Virat Kohli, the greatest ODI bat ever?

[Contra]

I simply can't overlook the one rule that I feel has caused the greatest damage to the bowlers which is the 2 new balls. Reverse swing has simply been eliminated from ODI's which just kills death bowling like anything.

As far as Tendulkar v Kohli I still rate Tendulkar much higher due to the sheer longevity of his career and the immense pressure he was under for the first 10-12 years of his career even in ODI's. It was always Tendulkar vs the rest until Ganguly/Sehwag/Dravid started to find there feet in ODIs. The 90's was all Sachin and boy was it glorious.

 

[Burgey]

#TendulkarPressure is the cricketing world's #TeacherBusy. Not really a thing, but nonetheless widely discussed.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I simply can't overlook the one rule that I feel has caused the greatest damage to the bowlers which is the 2 new balls. Reverse swing has simply been eliminated from ODI's which just kills death bowling like anything.

As far as Tendulkar v Kohli I still rate Tendulkar much higher due to the sheer longevity of his career and the immense pressure he was under for the first 10-12 years of his career even in ODI's. It was always Tendulkar vs the rest until Ganguly/Sehwag/Dravid started to find there feet in ODIs. The 90's was all Sachin and boy was it glorious.

Sehwag and Yuvi actually.
Dravid never been significant in ODis .
Ganguly brought some stability, but rarely scored in required rate.
Big targets meant Tendulkar must perform.

 

[h_hurricane]

Below article from cricinfo 8 years back illustrates how awesome a batsman Viv was. Tendulkar was truly great, but Viv clearly better. If any one has come close to him it is Virat.

Stats from the Past: The best ODI batsmen from across eras | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

[_00_deathscar]

Below article from cricinfo 8 years back illustrates how awesome a batsman Viv was. Tendulkar was truly great, but Viv clearly better. If any one has come close to him it is Virat.

Stats from the Past: The best ODI batsmen from across eras | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo.com

To be fair, that methodology also shows Sachin to only be a moderate upgrade over Sehwag so...

I'd take Sachin's 45/86 over Sehwag's 35/105 any day of the week. Plus Sachin is somewhat of a unique case in that he played SO many ODIs - the difference in average between him opening and not opening is staggering - and I think 'not opening' is a good 100 or so ODIs - at that point in that chart, Dhoni had played 194 ODIs which is a bloody good career.

What is curious is Sachin's mental block at opening as #1 (47 matches at 36/83) vs #2 (293 matches at 50/89)
293 matches is almost as many as Lara played in his entire career.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Below article from cricinfo 8 years back illustrates how awesome a batsman Viv was. Tendulkar was truly great, but Viv clearly better. If any one has come close to him it is Virat.

Stats from the Past: The best ODI batsmen from across eras | Cricket | ESPNcricinfo.com

Tendulkar in the list of 00s batsmen ?
He played 200 plus matches in 90s
1 match in 80s iirc

And he played 4 years more than Viv , which damaged his overall stats.

 

[h_hurricane]

To be fair, that methodology also shows Sachin to only be a moderate upgrade over Sehwag so...

I'd take Sachin's 45/86 over Sehwag's 35/105 any day of the week. Plus Sachin is somewhat of a unique case in that he played SO many ODIs - the difference in average between him opening and not opening is staggering - and I think 'not opening' is a good 100 or so ODIs - at that point in that chart, Dhoni had played 194 ODIs which is a bloody good career.

What is curious is Sachin's mental block at opening as #1 (47 matches at 36/83) vs #2 (293 matches at 50/89)
293 matches is almost as many as Lara played in his entire career.

This methodology need not be taken on face value but there are a few merits in this thought process.

Sachin's 45/86 is clearly better to Sehwag's 35/105. And once you bring in era adjusted stats and longevity, Sehwag is nowhere close. Viv is not as far ahead of Sachin as this methodology suggests, but clearly ahead. Longevity is one factor in which no one comes close to Tendulkar.

If we consider the matches Sachin did not open, we would also need to consider the period when Viv played below top 3.
I consider Viv and Virat to be moderate yet very clear upgrades over Sachin. Only thing separating Viv and Virat is a strong World Cup knockout performance from Virat, which is lesser than a moderate upgrade.

