Twitter concludes Kohli's 10k ODI runs are still the second best after Sachin's 10k runs !!!

[Nonbeliever]

Kedar jadhav is averaging 40 witha strike rate of 106 while yuvraj averaged 36 with strike rate of 87.  So jadhav should be one of our greatest odi talent.

[Nikola]

1 minute ago, Nonbeliever said:

Kedar jadhav is averaging 40 witha strike rate of 106 while yuvraj averaged 36 with strike rate of 87.  So jadhav should be one of our greatest odi talent.

Rayudu too has avg of 50 + bonus of winning mentality so isn't he better than all Indian batsman except Kohli?

[Nonbeliever]

2 minutes ago, Nikola said:

Rayudu too has avg of 50 + bonus of winning mentality so isn't he better than all Indian batsman except Kohli?

And babar azam and zaman are baap of all the pakistani batsman born till now

Edited October 26, 2018 by Nonbeliever

[vvvslaxman]

52 minutes ago, Nonbeliever said:

8 centuries were scored in 1992 world cup and 36 in 2015.  Still people argue that batting has not become easier.

 

Those were days when we would rarely see a century in a month of odi cricket and today you can see 1-2 centuries every game.  

 

Today peopel like faKhar zaman averages 59.  Babar azam close to 52.

Do u think player like jayasuria averaged 32 in todays time.

Adam Gilchrist averaged 36.  

 

 Approach has become different. Attitude has become different. Zaheer Abbas averaged 47 in the 80s. Dean Jones was also averaging around 44. I remember Richards/Greenidge smashed INdian bowlers to all parts of the park to rake up 226 runs in 26 overs. Srikkanth even with awful foot work, stance was able to dominate in Australia in the B&H series.  T20 changed the game. IPL gave more exposure. Strategies have evolved. Addition of new inventive shots. You can change anything at the end of the day bat has to meet the ball at the right time regardless of the era. It won't dramatically meet better just because you play in this era. 

[putrevus]

32 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

Well I'm not one of those that discredit Kohli. I can discredit Rohit because when I see a player struggle every freaking ball in the first 5 overs, it makes me sceptical of his ATG credentials. And why shouldnt I bring the two new balls into the discussion? It has made scoring redicuolousy easy because we don't see reverse swing anymore. I don't see that huge difference in scoring between kohli and Sachin before the 30th over to say one played for himself and the other one played for the team. Whats to say Sachin wouldnt have scored faster 100s if there were two new balls. Look at his 175 chasing albeit the attack was okay and pitch was flat. Look at his 200. He scored that at the age of 36?Look at Sachins innings against Asif I think at Ahmedabad 2005 where ball was seaming all over the place. Tell me if Rohit would have even survived one over. Kohli you can make a guess that he would have survived but Rohit? No way. 

Sachin and Rohit are not even in sample ball park. I never equated them anywhere all said about Rohit,  he is getting into ATG status and I would put in my All time Indian starting eleven.

I never said not to bring two new balls. When did two new ball start, it was done in early 1990s too if I remember correctly.

Sachin was great and he would be on Mount Rushmore of batting but I would not put Sachin ahead of Kohli in odis. I have seen Sachin thruout his career.

 

[Nonbeliever]

4 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 Approach has become different. Attitude has become different. Zaheer Abbas averaged 47 in the 80s. Dean Jones was also averaging around 44. I remember Richards/Greenidge smashed INdian bowlers to all parts of the park to rake up 226 runs in 26 overs. Srikkanth even with awful foot work, stance was able to dominate in Australia in the B&H series.  T20 changed the game. IPL gave more exposure. Strategies have evolved. Addition of new inventive shots. You can change anything at the end of the day bat has to meet the ball at the right time regardless of the era. It won't dramatically meet better just because you play in this era. 

Viv richards is on of the greatest ever batsman. zaheer abbas played only 60 odis. and Dean Jones strike rate was 72. while shrikanth averaged 27.

 

Even one of our greatest odi bastman yuvraj singh averaged 36 with strike rate of 87.

 

But i want to see same boundries, same rules and same bowlers once again,  most of today team won't even survive 50 overs.

[rtmohanlal]

2 hours ago, putrevus said:

Sachin had such a huge advantage for majority of his career by being an opener, Kohli at no3 does not get same chances as India has very good openers and still Kohli has beaten Sachin record more than 50 innings.There is no contest as who is better Kohli wins it by a mile and it is not even close as far odis are concerned.

 

Sachin was never this great in SENA countries and the consistency shown by Kohli is unmatched in history of odis.

