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

[Vijy]

36 minutes ago, Majestic said:

I will put him ahead of Sehwag and Laxman because those two played in era of flatties of 2000s while Kohli has been miserably treated in era of bowling more conducive to Ashwin, Jadeja at home while overseas it has usually been balanced except SA maybe.

 

I also believe that Kohli would have fared better if he got to play on Pakistani wickets where Sehwag batted like Bradman. Sehwag would have done better than Kohli in Asian conditions though no questions on that. But overseas, he would have done worse on these pitches that Kohli has played than Sehwag did in his own era.

 

VVS was an excellent pressure player but he lacks the conversion of tons which top players usually have.

just wait for 3-4 more years and look at his career at the time of retirement. VVS had avg of 47+ at some stage, Dravid had 59 after 100 tests, and so on. Once Kohli's avg goes below 45, then he will no longer have as strong a case as before.

[Muloghonto]

26 minutes ago, Majestic said:

I will put him ahead of Sehwag and Laxman because those two played in era of flatties of 2000s while Kohli has been miserably treated in era of bowling more conducive to Ashwin, Jadeja at home while overseas it has usually been balanced except SA maybe.

 

I also believe that Kohli would have fared better if he got to play on Pakistani wickets where Sehwag batted like Bradman. Sehwag would have done better than Kohli in Asian conditions though no questions on that. But overseas, he would have done worse on these pitches that Kohli has played than Sehwag did in his own era.

 

VVS was an excellent pressure player but he lacks the conversion of tons which top players usually have.

Sehwag and Laxman only got flatties in the last 4-5 years of their career, once Kumble declined and Bhajji couldnt exploit crumbling pitches as good as Kumble could.
Dunno where this flat track is coming from- i guess from a lot of weather affected draws in the 90s, but Indian pitches through 90s to mid 2000s  = crumbling from day 3. Those crumblers is what Kumble feasted on, where his top spinners would come on like a spitting cobra.

Bhajji didnt have a lethal top spinner to exploit them, he preferred the traditional slow turners that spinners do, but trouble is by the time Bhajji became our lead spinner, there were other traditional spinners like Swann, Hogg, etc. who put more revs on the ball and did better on traditional slow turners, so India started to give out flat tracks.

In anycase, Kohli cannot be ranked ahead of Sehwag.
A middle order bat who averages lower than an opener is by default worse than the opener, especially when that opener is not a specialist opener and also bats at the speed of a tornado.

Sehwag's FTB reputation, as i mentioned, is overstated. Man pretty much is excused from performing in NZ ( nobody performed in those 2 series where scores were like 120-180 in all innings of all sides), man is a success in Australia and did decently in England ( one good series + 1 bad series) and pretty much only failed in South Africa- where pretty much every batter outside of Australia & West Indies did significantly worse  there than anywhere else ( IIRC its true for all Indian, English, Pakistani, Sri Lankan & NZ batsmen. Only Aussie batsmen like Ponting, Steve Waugh, Hayden, Gillchrist and WI batsmen like Lara, Chanderpaul and Sarwan did well in South Africa compared to their career averages).

 

With Laxman its close, but i think Laxman batted against better bowling and in tougher conditions more often than Kohli, as a successful #6 like him means he is also shouldering the job of seeing off the 2nd new ball successfully ( one doesnt get to be a successful #6 in tests without the ability to see off the 2nd new ball and which is why great batsmen at #6 is rare.

Laxman and Kohli are identical averages in the middle order - Kohli is just a bit above 47 and has 9000 runs in the middle order, Laxman is just a bit above 48 and has 8000 runs in the middle order.

Yes, he has more not outs and less centuries than Kohli but that is to be expected batting most of his career at #5 and 6 behind Sehwag+Dravid+Tendulkar as opposed to batting most of your life at #3 or 4 batting behind Gambhir or Murali Vijay and Rohit.

 

[Vijy]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

Sehwag and Laxman only got flatties in the last 4-5 years of their career, once Kumble declined and Bhajji couldnt exploit crumbling pitches as good as Kumble could.
Dunno where this flat track is coming from- i guess from a lot of weather affected draws in the 90s, but Indian pitches through 90s to mid 2000s  = crumbling from day 3. Those crumblers is what Kumble feasted on, where his top spinners would come on like a spitting cobra.

