Whether Virat Kohli overtook Sachin as the test batsmen ??

[AKane]

20 minutes ago, Adamant said:

All these arguments don’t really matter as a player is product of his era and there is no way to extrapolate his performance in any other era.

Muhammad Ali talked about this in boxing - he was asked who from the past could beat him.... here is his answer about boxers in past days versus him.

 

https://youtu.be/8GdtNd-Qc9Y

 

[vvvslaxman]

25 minutes ago, Adamant said:

Would Bradman have averaged 99 in this era?

Would Hobbs average 57.

 

Would Akram average 23 in Odis with two new balls?

 

All these arguments don’t really matter as a player is product of his era and there is no way to extrapolate his performance in any other era.

 

A legend in one would be a legend in another era.

 

Yes.. i say the same here. Tendulkar would have thrived in this era too with superior technique. 

[New guy]

2 hours ago, Adamant said:

Would Bradman have averaged 99 in this era?

Would Hobbs average 57.

 

Would Akram average 23 in Odis with two new balls?

 

All these arguments don’t really matter as a player is product of his era and there is no way to extrapolate his performance in any other era.

 

A legend in one would be a legend in another era.

If someone with as many weakness and poor technique as kohli can score so many runs in this era, a much more technically superior sahin would score way more. 

[New guy]

On 1/7/2025 at 12:57 PM, Adamant said:

Please don’t get defensive, I can state my opinion here and Kohli being regarded as a better odi batsman than Sachin is not an unpopular opinion, you can go and check bigfooty and cricket web, most of the online forums do rate him higher.

 

No need to get into personal insults or crying comments etc.

 

That 81 is one of the worst knocks in semis and doesn’t deserve to be mentioned as a good knock.

 

As for the other knock vs Kenya, It was a decent knock . Quite similar to Kohlis knock vs Bangladesh in CT semifinal 2017. Both knocks were against minnows who qualified for knockouts. Doesn’t make much of a difference.

 

No need to bring in test matches for Kohli, I don’t rate him in tests.

 

The point is Kohli has a match winning knock in two CT semifinals, one match winning knock in CT finals, one century in Wc semis and his world cup final record is way better than sachin.

Yes a match winning 81 under tough circumstances is one of the worst knockedbecause you say so. He should have got out so we crash out of the semis and never win the cup.

 

Dude that's the only semis Sachin played in the world cup, he can only play what's in front

 

We literally have 48 match sample of how well he does in semis and finals.

 

So let's see your logic, match winning semis knock against arch rivals doesn't count as he was dropped. Minnows don't count despite Sachin only playing them and no one else in semis, his 68 under tough circumstances in 96 semis don't count because., the many semis and finals he aced doesn't count because only world cup matters.

 

I am surprised you didn't just say, knocks by someone called Sachin doesn't count, only someone called kohli does 

 

The mental gymnastics is off the chart

 

And the irony of a kohli stan calling others defensive after the above mental gymnastics, lmao.

Edited January 8 by New guy

[New guy]

 

 

[R!TTER]

3 hours ago, Adamant said:

Icc trophies do count more than any other Loi tournament and all those trophies are prestigious, way more than CB trophy or kitply trophy.

 

No, they don't; *, there are 4-6 ICC trophies in probably the same number of years now! How many were there in the 90's or 2k end? Just because ICC has rubber stamped them it doesn't make them more important 

[sensible-indian]

6 hours ago, Adamant said:

Sorry, this looks like a very superficial way yo explain things.

 

In world cup 2011, Sachin played one good innings in knockout , that 50 odd in quarter finals, even there he was a support act. 

 

In 2003, he failed against Aus and scored only against the minnows Kenya.

 

He has one 65(88) against SriLanka in semis, none of these innings can be considered great or anywhere close to it.

 

We can probably say that he has been decent in WC kos but that is it, do you see a single defining innings he has played in KOs?

I clearly can’t see one, people are adding kitply cup and Cb series finals to boost his record.

 

Similarly, Kohli has a century in Semis of world cup and a 55 in finals, his 35 in 2011 finals was also an important innings, I don’t see any difference between these two in WC kos, both were decent, that is it. If Sachin had an innings like Gambhir s 97 or Silva in wc final, I would have understood your point.

 

 

If we are talking about league games in Wc , Kohlis performance in 2023 has overtaken any player’s performance, let alone Tendulkar.

 

His 80 odd vs Aus, 90 odd vs Nz in chase, along with two more hundreds in group games and breaking the all time highest run record in a world cup puts him right on the top.

