Will Kohli retire as a top 5 Indian batter in tests?

[zen]

21 minutes ago, Vijy said:

Top 5 Indian batters who could perform across a variety of conditions (but not all conditions) are:

 

1. SRT

2. Gavaskar

3. Dravid

4. Merchant

5. Sehwag/VVS

 

I am the only one that will put Merchant there, but that's fine with me - I am prepared to die on this hill, even if sample size is low. My father, who lived to 90-odd, got to see cricketers from early 40s to mid 00s. This is the ranking that we both believed in - BTW, he loved sehwag's aggression (reminded him of mushtaq ali), so he was not a traditionalist. Neither am I. Obviously, when I am comparing across eras, I am not saying that Merchant would have instantaneous success if thrown into modern era directly - we would have to assume access to similar resources.

 

Everything I have read indicates that Merchant was our best technician apart from SRT - could handle spin, seam/swing, and pace/bounce. Lost best years to WW2, played on uncovered pitches, had nearly identical home and away avgs of about 47-48 against a strong team (Eng) and did not stat pad vs weaker teams like NZ, SA, WI at the time. And there's his FC avg of 71 with 13,000 runs; best after Bradman.

Merchant maybe technically among the best in India but he has no (or limited) career defining series performances iirc (can be attributed to not getting too many series). 
 

At this level, you are not necessarily looking for relatively technically good batsmen (Bradman or Sobers may not rank high on technical aspects) but someone who has stood up for his team.

 

One of the reasons, I rate S Waugh high.  I would rate him right there with Lara as the best from that generation (I do not rate Tendulkar in the top 2 of his generation in tests despite his technical brilliance).

[StraightDrive26]

It is hard to rate Virat in Top 5 of the all-time list. I don't think anyone who has been mentioned in the lists above had a 5 year struggle in Tests. Sachin struggled in his last 2 years, VVS and Dravid just had 1 bad year before they were dropped. I would rate VVS and Sehwag higher than Virat at the moment. While VVS might have batted at number 3 at the start of his career a few times, he was mostly batting at number 5 or 6. This meant that he wasn't able to score the amount to tons he could have if he had continued batting at the top of the order. VVS was great against spin, better than Virat and he wasn't bad against bounce as well. Virat for me till 2019 was an ATG and all time top 5 Indian batter but in the last 5 years he has tarnished his legacy. 

 

According to the grapevine, Virat might continue playing Tests, which means that he might end up with an average below VVS anyways. The fact that he did not even show a tiny bit of match awareness on day 5 while a 22 year old was fighting at the other end shows he is finished. India just fell short of 15 overs in the end to save the game, Virat and Rohit showing some resolve should have accomplished that. I don't think Virat for the way he has been irresponsible and for not thinking he needs to work on his game makes it to all-time top 5 in Tests for India.

[First class]

4 minutes ago, Vijy said:

Pak rates Kohli higher than Ind do (excluding the RCB fans and online bots). It is an interesting dichotomy - maybe because Kohli reminds them of Zaheer Abbas

No, its not being Pakistani and I'm not a typical Pakistani cricket follower, most of them have poor cricket knowledge. When it comes to cricket, I appreciate cricketers irrespective of their nationality. There is no similarity between Zaheer and Kohli. Zaheer was a very elegant batsman and if any cricketer was close to Zaheer in style , it was Azharrudin and to some extend VVS, not Kohli. 

[zen]

7 minutes ago, StraightDrive26 said:

This meant that he wasn't able to score the amount to tons he could have if he had continued batting at the top of the order

In tests, # of tons do not necessarily depend on batting positions (as there are no over restrictions). However, the ability to score big 100s can be impacted as you have to bat with the tail. But on the other hand, you can average high with relatively more “not outs”. 
 

Which is why going by merely averages is not a good idea unless the average is like close to 60 or above. 

Talking about VVS, he has a relatively high % of not outs and was guilty of wasting his best form (probably over confident got him out sooner than he expected).