 

This notion that Kohli needs to over take total number of runs scored  is also ridiculous. I really hope Kohli does not play 460 plus games, what is point in playing games for yourself and not for the team.

your points does not make any sense.

Firstly you are claiming  about the positions of Sachin & Kohli. But practically Kohli got  205 inns or so.Isn't it ? Then only Kohli could score 10000+ runs.Isn't it ? Then what is the purpose of this  claim about  lesser chances because of position?Not only that, whether you agree with or not w.r.t the effect of Sachin's greatness because of these stats,  once Sachin opened from Mar 27 ,94(the starting point of my filtered out data), he scored next 10000 runs(out of 16353 runs)  in 232 inns.

 

Secondly if any, it is unfavorable to Sachin, because   the chances of him getting   wear & tear,exhausted ,tired, cramps etc etc thru an inns  being an opener is  relatively a bit more  when compared to Kohli in general.Thirdly Kohli's percentage of not outs is very high when compared to that of Sachin's. Not outs inflate averages.   Being an opener also reduces the  batsman's chances of

remaining till the end in general.So Sachin's performance  as  finisher and there by a chaser needs to be evaluated based on this factor too.

 

If you think that just because Kohli maintained an avg: of  almost 59 after 10000, that would automatically mean he would maintain that avg: after 16350+ runs too ,  then it makes no sense

[Nikola]

3 minutes ago, Nonbeliever said:

Viv richards is on of the greatest ever batsman. zaheer abbas played only 60 odis. and Dean Jones strike rate was 72. while shrikanth averaged 27.

 

Even one of our greatest odi bastman yuvraj singh averaged 36 with strike rate of 87.

 

But i want to see same boundries, same rules and same bowlers once again,  most of today team won't even survive 50 overs.

Won't that be unfair on past & future batsman? As current era batsman already creamed alot soft runs and it will be huge task for future batsman to match those records now.

[vvvslaxman]

1 minute ago, Nonbeliever said:

Viv richards is on of the greatest ever batsman. zaheer abbas played only 60 odis. and Dean Jones strike rate was 72. while shrikanth averaged 27.

 

Even one of our greatest odi bastman yuvraj singh averaged 36 with strike rate of 87.

 

But i want to see same boundries, same rules and same bowlers once again,  most of today team won't even survive 50 overs.

Same bowlers? Like Chetan sharma, Steve waugh, lol Actually 80s was like this. There would be one good bowler in a team. Many pie chuckers. You could target bowlers. Only reason the rates were slow was because of lack of intent. The strategy of waiting till 40th over for an assault was the norm. When required batsmen were able to do what people are doing now. India had to achieve certain run rate against New zelaand in 1987 world cup to top the group. Gavaskar running a temperature of 102 scored 103 runs in 80 odd balls. Similarly when India set up a total of 299 in 40 overs, Srilanka chased brilliantly and reached 289 in 40 overs. Only Mahanama's run out saved India.Whenever they showed attitude they did well. Only reason 70 strike rate was good those days was because batsmen were not allowed to go helter skelter. Not because they were not capable or bowling was superior. There were enough pie chuckers in the 80s. Jamshedpur was a road in the 80s. It is still a road. No big change. Pakistan pitches were patta wickets even back then. Nowadays tampering has reduced a lot. Ball conditions are monitored closely. Review system is in place these days. Those days it was impossible to get lbw if you are on the frontfoot.

[Laaloo]

6 minutes ago, Nonbeliever said:

Viv richards is on of the greatest ever batsman. zaheer abbas played only 60 odis. and Dean Jones strike rate was 72. while shrikanth averaged 27.

 

Even one of our greatest odi bastman yuvraj singh averaged 36 with strike rate of 87.

 

But i want to see same boundries, same rules and same bowlers once again,  most of today team won't even survive 50 overs.

That's why you compare stats from kohlis debut until Sachin retirement. That was before the Advent of the second new ball. Those stats are eerily similar. You can argue that Kohli was newbie but you can also counterattack that Sachin was on his last legs. There's not much difference in those stats. And donr forget Sachin played for himself and Kohli played for the team. Imagine if Sachin had played for the team

[Nonbeliever]

1 minute ago, Nikola said:

Won't that be unfair on past & future batsman? As current era batsman already creamed alot soft runs and it will be huge task for future batsman to match those records now.

As a die hard cricket fan my heart cries for a contest. India loose or win does not matter to me.  I want to see cricket of highest standard.

