Sachin Tendulkar v Virat Kohli in Tests

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

yes, there should always be context in mind. it is like old were bad but when we compare different eras, we need to keep lot of things in mind.  If many bowlers in 80s and 90s averaged u25, it might also mean either pitches were more bowling friendly or batsmen were less skilled as they were in 2000s.

Nope. 

You can have better batsmen and still lower bowling averages, if the tailenders are a LOT crappier with the better batsmen. 

 

You can average 50 vs me. Doesnt mean you will average 50 vs Ambrose, regardless of whether my side is a test side or not. 
The quality of batting and bowling can BOTH be lower (or greater) and yeild the same average. 

This should be fairly straightforward to people who've actually watched stuff through the eras and not just random youtube short clips.

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Having watched cricket from November 1982...  I agree completely, especially regarding batters till 1995.

 

There were some especially courageous exceptions though ... like Gavaskar, Tendulkar, Amarnath etc.from India and Richards, Miandad, Greenidge, Lloyd, Jones and a few others.

If you watched more than just Indian cricket from 1982, you'd know that the average Aussie batsmen back then would eat the average Aussie batsmen today for dinner for handling pace and swing. 

 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Sunny G could demolish attacks.  Even he would laugh at this claim by you.  

Thank you for exposing your ignorance and that you havn't actually watched any old cricket outside of random youtube 5 min clips.

I dont know about you, but any batsman, in the pre-helmet, pre-bouncer restriction era, who could score nearly a run-a-ball century against the likes of Marshall, Holding, Daniel counts as 'could demolish any attack'. 

 

SunnyG mostly didn't, because rest of the Indian lineup was miles and miles worse than him at handling the new ball and allied with his iron technique, percentage cricket made more sense.

[Straight Drive]

6 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Nope. 

You can have better batsmen and still lower bowling averages, if the tailenders are a LOT crappier with the better batsmen. 

 

You can average 50 vs me. Doesnt mean you will average 50 vs Ambrose, regardless of whether my side is a test side or not. 
The quality of batting and bowling can BOTH be lower (or greater) and yeild the same average. 

This should be fairly straightforward to people who've actually watched stuff through the eras and not just random youtube short clips.

Ambrose and Walsh were terrific. 700 odd test wickets between them. I can still not forge his spell of 7 wickets for 1 run. I haven't seen a better spell than that. Obviously Botham bowled one versus Aussies in Headingley test but nothing beats 7 wkts for 1 run. 

[Muloghonto]

12 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Having watched cricket from November 1982...  I agree completely, especially regarding batters till 1995.

 

There were some especially courageous exceptions though ... like Gavaskar, Tendulkar, Amarnath etc.from India and Richards, Miandad, Greenidge, Lloyd, Jones and a few others.

 

The amount of fear so many batters displayed against even fast-medium bowling even when wearing helmets and having other protective gear, in the 1985 to 1995 period, was amazing by today's standards.

because helmets were not as good back then and protective gear was not as good or encompassing either. Not to mention, these blokes didnt grow up with protection, when technique is formed. Which is why they were far better at hooking and pulling than they are today, especially with the hook shot. 

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

I think the same of you, where you argue 'could've/should've/maybes' against the simple fact that mid 70s-mid 80s and late 80s-early 2000s represents a golden generation of cricket, the likes of which (quality of cricket) has not been since before or after. Or the fact that 90s players *were* better test players and certainly better ODI players on pitches where 250-260 were par scores for average sides.

 

 

It is impossible to compare different eras.  Each era has its own adavantages and difficulties ... charms and disappointments.

 

I  was just pointing out the difficulties and advantages of the current era. Not saying that this is a better or worse era for cricket.

 

While you have arrived at a conclusion and just stating your own opinion.

 

A champion cricketer is one ... primarily because of his attitude, hunger for success, will to succeed, ruthlessness, ability to adapt to what is needed in that era, work ethic etc. ( provided he has the basic required talent )

 

Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Richards, Ambrose, Walsh, Lara etc. would still be champion cricketers in this era.  And Kohli, Steve Smith, Root, Steyn, Rabada, ABDV  etc. would still be champion cricketers if they played in the 1980s and 1990s.

