Jump to content
Trichromatic

Sachin Tendulkar v Virat Kohli in Tests

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

SRT had 31 100s, 8800+ runs at avg of 57 at age of 30. How close is Kohli?

Who cares about  age, why you keep bringing age into it, Sachin debuted unusually early age and that is the reason why he has more runs at younger age.I don't see how it is great accomplishment.

 

 

Link to post
5 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

The high average is important here.  The other parameters are not as SRT played 100+ tests at age 29 and Kohli  67.

 

Similarly, SRT  having lesser centuries after 67 tests is not fair comparison as he was made to start at an young immature age.

Test cricket is not someone's training ground or victory lap ,Sachin in my book does not get a pass for debuting at a young age or playing till 40 when he was a shell of himself.

 

 

Link to post

To alll who are quoting Sachin total number of runs need to understand one fact. He played 200 tests which is 32 plus more tests than anyone.So it is natural for him to score more  and moreover that record is a meaningless record just tells one thing and onething only.

 

People who are comparing their odi careers ,   Kohli averages 14 more and has scored more odi hundreds and averages better in every country than Sachin.Kohli is head and shoulders above Sachin in odis it is not even close.

Link to post
1 hour ago, putrevus said:

Who cares about  age, why you keep bringing age into it, Sachin debuted unusually early age and that is the reason why he has more runs at younger age.I don't see how it is great accomplishment.

 

 

Early age gives you higher average too?

 

How convenient of you to ignore that average.

 

Kohli has been averaging 50+ consistently for grand total of 7 tests and he crossed 50+ only 19 months back.

 

This is first time he reached no 1 ranking.

 

By age of 30, SRT was consistently averaging 55+, was ranked 1 in 7 year out of 9 from 94-2003.

 

Let Kohli match those first. 

 

Link to post
3 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Early age gives you higher average too?

 

How convenient of you to ignore that average.

 

Kohli has been averaging 50+ consistently for grand total of 7 tests and he crossed 50+ only 19 months back.

 

This is first time he reached no 1 ranking.

 

By age of 30, SRT was consistently averaging 55+, was ranked 1 in 7 year out of 9 from 94-2003.

 

Let Kohli match those first. 

 

By 30 how many tests did Sachin play , compare the stats after 67 tests not the age.I am not igonoring anything, to me age is not a factor.

 

Sachin got very lucky that he could debut at 16 , if it was today there is no way he was making debut at 16.

 

Link to post
53 minutes ago, putrevus said:

By 30 how many tests did Sachin play , compare the stats after 67 tests not the age.I am not igonoring anything, to me age is not a factor.

 

Sachin got very lucky that he could debut at 16 , if it was today there is no way he was making debut at 16.

 

He won't debut because we have a captain who believes in giving chances to friends and experienced players only.

 

Otherwise SRT from age of 17-23 was easily better than most of these guys. 

 

Ok, let's remove that early debut luck and see how SRT did from 1996 (similar age when Kohli made debut).

 

SRT

67 tests

114 innings

6328 runs

60.2 avg

23 centuries

22 half centuries

 

Kohli

67 tests

114 innings (damn same number of innings)

5754 runs (574 less than SRT)

54.28 avg (6 less than SRT)

22 centuries (1 less than SRT)
17 half centuries (5 less than SRT)

 

SRT's figures are closer to Smith whom Kohli has always been following in test cricket.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Stan AF said:

Age not a factor???. Sachin was that good that he couldn't be kept in the sidelines anymore. He had baptism by fire in Pakistan series scored 4-5 100's in his teens before he scored his 1st 100 in India.  Show me one guy who has done half of this at that age.

  

Stop belittling other's achievements.

SRT before age of 23

Matches: 38

Runs: 2483

100s: 8

Avg: 51

Home avg: 67.4

Away avg: 43.8

Away 100s: 5 (2 in Aus, 2 in Eng, 1 SA)

 

@putrevus believes it was just luck that he was playing so early. If he was playing today, he won't even fit to tie shoelaces of much superior batsmen like Dhawan (monster overseas), Pujara (another monster overseas), Rahane (monster at home) and Rahul.

 

No way he could have broken into this line up for cricketing reasons, after all batsmen other than Kohli are averaging 70 overall and 50+ at home. Who would give chance to player like SRT? Such a lucky guy to make debut in easy era and not this high batsmenship competitive era.

 

Give him Dhawan over teen SRT any day.