Bhajji didnt have a lethal top spinner to exploit them, he preferred the traditional slow turners that spinners do, but trouble is by the time Bhajji became our lead spinner, there were other traditional spinners like Swann, Hogg, etc. who put more revs on the ball and did better on traditional slow turners, so India started to give out flat tracks.

In anycase, Kohli cannot be ranked ahead of Sehwag.
A middle order bat who averages lower than an opener is by default worse than the opener, especially when that opener is not a specialist opener and also bats at the speed of a tornado.

Sehwag's FTB reputation, as i mentioned, is overstated. Man pretty much is excused from performing in NZ ( nobody performed in those 2 series where scores were like 120-180 in all innings of all sides), man is a success in Australia and did decently in England ( one good series + 1 bad series) and pretty much only failed in South Africa- where pretty much every batter outside of Australia & West Indies did significantly worse  there than anywhere else ( IIRC its true for all Indian, English, Pakistani, Sri Lankan & NZ batsmen. Only Aussie batsmen like Ponting, Steve Waugh, Hayden, Gillchrist and WI batsmen like Lara, Chanderpaul and Sarwan did well in South Africa compared to their career averages).

 

With Laxman its close, but i think Laxman batted against better bowling and in tougher conditions more often than Kohli, as a successful #6 like him means he is also shouldering the job of seeing off the 2nd new ball successfully ( one doesnt get to be a successful #6 in tests without the ability to see off the 2nd new ball and which is why great batsmen at #6 is rare.

Laxman and Kohli are identical averages in the middle order - Kohli is just a bit above 47 and has 9000 runs in the middle order, Laxman is just a bit above 48 and has 8000 runs in the middle order.

Yes, he has more not outs and less centuries than Kohli but that is to be expected batting most of his career at #5 and 6 behind Sehwag+Dravid+Tendulkar as opposed to batting most of your life at #3 or 4 batting behind Gambhir or Murali Vijay and Rohit.

 

Moreover, Kohli's career is not yet over. His avg will regress further, thus highlighting how his 2016-19 peak was more of an aberration than the norm - namely, more of a Mohd. Yousuf type (not making a direct comparison with the latter here, but an analogy).

[Majestic]

12 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

If home pitches are so terrible for batting, how have  Jadeja/Ashwin themselves batted well here? They are much lesser bats ofcourse. Guys like Pant, Pujara ofcourse have done better too. 

 

Sehwag sure feasted on some pattas, but had much more impact due to his SR. 

 

VVS couldn't convert because he batted so low. '

 

Kohli had an incredible peak but is now getting out same way for years now. That can't be attributed to pitches alone.

There was a short period where they did well. I don’t see Jadeja performing as much with bat anymore. Tough pitch and he gets out.

 

Anyways, Sehwag in Asia is beast no debate there.

 

In SENA, he should have done better for the era he batted. Kohli has done special things in SA vs SA pacers on those bowling paradise and that to me forces me to rate him just above him. But neither ATG.

[sensible-indian]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Sehwag and Laxman only got flatties in the last 4-5 years of their career, once Kumble declined and Bhajji couldnt exploit crumbling pitches as good as Kumble could.
Dunno where this flat track is coming from- i guess from a lot of weather affected draws in the 90s, but Indian pitches through 90s to mid 2000s  = crumbling from day 3. Those crumblers is what Kumble feasted on, where his top spinners would come on like a spitting cobra.

Bhajji didnt have a lethal top spinner to exploit them, he preferred the traditional slow turners that spinners do, but trouble is by the time Bhajji became our lead spinner, there were other traditional spinners like Swann, Hogg, etc. who put more revs on the ball and did better on traditional slow turners, so India started to give out flat tracks.

In anycase, Kohli cannot be ranked ahead of Sehwag.
A middle order bat who averages lower than an opener is by default worse than the opener, especially when that opener is not a specialist opener and also bats at the speed of a tornado.

Sehwag's FTB reputation, as i mentioned, is overstated. Man pretty much is excused from performing in NZ ( nobody performed in those 2 series where scores were like 120-180 in all innings of all sides), man is a success in Australia and did decently in England ( one good series + 1 bad series) and pretty much only failed in South Africa- where pretty much every batter outside of Australia & West Indies did significantly worse  there than anywhere else ( IIRC its true for all Indian, English, Pakistani, Sri Lankan & NZ batsmen. Only Aussie batsmen like Ponting, Steve Waugh, Hayden, Gillchrist and WI batsmen like Lara, Chanderpaul and Sarwan did well in South Africa compared to their career averages).