 

Anyone who does not understand this is an impractical person.

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by express bowling

[Straight Drive]

35 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

because helmets were not as good back then and protective gear was not as good or encompassing either. Not to mention, these blokes didnt grow up with protection, when technique is formed. Which is why they were far better at hooking and pulling than they are today, especially with the hook shot. 

Very good points regarding helmets. When i first purchased an helmet the shopkeeper showed me few without grills. Obviously i opted for one with grill. Yet, i have to agree the quality of helmets nowadays is way too higher. They are more lightweight nowadays, easier for batsman. My second helmet was much better. Also they have extra protection on helmets now.  Even the second set of batting pads i purchased where much light weight than what i used 25 years back. Not to mention. Cricketing gear is much advanced, more protective than what it used to be 3 decades back. There is no denying that.

[express bowling]

34 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

because helmets were not as good back then and protective gear was not as good or encompassing either. Not to mention, these blokes didnt grow up with protection, when technique is formed. Which is why they were far better at hooking and pulling than they are today, especially with the hook shot. 

 

There were other reasons too ... like they did not having bowling machines to practice against ...  familiarity with those bowlers were lower  ( in the absence of T20 leagues )   now, even a Surya Yadav has lots of practice playing Rabada, Starc etc. ... so the aura and fear of the big fast bower is reduced ...  seeing fast bowlers getting hit like off spinners on flat T20 pitches reduces their fear in the modern era too.

 

But, all these factors made it easier for anyone with a bit of pace, bounce and discipline to pick wickets in the 80s and 90s.

 

p.s -- See, you recognize the difficulty and the effect of formative years on the 80s batter ...  but not of the 2010s batter. 

[Straight Drive]

Those days there was no spray as well. I don't think we ever got to use relispray on getting hit by pacers or diving fielding. Now the cricketers have the luxury of using pain killers, injectibles, pain sprays and what not. They need Gatorade nowadays to play 20 over match. We didnt get to drink water more than twice in 50 over matches. Now the young boys , heck even the umpires cant control the urge to have water. Well, tuimes change and we have to accept that the new generation is better than ours in some aspects. But cricket has got more tougher in fielding than in those times. Now players are expected to dive and take catches. There was one Roger Harper but now we seen many brilliant fielders. That is one aspect which is incredibly higher than benchmark now and hats of to new generation fielders. But batting and bowling, rather playing cricket before was incredibly tougher then.

Edited August 5, 2018 by Straight Drive

[express bowling]

12 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

If you watched more than just Indian cricket from 1982, you'd know that the average Aussie batsmen back then would eat the average Aussie batsmen today for dinner for handling pace and swing. 

Firstly, no one would eat anyone for dinner. They are not cannibals.  

 

Secondly,  almost every good batsman from every country in the 80s, 90s and early 2000s were better at playing swing ...  because most of them played a lot more county cricket.

 

But they were inferior at handling high pace.  The worst period for Aussie genuine fast bowling from 1970s onwards was the 1985 to 1995 era.  And it affected their batting against pace too.

 

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by express bowling

[express bowling]

On the topic of the aura that a fast bowler created in the 1980s and 1990s, I remember an interesting anecdote.

 

South Africa was returning to international cricket in 1991. There was a lot of talk of the " White lightening " Allan Donald and half our batters were trembling even before the series began. Now, Donald turned out to be a very good bowler and a very quick bowler, but even if he weren't,  just the aggressive publicity had already claimed a couple of wickets per innings and more frequent trips to the latrine. 

 

In this backdrop, our captain Azhar was asked by the South African media, " Sir, what are your plans for Peter Kirsten ? "  (  Peter was the elder brother of Gary Kirsten and the best batsman in that 1991 SA team  ).

 

Azhar replied in his inimitable style and dead-pan expression, " Whoh is Payterr Kaasten ?  "

 ... being totally oblivious to the opposition players and their strengths, diminished some of their aura    

[express bowling]

2 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

One thing is right about there - players don't practice slip fielding much now or at least not doing it right way.

