Why do Pakistanis rate kohli over tendulkar

[Thala_0710]

I would say SRT and Akram are around equal and place Inzi just ahead of Kumble probs, so just. But not by any significant margin really.

I would have Sachin ahead of Akram and Inzi-Kumble around equal

 

[Johan]

if Kumble is around Inzi then Ashwin must be below Kane

 

[sayon basak]

if Kumble is around Inzi then Ashwin must be below Kane

In ODI's? Why not?

 

[Thala_0710]

if Kumble is around Inzi then Ashwin must be below Kane

In ODIs Kane is easily better than Ashwin.
The earlier statement was regarding ODIs only.

 

[Chin Music]

Answering the original question, if it is about limited overs then they have a point. If they rate Kohli over SRT in red ball cricket, then they clearly don't recall SRT of the mid to late 90s, which is of course a recency bias.

 

[Moss]

Back in the day the rivalry was more intense. So conceding Tendulkar was best in the world was not agreeable to Pakistan fans. Imran played a role with his "Inzamam is the best player of pace since Viv Richards" and "Tendulkar can't win matches" narratives.

Although Indian fans of same vintage grew up idolizing Wasim Akram, believing him to be the greatest fast bowler of all time. Guess that was because we didn't have a rival to Akram like Pak had Inzamam to Tendulkar.

This sounds believable. As another post said, VK comes across as adrenaline-fuelled on the field and large hearted off it, which probably appeals to those who like their winners to fit a certain template. Add to that the frequency of winning games off his own bat.

Not that Tendulkar didn’t have his moments against Pakistan, but it took a long time into his career before India started winning consistently and he wasn’t carrying the batting any longer by then. One “criticism” of peak SRT was he wasn’t seen as a matchwinner. Can recall at least one Indian writer claiming (perhaps unfairly) that if he wanted someone to bat for his life, he’d choose Miandad over SRT given JM’s ability to win games out of nowhere.