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

[mishra]

6 hours ago, rtmohanlal said:

oh ... yes ... then Lara, Ponting,Kallis, Ganguly, Hayden ,Gilchrist ,M.Waugh etc can be considered  rubbish one day batsmen when compared to Babar Azam, Root, Dhoni,Williamson,Dhawan  etc etc

You forgot Sachins coach, flower brothers, alloooo and anwar, And few Indians

[Global.Baba]

1 minute ago, mishra said:

You forgot Sachins coach, flower brothers, alloooo and anwar, And few Indians

Ramakant Achrekar???

[mishra]

1 minute ago, Global.Baba said:

Ramakant Achrekar???

Kirsten and his whole team.

[vvvslaxman]

6 hours ago, Cricketics said:

I wwill seal the debate.

 

Tendulkar most complete batsman without any doubt with all the shots and less weakness and one of the greatest overall

 

Kohli close to complete batsman in ODI’s but not as complete as Tendulkar, howevwr, overall better temperament who has more impact on the match and the wins.

 

 

 

That is the point i am trying to make. IN terms of batsmanship Tendulkar is better than anyone.  But temperamentally Kohli is better. His groundstroke style perfectly suits his temperament. It was the case in tests as well. After 2000 he was not indisputed in every area. He couldn't do what Dravid could do or Laxman could do or Sehwag could do. It always boiled down to temperament. There is one and only sehwag. Nobody can do what he did.

[goose]

3 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

That is the point i am trying to make. IN terms of batsmanship Tendulkar is better than anyone.  But temperamentally Kohli is better. His groundstroke style perfectly suits his temperament. It was the case in tests as well. After 2000 he was not indisputed in every area. He couldn't do what Dravid could do or Laxman could do or Sehwag could do. It always boiled down to temperament. There is one and only sehwag. Nobody can do what he did.

I agree but to be fair by 2002 he was already regarded by Wisden the best ever second only to Bradman (tests) and Richards (ODIs). It saddens me when people attribute Tendulakr's greatness to his longevity. It was really only a tiny fraction of his legacy, a useful aid for the stats guru brigade. Speaking of temperament can you think of a better performance under pressure than his Centurion 98 against Pakistan in WC'03?

 

 

[Cricketics]

40 minutes ago, goose said:

I agree but to be fair by 2002 he was already regarded by Wisden the best ever second only to Bradman (tests) and Richards (ODIs). It saddens me when people attribute Tendulakr's greatness to his longevity. It was really only a tiny fraction of his legacy, a useful aid for the stats guru brigade. Speaking of temperament can you think of a better performance under pressure than his Centurion 98 against Pakistan in WC'03?

 

 

That was one of the greatest knocks by the greatest batsman then surely but that doesn’t make alone him stand out among the rest. Its my fav knock too and I can watch it agin and again, Tendulkar against top bowling attack.

 

But still when we put the whole thing into perspective, Kohli has reached a different peek all of a sudden and is creating his own name and will surpass Tendulkar when the actual numbers are in favor of Kohli, which currently aren’t due to him having not played enough. It wil be matter of time though.

 

 

 

[rkt.india]

1 hour ago, goose said:

I agree but to be fair by 2002 he was already regarded by Wisden the best ever second only to Bradman (tests) and Richards (ODIs). It saddens me when people attribute Tendulakr's greatness to his longevity. It was really only a tiny fraction of his legacy, a useful aid for the stats guru brigade. Speaking of temperament can you think of a better performance under pressure than his Centurion 98 against Pakistan in WC'03?

 

 

2003 Indian team was on a roll anyway and they were decimating every team bar Aussies and that was an expiry attack of Akram and Waqar on a patta pitch.  Centurian is infamous for being patta in ODIs. it was as patta as Mumbai 2011 Wankhede.  What happened in the final in 2003?  BY 2002, SRT had played 13 years of International cricket and it was not like he was regarded after 3 years and still only around 29 years of age.

