Kohli's performance v team performance

[Trichromatic]

Whenever Kohli scores 50+ runs, India manages to score 300+ or 30 runs per wicket 80% of time, 350 or 35 rpw - 72% of time. It shows the importance and influence of his innings.

 

Kohli	India
51	262/5
52	482
54	174/6
57	495
58	438
63	242/9
67	366
67*	499
75	171
78	393
88	267/5
96	421
103	375
103	326/9
103	353
105	166/3
107	572
115	444
116	272
119	280
141	315
147	475
169	465
200	566/9
211	465/4

[Forever Indian]

Well, it could also mean that Kohli scores mostly on easier wickets 

[BeautifulGame]

Or that conditions are more easier (or flat) whenever he has scored big .

I don't want to nitpick because it was a quality innings but that stat is meaningless .

Can u also put the figures for our bowlers also when Kohli have scored big ? Would point a much clear picture .

[Trichromatic]

5 minutes ago, BeautifulGame said:

Or that conditions are more easier (or flat) whenever he has scored big .

I don't want to nitpick because it was a quality innings but that stat is meaningless .

Can u also put the figures for our bowlers also when Kohli have scored big ? Would point a much clear picture .

Well it's not necessarily big scores, just relating his 50+ scores with team scores. This includes his 12 half centuries along with his 13 big scores.

[express bowling]

14 minutes ago, Forever Indian said:

Well, it could also mean that Kohli scores mostly on easier wickets 

Seeing from  that  list  that   10  out of  his 17 scores of 75+ have  been made when his  team has scored less than 400.

 

7  out of his  13 centuries have been scored with his team scoring less than 400.

 

So, that fact is not correct.

Edited October 9, 2016 by express bowling

[Forever Indian]

5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Seeing from  that  list  that   10  out of  his 17 scores of 75+ have  been made when his  team has scored less than 400.

 

7  out of his  13 centuries have been scored with his team scoring less than 400.

 

So, that fact is not correct.

I meant that this stat doesnt provide the correct insight. For eg, a stat showing how many of his 50+ have lead to an India win would be an insightful stat.

[BeautifulGame]

Seeing from  that  list  that   10  out of  his 17 scores of 75+ have  been made when his  team has scored less than 400.

 

7  out of his  13 centuries have been scored with his team scoring less than 400.

 

So, that fact is not correct.

How many of those 75+(or 50) are when team has scored less than 300? That's what the OP referred to .

[express bowling]

4 minutes ago, BeautifulGame said:

How many of those 75+(or 50) are when team has scored less than 300? That's what the OP referred to .

One batsman scores a 100 +   and the team scores less than 300....is that very common for any batsman, especially these days   ?

[BeautifulGame]

One batsman scores a 100 +   and the team scores less than 300....is that very common for any batsman, especially these days   ?

It was about 50 not 100 the OP was

[express bowling]

15 minutes ago, BeautifulGame said:

It was about 50 not 100 the OP was

I am not talking about the OP but the really bigger knocks of 100+ and the biggish knocks of 75+.....and their co-relation to our team total.

 

When the team can't make even 400  then the pitch or the conditions  or the bowling or all  must not have been easy.

Edited October 9, 2016 by express bowling

[Forever Indian]

11 minutes ago, express bowling said:

I am not talking about the OP but the really bigger knocks of 100+ and the biggish knocks of 75+.....and their co-relation to our team total.

 

When the team can't make even 400  then the pitch or the conditions must not have been easy.

We can also say that only 5 out of his 25 Fifties have come when the team score is less than 300 (i.e the real tough conditions). In today's day and age with tests lasting an average of 4 days, 400 runs doesn't mean tough conditions.

 

As I said only scores co-relating to Wins have any meaning. Else they can be interpreted in any way.

[express bowling]

6 minutes ago, Forever Indian said:

We can also say that only 5 out of his 25 Fifties have come when the team score is less than 300 (i.e the real tough conditions). In today's day and age with tests lasting an average of 4 days, 400 runs doesn't mean tough conditions.

 

As I said only scores co-relating to Wins have any meaning. Else they can be interpreted in any way.

Matches are finishing in 4 days because batsmen are scoring faster and have lost the ability to hang on by blocking and leaving ...after playing T20s.   400+ runs in an innings are pretty common everywhere else in  the world apart from India.

