Jump to content

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


Who is better ODI batsman?  

153 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is better ODI batsman?



Recommended Posts

What an absolute legend a modern day great kohli is, a correct successor of master blasters throne , if any one deserve to be compared with king tendu its the king kohli, both masters of eye pleasing stroke play, dominated and humiliated bowlers of their era's, all hail king kohli hope you continue for many many years and brke tendulkar records and take India to new heights with  ur batting and DADA  esq captaincy..  

Edited by speedheat
Link to comment
1 minute ago, speedheat said:

What an absolute legend a modern day great kohli is, a correct successor of master blasters throne , if any one deserve to be compared with king tendu its the king kohli, both masters of eye pleasing stroke play, dominated and humiliated bowlers of their era's, all hail king kohli hope you continue for many many years and broke tendulkar records and take India to new heights with  ur batting and DADA  esq captaincy..  

When Dada played 6 matches against England at home, he couldn't win it after being up in series 3-1

Link to comment
18 hours ago, UnknownGenius said:

Again, longevity aside, Tendulkar has ZERO case whatsoever over Kohli

 

Kohli is the superior ODI batsman. Averages, strike rates, 100's while chasing, match winning innings....

 

If Kohli never plays another ODI cricket game ever again, he would still be rated a better ODI cricketer than Tendy.


LET THAT SINK IN:bow:

Tendy still has superior WC record and an average of 56 in tournament finals which is far superior to kohli.

Link to comment

SRT technically is a more complete player, but Virat plays a more wider array of shots (especially the frequency of hooks/pulls). Virat is more clutch and he keeps this up he will surpass all of SRT's ODI records. SRT probably played better bowlers, but the art of ODI bowling has been perfected a bit more in Virat's time (slower balls, slower bouncers, knuckle balls, etc.), but this difference not as much compared to Viv's time.

 

I think SRT set the stage in terms of modern day ODI batting and Virat is taking it to another level.

Link to comment
On 2/17/2018 at 8:52 PM, dandaroy said:

SRT technically is a more complete player, but Virat plays a more wider array of shots (especially the frequency of hooks/pulls). Virat is more clutch and he keeps this up he will surpass all of SRT's ODI records. SRT probably played better bowlers, but the art of ODI bowling has been perfected a bit more in Virat's time (slower balls, slower bouncers, knuckle balls, etc.), but this difference not as much compared to Viv's time.

 

I think SRT set the stage in terms of modern day ODI batting and Virat is taking it to another level.

I don't understand why people kept saying SRT faced better bowlers. SRT just retired 5 years. He faced all these bowlers too. 90s was completely different as ODI but most of these bowlers Kohli faced would have fared far better in 90s. Cricket has changed drastically after the Advent of t20 and is less bowler friendly but it doesn't mean these bowlers are not good. Bowlers averaging 22-25 were greats in 90s because average scores were low. 250 would win you games most times. Now average scores are higher, so bowling averages are also increased. I would say any bowler averaging 25-27 in ODIs is a great now.

Edited by rkt.india
Link to comment
48 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

I don't understand why people kept saying SRT faced bowlers. SRT just retired 5 years. He faced all these bowlers too. 90s was completely different as ODI but most of these bowlers Kohli faced would have fared far better in 90s. Cricket has changed drastically after the Advent of t20 and is less bowler friendly but it doesn't mean these bowlers not good. Bowlers averaging 22-25 were greats 90s because average scores were low. 250 would win you games most times. Now average scores are higher, so bowling averages are also increased. I would say any bowl averaging 25-27 in ODIs is a great now.

For a change, I kind of agree with you on this point :P ( Miracles do happen )

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

I don't understand why people kept saying SRT faced bowlers. SRT just retired 5 years. He faced all these bowlers too. 90s was completely different as ODI but most of these bowlers Kohli faced would have fared far better in 90s. Cricket has changed drastically after the Advent of t20 and is less bowler friendly but it doesn't mean these bowlers not good. Bowlers averaging 22-25 were greats 90s because average scores were low. 250 would win you games most times. Now average scores are higher, so bowling averages are also increased. I would say any bowl averaging 25-27 in ODIs is a great now.

