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

[express bowling]

8 hours ago, sandeep said:

Bevan is an outlier due to a massive number of not outs, and the fact that he got to "finish" games that were already finished ifif you higher AT e that top order. 

 

Even if you exclude Bevan, there were many other batsmen who were in the ballpark similar statistical range as Sachin.   

 

And I would not exclude Bevan as he was considered by Australia as a batsman who helped their cause in ODIs.  His not outs did not come at the cost of his team.

 

Quote

Same reason why Ambatli Rayudu also has a very high average. 

 

Not really.  Rayudu's high average is due to a lot of matches against minnows like Zimbabwe and HK.

 

Also, his SR is very poor.

 

Quote

Also, when I meant numbers, I was referring to SR and average together.  Compare those to Sachin's peers and you are likely to find him... peerless.

 

Kohli has a higher SR than most batters who average within even 10 of his average.

 

Quote

What is Rohit's average as opener?  His numbers are vastly skewed due to his poor results in the middle-order.   I think you will find his numbers as opener quite close to Virat's.

 

Can't pick and choose regarding any player when we are considering greatness.   Kohli's figures as a batsman while captaining are almost Bradmanesque ... but I won't consider it either.

 

Quote

Its always misleading to compare a player in the midst of his white-hot prime, to a player who has completed his career, including the tail-end, where most if not all players fade away a bit.  Virat could well have a couple of years like Dhoni towards the end, which will bring down his cumulative numbers.  Won't make him a lesser player in my eyes, but just making the point about stats and respective context.  

 

I did not open this thread ... nor am I in favour of comparing greats of different eras.

 

I was just responding to your post that Sachin is statistically head and shoulders above his peers ... while Kohli is not.  The reverse is true actually as far as averages are concerned.  And both have better strike rates than 80% of their comparable peers.

Edited October 31, 2018 by express bowling

[Trichromatic]

8 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

 Batting averages in ODIs  (  rounded off )

 

Kohli       60

 

ABDV     54

Azam     52

 Amla      50

Rohit      47

Warner  43

 

These are not " similar big numbers ".

 

 Huge difference actually.

 

 

 

ODI  Batting averages  (  rounded off )

 

Bevan            53

Sachin           45

Kallis             44

Hayden         44

Ponting         42

Sangakkara  42

Ganguly        41

Lara              40

 

Not a case of numbers head and shoulders ahead of Sachin's peer group.

 

 

Out of those batsmen who had SR above 85?

[putrevus]

9 hours ago, Nonbeliever said:

90s Zimbabwe were much better than today's Lanka or westindies.

Are you kidding me.We will now  say Henry Olanga was one of best pace bowler in 1990s. 

[Trichromatic]

From 1993 to 2002

 

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0
MG Bevan (AUS)	1994-2002	189	163	56	5850	108*	54.67	7769	75.29	6	38	4
SR Tendulkar (INDIA)	1993-2002	253	246	26	10184	186*	46.29	11513	88.45	33	45	10
BC Lara (WI)	1993-2002	170	165	19	6481	169	44.39	7990	81.11	15	38	10
JH Kallis (SA)	1996-2002	168	162	28	5902	113*	44.04	8433	69.98	8	42	6
SC Ganguly (INDIA)	1996-2002	212	204	15	8208	183	43.42	10976	74.78	19	50	9
ME Waugh (AUS)	1993-2002	203	199	17	7642	173	41.98	10017	76.29	18	45	13
RT Ponting (AUS)	1995-2002	151	150	19	5428	145	41.43	7095	76.50	10	30	12
G Kirsten (SA)	1993-2002	179	179	16	6612	188*	40.56	9219	71.72	13	42	10
Saeed Anwar (PAK)	1993-2002	212	210	17	7826	194	40.54	9742	80.33	17	42	13
Inzamam-ul-Haq (PAK)	1993-2002	254	237	37	8040	137*	40.20	11306	71.11	6	59	12
M Azharuddin (INDIA)	1993-2000	189	175	29	5723	153*	39.19	7501	76.29	4	41	3
R Dravid (INDIA)	1996-2002	191	175	19	6103	153	39.12	8808	69.28	8	42	4
A Jadeja (INDIA)	1993-2000	183	167	35	5154	119	39.04	7223	71.35	6	30	9
WJ Cronje (SA)	1993-2000	170	160	25	5235	112	38.77	6858	76.33	2	38	7
MS Atapattu (SL)	1996-2002	168	166	18	5712	132*	38.59	8507	67.14	7	43	8
PA de Silva (SL)	1993-2002	187	181	21	6081	145	38.00	7493	81.15	9	42	11
JN Rhodes (SA)	1993-2002	225	202	48	5600	121	36.36	6854	81.70	2	33	12
A Flower (ZIM)	1993-2002	194	190	14	6080	145	34.54	8059	75.44	3	50	13
NJ Astle (NZ)	1995-2002	164	161	8	5280	122*	34.50	7277	72.55	12	31	11
GW Flower (ZIM)	1993-2002	189	185	15	5712	142*	33.60	8438	67.69	6	33	16
ST Jayasuriya (SL)	1993-2002	253	250	10	8060	189	33.58	8939	90.16	13	51	16
ADR Campbell (ZIM)	1993-2002	182	179	14	5165	131*	31.30	7760	66.55	7	30	10

