Difference between batting average of Rohit and Gilchrist is twice as that of Smith and Kohli . But Smith is 2nd to Bradman and Rohit is not even good to replace Gilchrist in ODI ATXI . Talk about being biased and single eyed as a fan .
Lol talk about comparing apples to oranges.
Your statement is bad for multiple reasons, so I'll enumerate a few.
1) average is far more important in tests than ODIs
2) Smith and Kohli are contemporaries, Gilchrist and Rohit are not
3) Gilchrist strikes at a rate that was substantially faster than his contemporaries - a similar amount to how Rohit averages more than his contemporaries
4) Gilchrist can keep, meaning that an ODI side can play superior players in other positions
Rohit might be a better batsman than Gilchrist as an ODI opener but:
- Rohit spent his learning years as a batsman in the middle order and was rubbish, so his time as opener corresponds to his peak
- The era Rohit plays in is the easiest batting era in history and yet his record in some countries is utterly horrid
- Rohit doesn't strike faster than his contemporaries
- Rohit can't keep
Rohit is a flat track bully, which isn't a huge issue in ODIs but there's no way I'd pick him in an all time XI where he'd be facing bowlers of the calibre of Ambrose, Donald and McGrath.