 

Link to post
1 minute ago, Trichromatic said:

SRT before age of 23

Matches: 38

Runs: 2483

100s: 8

Home avg: 67.4

Away avg: 43.8

Away 100s: 5 (2 in Aus, 2 in Eng, 1 SA)

 

@putrevus believes it was just luck that he was playing so early. If he was playing today, he won't even fit to tie shoelaces of much superior batsmen like Dhawan (monster overseas), Pujara (another monster overseas), Rahane (monster at home) and Rahul.

 

No way he could have broken into this line up for cricketing reasons, after all batsmen other than Kohli are averaging 70 overall and 50+ at home. Who would give chance to player like SRT? Such a lucky guy to make debut in easy era and not this high batsmenship competitive era.

 

 

Anyone who has closely followed Sachin's career right from his age of 4 will understand how well it has been planned. Probably it is lack of knowledge that someone feels he was lucky to make a career early. But then nobody sees the hard work a cricketer makes. Everyone is crazy when a kid shows immense advanced knowledge in academics, however when a cricketer shows similar traits at early ages it becomes luck !!

Link to post
1 hour ago, putrevus said:

By 30 how many tests did Sachin play , compare the stats after 67 tests not the age.I am not igonoring anything, to me age is not a factor.

 

Sachin got very lucky that he could debut at 16 , if it was today there is no way he was making debut at 16.

 

Tell us one talented cricketer at the age of 16 now who could have debut as early as sachin in past era. It was not like he has given debut coz we din't have anyone .sachin was breaking all the record in domestic and chosen on back of those performances which clearly reflects soon after his debut , Kambli was senior to Sachin and he was also one of the top performer but he din't debut along with Sachin as Sachin definetely have something at that point which his peers or senior din't have.  Kohli still took his time before establishing him as a good/great batsmen. you can't compare avg of past with current when you know there were lot of things different than what it is now. No way anyone is discarding that kohli can't surpass sachin in terms of stats. But it's really hard to surpass Sachin in terms of his impact on Indian cricket also longevity is the thing which you are clearly ignoring. Performing consistently and being one of the top batsmen for 24 years is no child play, whereas our modern day players are not able to survive one series and asking for breaks if they play continuously 2-3 series. And as trirchomatic mentioned this is kohli first good season in test cricket since his debut from 2009 where as Tendulkar was averaging closer to 60 for continuously 9 years.

Link to post
19 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

He won't debut because we have a captain who believes in giving chances to friends and experienced players only.

 

Otherwise SRT from age of 17-23 was easily better than most of these guys. 

 

Ok, let's remove that early debut luck and see how SRT did from 1996 (similar age when Kohli made debut).

 

SRT

67 tests

114 innings

6328 runs

60.2 avg

23 centuries

22 half centuries

 

Kohli

67 tests

114 innings (damn same number of innings)

5754 runs (574 less than SRT)

54.28 avg (6 less than SRT)

22 centuries (1 less than SRT)
17 half centuries (5 less than SRT)

 

SRT's figures are closer to Smith whom Kohli has always been following in test cricket.

No you can't do that, There is nothing called debut's luck Sachin playing test at 16 counts the same as Sachin playing at 36.

 

After 67 tests how many 100s did Sachin score , and how many did Kohli score ???? Kohli is ahead in every metric, it is not his fault Sachin started at 16 like wise it is not Sachin's fault that Kohli started at 22.

 

Kohli as of now after 67 tests and 200 plus odis is far superior batsman. Kohli might not now reach the totals which Sachin reached but I don't think it is big deal at all.

 

Are you serious , Karan Sharma, Bumrah were they not choosen over more experienced players???? Sachin played at 16 becuase of the hype but he was no where near ready and that really hampered him in becoming the greatest batsman.

 

As far as talent is concerned Sachin is way ahead of Kohli.Sachin had capabilities like Bradman to seperate himself so far above his peers but starting at that young age hampered his development. 

Link to post
8 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

SRT before age of 23

Matches: 38

Runs: 2483

100s: 8

Avg: 51

Home avg: 67.4

Away avg: 43.8

Away 100s: 5 (2 in Aus, 2 in Eng, 1 SA)

 

@putrevus believes it was just luck that he was playing so early. If he was playing today, he won't even fit to tie shoelaces of much superior batsmen like Dhawan (monster overseas), Pujara (another monster overseas), Rahane (monster at home) and Rahul.

 

No way he could have broken into this line up for cricketing reasons, after all batsmen other than Kohli are averaging 70 overall and 50+ at home. Who would give chance to player like SRT? Such a lucky guy to make debut in easy era and not this high batsmenship competitive era.