 

2nd highest average and highest SR among. Lara with 2nd highest SR at 81. That's huge difference. Sanath had SR of 90 had avg of 33. Most of the batsmen had SR in 70s.

 

88 is SR of modern day batsman when double centuries and centuries are so common. 

 

Clearly it was difficult for batsmen of that era to be both aggressive and maintain high avg and SRT was only one who managed to do it.

 

You don't need these numbers to realize that how ahead he was among his peers. If you had followed cricket in 90s you can say that easily. 

 

[Nonbeliever]

5 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Are you kidding me.We will now  say Henry Olanga was one of best pace bowler in 1990s. 

Never said that. 

Zimbabwe was not limited to olonga only.  They had streak,brandes and Paul strang.  Combined with very very good fielding.

 

 

[putrevus]

16 hours 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.

Kohli scored 183 when Sachin was batting with him from second ball of innings  before Sachin faced a ball. While I understand Kohli does not face new ball  but white ball rarely swings.

Sachin batted in power plays and also batting power plays. Most cricketers like Rahim or Salman Butts are not equal to Virat Kohli.

You don't have to agree with me but Sachin in my view is not better odi batsmen than Kohli.He was a better Odi player than Kohli because he had bowling which Kohli does not have , Sachin won matches with ball too.

Kohli as test batsmen recently has done more in his overseas on harder pitches against better attack both in SA and England  than any of Sachin's overseas tours agree or disagree ??? If disagree what tours did Sachin better Kohli ?

As far as talent goes Sachin was far more talented than Kohli.But Kohli has done more with his talent.

 

 

 

[Trichromatic]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

Kohli scored 183 when Sachin was batting with him from second ball of innings  before Sachin faced a ball. While I understand Kohli does not face new ball  but white ball rarely swings.

Sachin batted in power plays and also batting power plays. Most cricketers like Rahim or Salman Butts are not equal to Virat Kohli.

You don't have to agree with me but Sachin in my view is not better odi batsmen than Kohli.He was a better Odi player than Kohli because he had bowling which Kohli does not have , Sachin won matches with ball too.

Kohli as test batsmen recently has done more in his overseas on harder pitches against better attack both in SA and England  than any of Sachin's overseas tours agree or disagree ??? If disagree what tours did Sachin better Kohli ?

As far as talent goes Sachin was far more talented than Kohli.But Kohli has done more with his talent.

 

 

 

It's easy in tests.

 

Start comparing Kohli with Lara and tell us what has Kohli done better than Lara so far. Big series, runs in tough conditions against spin and pace. Great innings, dominate bowlers, good series against ATG attacks. 

 

Lara has probably better achievements in tests as Kohli.

 

Then you will know the answer.

[zen]

32 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Lara has probably better or at least similar achievements in tests as Kohli.

