Areas where Kohli is better than Tendulkar as a player.

[Gambit]

22 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

Since Tendulkar's debut. I have 3 at No.1 and 3 at No.2. Tendulkar was not ahead of the pack..as is made out to be.

 

1) Tendulkar ( all round, everywhere, although he scored in Aus, only when Mcgrath was not around, when Mcgrath played, his avg was sub 35 in those matches ) 

 

1) Sangakkara ( Sangakkara, never failed anywhere, don't know a single bowler who dominated him, was a WK- captain too for a while, left with a bang, 12500 test runs @ 57 +, could have gone on for 2 more years ) 

 

1) Lara: Will go on and on once set..a little more inconsistent than Tendulkar and Sangu, but a genius in a different league

 

2) Kallis ( Some Weakness against the swinging ball, good in Aus, not great, but masterful against Indian spinners in India, like no other batsman, a bowler too )

 

2) Ponting: A bit overrated i feel, terrible in Indian conditions, but has done well in Lanka, so not BAD player of spinners necessarily.

The best player on pitches with pace and bounce. 

 

2) Dravid: All round player, no weakness whatsoever, on any pitch or condition. Except failure to dominate..or drive the pace of the innings.

 

Clearly, Tendulkar had company. He has more volume in his numbers which were a function of longevity.

 

But for all his breathtaking stroke making talent and technical mastery,  never in my following him since 1991 have I seen him give a feeling of " total control"  that he would not get out when set. Dravid gave that feeling for a while.

 

Kohli gives a feeling of Dravid's solidity with Tendulkar's stroke making ability. 

 

He has too much fire to WIN for India at ALL COSTS, it shows in his attitude.

 

Kohli will break the records of all the 6 men above, except Lara's 400 maybe

Good list but I feel Sangakarra is overrated and his away test sample size is too small to even see how good he was away from Asia.

 

Dravid's failing was averaging in mid-30s in Aus and SA combined. 

 

Regarding McGrath and Tendulkar, I believe Tendulkar averages 46 in matches against him in Australia.

 

For me, there is little to separate between Lara and Tendulkar. Ponting comes a close third. It's still early days for Kohli. Let's see how he does away from home as captain batsman.

[Vijy]

Just now, Gambit said:

Good list but I feel Sangakarra is overrated and his away test sample size is too small to even see how good he was away from Asia.

 

Dravid's failing was averaging in mid-30s in  Aus and SA combined. 

 

Regarding McGrath and Tendulkar, I believe Tendulkar averages 46 in matches against him in Australia.

 

For me, there is little to separate between Lara and Tendulkar. Ponting comes a close third. It's still early days for Kohli. Let's see how he does away from home as captain batsman.

There is little to separate between the two, but only because they are diff players. In terms of consistency across all regions and formats, no comparison really.

[narenpande1]

7 minutes ago, Gambit said:

Good list but I feel Sangakarra is overrated and his away test sample size is too small to even see how good he was away from Asia.

 

Dravid's failing was averaging in mid-30s in  Aus and SA combined. 

 

Regarding McGrath and Tendulkar, I believe Tendulkar averages 46 in matches against him in Australia.

 

For me, there is little to separate between Lara and Tendulkar. Ponting comes a close third. It's still early days for Kohli. Let's see how he does away from home as captain batsman.

 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;player_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting

 

Avg of 36.77 overall against Aus in matches involving Glenn Mcgrath. ( 9 matches ) 

 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=2;orderby=default;player_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting

 

Avg of 46.33  against Aus in  Aus in matches involving Glenn Mcgrath. ( 3 matches ) 

 

Sangakkara can only score against who he comes across..not seen a single bowler dominate him.

 

He was a dishonest prick as a sportsman but a bloody good test batter, at par with the best of his generation.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 11, 2016 by narenpande1

[randomGuy]

11 hours ago, velu said:

SRTs fitness is underrated .. though he got injury issues , he was quicker/fitter than most of the young guys in the team even at his late 30s..

 

kudos to OP..

anyway if i had created this thread i might have recived infraction or a ban

 

++ Have to agree here. Sachin was quite fit.

[Gambit]

8 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;player_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting

 

Avg of 36.77 overall against Aus in matches involving Glenn Mcgrath. ( 9 matches ) 

 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=2;orderby=default;player_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting

 

Avg of 46.33  against Aus in  Aus in matches involving Glenn Mcgrath. ( 3 matches ) 

 

Sangakkara can only score against who he comes across..not seen a single bowler dominate him.

 

He was a dishonest prick as a sportsman but a bloody good test batter, at par with the best of his generation.

 

 

 

 

So that's what I said. He averages 46 against McGrath in Australia.

 

And from what I remember v India, Sangakarra used to get out to Zaheer and Ashwin a lot.

[MechEng]

Dragon Ball Z fusion of Sachin and Virat, gives you new hybrid:

 

Sachrat Kohldulkar - greatest ever.