 

With Laxman its close, but i think Laxman batted against better bowling and in tougher conditions more often than Kohli, as a successful #6 like him means he is also shouldering the job of seeing off the 2nd new ball successfully ( one doesnt get to be a successful #6 in tests without the ability to see off the 2nd new ball and which is why great batsmen at #6 is rare.

Laxman and Kohli are identical averages in the middle order - Kohli is just a bit above 47 and has 9000 runs in the middle order, Laxman is just a bit above 48 and has 8000 runs in the middle order.

Yes, he has more not outs and less centuries than Kohli but that is to be expected batting most of his career at #5 and 6 behind Sehwag+Dravid+Tendulkar as opposed to batting most of your life at #3 or 4 batting behind Gambhir or Murali Vijay and Rohit.

 

Fully agreed.

 

Sehwags reputation isnt due to stats alone.

 

Dude used to struggle badly when the ball swung or seamed regardless of the country.

 

In 2004, McGrath manhandled Sehwag in India across multiple innings.

 

I prefer to put Sehwag in the flawed genius category.

 

Will make the all time Indian XI.

 

He makes all time world XI of so many experts around the globe.

 

Thats special.

[Majestic]

2002 Eng and 2003 Aus were flatties. 2001 SA he batted at 6 and that is not even a standard SA track which India faces today. No comparison in SENA between Kohli and Viru for me. Viru never made enough efforts to see off the new ball. That’s a basic requirement of a world class test opener. What he did in 2006 tour of SA was even worse and deservingly got dropped for 1.5 years.

[Majestic]

In Asia, Viru >> Kohli.

Outside Asia, Kohli >> Viru.

 

It is close but I think we have produced several great batters for Asian conditions but very few who did well outside Asia and due to Kohli’s performance in South Africa, I will rate him better than his stats. But either way, he isn’t an ATG.

 

Rest everyone can have different opinions, I can understand because there is attachment with certain players you grew up watching so I don’t have issue with that.

Edited January 2, 2025 by Majestic

[Chaos]

16 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Sehwag and Laxman only got flatties in the last 4-5 years of their career, once Kumble declined and Bhajji couldnt exploit crumbling pitches as good as Kumble could.
Dunno where this flat track is coming from- i guess from a lot of weather affected draws in the 90s, but Indian pitches through 90s to mid 2000s  = crumbling from day 3. Those crumblers is what Kumble feasted on, where his top spinners would come on like a spitting cobra.

Bhajji didnt have a lethal top spinner to exploit them, he preferred the traditional slow turners that spinners do, but trouble is by the time Bhajji became our lead spinner, there were other traditional spinners like Swann, Hogg, etc. who put more revs on the ball and did better on traditional slow turners, so India started to give out flat tracks.

In anycase, Kohli cannot be ranked ahead of Sehwag.
A middle order bat who averages lower than an opener is by default worse than the opener, especially when that opener is not a specialist opener and also bats at the speed of a tornado.

Sehwag's FTB reputation, as i mentioned, is overstated. Man pretty much is excused from performing in NZ ( nobody performed in those 2 series where scores were like 120-180 in all innings of all sides), man is a success in Australia and did decently in England ( one good series + 1 bad series) and pretty much only failed in South Africa- where pretty much every batter outside of Australia & West Indies did significantly worse  there than anywhere else ( IIRC its true for all Indian, English, Pakistani, Sri Lankan & NZ batsmen. Only Aussie batsmen like Ponting, Steve Waugh, Hayden, Gillchrist and WI batsmen like Lara, Chanderpaul and Sarwan did well in South Africa compared to their career averages).

 

With Laxman its close, but i think Laxman batted against better bowling and in tougher conditions more often than Kohli, as a successful #6 like him means he is also shouldering the job of seeing off the 2nd new ball successfully ( one doesnt get to be a successful #6 in tests without the ability to see off the 2nd new ball and which is why great batsmen at #6 is rare.

Laxman and Kohli are identical averages in the middle order - Kohli is just a bit above 47 and has 9000 runs in the middle order, Laxman is just a bit above 48 and has 8000 runs in the middle order.