Completely disagreed. :dontknow:

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

I don't understand why people kept saying SRT faced bowlers. SRT just retired 5 years. He faced all these bowlers too. 90s was completely different as ODI but most of these bowlers Kohli faced would have fared far better in 90s. Cricket has changed drastically after the Advent of t20 and is less bowler friendly but it doesn't mean these bowlers not good. Bowlers averaging 22-25 were greats 90s because average scores were low. 250 would win you games most times. Now average scores are higher, so bowling averages are also increased. I would say any bowl averaging 25-27 in ODIs is a great now.

Agree, this is a blind bhakts logic, Virat has left Sachin behind by a long way,his sheer match winning innings are too much to compare n he doesnt even open like Tendulkar did n used field restrictions to his benefit.

Link to comment
On 2/18/2018 at 9:00 AM, rkt.india said:

I don't understand why people kept saying SRT faced bowlers. SRT just retired 5 years. He faced all these bowlers too. 90s was completely different as ODI but most of these bowlers Kohli faced would have fared far better in 90s. Cricket has changed drastically after the Advent of t20 and is less bowler friendly but it doesn't mean these bowlers not good. Bowlers averaging 22-25 were greats 90s because average scores were low. 250 would win you games most times. Now average scores are higher, so bowling averages are also increased. I would say any bowl averaging 25-27 in ODIs is a great now.

 

Agree strongly.

Link to comment
On 17/02/2018 at 8:52 PM, dandaroy said:

SRT technically is a more complete player, but Virat plays a more wider array of shots (especially the frequency of hooks/pulls). Virat is more clutch and he keeps this up he will surpass all of SRT's ODI records. SRT probably played better bowlers, but the art of ODI bowling has been perfected a bit more in Virat's time (slower balls, slower bouncers, knuckle balls, etc.), but this difference not as much compared to Viv's time.

 

I think SRT set the stage in terms of modern day ODI batting and Virat is taking it to another level.

Sachin was great but his short height and that built made him look better than he was. 

Link to comment
On 2/18/2018 at 9:00 AM, rkt.india said:

I don't understand why people kept saying SRT faced better bowlers. SRT just retired 5 years. He faced all these bowlers too. 90s was completely different as ODI but most of these bowlers Kohli faced would have fared far better in 90s. Cricket has changed drastically after the Advent of t20 and is less bowler friendly but it doesn't mean these bowlers are not good. Bowlers averaging 22-25 were greats in 90s because average scores were low. 250 would win you games most times. Now average scores are higher, so bowling averages are also increased. I would say any bowler averaging 25-27 in ODIs is a great now.

It is not the case of current lot of bowlers bowling with far lesser avg:s  on the avg: in general in the 90s and 2000s.It is even not the case of these set of bowlers needing to be credited with lot more weightage  when they are compared  with those bowlers from 90s and 2000s.But it is  the case of Sachin's avg:   getting affected because of him starting even from NOV 89 and going thru periods of times where even 200 was defendable total and hence evaluating his avg: and str:rate based on that & not merely by taking numerical values of  his stats in one one comparison with Kohli or any current generation batsman.

Link to comment
On 2/17/2018 at 3:14 AM, BeardedAladdin said:

But greatness is determined by longevity, and nothing else.

 

I share your sentiment though, something has to go terribly wrong for kohli to not finish close to or above Tendulkar's aggregate.

 

Longevity is number of caps. And higher number of caps will never make you greater.

 

It's about consistency, best players are the most consistent. Kolhi is one. And I haven't even mentioned his superior match winning knocks, higher SR.

Link to comment
On 2/17/2018 at 11:22 PM, dandaroy said:

SRT technically is a more complete player, but Virat plays a more wider array of shots (especially the frequency of hooks/pulls). Virat is more clutch and he keeps this up he will surpass all of SRT's ODI records. SRT probably played better bowlers, but the art of ODI bowling has been perfected a bit more in Virat's time (slower balls, slower bouncers, knuckle balls, etc.), but this difference not as much compared to Viv's time.

 

I think SRT set the stage in terms of modern day ODI batting and Virat is taking it to another level.

SRT played with many of the same bowlers as Virat. Also, if Virat is supposedly playing weaker bowlers, then why there are no other cricketers with similar records? Virat is dominating the game, while Sachin peaked at various points of his career while struggled at other times.

Edited by someone
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...