 

[h_hurricane]

Tendulkar in the list of 00s batsmen ?
He played 200 plus matches in 90s
1 match in 80s iirc

And he played 4 years more than Viv , which damaged his overall stats.

Yeah, Tendulkar was more of a 90's batsman. This article need not be taken on face value, but the methodology is reasonable.

By the way, Viv played his last ODI at an older age than Sachin.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Yeah, Tendulkar was more of a 90's batsman. This article need not be taken on face value, but the methodology is reasonable.

By the way, Viv played his last ODI at an older age than Sachin.

Viv debuted at 23 and retired at 39 (39 yrs and 2 months )

Sachin 16 - 39 ( 38yrs and 11 months)

Sachin played 7 years more , at an age most cricketers spending time in school teams , under 19 , or first class teams.
There is a reason , people getting selected to national team in their 20s.

 

[_00_deathscar]

If we consider the matches Sachin did not open, we would also need to consider the period when Viv played below top 3.
I consider Viv and Virat to be moderate yet very clear upgrades over Sachin. Only thing separating Viv and Virat is a strong World Cup knockout performance from Virat, which is lesser than a moderate upgrade.

I think that's almost fair - the only reasons I'm hesitant to rate Kohli over Sachin just yet (at least clearly) is:
- Longevity
- World Cups (Sachin top scored in 2, was #2 in another one and did pretty well in his first major one too)
- The ODI series thing someone mentioned earlier - certainly in the 90s and probably well into the 00s, ODI series whether between two or three etc teams were taken a lot more seriously than they are now (I don't recall Sachin resting for any matches?)

On face value, yes Kohli is probably better. No arguments as to Kohli being the better chaser or batting second, or that his century conversion rate is absolutely insane (is anyone else in the last 5 years scoring centuries at anywhere near the same rate? Even with 2 new balls, fielding restrictions, bigger bats, smaller grounds, higher scores, pumped up averages etc)?

Kohli top scores in this WC, or plays a key innings in a couple of knockout games or in key matches (or better yet, in a final), and I think he's nailed that spot.

There's clearly a top 3 - and it's almost a personal choice whom you prefer (I was too young for Viv so only seen YouTube). The great thing is that you could fit all 3 into the same ATG XI team comfortably.

 

[h_hurricane]

Viv debuted at 23 and retired at 39 (39 yrs and 2 months )

Sachin 16 - 39 ( 38yrs and 11 months)

Sachin played 7 years more , at an age most cricketers spending time in school teams , under 19 , or first class teams.
There is a reason , people getting selected to national team in their 20s.

Tendulkar's record from the age Viv debuted in ODIs

Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s
filtered 1996-2012 344 336 29 14331 200* 46.68 16384 87.46 41 70 14 1608 155

Average and strike rate less than Viv. Also played in a more batsmen friendly era. Insane longevity(in terms of matches) though.

He also opened around 87% of the time this period. Viv batted at # 3 or above only 30% of his career.

 

[mr_mister]

I feel like not since Bradman has a player been so expected to ton up as Kohli in ODIs the last few years. It really does just seem like routine for him atm

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Overall career comparisons are funny most of the times.

Player A 10 yrs career
Player B 15 yrs career

If you remove 5 yrs bad stretch in beginning or end ,from B's career , it's unfair. Because we are comparing B's peak to A's entire career.
Can't you see it's other way around
When we compare overall careers it's B's overall career and A's peak 10 yrs. ( That's why he is in the team )

 

[_00_deathscar]

Tendulkar's record from the age Viv debuted in ODIs

Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s
filtered 1996-2012 344 336 29 14331 200* 46.68 16384 87.46 41 70 14 1608 155

Average and strike rate less than Viv. Also played in a more batsmen friendly era. Insane longevity(in terms of matches) though.

He also opened around 87% of the time this period. Viv batted at # 3 or above only 30% of his career.

Direct comparisons like this are so tough, nevermind across eras.

Sachin never played for an all conquering, dominating Indian side, Viv clearly did.
I'm not entirely sure this current Indian side with Kohli is necessarily better than the latter ones Sachin played for (though injury had definitely changed him - less so in ODIs though I suppose) which competed at 2003 and won 2011, but it's less far behind the leaders for sure as there isn't one all conquering team anymore (West Indies, Australia).