[putrevus]

2 hours ago, goose said:

I agree but to be fair by 2002 he was already regarded by Wisden the best ever second only to Bradman (tests) and Richards (ODIs). It saddens me when people attribute Tendulakr's greatness to his longevity. It was really only a tiny fraction of his legacy, a useful aid for the stats guru brigade. Speaking of temperament can you think of a better performance under pressure than his Centurion 98 against Pakistan in WC'03?

 

 

How is that Knock against ageing attack  in a meaningless match where India had already qualified for semis better than Kohli knock in world cup opener in 2015 against same opponents.

 

Wisden may have said that about Tendulkar in 2002 then Kohli was no where in the picture .Just becauce Wisden said something it will valid forever.

 

If Wisden rated Sachin so highly they would have made him one of five players of century which they did not, they named Shane Warne and Viv Richards.

[putrevus]

10 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Sorry, but no. Sachin is head and shoulders above ALL his contemporaries during his peak period when strike rate AND average is consiedered, Kohli is not, with ABDV right up there with him. 

Plus it is a statistical fact that Kohli plays in an era where 300+ scores are far more common than in Sachin's era. 

Also statistical fact that Sachin has faced far greater ODI bowlers ( for whom, ECONOMY rate is the main factor, not average) than Kohli can dream of. 

 

How is the world was Sachin head and shoulders above his peers. Your so called head and shoulders above his peers batsman took 5 trips to score an odi hundred in Australia against home team. same against SA, same against NZ. and same in England too that too when England had a very poor team.So 4 total hundreds SENA countries in over 100 matches.

 

This is what so called greatest batsman could do in 24 years, where as mere mortals like Kohli have already scored more hundreds in all those countries. 

 

 

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by putrevus

[Global.Baba]

22 minutes ago, putrevus said:

How is that Knock against ageing attack  in a meaningless match where India had already qualified for semis better than Kohli knock in world cup opener in 2015 against same opponents.

 

Wisden may have said that about Tendulkar in 2002 then Kohli was no where in the picture .Just becauce Wisden said something it will valid forever.

 

If Wisden rated Sachin so highly they would have made him one of five players of century which they did not, they named Shane Warne and Viv Richards.

Sachin was the top or the top3 scorers in 3 world cups. Was man of the match in 3 Pakistan encounters which are always high profile. Man of the match in semifinals. Scored 50 in a qf vs Australia. Was the only guy who looked like he can bat in the semis vs Srilanka 96. .scored 80+ in another semifinal.I don’t even have to split each individual wc innings because I am sure that got the point across

Edited November 2, 2018 by Global.Baba

[Jimmy Cliff]

31 minutes ago, putrevus said:

How is that Knock against ageing attack  in a meaningless match where India had already qualified for semis better than Kohli knock in world cup opener in 2015 against same opponents.

 

Wisden may have said that about Tendulkar in 2002 then Kohli was no where in the picture .Just becauce Wisden said something it will valid forever.

 

If Wisden rated Sachin so highly they would have made him one of five players of century which they did not, they named Shane Warne and Viv Richards.

India hadn't even played a Super 6 game by then but had already qualified for the Semis?  

Edited November 2, 2018 by Jimmy Cliff

[Global.Baba]

Sachin Tendulkar- Top scorer 1996 Wc India reaches semis

Sachin Tendulkar-Top scorer 2003 WC India reaches finals

Sachin Tendulkar-2nd highest run getter 2011 WC- India wins

 

 

[Laaloo]

1 minute ago, Global.Baba said:

Sachin Tendulkar- Top scorer 1996 Wc India reaches semis

Sachin Tendulkar-Top scorer 2003 WC India reaches finals

Sachin Tendulkar-2nd highest run getter 2011 WC- India wins

 

 

So what. He scored most of those runs against Namibia and Kenya and Zimbabwe.

[Global.Baba]

1 minute ago, Laaloo said:

So what. He scored most of those runs against Namibia and Kenya and Zimbabwe.

Yeah he conveniently ignores all the 50s in the knockouts and the 3 man of the matches against Pakistan lol

 

Kohli so far has flopped where it mattered. Even though I think his knock in 2011 final was valuable.