Edited December 30, 2024 by zen

[First class]

2 hours ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Nope. He was much better for the following reasons...

 

1. He was an opener and changed the way the game is played. He was the one who started Bazball and scaring opponents the way he hammered the bowling while opening.

 

2. He was pretty good away from home as well as his innings at MCG (195) and his debut Test in SA where he scored a 100 showed. Plus the knocks he played against a peak Murali and Mendis when others couldn't even lay bat on the ball were out of this world. So yeah, not a FTB by any means.

Agree, Sehwaq was one of a kind, not at all a FTB. There has been many great batsmen in history but there are even fewer who changed the way batting is done and Sehwag has been one of those few. Jayasuria is another one comes in mind who changed the game in ODIs . 

[vvvslaxman]

Laxman in terms of clutch performances has surpassed even Sachin. Who the hell is Kohli. People only remember him for 281. But he won a test from 135/8. Then that famous partnership at adelaide oval chasing 556 with Dravid. Then at Durban when INdia was tottering at 93/5 with only a lead of 160 odd he took the score to 228 with tail.  Made 38 in the first innings as well out of 205. Then Chennai test where pitch was crumbling he made a calm 55. Many clutch knocks. Kohli is nowhere near him on that score

[vvvslaxman]

Laxman in terms of clutch performances has surpassed even Sachin. Who the hell is Kohli. People only remember him for 281. But he won a test from 135/8. Then that famous partnership at adelaide oval chasing 556 with Dravid. Then at Durban when INdia was tottering at 93/5 with only a lead of 160 odd he took the score to 228 with tail.  Made 38 in the first innings as well out of 205. Then Chennai test where pitch was crumbling he made a calm 55. Many clutch knocks. Kohli is nowhere near him on that score

[StraightDrive26]

13 minutes ago, zen said:

In tests, # of tons do not necessarily depend on batting positions (as there are no over restrictions). However, the ability to score big 100s can be impacted as you have to bat with the tail. But on the other hand, you can average high with relatively more “not outs”. 
 

Which is why going by merely averages is not a good idea unless the average is like close to 60 or above. 

Talking about VVS, he has a relatively high % of not outs and was guilty of wasting his best form (probably over confident got him out sooner than he expected).

VVS also had to throw away his wickets a lot of times in search of quick runs when batting with India's horrendous tail. Most often batting with the tail the main batter gets out because they have to take risk to maximise the runs. I can on top of my head list 2 innings like that, there are many more:

 

Kolkata first innings he batted in the middle order, India were bowled out for 171, VVS scored 59, he went for runs and got out. 

2010 Durban Test, VVS batted brilliantly to allow India to set a target for SA in the second innings, he was batting with tail and was last man out for 96

 

Batting at number 5 or 6 does not mean you get a lot of not outs, yes you do if your team is on top and you declare but if you don't the established batter mostly gets out trying to score runs. This is the reason most of the batters at number 5 or below neither have 30+ hundreds nor do they average 50+ in Tests over a period of time, even if they did it was a minority. Allan Border comes to mind who played 91 Tests at 5 & 6 and averaged 50+ and scored 15 hundreds. 

 

Edited December 30, 2024 by StraightDrive26

[zen]

1 minute ago, StraightDrive26 said:

Batting at number 5 or 6 does not mean you get a lot of not outs, yes you do if your team is on top and you declare but if you don't the established batter mostly gets out trying to score runs. This is the reason most of the batters at number 5 or below neither have 30+ hundreds nor do they average 50+ in Tests over a period of time. 

VVS does have a relatively high % of not outs. 
 

VVS 34 not outs in 225 innings = roughly 15%

Sehwag for e.g. 6 not outs in 180 innings = roughly 3%

 

Tendulkar 33 not outs in 329 = 10%
 

Dravid 32 not outs in 286 = 11%
 

So VVS has had roughly 50% more not outs than Dravid and Tendulkar, and considerable more times than Sehwag’s.