Yes, he has more not outs and less centuries than Kohli but that is to be expected batting most of his career at #5 and 6 behind Sehwag+Dravid+Tendulkar as opposed to batting most of your life at #3 or 4 batting behind Gambhir or Murali Vijay and Rohit.

 

what is this book? 

[Vijy]

3 minutes ago, Majestic said:

In Asia, Viru >> Kohli.

Outside Asia, Kohli >> Viru.

 

It is close but I think we have produced several great batters for Asian conditions but very few who did well outside Asia and due to Kohli’s performance in South Africa, I will rate him better than his stats. But either way, he isn’t an ATG.

 

Rest everyone can have different opinions, I can understand because there is attachment with certain players you grew up watching so I don’t have issue with that.

If current Kohli plays for some more years outside Asia, I don't think your second statement will be valid then. I agree it is currently a reasonable statement to make.

[Muloghonto]

27 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

Fully agreed.

 

Sehwags reputation isnt due to stats alone.

 

Dude used to struggle badly when the ball swung or seamed regardless of the country.

 

In 2004, McGrath manhandled Sehwag in India across multiple innings.

 

I prefer to put Sehwag in the flawed genius category.

 

Will make the all time Indian XI.

 

He makes all time world XI of so many experts around the globe.

 

Thats special.

 

Bhai with Sehwag there was no tuktuk and he is test opener. he has one of two jobs to do:
a) get out with the ball at least 15 overs old

b) get out with the score at least on 50 or 100 if u r 1st or 2nd wicket, respectively.

 

Sehwag did the b) part exceedingly well and didnt really go through extended rough patches because as you said, on pitches where the ball didnt swing, he was GOD and would whack the bejeezus outta even Bumrah if he was around. Like he did to McGrath,Steyn, Anderson and everyone else at home or on the rare overseas pitch where it didnt swing much.

Yes, Sehwag isnt your man for swinging greentops against an ATG attack, but even then, Sehwag's style means he will give u at least a century every 10 innings in even those conditions, which is like what Kohli is doing now, minus the absolute God status batting on Sehwag on any pitches without much swing.
Sehwag, as he showed in Australia, handled bouncy pitches quite well, provided there was no swing to go with the bounce ( as in South Africa).

As far as openers go, i cant think of one except Gavaskar who isnt a flawed genius and even then there are questions against Gavaskar wrt sustained pace battery, something he managed to avoid for most of his career as a matter of timing and trajectories involving Packer series and such.

beyond him, you would have to go back to the 'tip top posh pish' gentlemen cricket of the pre-bradman era, where bouncing the **** outta openers were not done and so you had openers like Hobbs or Suttcliffe piling on the runs to find an opener who is as spotless in stats.
 

Anyways, yes, i agree that Sehwag is a flawed genius, but in the 1950-present times, i cant think of very many contenders to partner Gavaskar in an ATG lineup and of them Sehwag is definitely one of them.

So Kohli cannot be compared to Sehwag.

People also forget what Sehwag centuries usually meant - it meant that the team is at 150/2 with Sehwag not out at lunch on day1. With Tendy+Laxy+Gangu still to come. That...is crazy.

To me, Sehwag is a must in an Indian team, if not as an opener, then automatic in the middle order because how can u leave out a middle order dude who opened and averaged 50 with 8000+ runs while never having opened in domestic cricket, in an era where the two Ws, the two Cs, Donald,Steyn, Murali,Warne,Pollock,etc. prowled around. Not an easy feat to do - even opening against SL was not exactly a joke coz they had Vaas - a guy who'd have you for dinner if you didnt take him seriously and tried to hit him outta the attack.
Opening back then didnt have very many free runs and in Sehwag's era, pretty much his only peers are also Hayden & Graeme Smith, with Cook still being a baccha by the time Sehwag retires.

That is still pretty elite company for openers.

 

I would have loved to see Sehwag in his prime in the middle order, even in swinging and bouncing pitches of South Africa, come in when the ball is 30-40 overs old and behind Rahul and Sachu. That.......would've been massacre par supreme given what Sehwag did to old balls even on swinging/seaming pitches.

 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

37 minutes ago, Majestic said:

In Asia, Viru >> Kohli.

Outside Asia, Kohli >> Viru.

 

It is close but I think we have produced several great batters for Asian conditions but very few who did well outside Asia and due to Kohli’s performance in South Africa, I will rate him better than his stats. But either way, he isn’t an ATG.