[putrevus]

7 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

Sachin was the top or the top3 scorers in 3 world cups. Was man of the match in 3 Pakistan encounters which are always high profile. Man of the match in semifinals. Scored 50 in a qf vs Australia. Was the only guy who looked like he can bat in the semis vs Srilanka 96. .scored 80+ in another semifinal.I don’t even have to split each individual wc innings because I am sure that got the point across

So what just becuase he scores more runs againsst Nambias and Zimbawawes in world cup he becomes the best batsmen.How many world cups did Sachin play and how many world cups did Kohli play. Most matches you are referring  were scored in his fifth world cup.

 

Kohli himself will say he has to do better in world cups but that does not make him any lesser player.But he showed in world T20s that he is capable of carrying the team.He single handledly carried the team in two world t20s.His knocks  against SA and Australia prove he is more than capable to handling any pressure.He did play small but important roles in CT finals and world cup finals.

 

Gambhir has two highest scores in two world cup finals, but that does not mean he is better than either Kohli or Sachin.

[putrevus]

21 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

India hasn't even played a Super 6 game by then but had already qualified for the Semis?  

Sorry they had already qualified for super6s not semis. 

[Jimmy Cliff]

19 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Sorry they had already qualified for super6s not semis. 

No worries. But beating Pakistan was still important as it meant carrying forward more points and making it easier for us to reach semis. It wasn't a dead rubber by any means. 

[goose]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

How is that Knock against ageing attack  in a meaningless match where India had already qualified for semis better than Kohli knock in world cup opener in 2015 against same opponents.

 

Wisden may have said that about Tendulkar in 2002 then Kohli was no where in the picture .Just becauce Wisden said something it will valid forever.

 

If Wisden rated Sachin so highly they would have made him one of five players of century which they did not, they named Shane Warne and Viv Richards.

you really are special

[rtmohanlal]

8 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

The good ODI batsmen of that era used to average 40 to 45 range.

 

The good ODI batsmen of this era are averaging 45 to 52.

 

That means an increase of around  7.

 

That means something like Kohli would be averaging around 53 in that era. That is how consistent he is.   

 

The only reason why I would not compare him with anybody yet is because he is in the middle of his career and this may change by the time he retires.  

As i earlier said   17 batsmen are averaging  in high 40s  after 2004(precisely those who debuted after 2004) where as  only 1 Sachin was averaging in    high 40s  before 2004(who debuted  around 1994 time period), combined with a huge str: rate difference in general  between both these set of batsmen.And this tells a lot.

And I don't find that much sense in what you are saying above.'increase of around  7.' from what ????And the last statement you made makes a lot of sense.Kohli is only in the midway thru his career. And that is exactly the same reason  I claim that as of now  Sachin is still ahead.

[rtmohanlal]

8 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

That is the point i am trying to make. IN terms of batsmanship Tendulkar is better than anyone.  But temperamentally Kohli is better. His groundstroke style perfectly suits his temperament. It was the case in tests as well. After 2000 he was not indisputed in every area. He couldn't do what Dravid could do or Laxman could do or Sehwag could do. It always boiled down to temperament. There is one and only sehwag. Nobody can do what he did.

temperament is dependent on the conditions & the basic nature  of the  scoring patterns in general that the  batsman  plays in.  That's why I feels that  if the target is very high in the range of 275+ - 350, Kohli is  better to Sachin in finishing off. On the other hand in  chasing difficult targets Sachin is  better  because of his   superior technique to combat lot more dangerous deliveries thru the inns.

For instance  go thru  the following score sheet.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8537/scorecard/65873/england-vs-india-1st-match-akai-singer-champions-trophy-1997-98

Top 6 baring Sachin  could manage only 114 runs in 176 balls.But Sachin alone could manage 91 off just 87 balls.

Sachin was a master at building these type of inns. When all others around  found it extremely difficult to score, he found  it so different because of his exceptional talent.That also is match temperament, not being slightly better in finishing huge targets alone.

 

 

Care to explain  the 2nd bolded part....