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

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

That is utter nonsense, Ponting debuted in 1995 , it is not his fault that other played declined. Give me a series where Sachin faced so called great bowlers and scored runs. Lara was better early than Sachin especially in 1990s.

 

Your point about Sachin facing great bowlers is as bigger myth as Gavaskar dominating 80s West Indies attack with all their great fast bowlers. 

 

He debuted in 1995. He was mediocre till 2002 ( his record till 2002 was : 52 tests, 83 innings 11 not outs, 3182 runs at 44.19, 9x100 and 15x50. 

Ambrose retired in 2000. Walsh in 2001. Akram in 2002. Waqar was averaging 30+ as a bowler since the late 90s and retired in 2003. 
Donald in 2002.

Ponting for SEVEN YEARS, while thse great bowlers roamed the scene, was a mid 40s average guy. Immediately they leave, he averages 70 and 100 for the next two years. The conclusion is obvious.

This is why i dont rate Ponting or Kallis very highly - they are good batsmen but not elite. They were mediocre for YEARS while facing great bowlers but transformed into killer batsmen the moment these guys left.

 

You can see for yourself how many great bowlers Sachin has faced in his career- nobody has as many great bowlers batted against as Sachin. Nobody. 

[mishra]

1 minute ago, rtmohanlal said:

that is a bit strange thinking  ... the need is to filter out the criteria for greatness  based on existing rules. For a start , providing very high weightage for econ:    in addition to a <25  avg: would be sensible

Let me put it this way. Moein gets 90% of his wicket while batsmen are playing attacking shot. Would you call Moein great?

ODI game is so much skewed that nowadays, only way you can judge a bowlers pottetial is by looking at his test stats.

 

Starc is feared because he has test numbers to back up. So will be probably Rabada.

[Muloghonto]

Also, yes Lara is the close second best batsman of the last 30 years for me. This is because Lara did face better quality bowling than Tendy in general (due to their long 5 match series vs OZ, ENG and RSA) and after 96 or so, Tendy was no longer the only competent batsman in Indian team, while Lara always was a one-man-show in his day, till the last 2-3 years when Chanderpaul finally grew up from a decent batsman to a great one.

On his day, he could absolutely massacre a bowling lineup - on the juciest of pitches, against alltime great attacks, he could score humongous runs while shepherding the tail. 
But he was inconsistent, even at his peak and he did have a weakness on the 4th stump line (this is how McGrath and Pollock repeatedly nailed him). 
He was also very aesthetically pleasing. But ultiamately, its a question of what do i prefer - a Tendy-esque 150,50,4,120,75 etc type scores or 250, 0,4,4,175 type of scores. 

 

In test cricket, these two names - Tendulkar and Lara- would easily make my team ahead of Kohli, Smith,deVilliers,etc. Without a question. 

Edited October 24, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Jimmy Cliff]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

He debuted in 1995. He was mediocre till 2002 ( his record till 2002 was : 52 tests, 83 innings 11 not outs, 3182 runs at 44.19, 9x100 and 15x50. 

Ambrose retired in 2000. Walsh in 2001. Akram in 2002. Waqar was averaging 30+ as a bowler since the late 90s and retired in 2003. 
Donald in 2002.

Ponting for SEVEN YEARS, while thse great bowlers roamed the scene, was a mid 40s average guy. Immediately they leave, he averages 70 and 100 for the next two years. The conclusion is obvious.

This is why i dont rate Ponting or Kallis very highly - they are good batsmen but not elite. They were mediocre for YEARS while facing great bowlers but transformed into killer batsmen the moment these guys left.

 

You can see for yourself how many great bowlers Sachin has faced in his career- nobody has as many great bowlers batted against as Sachin. Nobody. 

He had actually done very well against those guys until 2002. 

 

 

[rtmohanlal]

8 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

He had actually done very well against those guys until 2002. 