 

Rest everyone can have different opinions, I can understand because there is attachment with certain players you grew up watching so I don’t have issue with that.

Veeru is an ATG opener. Kohli isnt an ATG bat in tests.
You cannot directly compare middle order bat and opener in stats vs the new ball on swinging & seaming conditions. Because seeing the brand new ball every single time vs coming in at least one third of the time when the ball is already 10 overs old makes a HUGE difference.
But yes, South Africa performance is a huge badge of honour for Kohli and pretty much South Africa & Australia are the only places he's done well where he is in the convo. Otherwise no. Kohli is no great shakes in England or west indies or new zealand either.

 

I think the intangiables also favour Sehwag due to his blitzkreig scoring rate - having a mid 80s strike rate for a test opener who averages 50+ is just insane. That also has to be factored in- Sehwag didnt tuk tuk when he got big scores, his tuk tuks are almost always low scores because he took test batting seriously and didnt go blam from 1st over itself like early days Jayasurya or Kaluwitharana.

 

Either way, i cannot see how Kohli can be rated overall as a better test batter than Sehwag.

A middle order guy who averages lower than an opener is almost never rated better than the opener, even if the opener fails against some fast bowling units that he is supposed to take care of, such as Hayden vs the West Indies.

[sensible-indian]

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

Bhai with Sehwag there was no tuktuk and he is test opener. he has one of two jobs to do:
a) get out with the ball at least 15 overs old

b) get out with the score at least on 50 or 100 if u r 1st or 2nd wicket, respectively.

 

Sehwag did the b) part exceedingly well and didnt really go through extended rough patches because as you said, on pitches where the ball didnt swing, he was GOD and would whack the bejeezus outta even Bumrah if he was around. Like he did to McGrath,Steyn, Anderson and everyone else at home or on the rare overseas pitch where it didnt swing much.

Yes, Sehwag isnt your man for swinging greentops against an ATG attack, but even then, Sehwag's style means he will give u at least a century every 10 innings in even those conditions, which is like what Kohli is doing now, minus the absolute God status batting on Sehwag on any pitches without much swing.
Sehwag, as he showed in Australia, handled bouncy pitches quite well, provided there was no swing to go with the bounce ( as in South Africa).

As far as openers go, i cant think of one except Gavaskar who isnt a flawed genius and even then there are questions against Gavaskar wrt sustained pace battery, something he managed to avoid for most of his career as a matter of timing and trajectories involving Packer series and such.

beyond him, you would have to go back to the 'tip top posh pish' gentlemen cricket of the pre-bradman era, where bouncing the **** outta openers were not done and so you had openers like Hobbs or Suttcliffe piling on the runs to find an opener who is as spotless in stats.
 

Anyways, yes, i agree that Sehwag is a flawed genius, but in the 1950-present times, i cant think of very many contenders to partner Gavaskar in an ATG lineup and of them Sehwag is definitely one of them.

So Kohli cannot be compared to Sehwag.

People also forget what Sehwag centuries usually meant - it meant that the team is at 150/2 with Sehwag not out at lunch on day1. With Tendy+Laxy+Gangu still to come. That...is crazy.

To me, Sehwag is a must in an Indian team, if not as an opener, then automatic in the middle order because how can u leave out a middle order dude who opened and averaged 50 with 8000+ runs while never having opened in domestic cricket, in an era where the two Ws, the two Cs, Donald,Steyn, Murali,Warne,Pollock,etc. prowled around. Not an easy feat to do - even opening against SL was not exactly a joke coz they had Vaas - a guy who'd have you for dinner if you didnt take him seriously and tried to hit him outta the attack.
Opening back then didnt have very many free runs and in Sehwag's era, pretty much his only peers are also Hayden & Graeme Smith, with Cook still being a baccha by the time Sehwag retires.

That is still pretty elite company for openers.

 

I would have loved to see Sehwag in his prime in the middle order, even in swinging and bouncing pitches of South Africa, come in when the ball is 30-40 overs old and behind Rahul and Sachu. That.......would've been massacre par supreme given what Sehwag did to old balls even on swinging/seaming pitches.

 

 

 

 

Cook, Graeme Smith, Murali Vijay (For a short period of time) were all steady openers.