 

Give him Dhawan over teen SRT any day.

 

it is futile to argue with some dumb fools so much so  that  it will get sooooo irritating.That's why I altogether stopped arguing with such dumbs. SRT played  from the age of 16 due to sheer luck!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thooooo........ Such fools should atleast understand the fact that  even established much older batsmen like Vengsarkar,Manjrekar,Siddhu etc  couldn't avg:  what  Sachin avg:ed before turning 23.

Link to post
11 minutes ago, raki05 said:

Tell us one talented cricketer at the age of 16 now who could have debut as early as sachin in past era. It was not like he has given debut coz we din't have anyone .sachin was breaking all the record in domestic and chosen on back of those performances which clearly reflects soon after his debut , Kambli was senior to Sachin and he was also one of the top performer but he din't debut along with Sachin as Sachin definetely have something at that point which his peers or senior din't have.  Kohli still took his time before establishing him as a good/great batsmen. you can't compare avg of past with current when you know there were lot of things different than what it is now. No way anyone is discarding that kohli can't surpass sachin in terms of stats. But it's really hard to surpass Sachin in terms of his impact on Indian cricket also longevity is the thing which you are clearly ignoring. Performing consistently and being one of the top batsmen for 24 years is no child play, whereas our modern day players are not able to survive one series and asking for breaks if they play continuously 2-3 series. And as trirchomatic mentioned this is kohli first good season in test cricket since his debut from 2009 where as Tendulkar was averaging closer to 60 for continuously 9 years.

He was not breaking any records in domestic cricket.He did score debut 100 in every major tournament he played but that is not breaking any records.

 Tests have become more result oriented now and that is major difference, Sachin in first 67 tests played lesser innings than Kohli in his 67 tests. 

 

Who said this this the first good season of Kohli in tests.

 

Link to post
1 hour ago, Stan AF said:

Age not a factor???. Sachin was that good that he couldn't be kept in the sidelines anymore. He had baptism by fire in Pakistan series scored 4-5 100's in his teens before he scored his 1st 100 in India.  Show me one guy who has done half of this at that age.

 

Stop belittling other's achievements.

No one is belitting his acheivements but he got selected at 16 but what has that got to do with his superiority as a batsman.

Link to post
32 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

SRT before age of 23

Matches: 38

Runs: 2483

100s: 8

Avg: 51

Home avg: 67.4

Away avg: 43.8

Away 100s: 5 (2 in Aus, 2 in Eng, 1 SA)

 

@putrevus believes it was just luck that he was playing so early. If he was playing today, he won't even fit to tie shoelaces of much superior batsmen like Dhawan (monster overseas), Pujara (another monster overseas), Rahane (monster at home) and Rahul.

 

No way he could have broken into this line up for cricketing reasons, after all batsmen other than Kohli are averaging 70 overall and 50+ at home. Who would give chance to player like SRT? Such a lucky guy to make debut in easy era and not this high batsmenship competitive era.

 

Give him Dhawan over teen SRT any day.

 

Did I mention anywhere Sachin was worse than Dhawan and co ??????? which I forgot.

 

 

Link to post
1 minute ago, putrevus said:

He was not breaking any records in domestic cricket.He did score debut 100 in every major tournament he played but that is not breaking any records.

 Tests have become more result oriented now and that is major difference, Sachin in first 67 tests played lesser innings than Kohli in his 67 tests. 

 

Who said this this the first good season of Kohli in tests.

 

Why don't you answer in how many season kohli avg more or around 60 so far. Sachin continuously average around 60 for 9-10 years and around 57 for 15 years. Also how many player were averaging more than 50 during Sachin time and compare that with player averaging more than 50 during Kohli time. Have you consider the kind of bowling sachin faced during those initial 67 matches, pitch condition, access to the coaching and training standard and a very important factor frequency of playing in overseas condition and drs.

Link to post
1 minute ago, Trichromatic said:

Yeah, teenage SRT wasn't a superior batsman than current set of test batsmen.

I said teenage SRT wouldn't have made his debut now, Selectors are more aware of developing talent I still believe that would be right thing to do.

 

Gill or Shaw have should not be given debut now even though they are better right now than current set of batsmen becuase it will hamper their growth , it has got nothing to do with talent level of current batsman.

 

Sachin made his debut in 1989 but it took him a decade to score a double hundred. He never scored 500 in a series.This is the guy who scored triple hundred as school kid.

 

Getting youngster early in is not always right thing to do especially a batsman. Don't twist words.

 

 

Link to post

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...