Lara is probably among the top 3-4 test batsmen of all time -> Bradman, Sobers, Gavaskar and Lara 

 

Spot #5 is where the competition gets tough .... For e.g. Richards in his prime was avg 67 and also has a case for that #5 spot 

 

Records type batting analysis [change type]

View cumulative averages [change view]

Start of match date between 1 Jan 1976 and 1 Jan 1983

Ordered by start date (ascending)

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Career averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0
unfiltered	1974-1991	121	182	12	8540	291	50.23	24	45	10	Profile
filtered	1976-1982	37	57	2	3658	291	66.50	12	16	2

 

 

Richards as a top order batsman:

Records type batting analysis [change type]

View career summary [change view]

Batting position between 1 and 3

Ordered by default (ascending)

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Career averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0
unfiltered	1974-1991	121	182	12	8540	291	50.23	24	45	10	Profile
filtered	1976-1986	47	63	2	3787	291	62.08	13	16	2

 

 

PS

View overall figures [change view]

Start of match date between 1 Jan 1976 and 1 Jan 1983

Qualifications bowling strike rate less than or equal to 60

Ordered by wickets taken (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 38 of 38

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	5	10
IT Botham (ENG)	1977-1982	58	101	13810	6426	262	8/34	13/106	24.52	2.79	52.7	20	4
RGD Willis (ENG)	1976-1982	62	114	12059	5589	236	8/43	9/118	23.68	2.78	51.0	14	0
DK Lillee (AUS)	1976-1982	40	75	10633	5060	220	7/83	11/123	23.00	2.85	48.3	17	6
Imran Khan (PAK)	1976-1982	41	75	10728	4592	201	8/58	14/116	22.84	2.56	53.3	13	3
N Kapil Dev (INDIA)	1978-1982	44	76	9872	5105	172	7/56	11/146	29.68	3.10	57.3	13	1
Sir RJ Hadlee (NZ)	1976-1982	31	57	8089	3729	149	7/23	11/58	25.02	2.76	54.2	13	3
MA Holding (WI)	1976-1982	29	56	6685	2926	135	8/92	14/149	21.67	2.62	49.5	10	2
JR Thomson (AUS)	1976-1982	35	61	6914	3688	131	6/50	9/167	28.15	3.20	52.7	3	0
CEH Croft (WI)	1977-1982	27	52	6165	2913	125	8/29	9/95	23.30	2.83	49.3	3	0
J Garner (WI)	1977-1982	28	54	6648	2560	124	6/56	8/121	20.64	2.31	53.6	2	0

Edited October 31, 2018 by zen

[express bowling]

4 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Out of those batsmen who had SR above 85?

 

And out of the list I provided of modern day ODI batters ...  no one averaging 50+,  other than ABDV,  has a SR of 90+ while Kohli has a SR of 93

[vvvslaxman]

I am not going to go into who they faced, what the par score was, who they played with who they played against. Purely from technical perspective Kohli would have done well in any era. Yes he has a weakness against outside the off channel. Tendulkar had issue against incoming balls. Both find their own way to deal with it. Let us talk about stroke play. Here is where and here is why Kohli is bloody good. He is predominantly a groundstroke player. He doesn't go up and over like Sachin, Rohit or Sehwag.  Kohli's cricket is pretty risk free. He relies a lot on placing the ball. He is blood good at it. That is why he is amazingly consistent. He doesn't look like accumulating runs. Perfect example is Amla. If you look at the stats you would think AMla is an amazing genius in the one dayers. In reality construction of his ODI innings is very different from construction of Kohli. Same way Sachin had his own way of contructing the innings

 

Sachin's typical long innings on a true wicket  would be ( let us not discuss about anamolous slow lucky innings)

first 15 boom boom

till 40th over rotate strikes, (slow down near 100)

after 40th over he will start going after again. In the 90s he would postpone it to 45th over

 

KOhli's typical long innings is very different

Because he comes in at 3. He doesn't go bang bang upfront. He takes time to get to 50. Once he reaches the stage and gets the measure of the bowling he doesn't stop. He just unleashes stunning strokes against bowling regardless of the situation. He doesn't wait till 40th over. He starts a bit early. Ofcourse it is largely something to do with culture. 

