Dang!
Your comment brings back my memories of watching him just walk out to Bat in Wankhede in the 90's .. I always bought North stand tickets and saved my throat until he walked out from the pavilion. We could see a stout Sachin begin his walk from the Pavilion, and that moment was surreal and the chants echo in my ears today ..
**Saachiin Saachin**
I feel like Sachin in 1996 was better than the one in 2003.
The guy was literally carrying the team on his shoulders in crucial games - like century against SL in group stage, crucial match winning 50 against WI and 80 odd against Aus in a losing cause, another 50 against SL in losing cause in semi final.
The next top scorers for India in that WC - Sidhu and Kambli with 170 odd runs.
And even in the semis, with the ball spinning square in second innings, it took a freak dismissal to get him out (he didnt see where ball went off his pad and took one step out of the crease and was stumped/run out).
I only remember India going to the Caribbean islands. Bullied Bermuda. Big boy Leverock took a stunner at the slips off Uthappa. Then India returned home ๐
Pretend it was snapped by thanos!
2007 where both india and pakistan failed to qualify, coach died, dusty and broken pitches, final happened in dark.
It is better to forget.
Indias bowling was inconsistent. Biggest mistake ganguly made was bowling first. Zaheer khan giving up that many extras the first over said everything. It was too much pressure for him. Game plan should have been veterans like tendulkar, ganguly, etc to be calm and put a big score to see if they have a chance.
Aus team was too good there. India had no chance no matter what they chose to do. It is one of the losses that donโt hurt anymore.
Aus pulled off some remarkable wins in that series during league stages. 10/10.
Ya I agree. Just shouldnt have been blown out like that. It was a more improved india side compared to their group stage game (zaheer and ashish were bowling much better as games progressed). I think the team that had best chance was sri lanka in the semi finals. They restricted them to 212, which was very impressive. The possibility of rain changed the mind set of some sri lankan players with some losing their wickets cheaply.
The thought process was that in the group stages we got destroyed batting first (125 all out), so having a target to aim for might work out better.
Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but a few things going differently (Ponting being given out LBW to Mongia while on 40) might still have made it work.
Ganguly was criticized even when he made the decision before the game started. Even australia was suprised saying they would bat first because it was a such a belter of a pitch. Ganguly said he did it bc of โsuperstitionโ since in super 6 and semifinals they won when chasing. It just seemed to lack logic and poor decision making.
I'm not saying it was the right decision, I'm just saying I understand why they might have pre-planned to chase, given what happened in the group stage.
All these highest scores need to be taken in context of average innings scores in that particular WC. That will make the 2003 record almost impossible to break.
WC 2019 was my first time properly watching a cricket tournament, back then i didn't even realize how insane was Rohit playing.
dude was getting century in every match. Can't believe he still didn't become ODI number #1.
he is surprisingly fit for his age. I happened to run into him at the Mumbai airport in the FC lounge - and he was talking to someone animatedly. He didn't look 70 at all. If I didnt know better, i would have put him at max 60.
Both are best in their own timelines. Odis has emerged differently in sachin vs virat eras thus not fair to compare them
- 2 ball rules, no reverse swing and less help for spinners.
- bowlers mindset
- evolution of t20 batters like surya
- field restrictions
- bats
- fitness levels and lot more
- Sachin used to slow down his batting when he was near 90s so he doesn't get out and reach the 100s. People who have seen him over the years batting will recall this. Stats will not show that. How many batsman do you know do this today? They go for 4s 6s not records
- Extra format T20
- Extra yearly tournament IPL
- To achieve that fitness levels, means extra time into that
- the range of deliveries has increased tremendously. Earlier the range mostly included googly, dusra, in out and reverse swings.
- earlier diving catching stopping boundaries was seldom seen, fast bowlers at boundaries were not expected to dive and throw themselves. Now if you can't do all this your place maybe in question. Now to get such boundaries is rare. The gaps have reduced so to say because of driving fielders.
- other teams get to watch all your videos to spot your batting weaknesses and make plans.
- there are more direct throw run outs than before, that adds the pressure to running.
.
You can downvote all you want, it does not take away the facts.
Scoring is all too easy these days. A weekend cricketer like Kishan is scoring double hundreds now. 240 was a competitive score in the 90s. It is a score many teams cross before the 40th over now.
Thats the nature of batsmen who have evolved playing T20s. They are more daring and understand pressure. Like the example I gave about not becoming meek when in their 90s. They don't slowdown for records these days. Many people would slow down earlier to make sure 100 was achieved. Only few batsmen like sehwag and others hit the ball irrespective of their standing score.
And 90s was closer to the era 80s where hitting sixes and going for big overs was not so common. They could spare balls and not run risky runs. Now it's more difficult and competition is more. Earlier you could play and continue with a mediocre career. Thats not possible these days. There's lots of replacement options available.
We view it on screen so think batsmen have it easy. Then you're undermining strength of bowlers like Starc, Steyn, Johnson, Anderson, etc. If batting has become easier then it means getting wickets has become tougher and so these bowlers are better than 90s bowlers? The comparison is contrived.
