Michael Vaughan places Virat Kohli above Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara: I haven't seen anyone better

[raki05]

On 12/18/2018 at 12:33 PM, Jamadagni said:

I'd rather have an inconsistent Lara than a consistent Sachin in tests. 

 

In series of 6 innings, Lara's scores would be 15, 186, 5, 18, 169, 6.

 

Sachin's would be 52, 48, 102, 32, 78, 55.

 

The two big hundreds Lara scored would then have a huge impact on the result of the matches while though Sachin was consistent, he couldn't shape up the result of any of the three. That's why Lara is a better test batsman than Sachin in my view. 

How many test lara won due to his big scores . He was one of the selfish bloke who played all 3 days to score his 400. 

[raki05]

18 hours ago, R!TTER said:

He could've just like SRT "could've" taken us over the line in Chennai but we also had a few atrocious decisions that game, so the game was lost a lot earlier than what the scoreboard suggests.

 

Nope he tried to flick IIRC the first or the second ball of a new spell from Stokes, poor decision considering we were fairly evenly placed with Pandya at the other end. He tried a high risk, low reward shot, like Adelaide 2014, but unlike that Aus test this was a much more manageable total for chase. Also the closest loss we've had this year, a set batter who can't close out a 4th innings chase isn't blameless, especially given he's the captain (who thinks we don't need practice matches) & someone who scored a ton in the first innings.

 

They have but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that only our openers are the problem. The biggest issue I've seen is that when one dept does well the other fails or under performs, when bowlers do well the fielders (including Virat) drop dollies, when batters do relatively well the bowlers fail to capitalize & worst of all the opposition tail. Sadly for all the hype around our bowling we haven't been able to bowl out oppositions cheaply every time we blow away their top order.

 

Of course not but tell me how many of these close finishes were really that close, conversely had Virat done a little better how many of them could've been won? In this game itself he played an airy drive just before lunch, was that necessary? This is probably the 3rd or 4th time he's got out to Pat in the exact same manner!

 

India has 1 batter & none who are reliable under pressure. I don't see Kohli as someone who can win us the game when we're trailing, he's not a chase master in tests.

People who are getting ejaculation thinking that lara big score can win you matches. Can someone tell how many of his more than 200 scores have win WI matches .

[mishra]

20 hours ago, R!TTER said:

The Edgbaston loss should count against him, he was the set batsman who got out on the easiest of deliveries.

All losses count against him. Kohli is prooven failure.

 

He is Kejriwal of Indian Cricket

[mishra]

9 hours ago, CSK Fan said:

Angrezon(Vaughan) ki fidrat hi hai, divide and rule. Dono humare hi sher hai

Try someone compared with Bradman and see how various yardstick come and play. Desi Public will remain Desi public.

 

Sachin was Bradman of his generation. Kohli better than Sachin. So Kohli bigger than Bradmen. Ask Vaiughman and see how he starts shitting excuses

[zen]

15 hours ago, rtmohanlal said:

went thru all of your tables. 

can't agree with several of the  criteria though .

xyz

 

 

*Sachin Fanboy mode on*

 

We should also account for innings where Sachin was wrongly given out.  Surely, it is not Sachin's fault to suffer for umpiring mistakes? And then he played in ODIs too, where Lara was not too serious. If Sachin too focused on tests more and was less serious about ODIs, his average could have been even higher in tests

 

After removing his initial and later tests, and adding an avg of 5 runs for innings where he was given out wrongly, and adding 5 more to his tally as if he had focused on tests more he would have averaged more, his avg is now 67 from 177 tests 

 

Lara was always lucky. Even when he was out, umpires gave him not out. Opposition dropped his catches too and failed to appeal when he was LBW. That added approx. 5 runs to his avg. So if we subtract that, Lara's average would be roughly 48. Accounting for factors not thought of yet (as I am too busy trying to figure out how to show Sachin stats in better light), I will subtract 1 more run from Lara's average to make it 47

 

This means Sachin averaged 67 and Lara 47. As we can see the average difference is 20 

 

And the basket of bowlers, who started out in 90s, is not representative enough. BD and Zim bowlers performed equally well when playing against Ind. In fact, bowlers peak when they bowl to Sachin so even a minnow bowler turns into a McGrath or a Warne. And McGrath and Warne crap in their pants when they bowl to Sachin so they become more like minnow bowlers. Sachin average is less when McGrath + Warne are in the 11 but that is more due to Sachin playing loose shots to these scared bowlers than these bowlers getting him out. Considering this, we should create a basket of bowlers from Zim and BD 

 

We can also add runs or 100s from all formats. That would easily bury Lara in tests

 

There is no way Lara can be better in tests. I have watched both of them and Sachin was better. I may be an Indian cricket team supporter but I am even a bigger cricket supporter so my impartial analysis, along with what I have seen, says that Sachin was definitely better

 

There is a reason why Sachin is referred to as God of Cricket in India. Have you seen Lara (or any non-Indian great) being referred to as God of Cricket in Ind? That also shows Sachin is better. Just think, how can a large percentage of 1.3B people be wrong?  