 

Reduced levels of concentration, brought about by T20s, play a big part too.

 

Some of the champion slip fielders of yesteryears, like Dravid and Gavaskar, were masters of concentration.

 

Compare this to fidgety, thigh slapping Dhawan.

[Shunya]

King Kohli is breaching new barriers with every series... with Smith out of the race, he is undisputedly best of this generation

 

All time Test Rankings

ID	Rat.	Name	Nat.	Career Best Rating
1	961	D.G. Bradman	AUS	961 v India, 10/02/1948
2	947	S.P.D. Smith	AUS	947 v England, 30/12/2017
3	945	L. Hutton	ENG	945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
4	942	J.B. Hobbs	ENG	942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
4	942	R.T. Ponting	AUS	942 v England, 05/12/2006
6	941	P.B.H. May	ENG	941 v Australia, 27/08/1956
7	938	C.L. Walcott	WI	938 v Australia, 15/06/1955
7	938	K.C. Sangakkara	SL	938 v England, 05/12/2007
7	938	I.V.A. Richards	WI	938 v England, 31/03/1981
7	938	G.S. Sobers	WI	938 v India, 17/01/1967
11	935	M.L. Hayden	AUS	935 v England, 11/11/2002
11	935	J.H. Kallis	SA	935 v New Zealand, 22/11/2007
11	935	A.B. de Villiers	SA	935 v Australia, 24/02/2014
14	934	V. Kohli	IND	934 v England, 04/08/2018
15	933	Mohammad Yousuf	PAK	933 v West Indies, 01/12/2006
16	927	R.G. Pollock	SA	927 v Australia, 23/02/1970
16	927	E.D. Weekes	WI	927 v New Zealand, 07/03/1956
18	922	A.D. Nourse	SA	922 v England, 11/06/1951
18	922	K.D. Walters	AUS	922 v South Africa, 23/02/1970
20	921	R.N. Harvey	AUS	921 v South Africa, 10/02/1953
20	921	M.E.K. Hussey	AUS	921 v West Indies, 27/05/2008

 

Good England series will take him around Ponting... Wow...Loving this...

 

And yes, Kohli is the greatest Indian bastman.

[Straight Drive]

23 minutes ago, Shunya said:

King Kohli is breaching new barriers with every series... with Smith out of the race, he is undisputedly best of this generation

 

All time Test Rankings

ID	Rat.	Name	Nat.	Career Best Rating
1	961	D.G. Bradman	AUS	961 v India, 10/02/1948
2	947	S.P.D. Smith	AUS	947 v England, 30/12/2017
3	945	L. Hutton	ENG	945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
4	942	J.B. Hobbs	ENG	942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
4	942	R.T. Ponting	AUS	942 v England, 05/12/2006
6	941	P.B.H. May	ENG	941 v Australia, 27/08/1956
7	938	C.L. Walcott	WI	938 v Australia, 15/06/1955
7	938	K.C. Sangakkara	SL	938 v England, 05/12/2007
7	938	I.V.A. Richards	WI	938 v England, 31/03/1981
7	938	G.S. Sobers	WI	938 v India, 17/01/1967
11	935	M.L. Hayden	AUS	935 v England, 11/11/2002
11	935	J.H. Kallis	SA	935 v New Zealand, 22/11/2007
11	935	A.B. de Villiers	SA	935 v Australia, 24/02/2014
14	934	V. Kohli	IND	934 v England, 04/08/2018
15	933	Mohammad Yousuf	PAK	933 v West Indies, 01/12/2006
16	927	R.G. Pollock	SA	927 v Australia, 23/02/1970
16	927	E.D. Weekes	WI	927 v New Zealand, 07/03/1956
18	922	A.D. Nourse	SA	922 v England, 11/06/1951
18	922	K.D. Walters	AUS	922 v South Africa, 23/02/1970
20	921	R.N. Harvey	AUS	921 v South Africa, 10/02/1953
20	921	M.E.K. Hussey	AUS	921 v West Indies, 27/05/2008

 

Good England series will take him around Ponting... Wow...Loving this...