 

 

this is why I feel exactly as to why these type of filtrations alone  in itself do not lead us any where. If Ponting was brilliant against these bowlers, Ponting was poor in IND which takes off    a lot of glow in these one one comparisons. More over Ponting had the huge advantage of being part of an ATG team in which each player  fed off every other's performance. On the other hand, Lara didn't score a 100+  against Wasim or Waqar or Donald, but his highlight was his penchant for huge individual scores. Sachin faced those amount of ATG bowlers that no body faced and amidst huge pressure of expectations from every corner.  

That is why general perception with regard to pros and cons of each player in addition to great stats is a must in  marking these players.

[Muloghonto]

20 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

He had actually done very well against those guys until 2002. 

 

 

why are you including 2002 ? he only played against Waqar amongst great bowlers (who was already done for YEARS being a great bowler) and Donald's last series vs AUS where he only played 1 match, took 1-72 in 1 innings and thats it. 

This is like saying you dismissed a 40 year old Tendulkar 3 times in a row = you own Tendulkar and dominated the best batsman ever.....

 

[Jimmy Cliff]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

why are you including 2002 ? he only played against Waqar amongst great bowlers (who was already done for YEARS being a great bowler) and Donald's last series vs AUS where he only played 1 match, took 1-72 in 1 innings and thats it. 

This is like saying you dismissed a 40 year old Tendulkar 3 times in a row = you own Tendulkar and dominated the best batsman ever.....

 

Huh? Because you mentioned he was mediocre till 2002. And then proceeded to claim his overall record till 2002 was mediocre because the great bowlers were around till 2002. Clearly the above stats show his numbers until 2002 in matches involving these great bowlers were pretty good. Now some of them may not have been at their peak in this phase but neither was Ponting.

[Jimmy Cliff]

12 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

this is why I feel exactly as to why these type of filtrations alone  in itself do not lead us any where. If Ponting was brilliant against these bowlers, Ponting was poor in IND which takes off    a lot of glow in these one one comparisons. More over Ponting had the huge advantage of being part of an ATG team in which each player  fed off every other's performance. On the other hand, Lara didn't score a 100+  against Wasim or Waqar or Donald, but his highlight was his penchant for huge individual scores. Sachin faced those amount of ATG bowlers that no body faced and amidst huge pressure of expectations from every corner.  

That is why general perception with regard to pros and cons of each player in addition to great stats is a must in  marking these players.

As long as these filters are applied without any agenda, the results can actually be rather illuminating. Otherwise none of us has actually seen each and every game played by these players and our assessment of their ability can be clouded by bias/performances against our team/performances in games we have watched and so on.

[Muloghonto]

16 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

Huh? Because you mentioned he was mediocre till 2002. And then proceeded to claim his overall record till 2002 was mediocre because the great bowlers were around till 2002. Clearly the above stats show his numbers until 2002 in matches involving these great bowlers were pretty good. Now some of them may not have been at their peak in this phase but neither was Ponting.

Until 2002 means till the end of 2001.....

Thats 7 years.....if you are not at peak for 7 years when great bowlers are around and then right after most of them retire and the last one or two are on their last series when you start murdering the bowling, the conclusion is obvious......

[rtmohanlal]

13 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

As long as these filters are applied without any agenda, the results can actually be rather illuminating. Otherwise none of us has actually seen each and every game played by these players and our assessment of their ability can be clouded by bias/performances against our team/performances in games we have watched and so on.

definitely these stats form the basis  for reaching our conclusions, but 'basis' only. After that, it is all about  ones own preference of factors that determines the over all superiority.For instance in constructing big scores Lara had no parallel.Naturally people who gives utmost preference to this factor consider him the   better to Sachin & Ponting neglecting all his other negatives like no 100 vs Wasim,Waqar,Donald,  <40 avg: in 2 countries etc etc.

 

On the other hand people who consider consistancy ,brilliance in  every country, brilliance against every type of bowling, longevity etc etc treats Sachin the better batsman .And that 'huge pressure of expectations' factor is another thing that earns Sachin a lot of points.