[sandeep]

Lara was averaging around 40 in the latter half of his career - his numbers are too dependent on some massive innings - he was nowhere consistent or reliable as Tendy.  The one thing about Lara - when he was in full flow, he would enter a zone where he could do just about whatever he wanted - but he didnt hit those high notes that often.  Pietersen was kindof like Lara to some extent.  

[SUMO]

discussion seems to be never ending whenever sachin's name come up 
legend 

[randomGuy]

Just now, SUMO said:

discussion seems to be never ending whenever sachin's name come up 
legend 

Thanks to the sentimental , delusional fans.

[Muloghonto]

Just now, randomGuy said:

Thanks to the sentimental , delusional fans.

More like thanks to people who've seen cricket through the 80s, 90s onwards. Tendulkar was on a different planet. Kohli will be the first to admit that he is nowhere close to Tendulkar. One swallow doesnt make a summer and just 1 year of domination in tests doesnt even begin to compare with 24 years, of which 19 were utterly dominant.

 

[randomGuy]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

More like thanks to people who've seen cricket through the 80s, 90s onwards. Tendulkar was on a different planet. Kohli will be the first to admit that he is nowhere close to Tendulkar. One swallow doesnt make a summer and just 1 year of domination in tests doesnt even begin to compare with 24 years, of which 19 were utterly dominant.

 

If Kohli says he's nowhere close to sachin, it says more about him than about sachin. I started watching in 90s as well btw.

Don't forget Kohli plays 3 formats plus IPL as well. plus captaincy. Plus he already won more matches for the team than sachin. He's way better than sachin. Sachin was very good but massively overrated due to sentimental value.

[kosingh]

A few ICFers considered Sachn slightly overrated even before Kohli emerged as a great. 

[sandeep]

5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

More like thanks to people who've seen cricket through the 80s, 90s onwards. Tendulkar was on a different planet. Kohli will be the first to admit that he is nowhere close to Tendulkar. One swallow doesnt make a summer and just 1 year of domination in tests doesnt even begin to compare with 24 years, of which 19 were utterly dominant.

 

There's another factor at play - not for all, but definitely for some - Tendy played so long that it became passe to be a Tendy fan.  Its more fashionable to say meh, I'm an Indian cricket fan, but I don't "worship" Tendy.  Especiallly for those that didn't watch him live at his best.

[renjith]

Sachin

Test: 51 century - 20 wins, 20 draw, 11 loss (in those matches were he got centuries)
Win %:  39.22

Top Innings

136 V PAKISTAN, CHENNAI, 1999 (akram, waqar, saqlain)
114 V AUSTRALIA, PERTH, 1992 (mcdermott, huges, reiffel, whitney)
146 V SOUTH AFRICA, CAPE TOWN, 2011 (steyn, morkel)
155* V AUSTRALIA, CHENNAI, 1998 (kasprowicz, reiffel, warne)
103* V ENGLAND, CHENNAI, 2008 (harmison, anderson, flintoff, swan, panesar)
169 V SOUTH AFRICA, CAPE TOWN, 1997 (donald, pollock, klusner, mcmillan)
193 V ENGLAND, LEEDS, 2002 (hoggard, caddick, flintoff, giles)
119 V ENGLAND, MANCHESTER, 1990 (devon malcon, fraser, chris lewis)
116 V AUSTRALIA, MELBOURNE, 1999 (mcgrath, lee, fleming, warne)
241* V AUSTRALIA, SIDNEY, 2004 (lee, gillespie, macgil)

 

Kohli

Test: 15 century, 5 wins, 5 draw, 4 loss, 1 tbd (in those matches were he got centuries)
Win %: 33.33 (1 tbd, if we win this test match, this will become 40)

Top Innings

119 V SOUTH AFRICA, NEW WANDERERS, 2013 (steyn, philander, morkel, kallis)
116 V AUSTRALIA, ADELAIDE, 2012 (harris, siddle, hilfenhaus, lyon)
115 V AUSTRALIA, ADELAIDE, 2014 (johnson, harris, siddle, marsh, lyon)
141 V AUSTRALIA, ADELAIDE, 2014 (johnson, harris, siddle, marsh, lyon)
169 V AUSTRALIA, MELBOURNE, 2014 (johnson, harris, hazlewood, watson, lyon)
147 V AUSTRALIA, SIDNEY, 2015 (starc, harris, hazlewood, watson, lyon)
105* V NEW ZEALAND, BASIN RESERVE, 2014 (boult, southee, wagner, anderson)
103 V ENGLAND, NAGPUR, 2012 (anderson, bresnan, panesar, swan)
107 V AUSTRALIA, CHENNAI 2013 (starc, pattinson, siddle, lyon)
167 V ENGLAND, VISAKHAPATANAM, 2016 (anderson, board, stokes, rashid, moen ali)
200* V ENGLAND, MUMBAI, 2016 (anderson, woakes, stokes, rashid, moen ali)

 

Kohli is only into his 5th year as a test player. So if we compare the first 5 years of both players careers, both are heads on. sachin played around 5 world class innings during that period and kohli also has similar or more number of top class innings (sachin played less number of test during his first 5 years).