 

If we have to draw a parallel Dhoni vs Yuvraj construction of innings.  They are both different in certain way. In the end overs both can be absolutely devastating.  Yuvraj starts the assault early

 

Personally i think Sachin's aerial approach didn't allow him to realize his full potential. Kohli with solid ground strokes will be able to achieve his true potential as he rarely goes through slump.

[mishra]

^ How many such innings Kohli played before 2 new ball git introduced along with additional field restrictions.

 Yuvi was proper bats man. He can hit any bowler when he is in his zone. So Yuvi is like a Rhino. Once started running it will not care who is in path

But Dhoni was man with Cakculator. He has some strong point and targetted the bowlers who he wanted to target. MSD was like that hunter whi will patently wait till he is certain that he will hit the target and then pulled trigger. That wait if risk averse situation made him so successful 

Edited October 31, 2018 by mishra

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, mishra said:

^ How many such innings Kohli played before 2 new ball git introduced along with additional field restrictions.

 Yuvi was proper bats man. He can hit any bowler when he is in his zone. So Yuvi is like a Rhino. Once started running it will not care who is in path

But Dhoni was man with Cakculator. He has some strong point and hebtargetted the bowlers who he wanted to target. MSD was like that hunter whi will patently wait till he is certain that he will hit the target and then oulled trigger.

Introduction of two new balls is hardly his fault. His transformation in red ball cricket is a testimony to that. How many times Tendulkar has scored 500 runs in a test series? None. Kohli in a real tough series against a solid bowling group, in overwhelmingly helpful condition scored close to 600 runs at a healthy strike rate. So i am not buying the theory Kohli "would have" failed against red ball, failed against "single white ball" . Kohli has the same work ethic as Tendulkar probably Tendulkar was blessed with some inborn talent. But Kohli's ability to sustain his consistency is nearly unmatched in the one dayers. Nobody can get close to that. About field restrictions, how many times Kohli gets to bat in the first 10 overs. Does he rely on clearing the fielder by over their head? Nope. He relies on placing the ball. You could have 6 fielders on the fence i still back him to penetrate the field.

Edited October 31, 2018 by vvvslaxman

[mishra]

27 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

And out of the list I provided of modern day ODI batters ...  no one averaging 50+,  other than ABDV,  has a SR of 90+ while Kohli has a SR of 93

They dont need to, modern odi game is all about SR. Game has changed.

Thats the reason we are loosing against windies or England despite a hundred from Kohli.

You can look into Average, but its S/R which matters.

[mishra]

23 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Introduction of two new balls is hardly his fault. His transformation in red ball cricket is a testimony to that. How many times Tendulkar has scored 500 runs in a test series? None. Kohli in a real tough series against a solid bowling group, in overwhelmingly helpful condition scored close to 600 runs at a healthy strike rate. So i am not buying the theory Kohli "would have" failed against red ball, failed against "single white ball" . Kohli has the same work ethic as Tendulkar probably Tendulkar was blessed with some inborn talent. But Kohli's ability to sustain his consistency is nearly unmatched in the one dayers. Nobody can get close to that. About field restrictions, how many times Kohli gets to bat in the first 10 overs. Does he rely on clearing the fielder by over their head? Nope. He relies on placing the ball. You could have 6 fielders on the fence i still back him to penetrate the field.

I am not saying Kohli isnt a beast. But if a batsman has more than 4 strong areas . I.e 4+ locations can hit a ball for 6, he is unstoppable in current day odi system. Simple as that.

so its two new balls which are creating that additional pace and timing, this additional pace and timing was non existentent after 30th over. 

Take the second ball out of odi game. Ground shots would be protected and sixes may turn into catches

Edited October 31, 2018 by mishra

[putrevus]

4 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

It's easy in tests.

 

Start comparing Kohli with Lara and tell us what has Kohli done better than Lara so far. Big series, runs in tough conditions against spin and pace. Great innings, dominate bowlers, good series against ATG attacks. 