 

Despite all his brilliance, Ponting's record in India & being a part of such a great team  are 2 factors that goes against him. But still there are a few people who consider him  the better of the 3 by giving least preferences to these weaknesses of Ponting.

 

 

 

 

 

[Jimmy Cliff]

45 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Until 2002 means till the end of 2001.....

Thats 7 years.....if you are not at peak for 7 years when great bowlers are around and then right after most of them retire and the last one or two are on their last series when you start murdering the bowling, the conclusion is obvious......

The conclusion remains dubious even if the cut-off is set to 2001 instead of 2002. I will back that up by comparing Ponting's numbers to SRT and Lara against great fast bowlers till the end of 2001 .

[Muloghonto]

32 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

The conclusion remains dubious even if the cut-off is set to 2001 instead of 2002. I will back that up by comparing Ponting's numbers to SRT and Lara against great fast bowlers till the end of 2001 .

well the numbers i presented are from Ponting's debut till end of 2001. 

I am not going by bowling average against a said bowler - that is a bit of a bullshit stat, as its not really reflective of competence against a said bowler in test matches. Ie, i say if Lara came on the wicket on a green, grassy wicket against Akram at his pomp, played out 3 maidens, then smacked the bowling around to score a century in the next 30 overs vs the two Mushies, yet got dismissed first ball by Akram with the second new ball, stats will show an average of '0' vs the said bowler but its a perfect example of doing very well against the said bowler & attack.

 

[putrevus]

 

4 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

He debuted in 1995. He was mediocre till 2002 ( his record till 2002 was : 52 tests, 83 innings 11 not outs, 3182 runs at 44.19, 9x100 and 15x50. 

Ambrose retired in 2000. Walsh in 2001. Akram in 2002. Waqar was averaging 30+ as a bowler since the late 90s and retired in 2003. 
Donald in 2002.

Ponting for SEVEN YEARS, while thse great bowlers roamed the scene, was a mid 40s average guy. Immediately they leave, he averages 70 and 100 for the next two years. The conclusion is obvious.

This is why i dont rate Ponting or Kallis very highly - they are good batsmen but not elite. They were mediocre for YEARS while facing great bowlers but transformed into killer batsmen the moment these guys left.

 

You can see for yourself how many great bowlers Sachin has faced in his career- nobody has as many great bowlers batted against as Sachin. Nobody. 

52

83

11

3182

197

44.19

5837

54.51

9

15

6

345

18

v South Africa

26 Dec 2001

Test # 1580

 

52

79

8

3534

179

49.77

11

17

4

v West Indies

4 Apr 1997

Test # 1364  I dont see Sachin being that great either after 52 test.

 

Sachin thruout his career especially tests had been steady eddy .This notion that Sachin some how dominated world class bowling attacks is ridiculous , if he did  please share that series .

 

Let us examine his domination over great fast bowlers. 

 

 

 

 

[Trichromatic]

3 minutes ago, putrevus said:

 

52

83

11

3182

197

44.19

5837

54.51

9

15

6

345

18

v South Africa

26 Dec 2001

Test # 1580

 

52

79

8

3534

179

49.77

11

17

4

v West Indies

4 Apr 1997

Test # 1364  I dont see Sachin being that great either after 52 test.

 

Sachin thruout his career especially tests had been steady eddy .This notion that Sachin some how dominated world class bowling attacks is ridiculous , if he did  please share that series .

 

Let us examine his domination over great fast bowlers. 

 

 

 

 

Isn't that the point? When people say that he faced great bowling attacks, that doesn't mean he dominated those attacks. Actually batsmen rarely dominate great bowlers for years.

 

Highlighting great bowlers part is to show that because of avg/decent record against them the overall record has taken dent and he has proven to be as good as any other against mediocre attacks which others face now for longer time.