 

If we count Champions trophy then there is absolutely no Comparison whatsoever, Sachin averages around 36 in CT at str rate of 76, Kohli averages 88 at 93 str rate with match winning innings in two semifinals and one finals of CT.

 

Kohli is better than Tendulkar in pressure situations and pressure games. Champions trophy performance comparison absolutely kills your argument.

 

 

Ok let's assume your argument reg Kohli being a better pressure GAME player than Sachin is right.

 

Let's look at the evidence, shall we?

 

Let's take Kohli's PRIME in ODIs. It was insane. 70 average or something right? God mode.

 

What were his performances in knockouts DURING his prime?

 

2015 SF

2017 CT Finals

2019 World Cup SF

 

3 high profile games where he sank without a trace. Completely worked over by Johnson, Amir and Boult.

 

If you score a million runs and just go out without a whimper in the actual 3 games that matter...what's the use?

 

Now shall we compare Tendulkar's performance in his prime (NOT even whole career)?

 

1996 SF WC - Dominated the whole world cup and scored against SL in SF on a brutal turner.

 

1998 Sharjah Cup - Took us to finals and won us the finals

 

1998 CT QF - That 141 against Aus in QF that knocked them out

 

1998 indepedence day cup against Prime Pakistan - That 40 odd at 150 SR which gave the momentum for an impossible 315 run chase in 47 overs (of course Ganguly was the star but Tendulkar played a crucial role)

 

2000 CT Finals - Performed against NZ (Ganguly and him scored after which India collapsed)

 

This is EXCLUDING Tendulkar of the 2003 WC, CB Series performance and 2011 WC. 

 

Performances against PRIME SL, Pak, Aus in knockouts and against NZ in CT Finals..Look at the body of work (just half way through his career).

 

Compare those 2 in their primes and it's a NO contest when it comes to pressure games.

 

I fully stand by my distinction.

 

Apply it across a wide set of games and you will see it hold true.

 

There is a reason why Inzi is rated so high by Pakistanis (and others) as a pressure player even though he tanked in every WC since 1992 (even Sehwag called him Asia's best middle order bat in ODIs and yet his performances in WCs - let alone knockouts were so bad).

 

So how come he is regarded (by many) as someone good under pressure?

 

That's where the distinction comes.

 

Pressure games vs pressure situations.

Edited January 8 by sensible-indian

[sensible-indian]

10 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

 

Ok let's assume your argument reg Kohli being a better pressure GAME player than Sachin is right.

 

Let's look at the evidence, shall we?

 

Let's take Kohli's PRIME in ODIs. It was insane. 70 average or something right? God mode.

 

What were his performances in knockouts DURING his prime?

 

2015 SF

2017 CT Finals

2019 World Cup SF

 

3 high profile games where he sank without a trace. Completely worked over by Johnson, Amir and Boult.

 

If you score a million runs and just go out with a whimper in the actual 3 games that matter...what's the use?

 

Now shall we compare Tendulkar's performance in his prime (NOT even whole career)?

 

1996 SF WC - Dominated the whole world cup and scored against SL in SF on a brutal turner.

 

1998 Sharjah Cup - Took us to finals and won us the finals

 

1998 CT QF - That 141 against Aus in QF that knocked them out

 

1998 indepedence day cup against Prime Pakistan - That 40 odd at 150 SR which gave the momentum for an impossible 315 run chase in 47 overs (of course Ganguly was the star but Tendulkar played a crucial role)

 

2000 CT Finals - Performed against NZ (Ganguly and him scored after which India collapsed)

 

This is EXCLUDING Tendulkar of the 2003 WC, CB Series performance and 2011 WC. 

 

Performances against PRIME SL, Pak, Aus in knockouts and against NZ in CT Finals..Look at the body of work (just half way through his career).

 

Compare those 2 in their primes and it's a NO contest when it comes to pressure games.

 

I fully stand by my distinction.

 

Apply it across a wide set of games and you will see it hold true.

 

There is a reason why Inzi is rated so high by Pakistanis (and others) as a pressure player even though he tanked in every WC since 1992 (even Sehwag called him Asia's best middle order bat in ODIs and yet his performance in WCs - let alone knockouts were so bad).

 

So how come he is regarded (by many) as someone good under pressure?

 

That's where the distinction comes.

 

Pressure games vs pressure situations.

And oh I forgot the knockout against Aus in CT 2000 where Tendulkar and Yuvi scored and Aus got knocked out.

