Placing our bets on "Test Cricket's Young Fab Four"

[OverratedSanity]

*sigh* When did I say the 50+ average counts for nothing ? Why is this so hard to understand? No one us saying Root is rubbish away from home. As you said, he's hardly played overseas. Hence remains unproven, not rubbish, but unproven overseas. Which Bravo, Kohli, Williamson, Pujara, Rahane, Smith are not.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

No one's denying any of this. But Williamson, Kohli, Rahane, Pujara , Bravo have all already got important overseas runs. On multiple occasions. That obviously a point in their favour over Root, and puts them slightly ahead of Root at the moment.

Though Root hasn't looked a complete novice and all at sea in a series like Kohli. Yes he struggled v Australia but got 180 in one series and at least managed 87 in the carnage of Adelaide in the other. Has a hyped player like Kohli ever had such a pathetic tour in all forms of the game? For all the talk of Kohli being so much better abroad he averages a massive 5 runs more than Root overseas and Root is supposed to be a bum who has done nothing. Says Kohli is feast or famine then and not that great.

 

[Adders]

*sigh* When did I say the 50+ average counts for nothing ? Why is this so hard to understand? No one us saying Root is rubbish away from home. As you said, he's hardly played overseas. Hence remains unproven, not rubbish, but unproven overseas. Which Bravo, Kohli, Williamson, Pujara, Rahane, Smith are not.

Fair enough, but you did say " puts them slightly ahead of Root at the moment"...........and I still fail to see how that can be based on 8 overseas tests when his overall average is considerably higher than most in this discussion.

And for the record, I am fully aware that you are not **** canning Root.........but I still say to put him behind those others just because he hasn't made big runs overseas yet is too harsh.

 

[Maximas]

Nah it really isn't IMO, this topic is largely about potential, and the others have proven they have it in all conditions, Root is yet to, it's not really his fault but it's fair enough if people want to wait until he's done it around the world a bit before they rate him with the rest. If you really made me give an assessment on Root looking at his game I'd probably have him with the others tbh because I certainly think he'll have success around the world but I have to see just a little bit first

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Nah it really isn't IMO, this topic is largely about potential, and the others have proven they have it in all conditions,

Kohli hasn't. He can't play a moving ball as shown in England. Not all conditions is it?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Nah it really isn't IMO, this topic is largely about potential, and the others have proven they have it in all conditions, Root is yet to, it's not really his fault but it's fair enough if people want to wait until he's done it around the world a bit before they rate him with the rest. If you really made me give an assessment on Root looking at his game I'd probably have him with the others tbh because I certainly think he'll have success around the world but I have to see just a little bit first

So it's about potential, and all you do is talk about what's proven...

 

[Maximas]

Kohli hasn't. He can't play a moving ball as shown in England. Not all conditions is it?

Well without checking the stats you could go full Jassy on all of them and probably find that kind of thing (albeit not as significant as Kohli's poorness in England) but Root is bone dry without a century overseas.

 

[Maximas]

So it's about potential, and all you do is talk about what's proven...

Admittedly the wording of my post is somewhat contradictory in that sense but I think if the discussion is about young batsmen who will 'share the no 1 batsman title over their careers' then some evidence is needed to talk about potential IMO

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Kohli hasn't. He can't play a moving ball as shown in England. Not all conditions is it?

dislike. You can't forget his efforts in South Africa because of his failures in the next two series.

 

[Flem274*]

Remember when Umar Akmal and Phil Hughes would have been in the top three of this poll?

I'm still backing Hughes to come good.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Though Root hasn't looked a complete novice and all at sea in a series like Kohli. Yes he struggled v Australia but got 180 in one series and at least managed 87 in the carnage of Adelaide in the other. Has a hyped player like Kohli ever had such a pathetic tour in all forms of the game? For all the talk of Kohli being so much better abroad he averages a massive 5 runs more than Root overseas and Root is supposed to be a bum who has done nothing. Says Kohli is feast or famine then and not that great.