It's a whole different ball game when you know your bowlers and/or other batsmen are going to bail you out, and can rely on it time and again. Would Ponting have played the same innings in the 2003 final if he were an Indian, knowing his wicket would likely mean a collapse? (See the 2011 match India vs South Africa where India went from 268/1 after 39.3 overs - Sachin got out, and finished 296 all out). This was always an issue for a Sachin-led team.

Having said that, it impacts less in ODIs than it does in tests; a batsman can win a game all on his own (almost) in ODIs, that's very unlikely in tests where regardless of what the batsman does, the bowlers HAVE to take 20 wickets for the team to win the match - which is why I think Sachin is actually underrated in tests, to an extent.

Cricket as a sport lends itself to statistics far more than football or some other sports do, but there is so much to do with circumstance.

 

[h_hurricane]

I think that's almost fair - the only reasons I'm hesitant to rate Kohli over Sachin just yet (at least clearly) is:
- Longevity
- World Cups (Sachin top scored in 2, was #2 in another one and did pretty well in his first major one too)
- The ODI series thing someone mentioned earlier - certainly in the 90s and probably well into the 00s, ODI series whether between two or three etc teams were taken a lot more seriously than they are now (I don't recall Sachin resting for any matches?)

On face value, yes Kohli is probably better. No arguments as to Kohli being the better chaser or batting second, or that his century conversion rate is absolutely insane (is anyone else in the last 5 years scoring centuries at anywhere near the same rate? Even with 2 new balls, fielding restrictions, bigger bats, smaller grounds, higher scores, pumped up averages etc)?

Kohli top scores in this WC, or plays a key innings in a couple of knockout games or in key matches (or better yet, in a final), and I think he's nailed that spot.

There's clearly a top 3 - and it's almost a personal choice whom you prefer (I was too young for Viv so only seen YouTube). The great thing is that you could fit all 3 into the same ATG XI team comfortably.

Absolutely. All 3 are locks in an ATG team anyway. There are no arguments in that regard.

 

[stephen]

Direct comparisons like this are so tough, nevermind across eras.

Sachin never played for an all conquering, dominating Indian side, Viv clearly did.
I'm not entirely sure this current Indian side with Kohli is necessarily better than the latter ones Sachin played for (though injury had definitely changed him - less so in ODIs though I suppose) which competed at 2003 and won 2011, but it's less far behind the leaders for sure as there isn't one all conquering team anymore (West Indies, Australia).

It's a whole different ball game when you know your bowlers and/or other batsmen are going to bail you out, and can rely on it time and again. Would Ponting have played the same innings in the 2003 final if he were an Indian, knowing his wicket would likely mean a collapse? (See the 2011 match India vs South Africa where India went from 268/1 after 39.3 overs - Sachin got out, and finished 296 all out). This was always an issue for a Sachin-led team.

Having said that, it impacts less in ODIs than it does in tests; a batsman can win a game all on his own (almost) in ODIs, that's very unlikely in tests where regardless of what the batsman does, the bowlers HAVE to take 20 wickets for the team to win the match - which is why I think Sachin is actually underrated in tests, to an extent.

Cricket as a sport lends itself to statistics far more than football or some other sports do, but there is so much to do with circumstance.

It never stopped Warner from playing those kind of innings (in tests or ODIs). Who can forget the famous Perth collapse from 3/300 to 350ao?

 

[vcs]

Absolutely. All 3 are locks in an ATG team anyway. There are no arguments in that regard.

That won't change even if Kohli flops miserably in every WC knockout game he plays from here on in. He'll still be ATG and make All time XIs, he just won't be GOAT.

Considering the fact that WC knockouts constitute a miniscule percentage of a player's total career, that's all you can really ask for.

 

[Burgey]

No. No it really isn't. Stepping up when the pressure is greatest absolutely is a factor separating the GOAT from the sheep. If a bloke shines in KO games of the biggest tourneys (especially in finals) then it's definitely a factor in his favour against other great players who don't. Otherwise you end up rating all innings in all matches equally. And if you do that then you may as well not watch the game, and just compile stats.

 

[Burgey]

I feel like not since Bradman has a player been so expected to ton up as Kohli in ODIs the last few years. It really does just seem like routine for him atm

Ponting in tests in the mid 2000s was similar. Once he got to twenty he set like concrete.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

So , if there is anything stand out in odi batting history, it's Sachin's longevity.