[Nonbeliever]

7 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Same bowlers? Like Chetan sharma, Steve waugh, lol Actually 80s was like this. There would be one good bowler in a team. Many pie chuckers. You could target bowlers. Only reason the rates were slow was because of lack of intent. The strategy of waiting till 40th over for an assault was the norm. When required batsmen were able to do what people are doing now. India had to achieve certain run rate against New zelaand in 1987 world cup to top the group. Gavaskar running a temperature of 102 scored 103 runs in 80 odd balls. Similarly when India set up a total of 299 in 40 overs, Srilanka chased brilliantly and reached 289 in 40 overs. Only Mahanama's run out saved India.Whenever they showed attitude they did well. Only reason 70 strike rate was good those days was because batsmen were not allowed to go helter skelter. Not because they were not capable or bowling was superior. There were enough pie chuckers in the 80s. Jamshedpur was a road in the 80s. It is still a road. No big change. Pakistan pitches were patta wickets even back then. Nowadays tampering has reduced a lot. Ball conditions are monitored closely. Review system is in place these days. Those days it was impossible to get lbw if you are on the frontfoot.

So when you give exmaple of batsman you pick viv richards and when you turn to bowlers you pick Chetan Sharma and Steve Waugh. . 

Bytheway time to sleep now.

 

Edited October 26, 2018 by Nonbeliever

[vvvslaxman]

19 minutes ago, Nonbeliever said:

So when you give exmaple of batsman you pick viv richards and when you turn to bowlers you pick Chetan Sharma and Steve Waugh. . 

Bytheway time to sleep now.

 

You guys pick Ambrose Marsahall  Good positive batsmen always were rewarded. But there were not many batsmen with positive attacking mindset. Later Afridi, Jayasuriya, Gilchrist happened. We had our Sehwag. Yuvraj, Dhoni, Then array of big hitting west Indian batsmen, More positive batsmen emerged in this era. Sean tait bowling at 160 kph, Mccullum on one knee scoops him over fine leg for six. YOu think 80s players had that audacity? I don't think so. 

[vvvslaxman]

 

 

Current generation is this good :) Admit it. They are bosses.

[vvvslaxman]

You guys seriously under-estimating the work ethics of Virat Kohli who would have been a champion in any f**king era.

[vvvslaxman]

Tendulkar vs Kohli  @velu

 

At 1:30 Tendulkar tells he can also bowl :)

Edited October 26, 2018 by vvvslaxman

[SUMO]

I also rechecked those complex mathematics & corroborated that SRT's 10000 was better.

[putrevus]

Everything is not all about stats, there is something called eye test. Those who have seen Sachin full pomp and are seeing full pomp will understand, Sachin was especially from 1996 -99 was a different beast but even that Sachin in my view is not better than the Kohli we are seeing now.

 

There is a certainity about Kohli which was not there about Sachin. 

[putrevus]

1 hour ago, rtmohanlal said:

your points does not make any sense.

Firstly you are claiming  about the positions of Sachin & Kohli. But practically Kohli got  205 inns or so.Isn't it ? Then only Kohli could score 10000+ runs.Isn't it ? Then what is the purpose of this  claim about  lesser chances because of position?Not only that, whether you agree with or not w.r.t the effect of Sachin's greatness because of these stats,  once Sachin opened from Mar 27 ,94(the starting point of my filtered out data), he scored next 10000 runs(out of 16353 runs)  in 232 inns.

 

Secondly if any, it is unfavorable to Sachin, because   the chances of him getting   wear & tear,exhausted ,tired, cramps etc etc thru an inns  being an opener is  relatively a bit more  when compared to Kohli in general.Thirdly Kohli's percentage of not outs is very high when compared to that of Sachin's. Not outs inflate averages.   Being an opener also reduces the  batsman's chances of

remaining till the end in general.So Sachin's performance  as  finisher and there by a chaser needs to be evaluated based on this factor too.

 

If you think that just because Kohli maintained an avg: of  almost 59 after 10000, that would automatically mean he would maintain that avg: after 16350+ runs too ,  then it makes no sense

He does not have to make 16350 runs to become greater, He is already greater than Sachin as one day player. 

 

Kohli also played in at no 4 40 times in those 205 innings too.Kohli remains not out after scoring 100s not like no5 or 6 .

[rtmohanlal]

5 minutes ago, putrevus said:

He does not have to make 16350 runs to become greater, He is already greater than Sachin as one day player. 

 

Kohli also played in at no 4 40 times in those 205 innings too.Kohli remains not out after scoring 100s not like no5 or 6 .

so  10076/16353 .....61.62 % only.   And as per  your stance Kohli would go onto maintain this avg: of 59.62 automatically  even after scoring 16353 runs.

 

it is not about 4 or 5 or 6 ...not outs inflate averages. Any way each to their own