Where Kohli is better than Tendulkar

[Ultimate_Game]

Read a decent article today on cricinfo which reflects some of the folks' thoughts and opinions.

A note to the folks in general and Tendulkar fans in particular: Read the whole article. The author hasn't said Kohli is a better overall batsman than Tendulkar. He has merely focused on one particular aspect of batting in shorter formats.

Here's the link to the article with the article quoted below...
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/986665.html

I have, of late, but wherefore I know not, been writing a few pieces for ESPNcricinfo. So I am, I suppose, becoming in some very small way a bit of a cricket writer. But I have a long way to go before I can call myself a member of the club. There are trials to endure, secret handshakes to learn, miles to go before I can lunch with Dobell and Kimber, speak lightly of Gideon and Harsha, before I can - oh, be still, my beating heart! - DM Derek Pringle.

Above all, there is one test, and it isn't for the faint-hearted.

If you ever want to spook a press box, ask if anyone in it has ever written a piece not completely adoring of Sachin Tendulkar. Faces turn suddenly pale, knuckles whiten with the strain. Grown men flinch, call hurriedly for double whiskies, down them as glasses shake in trembling hands.

Silence falls. There are thousand-yard stares, twitching lips. They are remembering. And what they remember is clearly something they would much rather forget…

But faint heart never won the prize, and I would really like to DM Derek Pringle. So, here goes.

Tendulkar, eh? Good player, definitely. Very good, even. One of the best ever, no question. Absolutely. Lovely chap too, by all accounts.

But, well, umm, here's just a small observation, okay?

Virat Kohli - and here I speak only of limited-overs cricket, you understand - gives you something Tendulkar never did. When Kohli bats in limited-overs cricket, he whispers into my ear: I've got this. Whatever the situation, whatever my form, however hot the opposition are: I've got this.

Often he doesn't have it. He fails, or others fail around him, and the game is lost. That's just the nature of cricket, of batting in particular, because failure is the condition of batting. But the aura is consistent.

Tendulkar, at least to this observer, never gave off that particular vibe. He gave off many others, and is responsible for many of the best cricket-watching experiences of my life. But he never, to my eyes, gave off that almost chilling aura of stone-cold certainty. That, I think, is the crucial difference. Tendulkar gave you hope. As long as he was there, the match wasn't done. But Kohli gives you certainty. When he comes in, the match is done.

There are others with that Kohli-esque aura; Michael Bevan and MS Dhoni spring immediately to mind. But Bevan and Dhoni played the role of finisher, where it's much easier to be Mr Wolf. Not because the task is easy, but because the opportunity is frequent. That's why I want to compare Tendulkar with Kohli; why I think Kohli is remarkable. It's a lot harder for someone in the top three to make you think: he's going to fix this.

The question is, why? I mean, Tendulkar was objectively, and by some distance, a better batsman than Kohli. Heck, he probably still is. So it's not to do with quality, which would have been the obvious explanation. What then?

I think one part of the explanation is that Tendulkar and Kohli are different kinds of batsmen. Tendulkar, in fact, was himself different kinds of batsmen over his career, but none of those kinds was conducive to certainty.

In the first part of his career - it saddens me that some people forget this part and only remember the second or third part - he was basically a trouble starter, a punkin' instigator, an extremely twisted firestarter. His one-day career really began in Auckland in 1994, and though obviously he played different kinds of innings, that was the template. He was a tightrope artist. His genius meant he often made it to the other side - but the nature of his genius also meant that you were never sure whether he would or not (this World Cup game, for instance, illustrates both the genius and the tightrope).

As must happen with all adolescent phases, Tendulkar gradually grew out of the punk. He got a steady job, ascended the company ladder at a dizzying rate, settled into a comfortable middle age. Not for him any longer the mad incandescence of youth. He was no worse, on some scales even better, but he was different. He became a kind of cricket supercomputer, processing match situations, conditions, his own form, and doing what he thought all those factors together demanded. He became, in a word, a reactive cricketer.

He was a supremely successful one. But what this meant is that he was no longer imposing his will on the game (to repeat, I'm generalising, and there are naturally exceptions). He was letting the game determine his will. Which is an intelligent thing to do, but it means that you are also in some sense at the game's mercy, its servant and not its master.

Kohli is never a game's servant. He too is a supreme calculator, but the calculations are subtly and crucially different. They are not: what does this situation demand, but rather: how do I change the situation to suit my demands?

Part of this is down to temperament and personality, no doubt, but part is also down to technique and to a changing understanding of batsmanship. Kohli had the good fortune to be developing as T20 grew, and he has benefited from the pressure of having to learn to score quicker while retaining control. Indeed, he attributes his recent consistency in T20 cricket to his decision to stop worrying about hitting sixes, to be content with fours, because they are more natural to him, because they give him better control. He's just - and this is heresy, I know - more able to ruthlessly control a match, simply because he understands batting and risk differently, because batting and risk are for Kohli not what they were for Tendulkar.

A second part of the explanation has nothing to do with either Tendulkar or Kohli, but has to do with me, with us.

Basically the Indian fan has stopped expecting the worst. I'm probably the last generation that still does - in the 2011 final, after Tendulkar got out, I couldn't watch for an hour, so convinced was I that it was game over. But even I'm changing, and fans younger than me never had to change, they seem to expect success and consider it their entitlement. This expectation is, I think, a necessary condition for the aura Kohli gives off. He both reflects and sustains that expectation, is simultaneously cause and effect of a growing confidence (that sometimes spills over into ugly arrogance).