[putrevus]

Isn't that the point? When people say that he faced great bowling attacks, that doesn't mean he dominated those attacks. Actually batsmen rarely dominate great bowlers for years.
 
Highlighting great bowlers part is to show that because of avg/decent record against them the overall record has taken dent and he has proven to be as good as any other against mediocre attacks which others face now for longer time.

I don’t think it is that simple Sachin played in era of Two Ws and Ambrose and Walsh but he rarely played them so how you can you generalize and say Sachin did well against them.

As I said earlier Gavaskar scored 14 hundreds against West Indies but if you look closely you will know of those 14 very few hundreds were against their line actual bowling attack.

If we examine series by series for Sachin we will also come to the similar conclusion.

What Kohli is doing in Odis and Steve Smith did in tests is only below Bradman no one else comes close to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jimmy Cliff]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

well the numbers i presented are from Ponting's debut till end of 2001. 

I am not going by bowling average against a said bowler - that is a bit of a bullshit stat, as its not really reflective of competence against a said bowler in test matches. Ie, i say if Lara came on the wicket on a green, grassy wicket against Akram at his pomp, played out 3 maidens, then smacked the bowling around to score a century in the next 30 overs vs the two Mushies, yet got dismissed first ball by Akram with the second new ball, stats will show an average of '0' vs the said bowler but its a perfect example of doing very well against the said bowler & attack.

 

I am not interested in such a stat either. But I am interested in what a batsman averages in games involving ATG bowlers. Now if Ponting's moderate record until 2002 is being attributed to the presence of a number of great bowlers around, the same should reflect in his numbers in games involving those bowlers. However his average in these games is quite healthy.

 

 

LINK

 

If you look at SRT or Lara's average in matches involving the same bowlers (+McGrath) till the end of 2001, their average is actually lower compared to Ponting.

 

 

 

What this shows is that till the end of 2001, Ponting's raw stats in games involving great fast bowlers were at least comparable if not better than those of SRT/Lara. The reason SRT/Lara had much better overall numbers was they had done a much better job of dominating less fancied attacks compared to Ponting. Something that Ponting himself started doing post 2001.

[Global.Baba]

Statistically yes.

 

Kohli in tests or ODIs is yet to play that one ATG knock that will be talked about forever.

 

Even though I personally rate his T20

knock against Australia in WT20 2016 maybe as a Top 20 knock played by an Indian bat across all formats.

[Muloghonto]

56 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

I am not interested in such a stat either. But I am interested in what a batsman averages in games involving ATG bowlers. Now if Ponting's moderate record until 2002 is being attributed to the presence of a number of great bowlers around, the same should reflect in his numbers in games involving those bowlers. However his average in these games is quite healthy.

LINK

 

If you look at SRT or Lara's average in matches involving the same bowlers (+McGrath) till the end of 2001, their average is actually lower compared to Ponting.

 

What this shows is that till the end of 2001, Ponting's raw stats in games involving great fast bowlers were at least comparable if not better than those of SRT/Lara. The reason SRT/Lara had much better overall numbers was they had done a much better job of dominating less fancied attacks compared to Ponting. Something that Ponting himself started doing post 2001.

Your stats don't make sense- why are you restricting Lara or Tendulkar to 2001 vs McGrath ? He continued to play McGrath for later years.

Now throw in Warne-tharans and the numbers contrast will become stark. 

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

What Kohli is doing in Odis and Steve Smith did in tests is only below Bradman no one else comes close to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If we are talking about dominating test series, Smith or Kohli cannot tie Lara's shoelaces against the ATG Aussie attack that the absolutely beat-down or absolute domination vs Murali in his own backyard on square-turners.

 

[rkt.india]

15 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Your stats don't make sense- why are you restricting Lara or Tendulkar to 2001 vs McGrath ? He continued to play McGrath for later years.

Now throw in Warne-tharans and the numbers contrast will become stark. 

you can only compare stats to same bowlers both played. Ponting didnt polay Mcgrath and Warne, so no use including them.