Jump to content
Trichromatic

KL Rahul's batting is absolute treat to watch

Recommended Posts

Others may score more than him, hit more sixes than him, hack more and have more fan girls, but his batting has easily been most pleasing to the eyes.

 

Only Kohli is that good to watch.

 

Rest are either boring (Rahane, Dhoni, Rohit) or look like brute force (Pant, Kishan).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Others may score more than him, hit more sixes than him, hack more and have more fan girls, but his batting has easily been most pleasing to the eyes.

 

Only Kohli is that good to watch.

 

Rest are either boring (Rahane, Dhoni, Rohit) or look like brute force (Pant, Kishan).

No Kohli is no way as good to watch.  In fact, Williasmson is better in batting style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MechEng said:

Off topic but I wanted to know when are we playing Sri Lanka in ODIs next? I want to see Rohit Sharma torture them again with his 4th 200 or maybe a triple this time.

 

 Does it make me a sadist if I like watching Rohit torture SL?

Not at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Others may score more than him, hit more sixes than him, hack more and have more fan girls, but his batting has easily been most pleasing to the eyes.

 

Only Kohli is that good to watch.

 

Rest are either boring (Rahane, Dhoni, Rohit) or look like brute force (Pant, Kishan).

Rohit is very good to watch too. 
I would not say Kohli is good to watch but rather he is much more effective. That is I feel secured when Kohli is batting that he will give me a good contribution before he gets out and mostly his wicket has to be taken by opposition and will never be gifted away. 

With Rohit, atleast once upon a time it is only a matter of time he gives his wicket away to the opposition. Now a days, it is not so and he plays dots (if you meant that it is boring I will agree). When in decent form and when he is timing well, he is pretty good. Very much like early years VVS who used to very good on his good days and very pathetic otherwise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sarcastic said:

Rohit is very good to watch too. 
I would not say Kohli is good to watch but rather he is much more effective. That is I feel secured when Kohli is batting that he will give me a good contribution before he gets out and mostly his wicket has to be taken by opposition and will never be gifted away. 

With Rohit, atleast once upon a time it is only a matter of time he gives his wicket away to the opposition. Now a days, it is not so and he plays dots (if you meant that it is boring I will agree). When in decent form and when he is timing well, he is pretty good. Very much like early years VVS who used to very good on his good days and very pathetic otherwise. 

Kohli is peculiar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like batsmen 

 

--  Whose game is based on proper cricketing shots and proper technique.

--  Who are strokemakers

--  Are really good test batsmen but are good in LOIs too.

--  Are good against pace and bounce.

-- Are Indian.

 

Tendulkar obviously qualified.

 

Kohli and Rahul do too.

 

Gill  and Samson have the potential ... and Shaw if he rectifies his backfoot dragback issue.

 

These are the guys I hope to see playing long for India and doing well.

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Rahul is terrific, would like vohra to get more chances, he’s also a treat to watch and Gill and Samson play proper cricketing shots to.

Edited by gazza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO its not about elegance only, for me its about how a batsman toys with opposition . So 

 

1. kohli is an absolute treat to watch- he is so quick on the ball, his freak fitness has made sure his reflxes are fast and it shows. Some of the shots he plays are unbelievable . Their is an arrogance in his batting that i absolutely love 

2. smith- many people find him an eye sore but not me. He bats with one the most clear mindset. Knws when to be on front foot when on back. His extension of the arms, the way he reaches the ball. He toys with the bowling thats why he is the best test batsman

 

those lazy elegant category ones like rohit n nair are pleasing when in flow but many days they come across as careless to. So ill watch someone who does it consistently 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a natural talent with how he hits 4s and 6s, and with now the players are giving more priority to fitness and fielding, I'd say he's the true successor to Sachin and may even surpass him.

 

Kohli is just too brutal with his consistency where as Rahul is a top-notch when it comes to strokemaking. Together with these two, Indian team will be a force but sadly some petty politics is stopping it from happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

IMO its not about elegance only, for me its about how a batsman toys with opposition . So 

 

1. kohli is an absolute treat to watch- he is so quick on the ball, his freak fitness has made sure his reflxes are fast and it shows. Some of the shots he plays are unbelievable . Their is an arrogance in his batting that i absolutely love 

2. smith- many people find him an eye sore but not me. He bats with one the most clear mindset. Knws when to be on front foot when on back. His extension of the arms, the way he reaches the ball. He toys with the bowling thats why he is the best test batsman

 

those lazy elegant category ones like rohit n nair are pleasing when in flow but many days they come across as careless to. So ill watch someone who does it consistently 

Good to watch has nothing to do with being successful or being consistent.  Kohli is treat to watch? where? No, Kohli has a peculiar stiffness in his batting. His bat flow is stiff and very controlled that makes him effective but not very attractive. Him being bottom-hand player has a lot to do with this. Same with Smith. Smith is an ugly batsman, like Chanderpaul.  This thread is about elegance and attractiveness of the batsman and effectiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Good to watch has nothing to do with being successful or being consistent.  Kohli is treat to watch? where? No, Kohli has a peculiar stiffness in his batting. His bat flow is stiff and very controlled that makes him effective but not very attractive. Him being bottom-hand player has a lot to do with this. Same with Smith. Smith is an ugly batsman, like Chanderpaul.  This thread is about elegance and attractiveness of the batsman and effectiveness.

Aesthetics are difficult to ascertain .I found slater good to watch, he was similar to virat, kind of jabby, punchy approach .Rohit too looks good he is like mark waugh, samson too is in that category .On the other hand i find williamson boring ,i dont know why.One of the batsmen i found most boring was steve waugh.