 

Solid players who could perform in all conditions. 

 

Many more too if we dig in.

 

But Sehwag carried magic.

 

Prime Cook is as good an opener as any in the history of the game.

 

His body of work is immense. Carrying 2 of the most high profile series wins as opener (mind boggling achievement if you think about it).

Edited January 2, 2025 by sensible-indian

[Vijy]

19 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

 

Cook, Graeme Smith, Murali Vijay (For a short period of time) were all steady openers.

 

Solid players who could perform in all conditions. 

 

Many more too if we dig in.

 

But Sehwag carried magic.

 

Prime Cook is as good an opener as any in the history of the game.

 

His body of work is immense. Carrying 2 of the most high profile series wins as opener (mind boggling achievement if you think about it).

not really, even if we exclude pre-WW2 openers. likes of Hutton, Gavaskar, Barry Richards (who I saw) are clearly superior to him. And there are some others who were as good, if not more, than him: boycott, graeme smith, hayden, etc. even sehwag, anwar, langer, etc ended up with comparable/better overall records.

 

Cook's 2011 ashes came on very flat pitches (Oz pitches were particularly flat in 2011-2016, as seen from everyone's inflated avgs), and we saw that he struggled in general vs pace + bounce. he was great in SC conditions for sure.

Edited January 2, 2025 by Vijy

[R!TTER]

1 hour ago, Majestic said:

Kohli has done special things in SA vs SA pacers on those bowling paradise and that to me forces me to rate him just above him. But neither ATG.

He hasn't done anything special anywhere! He had the chance to win us series in SA/Eng & yes Oz back in 2018 & yet we just won the lone series vs Smith/Warner less Oz thanks mainly to Pujara! He choked consistently even in small chases, be it in SA/Eng or even in India on tough pitches. The only time he exceeded expectations, for me, was the 2014 Adelaide test & even there he choked royally  

 

As for opener vs middle order/needless to say opening even in that era was harder than the situation BRat came in most of the times, the only factor that gives a slight edge to him is DRS.

Edited January 2, 2025 by R!TTER

[Lord]

1 hour ago, Majestic said:

There was a short period where they did well. I don’t see Jadeja performing as much with bat anymore. Tough pitch and he gets out.

 

Anyways, Sehwag in Asia is beast no debate there.

 

In SENA, he should have done better for the era he batted. Kohli has done special things in SA vs SA pacers on those bowling paradise and that to me forces me to rate him just above him. But neither ATG.

 

5 years is enough time. Only Ashwin averages less but has one more ton. Pant,Rohit,Axar,Jadeja all did better

 

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

In SA sure Kohli wins it. Overall considering the SR, Sehwag shades it imo. VVS is roughly equal as he has similar average despite batting down and many clutch knocks.

 

 

[Vijy]

3 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

5 years is enough time. Only Ashwin averages less but has one more ton. Pant,Rohit,Axar,Jadeja all did better

 

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

In SA sure Kohli wins it. Overall considering the SR, Sehwag shades it imo. VVS is roughly equal as he has similar average despite batting down and many clutch knocks.

 

 

one feature of the above link is the poor 100 conversion rate for most batters barring Gill  (rohit also did well, but has weaker avg)

[Lord]

1 minute ago, Vijy said:

one feature of the above link is the poor 100 conversion rate for most batters barring Gill  (rohit also did well, but has weaker avg)

 

Pant has 3 90s too. We must consider that we are into the tail quickly almost every 2nd innings.

[Vijy]

3 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

Pant has 3 90s too. We must consider that we are into the tail quickly almost every 2nd innings.

even so, those knocks could/should have been converted to even bigger innings. ditto for jaiswal. lots of 70s/80s IIRC

[Texan]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Sehwag and Laxman only got flatties in the last 4-5 years of their career, once Kumble declined and Bhajji couldnt exploit crumbling pitches as good as Kumble could.
Dunno where this flat track is coming from- i guess from a lot of weather affected draws in the 90s, but Indian pitches through 90s to mid 2000s  = crumbling from day 3. Those crumblers is what Kumble feasted on, where his top spinners would come on like a spitting cobra.

Bhajji didnt have a lethal top spinner to exploit them, he preferred the traditional slow turners that spinners do, but trouble is by the time Bhajji became our lead spinner, there were other traditional spinners like Swann, Hogg, etc. who put more revs on the ball and did better on traditional slow turners, so India started to give out flat tracks.

