Areas where Kohli is better than Tendulkar as a player.

[SUMO]

31 minutes ago, Vijy said:

Yes, but BCCI will prob not arrange matches, and even if they do, will 2nd second string team (like in ODIs).

then lets go to UAE 
will have 2-2 days first inning from both sides 

[velu]

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

 

[Mariyam]

1 hour ago, Sajid_Rana said:

Kohli dont encourages the children to smoke like Tendulkar did in 90s by doing ads for cigarettes.

Which ads are you talking about?

 

See this: http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report-sachin-tendulkar-turns-down-record-rs20-crore-a-year-offer-to-endorse-liqour-brand-1479578

 

In the 96 World Cup, Wills (ITC) was our major sponsor. But I don't think Sachin did any advert for them.

Edited December 10, 2016 by Mariyam

[sandeep]

5 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

Which ads are you talking about?

 

See this: http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report-sachin-tendulkar-turns-down-record-rs20-crore-a-year-offer-to-endorse-liqour-brand-1479578

 

In the 96 World Cup, Wills (ITC) was our major sponsor. But I don't think Sachin did any advert for them.

Why are you taking that envy-based mini-troll of a post seriously?  

[MCcricket]

On sheer effectiveness n contributions towards winning at crucial times, assuredness, temperament, versatility, fitness, aggression, taking on bowlers, not bowing down to pressure or records, Virat is India's greatest batsmen for me n better then Tendulkar

[sandeep]

39 minutes ago, MCcricket said:

On sheer effectiveness n contributions towards winning at crucial times, assuredness, temperament, versatility, fitness, aggression, taking on bowlers, not bowing down to pressure or records, Virat is India's greatest batsmen for me n better then Tendulkar

you left out "most pretty beard", "best selfie pose", "best facial expressions on the field" and other such non batting related categories.  You don't need to bash one player to raise another.  That's what these type of threads degenerate into.  Let's stay away from that and celebrate both these quality bats...

[MCcricket]

12 minutes ago, sandeep said:

you left out "most pretty beard", "best selfie pose", "best facial expressions on the field" and other such non batting related categories.  You don't need to bash one player to raise another.  That's what these type of threads degenerate into.  Let's stay away from that and celebrate both these quality bats...

Did you remotely see me mention anything outside the game or is this adressed to you, look at the thread title, and comparisons are based on the game n not reputation or idol worshipping.

You are bringing this to all new level n that is silliness, if you hate Virat that's your problem n we are talking cricket not his popularity in social media as you are irked about somehow

[Vijy]

18 minutes ago, sandeep said:

you left out "most pretty beard", "best selfie pose", "best facial expressions on the field" and other such non batting related categories.  You don't need to bash one player to raise another.  That's what these type of threads degenerate into.  Let's stay away from that and celebrate both these quality bats...

Kohli does have a pretty beard :) Pulls it off well

[sandeep]

Chillax dude, I got sucked in by the implication that somehow Tendy wasn't aggressive enough, or didn't take on bowlers enough, and your opinion that Virat is India's greatest test batsman.  Like I wrote earlier on this very thread, everyone's allowed their favorites, no harm done.  

[Cricketics]

When people compare Kohli to only Tendulkar, it is baffling that they have already forgotten my favorite Dravid. Both Dravid and Tendulkar had equal impact to Indian test cricket. 

I honestly do not like comparisons, but if  Tendulkar is the greatest Indian test batsman to whom Kohli needs to be compared every time, then posters need to mention Dravid too.

 

He wasn't prodigy like Tendulkar, neither had that many centuries like Tendulkar, but his consistency to score runs was as good as Tendlya. And under pressure, you would pick him to bat for your life if it was on the line. 

 

Kohli will do well to match these two greats. All the best to him. 

[MCcricket]

Yes Dravid was one cricketer that a lot of serious cricketers would choose over Tendulkar to bat for their lives because of his technique n assuredness, though he did not have Sachin or Virats game.

Sachin was one of the most talented cricketers that I have known n followed since his days at Shards Ashram school but he was not the greatest test player in terms of batting when it mattered second innings n match winning knocks in test matches.