 

*Sachin Fanboy mode off* 

 

 

 

Back to reality, apples to apples:

 

Excluding BD and Zim, Lara has played 224 innings: 

Records type batting analysis [change type]

View career summary [change view]

Primary team West Indies

Opposition team Australia  or England  or India  or New Zealand  or Pakistan  or South Africa  or Sri Lanka

ulOrdered by default (ascending)

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Career averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
unfiltered	1990-2006	131	232	6	11953	400*	52.88	19753	60.51	34	48	17	1559	88	Profile
filtered	1990-2006	126	224	6	11517	400*	52.83	19211	59.95	32	47	17	1504	81

 

 

Similarly, Tendulkar at his 224th inning vs these sides:

Records type batting analysis [change type]

View career summary [change view]

Opposition team Australia  or England  or New Zealand  or Pakistan  or South Africa  or Sri Lanka  or West Indies

Start of match date less than or equal to 13 Aug 2008

Ordered by default (ascending)

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Career averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0
unfiltered	1989-2013	200	329	33	15921	248*	53.78	51	68	14	Profile
filtered	1989-2008	136	224	21	10403	241*	51.24	33	46	13

 

• This is apples to apples at the completion of their respective 224 innings mark
• They have the same # of 50+ scores with Lara having a 50 more, while Tendulkar has a 100 more. Therefore, both of them are equally consistent 
• Lara has scored 1114 more! (highlights the ability to score bigger 100s) 
• Lara averages 53 with just 6 not outs; Tendulkar averages 51 with 21 not outs

 

Edited December 19, 2018 by zen

[Trichromatic]

14 minutes ago, Mumbai Lobby said:

Fully agree with Vaughan

 

Kohli is way better than Sachin. In fact even Dravid and more than 10 other batsman are better than Sachin

If this account is also banned like your other accounts, will you create another one and continue trolling to waste resources of this forum?

[Vilander]

On 12/17/2018 at 6:34 PM, Muloghonto said:

Well no $hit if 'all three formats' are included. Both Tendulkar and Lara spent the bulk majority of their careers competing in 2 formats, back when the two formats had a clear-cut 1-2 structure, with test cricket reigning supreme and ODIs only mattering for world cups & trilaterals. They also spent exactly 0 hours in their development phase trying to be TwontyTwonty batsmen. 

Same way as how the greatest allrounder ever in test cricket (Sobers) is a nobody in limited overs cricket. 20 years from now, if the 'no attention-span' generation gets a Ten-Ten kirkut format, then some new guy will be automatically better across all four formats than Kohli. 

 

i think the point Vaughn is trying to make is that he is better than them in Tests and ODI. We don't know yet, we will only know when Kohli ends his career. 

[Muloghonto]

12 minutes ago, Vilander said:

i think the point Vaughn is trying to make is that he is better than them in Tests and ODI. We don't know yet, we will only know when Kohli ends his career. 

Unless Kohli turns into one of those 1 in 10 players who have better careers in their 30s than 20s, there is no chance in Tests. Kohli is a very good, but by no stretch is he even in an alltime great conversation. He's faced far weaker bowling lineups in general and he has obvious technical flaws that are much bigger than Lara's or Tendulkar's (which is non-existent for Tendy). 

 

[Real McCoy]

Vaughan is trying to get some Indian eyeballs on this non-issue here. He gets more money that way. Does it matter if VK is better than SRT or Lara. What happened to the thumb rule that "you dont compare players of different eras" Vaughany . I lost respect for him when he trolled Laxman for having his bat checked and for trolling SL fans on their national anthem being too long

[Jamadagni]

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Unless Kohli turns into one of those 1 in 10 players who have better careers in their 30s than 20s, there is no chance in Tests. Kohli is a very good, but by no stretch is he even in an alltime great conversation. He's faced far weaker bowling lineups in general and he has obvious technical flaws that are much bigger than Lara's or Tendulkar's (which is non-existent for Tendy). 

 

But Kohli performed suerbly against two best fast bowling teams(AUS&SA). He did well against Rabada, Philander, Steyn, Ngidi, Johnson, Harris, Starc, Cummins, Hazelwood. In fact, I don't think Sachin ever performed or even faced a complete pace bowling attack like Kohli did this year alone in SA(Rabada, Philander, Ngidi) and AUS(Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins). So that argument of weaker bowling lineups has no merit. Kohli has just entered his peak years. There's quite a few more left. I expect him to up his average to around 58 in the next 3-4 years and a small decline for a year or two, ending up with an average  between 56-57, which would surely place him above Sachin. 