And at least on the cricket field, no one has contributed more to creating that confidence than Tendulkar. So while Kohli has in a certain sense gone beyond him, he has only done so because of him. If he sees so far, it's because he's standing on the shoulders of a giant.

[New guy]

As teams changes and Dhoni etc disappear, I would like to see if Kohli still continues the same way or is he forced to change the way he plays. Because that is what happened to Sachin

[maniac]

As much as I think kohli is clutch and the best indian cricketer right now, in lois kohli plays for the top (1-3) odi/t20 team in the world.

not kohlis fault but atleast 3 teams from sachins era have been in spiral and almost hit rock bottom- srilanka, West Indies and Pak- then and now

zimbabwe was a very competitive unit in the 90s

so different eras but if kohli finishes even a 1000 odi runs below sachin at the end of his career given his t20 exploits I will hands down agree he is the greatest loi batsman of all time.

now test matches that's a different beast altogether and virat has a long way to go there.

too early to make such claims

but if I was a betting man I would bet kohli to overtake sachin as indias greatest batsman of all time.

as far as world cricket goes competition is heating up and hope he leaves behind competition just like sachin did.

Root,Willamson,Smith and Warner are more than a handful and I picked these and not the likes of Cook,Rohit etc because they are really good at 1/2 formats of the game.

[vvvslaxman]

Yea Tendulkar failed at the lats hurdle few times.  Even in Tests he bottled few times when opportunity presented itself to take the game away from the opposition. I remember in SA when India was had a golden chance to register a series win, he completely bottled against the debutant Paul Harris and India went on to lose the test and the series.  Another one was against Pakistan in Bangalore. India could have won the test series if he had been little more assertive. He just froze against pakistan spinners. 19 runs 80 odd balls with a life. He was ultra cautious and nervous .  This was after Viru's run out . VIru was flawless as long as he was out there. We bottled there. He has played some outstanding knocks in his life. Against Pakistan in chennai, he was in pain. SO we cannot blame him. He is a great batsman. But i never expected him to pull magical wins. Those wins stick in your memory. Tendulkar despite all great knocs his desert storm is considered to be one of the greatest knock. Because he pulled a magic there.

[Texan]

Good writeup and I am glad someone has written about it. Though author seems almost apologetic lest he faces the wrath of the Tendulkar fan. 

 

That is the problem,with sports journalism in India. Nobody ever had the guts to criticize Tendulkar. Only perhaps Manjrekar wrote some articles where he was critical of Sachin. People like Harsha Bhogle and all other sports journalists just rejoiced singing laurels in his praise and made him a Godlike figure. I do think Sachin was an extraordinarily good batsman, a modern great. But he was certainly incapable of finishing matches the way Lara did and Kohli does now. 

[Gambit]

Kohli also needs to step up in finals/knockouts. Out of 12 tournament knockouts/finals (ODIs) he's played in, he averages just 24 with 1 50. His Adelaide knock was similar to Tendulkar's Chennai knock. Took team to the brink and then got out.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Gambit

[TheWall]

Both r different..

[Sonix768]

Based on pure stats and numbers you may compare but the actual greatness can't be measured between these two.

Different era.. Different team mates.. Different demands.. Different quality of opposition bowlers.. Different quality of pitches..

Both are originals..

 

[Lala]

where I see kholi is better than tendulkar that kholi is a team player who thinks about full contribution to win for country and do not think individual milestones. tendulkar is selfish where going for centuries at the expense of team's victory. As an opener 100 runs in 120 balls are not expected in tendulkar which shows his 17+ centuries kept india losing. on the other hand when kholi scored a century india's winning percentage is very high. Famous example is Tendulkar's Century against Bangladesh in 2012 Asia Cup costed the series where Trophy was almost in India's hand. As far as I concern Kholi is much better batsman than 10dullcar.

[goose]

It's interesting how time and again we take a batsman's limited overs success and allow it to invade our perception (which by the way is totally valid after all perception is reality) of a batsman regardless of format. Yet long after the event we tend to break down careers by format in our meticulous quest to properly rank all time greats. When a player is deemed to 'just' need to improve his numbers to catch up with our hopes and perception of that player then he has already lost the battle. Kohli might, just might, be the next Ponting that's about it.

 

 

[adi B]

Wont compare till another 3 years

[Asim]

at "Match Winning" knocks... Already ahead...!!!

[goose]

i found a thread by @Ultimate_Game in praise of kohli. been looking for ages.

[Ultimate_Game]

10 minutes ago, goose said:

i found a thread by @Ultimate_Game in praise of kohli. been looking for ages.

 

2016 Kohli and 2025 Kohli are two different things.

 

At least it goes on to prove I'm not a "blind hater" which Kohli fanboys like to claim. I base my opinions based on performance. If our selectors had the same skill we wouldn't have lost to this Aussie team 

[singhvivek141]

13 minutes ago, goose said:

i found a thread by @Ultimate_Game in praise of kohli. been looking for ages.

@Ultimate_Game Bhai ye kya hai. 

[Ultimate_Game]

Just now, singhvivek141 said:

@Ultimate_Game Bhai ye kya hai. 

 

Bhai yeh 2016 ka hai 

[singhvivek141]

2 minutes ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Bhai yeh 2016 ka hai 

Lol...Bachpan ki Galtiyaan 

[Ultimate_Game]

5 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

Lol...Bachpan ki Galtiyaan 

 

Tab main ek nadaan baalak tha 

[Lord]

Poor article even in 2016

 

Sachin definitely gave the vibes of certainty until he was there. 

[Bigg Brother]

10 minutes ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Bhai yeh 2016 ka hai 

I was also die hard bhakt in 2016.. guilty indeed