 

That was one hell of an attack on McGrath who ended that day with the worst bowling figures from Aus.

Just check how McGrath was bowling before and after Tendulkar's onslaught.

 

Tendulkar went on record and said had he not attacked McGrath, he would have ended the day with some crazy figures. He was bowling thunderbolts (even Tendulkar needed a bit of luck at the start).

 

Imagine having such a wide body of work that people forget IMPORTANT games.

 

Stats and body of work support Tendulkar.

 

But inspite of it, I am batting for Kohli as being better in pressure situations cos when set, he controls the game better than Tendulkar.

 

But as for who stood up more in pressure games, no contest.

Edited January 8 by sensible-indian

[Suhaan]

7 hours ago, New guy said:

 

 

Talent idhar udhar chalakte hue

[Muloghonto]

9 hours ago, Adamant said:

Would Bradman have averaged 99 in this era?

Would Hobbs average 57.

 

Would Akram average 23 in Odis with two new balls?

With Akram, i can say - it depends, but not on Akram.

I say this, as a HUMONGOUS Akram fan because i saw most his career live :  Akram was a very tight ODI bowler who routinely took 1-2 wickets in the first spell and was devastatingly good in the death overs, but MOST of his death over success in terms of wickets came  against tailenders : Akram was a GOD against tailenders and probaly the deadliest bowler ever to a non specialist batsman i've ever seen.

 

And Akram often got to do this, because Akram & Waqar had the luxury of having the combo of Mushie-Saqlain-Razzaq-Mehmood-Salim Malik bowling the middle overs and often getting rid of the middle order by the 40th over in the first place - most sides were like 180/4 against Pakistan back in those days when the death started and ended up around 250-270 if they did really well.

 

So yes, Akram would be just as good- if he had similar bowlers to see out the middle overs.

9 hours ago, Adamant said:

 

All these arguments don’t really matter as a player is product of his era and there is no way to extrapolate his performance in any other era.

 

A legend in one would be a legend in another era.

 

This is both true and false.

When eras sufficiently differ in equipment, technique and most importantly have huge interval in time from one another, then yes, comparisons become difficult and a bradman vs tendulkar literally is the babe ruth vs barry bonds debate of the baseball fans.
But this is not the case here.
Tendulkar and Virat have been teammates for crying out loud and even if they hadnt been, its typically very easy to compare players that follow one another immediately, especially if you have seen BOTH their careers in entirity or for the substantial majority of it.

 

The simple reality is, as far as ODIs go, its difficult to compare the elite contenders for 'best batter in ODI' tag, mostly coz ODI has changed significantly and of that group, the first few names i can think of are Viv, Tendulkar, Bevan, MSD, Kohli, ABDV

And while i do rate Tendulkar better than Kohli in ODIs on basis of how i think their games hold up through the entire 1990-2025 period, Kohli also has a genuine case for being considered  greater ODI bat than tendulkar.
However, as far as Tests go, it aint even close.

 

Tendulkar is BAAP of Kohli in tests - the gap between Tendy and Kohli in my eyes is as big as between Viv Richards and Dean Jones as test players.

 

Simple reality is, Tendulkar's peak was much more dominant than Kohli's even though it doesnt look that way to those who didnt live it - because Tendulkars peak is also unique amonst Elite batsmen.

People dont realize, that most elite batsmen's peaks - like Sobers, Viv, Lara, Smith, Dravid, etc. all have a distinct pattern of going psycho run scoring over a series or two or a calendar year and coming back down to normal production and having another few peaks like that.

Tendulkar's peak was markedly different - he didnt do much HUGE innings of 200+, he didnt do like 2-3 centuries on a trot or consecutive centuries very often, but he did the whole ' i score a century every 4th innings i play and a 50 in between for pretty much a decade.

Which..actually from a team perspective is just crazy, coz it gives elite reliability at elite scoring speed ( coz back then Tendlya's big scores = 80+ strike rate in eras of 2.7-2.8 rpos in tests as default. Not even flatties went for 4rpo till Sehwag and Gilly showed up) for a combined peak of much longer than all the elites.

Sure, in that sequence he did too have some elite humongous run scorings but the end of Tendlya's peak really was the 2002 world cup. Yes, he was 'age' young, still not yet 30, but he wasnt body young anymore and while he was adequately fit and adept on the field, Tendlya never was a fitness god and this period is when his actual peak ends.

his rest of his career is basically what people mostly remember and massively tarnish his reputation ( and subsequently his overall stats coz he overstayed by 2 years) and the rest of his career is basically injury-->Recovery-->form-->loss of form-->final great outburst and of a final massive quality of scorign 7 tons in a year and 9 in like 18 months or so, before his final decline, after 22+ years of kirkut.