There could be a few reasons for it , Virat has the knack of doing that,Sachin could dominate any bowler but when chips were down he was not the same in test, Dravid n VVS to me were two more effective test match players

Edited December 10, 2016 by MCcricket

[Muloghonto]

17 hours ago, narenpande1 said:

Pressure: 

 You either crumble under pressure or allow it to effect you in a negative way OR you absorb the pressure and play to your potential (Tendulkar)  OR

you revel in pressure, get pumped up and raise your game ( Kohli ). This also shows in the fact that Kohli's individual performance has risen when captain,

whereas Tendulkar's declined.

 

Clearly, Sachin has absorbed pressure for so many years, BUT Kohli has pumped himself and raised his game under pressure.

 

Fitness:

Needless to say one has to be remarkably fit (and very lucky) to play top level sport for as long as Tendulkar.  But I think one can see that Kohli

takes fitness to a level no Indian cricketer ever has. I don't think there is a fitter cricketer today- even among Saffies, Aussies or any other team.

I dare say, should India play 10/11 test matches on avg every year, he will even break Tendulkar's test records.

 

Attitude:

 

Kohli's attitude to the competing teams is - don't FCUK with my team. He is fiercely protective and uber competetive. The greatest aspect is 

he gives a rat @$$ about his personal numbers, which are remarkable as it is.  He just wants India to win at all costs. 

Have followed both their careers closely, but also feel more reassured when Kohli is batting than Tendulkar was at his peak. Kohli looks more in control.

 

 

 

I will give you fitness, but Kohli is not better than Tendulkar in either pressure scenario or as attitude. Tendulkar's numbers in world cup elimination matches or any elimination matches in ODI was head and shoulders above his time, as well as in Tests, his record in 3rd,4th & 5th tests are exemplary, which indicates that he does well under pressure, when the series is still alive.

 

As far as attitude goes, i always prefer a player (be it cricket or otherwise), who are serene and don't let trash talk bother them, than fiery people who spend energy on the trash talk & mind games. Its always most optimal if you don't get bothered by it and shrug it off, because it always takes less effort, energy & concentration than 'giving it back'. Not to mention, no team is perfect and when you are in the business of 'giving it back', you always end up looking like a fool when the result doesnt back up your mouth (which is inevitable).

 

 

[sandeep]

^ Dravid was special in his own way - gritty hard worker who maximized his abilities.  I will always remember the Adelaide test that he won for us.  Simply brilliant in that match.  And I had the pleasure of watching him live - he carried his bat in the 1st innings with a 100 and then walked out to open when India followed on - this was in 2011.  What I remember from watching him live as opposed to on TV - the guy was supremely focused, even when he was at the non-striker's end.  Constantly shadow batting, watching the ball, just switched on, and in a zone of his own.  

[Muloghonto]

Also, looking at 'first and second innings' is too simplistic. 

Pitches in England & New zealand seam a lot less today than in the 80s & 90s, pitches in Australia & West Indies have a lot less pace and bounce than the 80s & 90. South African pitches too have slowed down a bit and have a bit less seam & bounce, but not as precipetously as the other nations mentioned.

This is why, when you look at the batsmen of the 80s & 90s, many of them have better 2nd innings numbers than 1st innings numbers- because pitches would start off blazing quick/bouncy/seaming & then ease up by the third day. 

From the early 2000s, the pitches are the other way round- flatter wickets are easier to bat on first, because there isn't too much seam, bounce & pace, but as the pitch deteriorates, it takes more spin, uneven bounce & you can cut the ball more as a pacer. This is why most batsmen of the late 90s onwards, have far better 1st innings stats than 2nd innings stats. 

Not because batsmen of the 70s-80s were all better pressure players than the ones of the 90s-2000s or vice versa.

