as well as subjectively.

 

(2) As far as destruction of bowling atatcks, VIV was the top destructive batsman of his era. Nobody matched him. There was no competition between how he destroyed the bowling atatcks and how the next best of his era destroyed. Whereas, Virat has clear competition in this aspect. Rohit Sharma, ABD, Gayle, Guptill have been more destructive than him when they played those big knocks. 

 

(3)None of the other players in that era had a highest score than his. Viv's 181 iirc is the best of that era. Now Rohit Sharma, Guptill, Sehwag, Sachin all had higher scores than Virat.

 

(4) The lack of helmets on those uncovered wickets was something many cricketers of today can only think of. With the lack of protective gear and still attack the way he did was just amazing batting.

 

Virat is not as distinctly ahead as Viv was to the next leading batters of this era. The difference between Viv and contemporaries is too huge than difference between Virat and contemporaries. 

 

What is Virat good at than Viv:

(1) Number of hundreds.

(2) Fitness in terms of the matches he plays and how easily he adjusts to the formats. Never know whether Viv could have been so match fit with games in all format sin such short notice, and all the effort Virat puts in field.

 

 

Viv being better than his peers does not mean much because one day cricket was in its nascent age then and he was ahead of his time but that does not make him better than modern batsmen.  One days used to be played like shorter version of tests and field settings used to be attacking, so, was easier for him get away with attacking shots.

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Gollum said:

V, 90s era peaked in ODI bowling department but 70s and 80s had better balance to make up, green tops were not the exception and even trundlers had their day in the sun......no way is a bowling attack we fielded in 1983 ever going to compete in modern day cricket, but times were different then and even a Madan Lal could get extravagant movement off the pitch.

 

you are contradicting here. If that era was so bowling friendly than how does he average 45 and SR 90 plus? 

[Straight Drive]

2 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Viv being better than his peers does not mean much because one day cricket was in its nascent age then and he was ahead of his time but that does not make him better than modern batsmen.  One days used to be played like shorter version of tests and field settings used to be attacking, so, was easier for him get away with attacking shots.

I have watched Viv bat. He imo was the  most destructive ODI batsman of his era.

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Gollum said:

 

4. No fielding restrictions, you could have all 11 players manning the ropes in the death overs in case the batsman was going bonkers.

 

Regarding this, can you show any evidence? Field restrictions may not be there but teams used to have very attacking fields giving lot of opportunities for an attacking batsman to score. 

[MCcricket]

Virat is the greatest batsmen till date to have played ODI , no two ways about it, his propensity to win games at the amazing rate is unmatched

[Straight Drive]

14 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Regarding this, can you show any evidence? Field restrictions may not be there but teams used to have very attacking fields giving lot of opportunities for an attacking batsman to score. 

Sweeper Cover, Third man and Deep backward short leg were in existence even then and so did other fielders. What evidence is required for this. Those fielders were there when Viv batted. Haven't you seen the field settings when Viv batted. The field used to be three slips at times, some fielders restricting boundaries as well. It was not sterotype at all. One thing you can debate is the fielding of today is much better than fielding of yesteryear. 

[rkt.india]

18 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

I have watched Viv bat. He imo was the  most destructive ODI batsman of his era.

His era, remember.  Era that was not known for destructive batsmen and he was an outlier when ODI cricket was just taking shape but that does not make him better than modern batsmen.

[rkt.india]

1 minute ago, Straight Drive said:

Sweeper Cover, Third man and Deep backward short leg were in existence even then and so did other fielders. What evidence is required for this. Those fielders were there when Viv batted. Haven't you seen the field settings when Viv batted. The field used to be three slips at times, some fielders restricting boundaries as well. It was not sterotype at all. One thing you can debate is the fielding of today is much better than fielding of yesteryear. 

those are normal field positions you expect even in a test match. 

[vvvslaxman]

Here is one thing i have to say though. 80s had good bowlers. But when you look at the ratio Rubbish bowlers simply outnumbered them. I remember Greenidge/Richards made merry of Indian bowling. They scored only 44 of Kapil. 47 of Madanlal. Look at the rest.

Ravi bot 77 runs in 7 overs lol

 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/16933/scorecard/64220/india-vs-west-indies-4th-odi-west-indies-tour-of-india-1983-84/

[kira]

1 minute ago, vvvslaxman said:

Here is one thing i have to say though. 80s had good bowlers. But when you look at the ratio Rubbish bowlers simply outnumbered them. I remember Greenidge/Richards made merry of Indian bowling. They scored only 44 of Kapil. 47 of Madanlal. Look at the rest.

Ravi bot 77 runs in 7 overs lol

 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/16933/scorecard/64220/india-vs-west-indies-4th-odi-west-indies-tour-of-india-1983-84/

Most cricketers from the past are hugely overrated and viv is no exception. Viv was a great odi player but he wasn't the best ever, sachin surpassed him back in 1998 and king kohli has also surpassed him

[Straight Drive]

1 minute ago, rkt.india said:

those are normal field positions you expect even in a test match. 

You said you wanted evidence. So i mentioned what i watched. It is not wise to expect people then to provide you pics captured on mobile or tv tuners. They didnt exist. There were not recording software during those times when we watched cricket in past. The cameras too used to be black and white with no recording function. You are expecting a video recording from those times. When matches used to be watched nobody even thought of taking pics. Try You Tube, maybe some of his knocks may be there.

[rkt.india]

6 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Here is one thing i have to say though. 80s had good bowlers. But when you look at the ratio Rubbish bowlers simply outnumbered them. I remember Greenidge/Richards made merry of Indian bowling. They scored only 44 of Kapil. 47 of Madanlal. Look at the rest.

Ravi bot 77 runs in 7 overs lol

 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/16933/scorecard/64220/india-vs-west-indies-4th-odi-west-indies-tour-of-india-1983-84/

Also, bowlers were not skilled enough for ODI cricket like different slower bowls, yorkers, slow bouncers etc. 

[rkt.india]

4 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

You said you wanted evidence. So i mentioned what i watched. It is not wise to expect people then to provide you pics captured on mobile or tv tuners. They didnt exist. There were not recording software during those times when we watched cricket in past. The cameras too used to be black and white with no recording function. You are expecting a video recording from those times. When matches used to be watched nobody even thought of taking pics. Try You Tube, maybe some of his knocks may be there.

i asked because the poster was saying you could field 11 fielders at the boundaries.

[Straight Drive]

5 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

i asked because the poster was saying you could field 11 fielders at the boundaries.

There were no field restrictions during that time. He is damn correct regarding this. In 1990's they started to get 2 fielders rule.

 

Having said that nobody put 11 fielders on boundary in all matches or all overs. Maybe someone saw it on odd instance, however I don't think anyone actually did that.  There were regulation slips, covers, DBSL, SC, Mid off, Short leg, long leg and other fielding positions etc etc as they are today.

 

The game was so bowler friendly then. I don't think any captain had to use those tactics in spite of no restrictions on fielding whatsoever. 

Edited February 8, 2018 by Straight Drive

[vvvslaxman]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/16906/scorecard/64976/england-vs-west-indies-1st-odi-west-indies-tour-of-england-1984/

 

This is still Viv's best ODI innings  His 153 against Lille/Thommo/Hogg at the MCg was also good. But 4th and 5th bowling option was poor. Ray bright, Border, Chappell. 

[rkt.india]

5 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

There were no field restrictions during that time. He is damn correct regarding this. In 1990's they started to get 2 fielders rule.

yes, he is correct about it but did that really happen is the question. Ruling along does not make it.