Speak for yourself, but I measure potential of a young player by the highs he manages to touch, not the lows he falls to. Kohli's lone hands at Perth and Adelaide, and his hundred on day 1 at Joburg show that he has the potential to do well overseas... he also has the potential to be a walking wicket against the outswinger like he showed in England, but that's pretty irrelevant to me when judging what he's capable of. Not once in this thread have I tried to pull down Root by saying he was rubbish against Mitch, or something. Even if Root had been as bad in Australia, as Kohli was in England, I wouldn't have gone on about it.

Kohli has the following performances in his favour, which provide an indicator of his potential in tough overseasconditions:
Runs at Perth when everyone collapsed on a not-so-easy pitch
Hundred at Adelaide when everyone collapsed
Hundred in Joburg vs Steyn, Philander, Morkel + a second innings 96
Hundred against Southee, Boult in NZ (albeit when the match was all but dead)

And Root has:
An 87 in Adelaide in the midst of a collapse against MJ

Kohli's runs there don't make him a "proven" performer (agreed, that word was misleading) that gets built up over a long period, not a couple of tours. They simply show he's capable of doing it. Root's lack of runs overseas doesn't mean he's incapable of doing it. It just means he hasn't yet. So, on what basis are we supposed to say that he has more potential than Kohli overseas? His runs at home vs us and SL were awesome, but is it an indicator of his ability to play quality bowling? *** no.

One point in favour of Root is that he looks like a guy who likes to go big when he tons up, unlike Kohli who has always given it away after the landmark.

 

[GIMH]

I've never seen any top six batsmen look as bad as Kohli did this summer

 

[harsh.ag]

Were you out fishing through the entirety of the 90s English summers?

 

[Esperance]

Who is TPC I still do not understand

 

[GIMH]

Were you out fishing through the entirety of the 90s English summers?

Had I been then I probably still would have scored more runs than Kohli this summer

 

[harsh.ag]

Yeah, but in 10 summers.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, but in 10 summers.

Tbf even some of the **** we did select would have scored more than the 8 runs Kohli managed, 7 coming via edges through second slip

 

[GIMH]

Who is TPC I still do not understand

Bopara

 

[91Jmay]

Speak for yourself, but I measure potential of a young player by the highs he manages to touch, not the lows he falls to. Kohli's lone hands at Perth and Adelaide, and his hundred on day 1 at Joburg show that he has the potential to do well overseas... he also has the potential to be a walking wicket against the outswinger like he showed in England, but that's pretty irrelevant to me when judging what he's capable of. Not once in this thread have I tried to pull down Root by saying he was rubbish against Mitch, or something. Even if Root had been as bad in Australia, as Kohli was in England, I wouldn't have gone on about it.

Kohli has the following performances in his favour, which provide an indicator of his potential in tough overseasconditions:
Runs at Perth when everyone collapsed on a not-so-easy pitch
Hundred at Adelaide when everyone collapsed
Hundred in Joburg vs Steyn, Philander, Morkel + a second innings 96
Hundred against Southee, Boult in NZ (albeit when the match was all but dead)

And Root has:
An 87 in Adelaide in the midst of a collapse against MJ

Kohli's runs there don't make him a "proven" performer (agreed, that word was misleading) that gets built up over a long period, not a couple of tours. They simply show he's capable of doing it. Root's lack of runs overseas doesn't mean he's incapable of doing it. It just means he hasn't yet. So, on what basis are we supposed to say that he has more potential than Kohli overseas? His runs at home vs us and SL were awesome, but is it an indicator of his ability to play quality bowling? *** no.

One point in favour of Root is that he looks like a guy who likes to go big when he tons up, unlike Kohli who has always given it away after the landmark.

Root's debut innings in India was supremely impressive given how alien that was to him.

He also has 180 against Harris/Siddle/Pattinson/Watson which is a very good attack and at least as impressive than Kohli's ton vs Southee/Boult.

I also don't buy the idea that one hundred in a country makes you capable of anything to be honest.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Bopara

Think the C may stand for something else with him.