Edited October 9, 2016 by express bowling

[Forever Indian]

11 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Matches are finishing in 4 days because batsmen are scoring faster and have lost the ability to hang on by blocking and leaving ...after playing T20s.   400+ runs in an innings are pretty common everywhere else in  the world apart from India.

Now, here is a useful tests stat. Out of Kohli's 13 centuries only 3 have resulted in an India win. Also Kohli averages 40 when India wins vs overall average of 46.

 

He also averages 66 in drawn tests with 5 centuries.

 

This includes both home and away. 

Edited October 9, 2016 by Forever Indian

[express bowling]

12 minutes ago, Forever Indian said:

Now, here is a useful tests stat. Out of Kohli's 13 centuries only 3 have resulted in an India win. Also Kohli averages 40 when India wins vs overall average of 46.

 

He also averages 66 in drawn tests with 5 centuries.

 

This includes both home and away. 

Won tests hardly give you a correct picture about the quality of an innings.

 

What about a batsman batting valiantly, trying to save the match for his team but  not succeeding due to lack of support from other players  OR  a batsman playing out of his skin to draw a match for his team.

 

India have lost most of their test matches and drawn some tests outside Asia between 2011 and  2015.....so, the valiant centuries and  70+  in those test matches in hostile conditions by Kohli, Rahane, Vijay, Pujara  etc. do not matter  ?

Edited October 9, 2016 by express bowling

[Forever Indian]

5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Won tests hardly give you a correct picture about the quality of an innings.

 

What about a batsman batting valiantly, trying to save the match for his team but  not succeeding due to lack of support from other players  OR  a batsman playing out of his skin to draw a match for his team.

 

India have lost most of their test matches outside Asia between 2011 and  2015.....so, the valiant centuries and  70+  in those test matches in hostile conditions by Kohli, Rahane, Vijay, Pujara  etc. do not matter  ?

Quality of an innings hardly matters if it doesn't lead to a Win. And if you are to look at quality of innings in each case then none of the stats will ever matter.

 

End of the day Kohli is not yet a match winner in tests whether at home or away. Pujara and Vijay are match winners at home. Away no one is a match winner in this team ofcourse.

[express bowling]

1 minute ago, Forever Indian said:

Quality of an innings hardly matters if it doesn't lead to a Win. And if you are to look at quality of innings in each case then none of the stats will ever matter.

 

End of the day Kohli is not yet a match winner in tests whether at home or away. Pujara and Vijay are match winners at home. Away no one is a match winner in this team ofcourse.

Cricket is a team game and it is won  by 11 players, not 1 or 2.

 

In test matches,  if your bowlers can't take 20 wickets, it is immaterial what the batsman does.

 

 

[Forever Indian]

Just now, express bowling said:

Cricket is a team game and it is won  by 11 players, not 1 or 2.

 

In test matches,  if your bowlers can't take 20 wickets, it is immaterial what the batsman does.

 

 

Agreed, but batsmen will also need to score runs to win. Else we can go with a batting lineup of Rohit Sharmas, Rainas, Yuvis, etc. and still win bcos of bowlers.

[Forever Indian]

Also it comes back to my point that if our bowlers are unable to take wickets then it has to be flattish track as our bowlers bowl really well when conditions favour spin or on green decks. It is the flat pitches when we are toothless.

[express bowling]

4 minutes ago, Forever Indian said:

Agreed, but batsmen will also need to score runs to win. Else we can go with a batting lineup of Rohit Sharmas, Rainas, Yuvis, etc. and still win bcos of bowlers.

Don't dispute that.

 

Thing is, we have bowlers who can win us at home. Now, those batsmen who can score at home end up scoring in winning matches and those batters who can score away don't end up scoring in winning matches because our bowlers can't  take  20 wickets out of Asia.

 

It is more a case of  some of our batters' natural ability to bat on pitches syncing  with where the bowlers can take wickets too.

 

Reality is.....we don't have any all-conditions batters apart from Vijay and even he is not that consistent as he averages just 40 in test matches.

 

Stereotypically , scoring runs away from home is actually held in much higher esteem for all teams as those conditions are alien to them.....and Rahane, Kohli and Vijay have succeeded in that.

[velu]

whenever kohli scores a double century , we score more than 200 ..

/vibash