 

And yes, Kohli is the greatest Indian bastman.

Virat is nowhere near the classy of Sunny or Sachin or Rahul as far as tests are concerned, imo anyways i have to add.  Having said that i wish he becomes better than Sunny, Sachin and Rahul in tests for the sake of the country. 

Edited August 5, 2018 by Straight Drive

[The Dark Horse]

One thing about Kohli, he’s been the best batsman- both playing teams combined in the best bowling conditions. That innings in South Africa and now this. He’s been head and shoulders above AB Devilliers and Joe Root or any other player in their respective teams.

[express bowling]

The quality of a cricketer is gauged by the impact that he has or had on his team's performances against tougher opponents or when the rest of the team is struggling or in tougher conditions.  Not just by the number of runs and the number of wickets.

 

Tendulkar from 1992 to 2001 and Kohli from late 2014 till now,  have been champions in this regard.

 

We are blessed to have 2 such batsmen in 2 different eras ...  but we want to demean one of them  !!

Edited August 5, 2018 by express bowling

[kira]

[Rasgulla]

1 hour ago, kira said:

Viirat is better glad sachin chamcha opened his eyes

[Rasgulla]

6 hours ago, Shunya said:

King Kohli is breaching new barriers with every series... with Smith out of the race, he is undisputedly best of this generation

 

All time Test Rankings

ID	Rat.	Name	Nat.	Career Best Rating
1	961	D.G. Bradman	AUS	961 v India, 10/02/1948
2	947	S.P.D. Smith	AUS	947 v England, 30/12/2017
3	945	L. Hutton	ENG	945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
4	942	J.B. Hobbs	ENG	942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
4	942	R.T. Ponting	AUS	942 v England, 05/12/2006
6	941	P.B.H. May	ENG	941 v Australia, 27/08/1956
7	938	C.L. Walcott	WI	938 v Australia, 15/06/1955
7	938	K.C. Sangakkara	SL	938 v England, 05/12/2007
7	938	I.V.A. Richards	WI	938 v England, 31/03/1981
7	938	G.S. Sobers	WI	938 v India, 17/01/1967
11	935	M.L. Hayden	AUS	935 v England, 11/11/2002
11	935	J.H. Kallis	SA	935 v New Zealand, 22/11/2007
11	935	A.B. de Villiers	SA	935 v Australia, 24/02/2014
14	934	V. Kohli	IND	934 v England, 04/08/2018
15	933	Mohammad Yousuf	PAK	933 v West Indies, 01/12/2006
16	927	R.G. Pollock	SA	927 v Australia, 23/02/1970
16	927	E.D. Weekes	WI	927 v New Zealand, 07/03/1956
18	922	A.D. Nourse	SA	922 v England, 11/06/1951
18	922	K.D. Walters	AUS	922 v South Africa, 23/02/1970
20	921	R.N. Harvey	AUS	921 v South Africa, 10/02/1953
20	921	M.E.K. Hussey	AUS	921 v West Indies, 27/05/2008

 

Good England series will take him around Ponting... Wow...Loving this...

 

And yes, Kohli is the greatest Indian bastman.

hahahahahaha sachin not even in top 20

[Muloghonto]

8 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

There were other reasons too ... like they did not having bowling machines to practice against ...  familiarity with those bowlers were lower  ( in the absence of T20 leagues )   now, even a Surya Yadav has lots of practice playing Rabada, Starc etc. ... so the aura and fear of the big fast bower is reduced ...  seeing fast bowlers getting hit like off spinners on flat T20 pitches reduces their fear in the modern era too.

 

But, all these factors made it easier for anyone with a bit of pace, bounce and discipline to pick wickets in the 80s and 90s.

 

p.s -- See, you recognize the difficulty and the effect of formative years on the 80s batter ...  but not of the 2010s batter. 

False, because batsmen in the 80s had far greater defensive technique and far less tendency to try and hit good balls. So much harder to pick up wickets, period.