Kohli will be the world's best batsman very, very soon.

[JaFanatic]

Do you even know that this two new ball rule has been in use since Oct 2011? He was scoring all those runs with the new new balls rule! Avrage since then? 61, has scored nearly the same runs as Hafeez, Misbah and Umar Akmal put togehter.

our padosis always waits for a chance to downplay him:giggle:

[SLICKR392]

Two new ball rule is Kohli's downfall in ODIs. He will average around 20-30 from its inception.

All you need to dismiss hacks like your batsmen is a good bowler and a "ball". Doesn't matter if it's made up of plastic or a bamboo stick.

[Guest indianguji]

gud batter but junaid makes him look bad lol

[Guest indianguji]

jus keeps edging too slips

[Vivek.S.123]

gud batter but junaid makes him look bad lol

Kohli makes Wahab Riaz look bad :cantstop:

[King Tendulkar]

Superb. 2 test tons a row

[King Tendulkar]

Well done virat

[Ultimate_Game]

Two new ball rule is Kohli's downfall in ODIs. He will average around 20-30 from its inception.

Do you even know that this two new ball rule has been in use since Oct 2011? He was scoring all those runs with the new new balls rule! Avrage since then? 61, has scored nearly the same runs as Hafeez, Misbah and Umar Akmal put togehter.

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[King Tendulkar]

It will happen

[FischerTal]

as long as amla and ab are there, its very tough but all the best to him

[carnish]

He hasn't scored a single ODI 100 facing a good bowler apart from Malinga and Ajmal. Even most of those 100s have come on flat decks or against poor bowling. Talking about Best batsman, he has to convert these 100s into big ones. I mean only twice has he gone over 120 after getting 18 100s ... That speaks of something faulty in his temperament. He even throws away after reaching 100 in tests. I am a big Kohli fan, but this prediction has a long way to go. Amla, Cook, Smith, ABDV, Sachin are way better. When I say poor Bowling, I mean the bowlers were not bowling at their best on those days. Or some best bowlers not playing for the side ala Broad and Anderson in Delhi ODI.

[Crookbond]

He hasn't scored a single ODI 100 facing a good bowler apart from Malinga and Ajmal. Even most of those 100s have come on flat decks or against poor bowling. Talking about Best batsman' date= he has to convert these 100s into big ones. I mean only twice has he gone over 120 after getting 18 100s ... That speaks of something faulty in his temperament. He even throws away after reaching 100 in tests. I am a big Kohli fan, but this prediction has a long way to go. Amla, Cook, Smith, ABDV, Sachin are way better. When I say poor Bowling, I mean the bowlers were not bowling at their best on those days. Or some best bowlers not playing for the side ala Broad and Anderson in Delhi ODI.

Where did the magic number 120 come from? :dontknow: In ODIs, he's well on to become the BEST batsman if not already being one. Test matches there's time. Anyways, let us consider this so called magic figure and look at beloved ABDV and Amla's stats. First, Kohli has 3x120+ scores and not two like you mention (133* Hobart, 183 Dhaka, 128* Colombo). AB DeVilliers has 5x120+ scores in 146 matches Amla has 4x120+ scores in 73 matches Kohli has 3x120+ scores in 104 matches Well, I don't see much difference in ODIs. Your prediction about the BEST batsman in the world may be good but your method to prove it is quite flawed. Also, LOL at putting Graeme Smith and Cook as BEST batsmen across formats. Cook and Smith average

[carnish]

Where did the magic number 120 come from? :dontknow: In ODIs, he's well on to become the BEST batsman if not already being one. Test matches there's time. Anyways, let us consider this so called magic figure and look at beloved ABDV and Amla's stats. First, Kohli has 3x120+ scores and not two like you mention (133* Hobart, 183 Dhaka, 128* Colombo). AB DeVilliers has 5x120+ scores in 146 matches Amla has 4x120+ scores in 73 matches Kohli has 3x120+ scores in 104 matches Well, I don't see much difference in ODIs. Your prediction about the BEST batsman in the world may be good but your method to prove it is quite flawed. Also, LOL at putting Graeme Smith and Cook as BEST batsmen across formats. Cook and Smith average <39 in ODIs - this after having the best position to bat in ODIs. They are both good in TEST matches but in the other forms of the game; they are touch above average players.

DM, I was not analyzing or finding exact scores of his nor is 120 a Magic Number ... I wrote that post of the top of my head and was pointing out his lack of converting 100s into big ones. Yes, I missed the 128* at Colombo but again that was in Colombo ... Flat pitch. About conversions, you just took into account the ODIs, why had I mentioned 18 hundreds if you will selective choose only ODIs. It was just to determine he fails to cross that barrier in tests too and thats where the problem lies. ABDV and Cook don't falter on that aspect and hence it is not a problem for them but in case of Kohli, it can certainly be taken as a worrying sign. Cook and Smith are more than decent bat in both formats, forgetting T20 for a while. If averages were the best indicator, people would not be arguing when some XYZ guy comes and says Bradman is the best. Both of them play in tougher conditions than Kohli does more often. Plus the best indicator is they have scored hundreds against good bowling line ups which as I said Kohli has not done apart from in 3-4 innings. He has a long way to go and I am happy you agree with me on that.