But tendlya's peak is basically 92 to 2002. There is only one tarnishing factor to this period, where i think he was a more accomplished bat than even Lara ( though Lara has, in my mind, at least 1, maybe 3 innings of that same period of higher quality than tendlya's highest- his losing 100 in 4th against Pakistani). And that is he shat the bed in terms of his batting while he became captain but unlike many, had the nous to give it up and go back to just being a batter.

In **THIS** Period, what Tendlya was, was essentially a steve smith in run scoring but at the rate of an ABDV for his era. And he also got massively screwed outta good stats in THIS period, because his peak is also the period when India became cricket centre with the whole trilateral ODI system ever so often and did the whole 'we play 6-8 tests and 25-30 ODIs a year' routine.

Yes, one can successfully argue that Tendy's ODI stats greatly benefitted due to this also, because his absolute raw best mostly got translated in ODI sector due to frequency during his peak, but as far as TESTS go, Tendy could've easily had like 18K test runs if India played as many tests as Australia, England, South Africa and West Indies in the 90s and maybe even Pakistani, though i dunno of them for sure. We pretty much played more than only Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and New Zealand in the 90s.

 

[Stan AF]

 

ICF opening useless threads as usual. I'd like to see how Mr 8 point average drop would have played here.

[Suhaan]

1 hour ago, Stan AF said:

 

ICF opening useless threads as usual. I'd like to see how Mr 8 point average drop would have played here.

 As many dismissals for as many deliveries

[Laaloo]

10 hours ago, Stan AF said:

 

ICF opening useless threads as usual. I'd like to see how Mr 8 point average drop would have played here.

What a flat pitch!!!

[maniac]

From social media

 

How does Anushka call out to Virat?

 

Edgy, sunte ho!!

 

[vvvslaxman]

Both at their peak are very close to each other. You should also compare at their lowest point. That is where Kohli is at tailender level. Sachin even at his worst look like a proper batsman who is going through a slump.

[Lord]

4 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Both at their peak are very close to each other. You should also compare at their lowest point. That is where Kohli is at tailender level. Sachin even at his worst look like a proper batsman who is going through a slump.

 

Sachin was the best batsman of his era. Kohli is not even 2nd best. That is enough indication

[vvvslaxman]

13 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

Sachin was the best batsman of his era. Kohli is not even 2nd best. That is enough indication

 

Yea..They are comprable only in ODIs. Kohli's one strength is risk free innings construction. Tendulkar after getting into rhythm will take some risks. SInce he started as opener his approach was go bang bang in the first 10 overs then after power play is over he takes time and goes bang bang in the end. That was t ypical back then.  SOmetimes in the process he would get out to in the first 10. He was never doing the anchor role. He was prepared to lose his wicket inside 10 overs. Tendulkar's 100th 100 really showed him in poor light as a selfish cricket all his life. That was not true. If anything he was very unselfish.

Edited January 9 by vvvslaxman

[Lord]

5 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Yea..They are comprable only in ODIs. Kohli's one strength is risk free innings construction. Tendulkar after getting into rhythm will take some risks. SInce he started as opener his approach was go bang bang in the first 10 overs then after power play is over he takes time and goes bang bang in the end. That was t ypical back then.  SOmetimes in the process he would get out to in the first 10. He was never doing the anchor role. He was prepared to lose his wicket inside 10 overs. Tendulkar's 100th 100 really showed him in poor light as a selfish cricket all his life. That was not true. If anything he was very unselfish.

 

SRT could not play anchor role with the support cast he had. Also conditions were lot more different in 90s

[vvvslaxman]

Just now, Lord said:

 

SRT could not play anchor role with the support cast he had. Also conditions were lot more different in 90s

 

Yea.. it was distinctly difficult to hit the 40 over balls for 4s and sixes as it would get softer. You need a lot of muscle power compared to now where the ball doesn't get older than 25 overs.

[New guy]

18 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Yea.. it was distinctly difficult to hit the 40 over balls for 4s and sixes as it would get softer. You need a lot of muscle power compared to now where the ball doesn't get older than 25 overs.

And the boundaries were much bigger. In kapil etc time and early Sachin time you needed real strength to clear the huge boundaries, many of today's 6s will easily be caught at the boundary