 

[Vijy]

4 minutes ago, sandeep said:

^ Dravid was special in his own way - gritty hard worker who maximized his abilities.  I will always remember the Adelaide test that he won for us.  Simply brilliant in that match.  And I had the pleasure of watching him live - he carried his bat in the 1st innings with a 100 and then walked out to open when India followed on - this was in 2011.  What I remember from watching him live as opposed to on TV - the guy was supremely focused, even when he was at the non-striker's end.  Constantly shadow batting, watching the ball, just switched on, and in a zone of his own.  

A wonderful batsman from our golden era of batsmanship.

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, sandeep said:

^ Dravid was special in his own way - gritty hard worker who maximized his abilities.  I will always remember the Adelaide test that he won for us.  Simply brilliant in that match.  And I had the pleasure of watching him live - he carried his bat in the 1st innings with a 100 and then walked out to open when India followed on - this was in 2011.  What I remember from watching him live as opposed to on TV - the guy was supremely focused, even when he was at the non-striker's end.  Constantly shadow batting, watching the ball, just switched on, and in a zone of his own.  

The one knock against Dravid, is that against the best of the best, aka Australia and South Africa of his era, he was merely 'very good' and not great, whereas Tendulkar utterly dominated the Aussies & had better stats than most against Saffies. 

Also, i don't agree that Dravid had a better technique than Tendulkar, because while there was little to pick and choose between Tendulkar & Dravid in technical terms on pacy/bouncy/seaming wickets, Tendulkar was a whole league ahead than Dravid on crumbling spinning wickets or slow, sticky spin wickets. Its because Tendulkar had a superior eye than Dravid and he often neutralized the spinner's rhythm by stepping out and lofting the well, while Dravid was a lot more 'play from the crease' kind of guy- which is always an uphill battle against spinners on spinning wickets, no matter how good you are - which is also reflected in their stats.

 

[sandeep]

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

The one knock against Dravid, is that against the best of the best, aka Australia and South Africa of his era, he was merely 'very good' and not great, whereas Tendulkar utterly dominated the Aussies & had better stats than most against Saffies. 

Also, i don't agree that Dravid had a better technique than Tendulkar, because while there was little to pick and choose between Tendulkar & Dravid in technical terms on pacy/bouncy/seaming wickets, Tendulkar was a whole league ahead than Dravid on crumbling spinning wickets or slow, sticky spin wickets. Its because Tendulkar had a superior eye than Dravid and he often neutralized the spinner's rhythm by stepping out and lofting the well, while Dravid was a lot more 'play from the crease' kind of guy- which is always an uphill battle against spinners on spinning wickets, no matter how good you are - which is also reflected in their stats.

 

Agree on both counts.  Dravid's game was attrition based - his scores were built on his defense - he didn't quite have the scoring range that the great bats do.  And he went through a long phase where he kept failing against Aussies who figured out and bottled up his scoring areas.  Look at his away numbers in Aus before that 2003 tour, they are pretty bad.  And a huge contrast to Tendy.  To Dravid's credit, he expanded his scoring range, and got over that hurdle successfully.  

 

And claiming Dravid was technically better than Tendy actually doesn't have much basis in fact.  Dravid was explicitly more focused on technique and defense - that doesn't mean that his technique was better -  Tendy was equally good if not better and could focus on the next level of batting, which is attacking the opposition etc.  

 

The other thing that colors perception favorably in Dravid's favor is that his 'peak' performances as a batsman came during a time when Tendy was past his prime.  Its another thing that even past his prime, Tendy still managed to be extremely effective and successful.  Most batsmen don't manage to extend that 'past-prime' phase more than a couple of seasons - Tendy was good enough to extend it for a decade.  Even if you chop off the last couple of years claiming he stuck around "too long".  

 

[Muloghonto]

^^

Not to mention, Tendulkar's prime was longer than most people's careers. 

Yes, he declined precipitously in the last couple of years and took 2-3 years to find his feet in international cricket, but he basically averaged 60+ from 92 to 2010. 

[goose]

These Kohli qualities you list, though admirable, are not exactly unattainable, anyone here might have them or work towards them. 

[kira]

Lol only kids who have never seen sachin's peak in the late 90s can rate Kohli above Sachin, I pity you kids, you missed the prime of GOAT