[Crookbond]

Cook and Smith are just "more than decent bats" that's about it. At no particular point of time are Cook/Smith would/will be considered the best batsmen in ODIs and they won't be because they don't have the same impact. And no, tracks in ODIs across the last decade are pretty much same across the world. There's not much difference - the fact that Cook/Smith get to open which Kolhi does not compensates for the same as the opening slot is the best position to play in an ODI particularly in terms of runs. The average argument also holds true for other positions but not for an opener as he essentially has all 50 overs to play if he wants to i.e. In Tests, you have a case for Kohli - in ODI's it is bloody hard to ignore his rise.

[carnish]

Cook and Smith are just "more than decent bats" that's about it. At no particular point of time are Cook/Smith would/will be considered the best batsmen in ODIs and they won't be because they don't have the same impact. And no' date= tracks in ODIs across the last decade are pretty much same across the world. There's not much difference - the fact that Cook/Smith get to open which Kolhi does not compensates for the same as the opening slot is the best position to play in an ODI particularly in terms of runs. The average argument also holds true for other positions but not for an opener as he essentially has all 50 overs to play if he wants to i.e. In Tests, you have a case for Kohli - in ODI's it is bloody hard to ignore his rise.

Bold 1: Cook/Smith are not best batsman in ODIs, but overall across formats rise above many and that was the club of batsmen I was talking about. By that manner, Kohli is also cannot be considered even more than decent in tests. But you will surely, continue to overlook that. Bold 2: Anyone who has watched India in the last 3 years would know what I am talking about but choose to ignore all of that just to make a generalistic comment. Indian opening partnership was practically non-existent through most of Kohli's career and he was India's No.3 batsman. Its pretty easy to figure out that he did not have any less chances. And yes, even though Cook/Smith get more chances, but they also have to deal with the New ball and a fresh pitch, plus in cook's case, he has to deal with the England conditions too.

[omkarkiran]

great innings from Kohli.. :nice:

[Crookbond]

Bold 1: Cook/Smith are not best batsman in ODIs' date= but overall across formats rise above many and that was the club of batsmen I was talking about. By that manner, Kohli is also cannot be considered even more than decent in tests. But you will surely, continue to overlook that. Bold 2: Anyone who has watched India in the last 3 years would know what I am talking about but choose to ignore all of that just to make a generalistic comment. Indian opening partnership was practically non-existent through most of Kohli's career and he was India's No.3 batsman. Its pretty easy to figure out that he did not have any less chances. And yes, even though Cook/Smith get more chances, but they also have to deal with the New ball and a fresh pitch, plus in cook's case, he has to deal with the England conditions too.

Cook/Smith do not even feature in T20s for their sides; so across format arguments does not hold true. You saying that Cook/Smith are best batsman across formats does not make them one. They are not - they are damn good in Tests but decent in ODIs. Not bad, but not great as well. I never said Kohli was good in Test matches; in fact I mention quite the contrary. Do not make things up. Opening partnership non-existent? :WTF: He has had Sehwag/Gambhir/Tendulkar in that position and no way they were "non-existent".

[carnish]

Cook/Smith do not even feature in T20s for their sides; so across format arguments does not hold true. You saying that Cook/Smith are best batsman across formats does not make them one. They are not - they are damn good in Tests but decent in ODIs. Not bad, but not great as well. I never said Kohli was good in Test matches; in fact I mention quite the contrary. Do not make things up. Opening partnership non-existent? :WTF: He has had Sehwag/Gambhir/Tendulkar in that position and no way they were "non-existent".

We can agree to disagree on Cook/Smith. For me as of now, they are much better than Kohli in ODIs. Maybe a few more years of consistency and I will rate Kohli better. He had good openers but not good opening partnerships ... Since 2010 when he actually rose in the ranks and got No.3 position how many 75+ partnerships India have had?? I haven't got the stats but I don't remember many. Sehwag or Gambhir used to get out cheap on most occasion, Sachin didn't play many ODI tournaments. WC 2011 he was not playing at 3 ... and stuff like that which you are ignoring.

[Crookbond]

We can agree to disagree on Cook/Smith. For me as of now, they are much better than Kohli in ODIs. Maybe a few more years of consistency and I will rate Kohli better. He had good openers but not good opening partnerships ... Since 2010 when he actually rose in the ranks and got No.3 position how many 75+ partnerships India have had?? I haven't got the stats but I don't remember many. Sehwag or Gambhir used to get out cheap on most occasion, Sachin didn't play many ODI tournaments. WC 2011 he was not playing at 3 ... and stuff like that which you are ignoring.

I would be interested to know why you rate Cook/Smith better than Kohli. Smith may be an unfair comparison considering Smith debuted in 2002 and has only 10x100s. I don't have the statistics either but Sehwag/Gambhir have had their best runs between 2008-2011 and I won't be surprised if they were doing well.

[Haarkarjeetgaye]

it wont matter. he prides more in India winning than becoming best or second best batsman.