In anycase, Kohli cannot be ranked ahead of Sehwag.
A middle order bat who averages lower than an opener is by default worse than the opener, especially when that opener is not a specialist opener and also bats at the speed of a tornado.

Sehwag's FTB reputation, as i mentioned, is overstated. Man pretty much is excused from performing in NZ ( nobody performed in those 2 series where scores were like 120-180 in all innings of all sides), man is a success in Australia and did decently in England ( one good series + 1 bad series) and pretty much only failed in South Africa- where pretty much every batter outside of Australia & West Indies did significantly worse  there than anywhere else ( IIRC its true for all Indian, English, Pakistani, Sri Lankan & NZ batsmen. Only Aussie batsmen like Ponting, Steve Waugh, Hayden, Gillchrist and WI batsmen like Lara, Chanderpaul and Sarwan did well in South Africa compared to their career averages).

 

With Laxman its close, but i think Laxman batted against better bowling and in tougher conditions more often than Kohli, as a successful #6 like him means he is also shouldering the job of seeing off the 2nd new ball successfully ( one doesnt get to be a successful #6 in tests without the ability to see off the 2nd new ball and which is why great batsmen at #6 is rare.

Laxman and Kohli are identical averages in the middle order - Kohli is just a bit above 47 and has 9000 runs in the middle order, Laxman is just a bit above 48 and has 8000 runs in the middle order.

Yes, he has more not outs and less centuries than Kohli but that is to be expected batting most of his career at #5 and 6 behind Sehwag+Dravid+Tendulkar as opposed to batting most of your life at #3 or 4 batting behind Gambhir or Murali Vijay and Rohit.

 

Sehwag >>> Kohli

 

In addition to what you have mentioned, the impact of Sehwag's innings was multifold. The breakneck pace at which he scored put the opposition bowlers on the backfoot and enabled MO batters to pile on the misery and provided ample time for our bowlers to bowl out opposition twice.

 

Second point that is largely ignored: Sehwag was one of the most destructive batters against spin that we have ever seen. It is a very underrated skill since it was assumed at the time that all Indian batsmen are good against spin.

 

But as we can see in recent Indian batsmen and Kohli in particular, many are inept at playing even low quality spinners like Ajaz Patel and Mitchell Santner. Sehwag had to deal with Warne, Murali and Saqlain and he dismantled all of them. His double hundred in  SL (Galle) was a gem. His triple hundred in Pak v/s Shoaib and Saqlain enabled us to win our first ever Test match in Pak in 50 years. His hammering of England in the 4th innings in India enabled us to chase a big total, which we struggled to do until then.

 

==

 

Laxman >>> Kohli

 

Here as well, Laxman is significantly superior in playing spin bowlers. I mean it is not even a comparison. Laxman also played many impactful innings with the tail in helping save/win matches.

 

Laxman had weaknesses while playing in swinging conditions, but so also does Kohli. We have not seen any batsman get out fishing ball outside 8th stump line as much as Kohli has. Also Laxman's average is affected due to being constantly shuttled up and down the order. As you have rightly pointed out, excluding his numbers as an opener, Laxman actually averages more than Kohli and he faced better quality bowlers.

 

 

[vvvslaxman]

1 hour ago, Majestic said:

2002 Eng and 2003 Aus were flatties. 2001 SA he batted at 6 and that is not even a standard SA track which India faces today. No comparison in SENA between Kohli and Viru for me. Viru never made enough efforts to see off the new ball. That’s a basic requirement of a world class test opener. What he did in 2006 tour of SA was even worse and deservingly got dropped for 1.5 years.

 

Sehwag had one way. He had the license to do that because he had a strong middle order. I am sure he could have statpadded if he had really wanted. He had reasonable defensive technique. But then it is not sehwag. I didn't mind his failures there. There was one series in 2002/03 both Tests and ODI in NZ where every tom, dick harry medium pacer looked threatening on those drop in pitches. India lost 0-2 test series. And in Odis we lost 2-5. Nobody scored 50 in that ODI series from both sides. But Sehwag made 2 centuries. His game is about seeing the ball hitting it. Mere mortals would miss those balls. He was good enough to edge them unfortunately. I think he is better than the stats show.  But i woul not want him to change anything in his career if we have to revisit.