 

Lara has probably better achievements in tests as Kohli.

 

Then you will know the answer.

Lara in early 1990s was better than Sachin  and that Lara is better than Kohli . But we are not comparing Lara and Kohli.

[rtmohanlal]

36 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Introduction of two new balls is hardly his fault. His transformation in red ball cricket is a testimony to that. How many times Tendulkar has scored 500 runs in a test series? None. Kohli in a real tough series against a solid bowling group, in overwhelmingly helpful condition scored close to 600 runs at a healthy strike rate. So i am not buying the theory Kohli "would have" failed against red ball, failed against "single white ball" . Kohli has the same work ethic as Tendulkar probably Tendulkar was blessed with some inborn talent. But Kohli's ability to sustain his consistency is nearly unmatched in the one dayers. Nobody can get close to that. About field restrictions, how many times Kohli gets to bat in the first 10 overs. Does he rely on clearing the fielder by over their head? Nope. He relies on placing the ball. You could have 6 fielders on the fence i still back him to penetrate the field.

really find it strange that '500' mark is given so much preference. We need  to realize that the chances of that depends on the no: of inns a batsman gets to play thru a series. So avg:  in a  series should be  the criteria, not this '500' thing. If we go thru series wise data of Sachin, we can see that there were several series where he could easily have touched '500' but couldn't because of the very few no: of inns he played in those series.

For instance in IND vs AUS series in 2010/11  Sachin scored  403 from just 4 inns with avg: 134.33. If he just continued with the not out  inns  he would have touched 500  even there it self, let alone the case that  he got 8 full inns in the series. Similarly  in 2008 AUS series he needed just 7 runs to touch 500.If he batted thru  the 1 not out inns , he would have touched that.So avg: needs to be given preference , not this '500' limit.

[Muloghonto]

15 hours ago, velu said:

soon some sachin fan here will start hyping henry olanga and @Muloghonto bhai will say that zimbabwe bowling of 1990s was close to world class  

Actually, for a few matches here and there, Zimbabwe attack of the 90s was a worldclass attack by today's standards, where pretty much only RSA, OZ are clearly better: in matches where Streak, both the Strangs and Grant flower played, they were defending 220-230 runs against strong teams. 

Again, if i were to be like you and go by a 'dream team combo to take the field once or twice' then even Zimbabwe becomes an amazing attack.

[Muloghonto]

17 hours ago, velu said:

 

what about equivalent for wasim , waqar , saqlain and akhtar  

you got one steyn 

Thats an All-time great attack, much better than merely 'worldclass'. 

 

[Muloghonto]

16 hours ago, rkt.india said:

which opener is averaging similar to Rohit?  Rohit is averaging 59.  No other opener is even averaging close to him.  Amla is the closest but he does not have the same impact or big scores as frequently as Rohit.  Rohit has 7 150 plus scores in ODIs.  The second highest is 5 by SRT who played 462 matches and Warner while Warner's batting average is just 43 in ODIs.

Sure. But Rohit is barely crossing a 100 ODIs as an opener. Which is barely a 4 year ODI patch in terms of full calendar. Too soon to compare him with the greats. 

[Muloghonto]

16 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Did I talk about how SRT fared on his last leg 2012-13?  Same way, I take that 2003 match with a pinch of salt as both Akram and Waqar retired soon after.  we are talking about peaks.  SRT at his peak averaged 48 from 94-2003 as said by @Muloghonto, Kohli at his peak in last five years is averaging 71 and he has not finished yet.

2003 is not the only time Tendulkar demolished Akram or Waqar. 

Yes, we are talking of peaks. but absolute comparison of peaks is irrelevant stat in ODI cricket, since today 300 is a par score and in Tendy's era, 250 was a par score. In terms of distribution of matches that hit 300 runs batting first or both innings, its humongously larger today than in Tendy's peak. 
So obviously, same genius batting in 90s would have less runs to show for it than teleported to today and vice versa. 

Also, Tendulkar's peak is not just a significant 10-20% better than his nearest rivals in terms of average. he is also 10-15% better than his nearest rivals in terms of average, with respect to strike rates.