 

 

[maniac]

Kohli has a pretty poor 4th innings average in SENA from memory. Can someone compare it with Lara and Sachin.

 

The way Kohli has been scoring 100s for fun overseas I don’t tbink this statement is too far off though.

Edited December 19, 2018 by maniac

[Muloghonto]

16 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

But Kohli performed suerbly against two best fast bowling teams(AUS&SA). He did well against Rabada, Philander, Steyn, Ngidi, Johnson, Harris, Starc, Cummins, Hazelwood. In fact, I don't think Sachin ever performed or even faced a complete pace bowling attack like Kohli did this year alone in SA(Rabada, Philander, Ngidi) and AUS(Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins). So that argument of weaker bowling lineups has no merit. Kohli has just entered his peak years. There's quite a few more left. I expect him to up his average to around 58 in the next 3-4 years and a small decline for a year or two, ending up with an average  between 56-57, which would surely place him above Sachin. 

 

 

1. Sachin faced Donald, Pollock, Klusener in matches bowling together. He's also faced Steyn, Morkel. Ergo, Sachin has faced more quality South African bowlers than Kohli. Same with Australia. 

 

2. Sachin has faced more great & amazing bowlers in his career than ANY other batsman in history. This is objective fact based on who has bowled to Sachin vs other batsmen. 

 

3. Yes, Kohli has quite a few years left. But as i said, for most cricketers, including batsmen, they are usually more productive in their 20s than their 30s. Exceptions are there but unless Kohli becomes the exception rather than the rule, he has no chance to be even in the same conversation as Sachin or Lara in tests. He is already far, far behind. 

4. Even if he averages 56-57, it'd be very hard for him to be considered in the same ballpark as Sachin, since:

a) Sachin averaged 59+ for over 12K runs at a stretch over 17 years

b) Sachin averaged 50+ in an era where only 5 batsmen had career averages of 50+ for the entire decade - Sachin, Lara, Tugga, AndyF and Border. 

c) Most of Sachin's career came in an era where runs on average were 10-15% LESS than what they are today per test match. 

 

Its pretty much exactly why Sanga has a way higher average but isn't considered in the same league as Lara or Sachin. Quality of runs and in the era scored, matters. If they didn't and it was just raw averages, then the greatest fast bowler ever would always be one and only George Lohman.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Jamadagni]

5 minutes ago, maniac said:

Kohli has a pretty poor 4th innings average in SENA from memory. Can someone compare it with Lara and Sachin.

 

The way Kohli has been scoring 100s for fun overseas I don’t tbink this statement is too far off though.

Sachin:

 

Overall 4th innings average: 36.93

In SENA: 25.63

 

Lara:

 

Overall: 35.12

SENA: 26.52

 

Kohli:

 

Overall: 49.77

SENA: 47.84

 

These speak for themselves /thread. 

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

Sachin:

 

Overall 4th innings average: 36.93

In SENA: 25.63

 

Lara:

 

Overall: 35.12

SENA: 26.52

 

Kohli:

 

Overall: 49.77

SENA: 47.84

 

These speak for themselves /thread. 

kindly also post the average 4th innings score in the Sena countries for 90s, 2000s and 2010s. Oh and in Sachin's case, also include WI. When he played in WI, they had Walsh, Ambrose and Bishop - all 3 of them would walk into any bowling lineup today. 

[Jamadagni]

6 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

1. Sachin faced Donald, Pollock, Klusener in matches bowling together. He's also faced Steyn, Morkel. Ergo, Sachin has faced more quality South African bowlers than Kohli. Same with Australia. 

 

2. Sachin has faced more great & amazing bowlers in his career than ANY other batsman in history. This is objective fact based on who has bowled to Sachin vs other batsmen. 

 

3. Yes, Kohli has quite a few years left. But as i said, for most cricketers, including batsmen, they are usually more productive in their 20s than their 30s. Exceptions are there but unless Kohli becomes the exception rather than the rule, he has no chance to be even in the same conversation as Sachin or Lara in tests. He is already far, far behind. 

4. Even if he averages 56-57, it'd be very hard for him to be considered in the same ballpark as Sachin, since:

a) Sachin averaged 59+ for over 12K runs at a stretch over 17 years

b) Sachin averaged 50+ in an era where only 5 batsmen had career averages of 50+ for the entire decade - Sachin, Lara, Tugga, AndyF and Border. 

c) Most of Sachin's career came in an era where runs on average were 10-15% LESS than what they are today per test match. 

1. Not true. The attack Kohli faced this year(Rabada, Morkel, Philander, Ngidi) was stronger and relentless as a unit than any Sachin faced. Ditto with ongoing series(Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins). 