 

The main factors that separates sachin from kohli imo are:

sachin has atleast 25 more world class test centuries than kohli. for example the 111 against sa at wanderers in 1992, 122 against england at edgebaston in 1996 are better than the best innings kohli has so far played but still can't find a place in the best 10 innings sachin played. there is no reason why kohli can't match that after he plays same number of matches as sachin. but until he does that its only an extrapolation.

the quality of attacks sachin faced were far better than the current ones.

the pitches were more bowler friendly than these days (just compare todays australian pitches with the ones in 90s)

the amount of pressure sachin had in the first 10 years of his career is not comparable to just kohli but to any sports person ever played in my opinion.

 

Edited December 11, 2016 by renjith

[narenpande1]

2 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

If Kohli says he's nowhere close to sachin, it says more about him than about sachin. I started watching in 90s as well btw.

Don't forget Kohli plays 3 formats plus IPL as well. plus captaincy. Plus he already won more matches for the team than sachin. He's way better than sachin. Sachin was very good but massively overrated due to sentimental value.

 

Touche !

 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

If Kohli says he's nowhere close to sachin, it says more about him than about sachin. I started watching in 90s as well btw.

Don't forget Kohli plays 3 formats plus IPL as well. plus captaincy. Plus he already won more matches for the team than sachin. He's way better than sachin. Sachin was very good but massively overrated due to sentimental value.

No, he hast won more matches for the team, since Sachin has won way, way more ODIs than Kohli has.

He isn't a better batsman than Sachin and most experts as well as long-time watchers agree on that. Kohli has good numbers in an era saturated with 50+ averages, Sachin was one of 3 to average 50+ in a decade dominated by bowlers (90s). 

There is simply no comparison. Kohli is a potential great, Tendulkar is in the extremely rare 'great of the greats' category.

 

[narenpande1]

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

No, he hast won more matches for the team, since Sachin has won way, way more ODIs than Kohli has.

He isn't a better batsman than Sachin and most experts as well as long-time watchers agree on that. Kohli has good numbers in an era saturated with 50+ averages, Sachin was one of 3 to average 50+ in a decade dominated by bowlers (90s). 

There is simply no comparison. Kohli is a potential great, Tendulkar is in the extremely rare 'great of the greats' category.

 

 

For how many years in his 24 year career was he No.1 or No.2 in the ICC ratings in tests ?

 

 

[Muloghonto]

14 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

For how many years in his 24 year career was he No.1 or No.2 in the ICC ratings in tests ?

 

 

That is largely irrelevant, since #1 ranking is more about 'feast or famine' type players than players who are consistently at an excellent level.

A score of 300,0,0 gets you a higher ICC rating than a score of 100,100,100. 
Lara scored a 4th innings 153* against McGrath, Gillespie, Warne & McGill to get #1 innings of all-time. Tendulkar scored 136 in a 4th innings against Wasim,Waqar & Saqlain and isn't even in the top 100- because at that time Pakistan didnt play enough tests to get their bowler rankings high enough to give batsmen enough points. Thats all you need to know how flawed these rankings are.

 

FYI, if you care so much about rankings, Sachin was ranked Wisden's top 5 player of the century. That is a full 100 years. Kohli isn't a top 5 player for the last 16 years of 'this century', let alone 100 years.

PS: In ODIs, Tendulkar hogged the #1 ranked player spot for longer than ANY other batsman.

 

Edited December 11, 2016 by Muloghonto

[narenpande1]

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

That is largely irrelevant, since #1 ranking is more about 'feast or famine' type players than players who are consistently at an excellent level.

A score of 300,0,0 gets you a higher ICC rating than a score of 100,100,100. 
Lara scored a 4th innings 153* against McGrath, Gillespie, Warne & McGill to get #1 innings of all-time. Tendulkar scored 136 in a 4th innings against Wasim,Waqar & Saqlain and isn't even in the top 100- because at that time Pakistan didnt play enough tests to get their bowler rankings high enough to give batsmen enough points. Thats all you need to know how flawed these rankings are.

 

FYI, if you care so much about rankings, Sachin was ranked Wisden's top 5 player of the century. That is a full 100 years. Kohli isn't a top 5 player for the last 16 years of 'this century', let alone 100 years.

PS: In ODIs, Tendulkar hogged the #1 ranked player spot for longer than ANY other batsman.

 

 

Blah ..blah ...blah..everything objective and measurable is rubbish. Only what you feel is right.

 

Cant argue

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, narenpande1 said:

 

Blah ..blah ...blah..everything objective and measurable is rubbish. Only what you feel is right.

 

Cant argue

Spoken like someone who doesnt understand the formula or method of calculating the rankings.

But tell us more about whats going on inside the heads of people you don't know and what their 'inner secrets and true motivations' are.