 

[bowl_out]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

VVS does have a relatively high % of not outs. 
 

VVS 34 not outs in 225 innings = roughly 15%

Sehwag for e.g. 6 not outs in 180 innings = roughly 3%

 

Tendulkar 33 not outs in 329 = 10%
 

Dravid 32 not outs in 286 = 11%
 

So VVS has had roughly 50% more not outs than Dravid and Tendulkar, and considerable more times than Sehwag’s.

 

VVS has so many innings where he has won or drawn games playing with the tail. The game where he played alongside Pragyan Ojha comes to mind

[The Realist]

Kohli has fallen off a cliff for so long, circa 5 years, that the likes of Gambhir abd Pujara have had more impactfull innings.

 

Kohli is only dragging his own name through the dirt by hanging on. He himself has destroyed his legacy.

[zen]

1 minute ago, bowl_out said:

VVS has so many innings where he has won or drawn games playing with the tail. The game where he played alongside Pragyan Ojha comes to mind

Yeah, he has some good knocks.

[vvvslaxman]

1 minute ago, bowl_out said:

VVS has so many innings where he has won or drawn games playing with the tail. The game where he played alongside Pragyan Ojha comes to mind

Kohli is a certified choker in Tests.   This is another test where he lifted India from 62/4 chasing 258 in the 4th innigs.

 

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/india-tour-of-sri-lanka-2010-455238/sri-lanka-vs-india-3rd-test-456671/full-scorecard

[Vijy]

52 minutes ago, First class said:

No, its not being Pakistani and I'm not a typical Pakistani cricket follower, most of them have poor cricket knowledge. When it comes to cricket, I appreciate cricketers irrespective of their nationality. There is no similarity between Zaheer and Kohli. Zaheer was a very elegant batsman and if any cricketer was close to Zaheer in style , it was Azharrudin and to some extend VVS, not Kohli. 

I meant it not so much in terms of style, but more of feast & famine type of scoring - this is what both Abbas and Kohli exhibited.

[Vijy]

1 hour ago, zen said:

Merchant maybe technically among the best in India but he has no (or limited) career defining series performances iirc (can be attributed to not getting too many series). 
 

At this level, you are not necessarily looking for relatively technically good batsmen (Bradman or Sobers may not rank high on technical aspects) but someone who has stood up for his team.

 

One of the reasons, I rate S Waugh high.  I would rate him right there with Lara as the best from that generation (I do not rate Tendulkar in the top 2 of his generation in tests despite his technical brilliance).

There is strong correlation between level of technical brilliance and number of matchwinning knocks; obviously exceptions do exist. Lara was great, but 2nd best batter of his era in terms of match winning knocks would not be Waugh, but probably Punter instead.

 

In my book, I don't look for the "best" batters since that is subjective - just like the "best" films. Instead, akin to how films can be assessed on their objective technical merits (e.g., cinematography, editing), I too use these criteria for determining my list of batters. These batters are therefore not necessarily the "best", whatever that term means to different people.

 

Case in point: Citizen Kane vs Jeanne Dielman. I rate the former more highly because of its greater technical brilliance, even if the latter is seen by film critics as the "better" film nowadays.

Edited December 30, 2024 by Vijy

[First class]

8 minutes ago, Vijy said:

I meant it not so much in terms of style, but more of feast & famine type of scoring - this is what both Abbas and Kohli exhibited.

Yes, and  if have to pick one of them for my team , I would pick Abbas in Pakistan and England and Kohli everywhere else. 

[StraightDrive26]

40 minutes ago, zen said:

VVS does have a relatively high % of not outs. 
 

VVS 34 not outs in 225 innings = roughly 15%

Sehwag for e.g. 6 not outs in 180 innings = roughly 3%

 

Tendulkar 33 not outs in 329 = 10%
 

Dravid 32 not outs in 286 = 11%
 

So VVS has had roughly 50% more not outs than Dravid and Tendulkar, and considerable more times than Sehwag’s.