 

2. Yes he faced more great bowlers, but his average goes down in matches which involved them. 

 

3. He has entered his peak at 30. It should last for 3-4 more years. Even without his peak years till now, he's got close to Sachin and Lara. It's just a matter of time. 

 

4. Surely can't be true. Give me any any link for batting being tougher in Sachin's era. 

[Muloghonto]

6 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

1. Not true. The attack Kohli faced this year(Rabada, Morkel, Philander, Ngidi) was stronger and relentless as a unit than any Sachin faced. Ditto with ongoing series(Starc, Hazelwood, Cummins). 

Definitely disagree. Strongest Saffie attack i've seen in terms of relentless-ness was their mid-late 90s attack that had Donald, Pollock, McMillan, Klusener, deVilliers and occasionally, Schultz in it. Stats also reflect this - this is the period where Saffie bowling attack had its best overall performances.  And no, this Aussie attack is no different than the 91 attack India faced, save for Lyon being a better spinner than May or whoever it was who spun the ball back then. 

6 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

2. Yes he faced more great bowlers, but his average goes down in matches which involved them. 

So does everyone else's. You are supposed to do better against crappier players than ATGs - which is why the latter are ATGs in the first place. 

6 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

3. He has entered his peak at 30. It should last for 3-4 more years. Even without his peak years till now, he's got close to Sachin and Lara. It's just a matter of time. 

He's been at his peak for the last 4-5 years already. Peaking is not about age usually,its about having the ideal combination of enough experience but also enough juice left in the body ( ie, not too much mileage). Usually peaks come 4-6 years after debut and Kohli is no different. 

6 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

4. Surely can't be true. Give me any any link for batting being tougher in Sachin's era. 

Check the average match scores, the overall bowling average of the 90s. Way lower than today's. 

[Jamadagni]

16 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

kindly also post the average 4th innings score in the Sena countries for 90s, 2000s and 2010s. Oh and in Sachin's case, also include WI. When he played in WI, they had Walsh, Ambrose and Bishop - all 3 of them would walk into any bowling lineup today. 

If you add WI, it only goes up a bit to 28.

 

1990s 4th innings average in SENA: 26.82

2000s: 30.54

2010s: 25.70

 

 

Surprise surprise! Batting in 4th innings has been the toughest in 2010s. No matter what filter you use, Kohli comes out on top. 

 

[Jamadagni]

5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Definitely disagree. Strongest Saffie attack i've seen in terms of relentless-ness was their mid-late 90s attack that had Donald, Pollock, McMillan, Klusener, deVilliers and occasionally, Schultz in it. Stats also reflect this - this is the period where Saffie bowling attack had its best overall performances.  And no, this Aussie attack is no different than the 91 attack India faced, save for Lyon being a better spinner than May or whoever it was who spun the ball back then. 

So does everyone else's. You are supposed to do better against crappier players than ATGs - which is why the latter are ATGs in the first place. 

He's been at his peak for the last 4-5 years already. Peaking is not about age usually,its about having the ideal combination of enough experience but also enough juice left in the body ( ie, not too much mileage). Usually peaks come 4-6 years after debut and Kohli is no different. 

Check the average match scores, the overall bowling average of the 90s. Way lower than today's. 

Bowling average in 90s: 31.51

2000s: 34.10

2010s: 32.71

 

31.51 and 34.10 were the eras Sachin played all his matches. Way way lower than 32.71 eh? 

 

OK. Let's also get into batting averages:

 

90s: 29.45

00s: 32.02

10s: 31.33

 

Batting averages of 29.45 and 32.02 way way higher than 31.33 right? 

 

As I said, no matter what........

[Muloghonto]

19 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

If you add WI, it only goes up a bit to 28.

 

1990s 4th innings average in SENA: 26.82

2000s: 30.54

2010s: 25.70

 

 

Surprise surprise! Batting in 4th innings has been the toughest in 2010s. No matter what filter you use, Kohli comes out on top. 

 

Not batting average. Total innings score average. 4th innings is the least completed innings in tests. 210 all-out is a lower average than 120/5 (draw). You can't score runs, if you can't complete innings as often. 

 

How on earth Kohli comes out on top, if he's faced far inferior bowling in general, on far easier pitches in general and has faced far less pressure in general due to his own bowling unit being way more effective ?!? 

 

Edited December 19, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Jamadagni said:

Bowling average in 90s: 31.51

2000s: 34.10

2010s: 32.71

 

31.51 and 34.10 were the eras Sachin played all his matches. Way way lower than 32.71 eh? 

 

OK. Let's also get into batting averages:

 

90s: 29.45

00s: 32.02

10s: 31.33

 

Batting averages of 29.45 and 32.02 way way higher than 31.33 right? 

 

As I said, no matter what........

The only reason 90s average is even 29.45 is because of lesser completed 4th match innings, aka draws, which boost averages. It'd be nice if you knew basic stat analysis.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Muloghonto