Edited by MultiB48

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

Good to watch has nothing to do with being successful or being consistent.  Kohli is treat to watch? where? No, Kohli has a peculiar stiffness in his batting. His bat flow is stiff and very controlled that makes him effective but not very attractive. Him being bottom-hand player has a lot to do with this. Same with Smith. Smith is an ugly batsman, like Chanderpaul.  This thread is about elegance and attractiveness of the batsman and effectiveness.

You don't think Kohli's cover drive is beautiful to watch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



He's a natural talent with how he hits 4s and 6s, and with now the players are giving more priority to fitness and fielding, I'd say he's the true successor to Sachin and may even surpass him.
 
Kohli is just too brutal with his consistency where as Rahul is a top-notch when it comes to strokemaking. Together with these two, Indian team will be a force but sadly some petty politics is stopping it from happening. 


Rahul is now signed up with Bunty.
I hope he will be more consistent now.

To be frank, now I won't be even surprised if Rahul and Kohli becomes best friends LMFAOOO




Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

Aesthetics are difficult to ascertain .I found slater good to watch, he was similar to virat, kind of jabby, punchy approach .Rohit too looks good he is like mark waugh, samson too is in that category .On the other hand i find williamson boring ,i dont know why.One of the batsmen i found most boring was steve waugh.

Williamson is as boring as Laxman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MultiB48 said:

Aesthetics are difficult to ascertain .I found slater good to watch, he was similar to virat, kind of jabby, punchy approach .Rohit too looks good he is like mark waugh, samson too is in that category .On the other hand i find williamson boring ,i dont know why.One of the batsmen i found most boring was steve waugh.

not difficult at all. Most bottom hand dominant batsman wont be most aesthetically pleasing to watch. Kohli though is still more attractive than likes of Dhoni and Pujara, who both are also bottom hand batsmen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

not difficult at all. Most bottom hand dominant batsman wont be most aesthetically pleasing to watch. Kohli though is still more attractive than likes of Dhoni and Pujara, who both are also bottom hand batsmen.

pant and srt both have bottom hand grips but look vastly different.i found aravinda better to watch than atapattu or atherton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Good to watch has nothing to do with being successful or being consistent.  Kohli is treat to watch? where? No, Kohli has a peculiar stiffness in his batting. His bat flow is stiff and very controlled that makes him effective but not very attractive. Him being bottom-hand player has a lot to do with this. Same with Smith. Smith is an ugly batsman, like Chanderpaul.  This thread is about elegance and attractiveness of the batsman and effectiveness.

to me he is and so is smith, to each it own choice . I find both their batting attractive 

yes chanderpaul , raydu i never found pleasent

 

 

Edited by Ankit_sharma03

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2018 at 3:34 PM, Ankit_sharma03 said:

to me he is and so is smith, to each it own choice . I find both their batting attractive 

yes chanderpaul , raydu i never found pleasent

 

 

Smith is Chanderpaul part 2. You didnt like Chander but likes Smith's batting.  This thread isnt about favorite batsman. Smith and Kohli can be your favorite batsman, but attractive batsman to watch, no, they are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Smith and Kohli can be your favorite batsman, but attractive batsman to watch, no, they are not.

 

I find both Kohli and Smith very attractive to watch as batsmen.   

 

And I have seen / heard many people agree with me on this issue.

 

Attractiveness lies in the mind of the the observer.

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bowl_out said:

Gets 95, ends up on the losing side.

Gets 94, ends up on the losing side.

 

Great player playing for a pathetic team

Agreed the team is mostly responsible , but this is one area he needs to work on . If you add the 100 against wi , this is the third time hes fallen just short . This is where some one like Virat is so special , hopefully he will smarten up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

I find both Kohli and Smith very attractive to watch as batsmen.   

 

And I have seen / heard many people agree with me on this issue.

 

Attractiveness lies in the eyes of the beholder.

Not in cricket, attractiveness isnt subjective. Smith is one of the most ugly looking batsman. If he is attractive then no one is ugly then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Suhaan said:

Dont see any reason or any flaw in his batting for which he should be benched....he can play at any position 3,4,5 can even open,if you have floater( at the moment) of his quality you ought to play him

Kohli fans have already said in past that he has failed in middle order, and can bat only as opener even though there is nothing to prove that so called failure. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Kohli fans have already said in past that he has failed in middle order, and can bat only as opener even though there is nothing to prove that so called failure. 

 

 

Rahul has not failed in the middle order.  Just 3 games mean nothing.  Moreover, he scored a 100 in a T20I at No.4.

 

A talent like Rahul needs to be given 15 ODIs on the trot without judging. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Not in cricket, attractiveness isnt subjective. Smith is one of the most ugly looking batsman. If he is attractive then no one is ugly then. 

 

It depends on what one is looking for in a batsman.

 

Those who look for dominance over bowlers,  great hand-eye coordination, good timing etc. will find Smith's batsmanship attractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

It depends on what one is looking for in a batsman.

 

Those who look for dominance over bowlers,  great hand-eye coordination, good timing etc. will find Smith's batsmanship attractive.

that is not the parameter of attractiveness. This is effectiveness and not attractiveness.  You find Smith's effectiveness attractive but that is not what being attractive as a batsman is.

Edited by rkt.india

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jusarrived said:

Agreed the team is mostly responsible , but this is one area he needs to work on . If you add the 100 against wi , this is the third time hes fallen just short . This is where some one like Virat is so special , hopefully he will smarten up

Virat has choked plenty of times in ipl while chasing. 

 

Most famous was the DC loss in 2013.

 

Its just really hard in T20s.

 

Maybe Rahul should hav not lofted Bumrah but it wasnt a bad move to hit a ball in the slot. Too bad he hadnt picked the slower ball. 

 

Pathetic middle order and axar promotion screwed it up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×