 

That does not mean that he gets the same opportunity like Tendulkar, Sehwag and Dravid to put up big scores. For example a batter at number 10 may have a high percentage of not outs in a strong batting line up, that does not mean that he will average more. In the same way VVS might have had not outs but at the same time, he would have had to sacrifice his wicket in the look out for runs when batting with the tail. If VVS was playing in the era of Jadeja and Ashwin, I am sure he would have had more hundreds and slightly higher average. I am not saying he is perfect, he had his own flaws but again he never looked uncomfortable anytime at the crease except for few ODI games. Virat on the other hand has one major flaw which isn't able to rectify for 5 years now. VVS wasn't an ATG in Tests and so is Virat as he is fast catching up with VVS in terms of average. Virat would have ended up with 52-53 average in Tests if he actually cared. I don't think he does which is the reason he would never be an ATG in my books. May be a top 10 Indian batter but surely not in top 5 just because he has more hundreds. Ishant has 300+ wickets in Tests, more wickets than Roberts, Garner, Brett lee, Holding etc, but no one will say Ishant is a better bowler than any of them. 

[zen]

6 minutes ago, Vijy said:

There is strong correlation between level of technical brilliance and number of matchwinning knocks; obviously exceptions do exist. Lara was great, but 2nd best batter of his era in terms of match winning knocks would not be Waugh, but Punter instead.

Ponting played in a relatively more batting friendly era and when SA was the mainly the only strong challenger for Aus, and he wasn’t that great against spin too. 
 

In the 90s, WI decline and Aus rise, created some mouth watering series where both Lara and Waugh shone. Waugh also helped his team win a series in Pak in 1998 iirc. Waugh’s performances in Ashes, which is like the most important test series for Aus, are legendary too. Against the strong SA team of his time, Waugh has some good performances too.
 

 

[Vijy]

19 minutes ago, StraightDrive26 said:

That does not mean that he gets the same opportunity like Tendulkar, Sehwag and Dravid to put up big scores. For example a batter at number 10 may have a high percentage of not outs in a strong batting line up, that does not mean that he will average more. In the same way VVS might have had not outs but at the same time, he would have had to sacrifice his wicket in the look out for runs when batting with the tail. If VVS was playing in the era of Jadeja and Ashwin, I am sure he would have had more hundreds and slightly higher average. I am not saying he is perfect, he had his own flaws but again he never looked uncomfortable anytime at the crease except for few ODI games. Virat on the other hand has one major flaw which isn't able to rectify for 5 years now. VVS wasn't an ATG in Tests and so is Virat as he is fast catching up with VVS in terms of average. Virat would have ended up with 52-53 average in Tests if he actually cared. I don't think he does which is the reason he would never be an ATG in my books. May be a top 10 Indian batter but surely not in top 5 just because he has more hundreds. Ishant has 300+ wickets in Tests, more wickets than Roberts, Garner, Brett lee, Holding etc, but no one will say Ishant is a better bowler than any of them. 

VVS batted at no. 5 and sometimes at no. 6 (less so at no. 3). More not-outs are often expected - the same is seen for Steve Waugh and Chanderpaul, both of whom batted at No. 5 too.

Edited December 30, 2024 by Vijy

[Vijy]

9 minutes ago, zen said:

Ponting played in a relatively more batting friendly era and when SA was the mainly the only strong challenger for Aus, and he wasn’t that great against spin too. 
 

In the 90s, WI decline and Aus rise, created some mouth watering series where both Lara and Waugh shone. Waugh also helped his team win a series in Pak in 1998 iirc. Waugh’s performances in Ashes, which is like the most important test series for Aus, are legendary too. Against the strong SA team of his time, Waugh has some good performances too.
 

 

Eng was a poor Test team at the time (most Ashes were very one-sided for much of his career), but I agree he has some nice performances against WI. And  also did okay against some other good teams.