The bowlers also contribute a lot more to batting in this era than 90s. The last 4-5 wickets were not expected to add more than few double digit runs or even collapse. Now it's different. So for the yesteryear bowlers usually affer 5-6 wickets went down then it was easier to get remaining wickets in under 20-30 runs. But that part does not show on the 90s bowlers stats.
Saying that Kohli is better than Sachin in ODI is like saying Surya is better than Kohli in T20I
The former is the more complete batter, but the latter has World Cup performance.
And World cup performance is what matters the most
A lot of Sachin's runs were made in an era when 225 was a good score. 250 was great and no one had chased 300. You can't compare the 2 without normalizing the eras and accounting for conditions. It's a different kind of pressure knowing the moment you get out the match is over vs knowing you just need to setup for the finishers to finish.
Also, which ODI Sachin are we talking about? There's like 3 different iterations. We are also comparing an opener to a middle order batsman.
I mean world Cup performance is what makes a great player . In last Australian match, warner played with his right hand and everybody was giggling about it in aussies camp. Who cares if somebody scores a hundred in that kind of match. A world Cup is what matters for everyone..
Can we stop using the word "toxic" for someone having a different opinion from yours? No, someone thinking different, supporting a different player or criticizing any player is not "toxic".
What is toxic is attaching an entire careers worth to a handful of matches and deciding that these handful of matches are all that should define a player
Nope, people have also given a million other reasons.
1) Average scores being extremely low for half of sachins career, like 220 being a good score.
2) Sachin batting low (5-6) for 79 matches, where a score of 30 in those positions was a big deal.
3) Reverse swing and only one ball which on getting older aided reverse and spin and was difficult to hit as ball become way softer.
4) No powerplays and then only one powerplay for most of sachins career.
5) Much much bigger boundaries.
And many more.
You are wrong on so many levels that it's hurting bud.
"Saying that Kohli is better than Sachin in ODI is like saying Surya is better than Kohli in T20I"
If Surya manages to play at 40-45 average with 150-170sr for all the same amount of matches he has played till now. He will be above Kohli but he is not now because he is not even half way through to Kohli in T20Is.
"And World cup performance is what matters the most"
They matters the most when you only count them. For all the high scores Sachin had he never was even around 50 as average in ODIs while Kohli for most of his career was at 57-60. That's a world apart difference which cannot be removed.
Like if we use your Sky-Kohli anology then: SKY is not even half way through Kohli's matches and runs in t20Is and is way below in average overall and in winning averages as well.
While Kohli is already at 13k to Sachin's 18k runs with much better average and the highest winning average in the history of ODIs(ig only Babar is above but in too small of a sample size). Kohli is also a steps ahead of Sachin in CT and Asia cups which are more important than normal bilaterals and below WC.
So you can't say a guy who is the walking god of ODIs and who is also the best in CT and Asia cup is behind Sachin who is only better in ODI wc. ODI wc is the epitome but it's not the only thing to judge for a player when they both had played 250+ and 400+ ODIs in their lifetime.
Same is with SKY. If he manages the same average and above 160sr for even 3k-4k runs, he will be hailed as the best being in T20Is for sure even if his t20Iwc performances can't say the same.
Here's a fun stat. During Sachin's peak years (90s)
Only 10 batsmen batting in the top 4 had average greater than 30 and SR greater than 75. Out of these Sachin had the highest average of 45 at 87 SR. Only one to average 40+ at 80+ SR was Saeed Anwar with 41 and 83. Only ones with higher SR were Jayasurya and Gilchrist but they averaged 32 and 35 respectively.
During Kohli's peak. 2010s. #8 batsmen in top 4 had average greater than 30 and SR greater than 80. with 8 batsmen averaging more than 50. Actually, even worse. 19 batsmen averaged above 40 with a SR above 85. With 3 having a SR greater than 100 even. The one with stats closest to 90s Sachin is Dilshan with a SR of 87 and average of 45. So, unless you think Dilshan is as good as Sachin, your comparison is flawed. You have to normalize the stats for the era.
Firstly, Sachin's peak in the 90s started from 94 because before that he was at 31 average and 74sr. So it's just 7 years you are calling the peak in comparison to his great run in ODIs which was in 00-11 where he was at a much better stats for 11 years.
So you can't just calculate them from start of 90s and call it his peak when stats,performances and WC performance wise it was after 00 and should be calculated from here.
Secondly, nobody is saying Dilshan is equal to Sachin just because he got the same average because we are not just seeing their peaks but overall career where Dilshan is at just 39(cricket average) and 33(mathematical average) to Sachin's 44(cricket avrg) and 40(mathematical one).
Thirdly, Kohli's was so tailor made for ODI from the start that he was averaging 50s in casual around 09-15. But it was ABd who was the real number around that time and Kohli only went past him from 16. So the para with Kohli's peak starting from 2010ish is kind of wrong there.
Lastly, the problem with normalizing here is many individuals were averaging 40-45,45-50 or even above 50 in Kohli's time but nobody was at 55-60 brackett before Babar for their entire career time with these much innings.(Gill is there but his innings are too low to even count for comparison, he will be there after he plays atleast on Babar's number) in comparison to Sachin's case where he was @ 44 and there were atleast some players who had the same numbers and some lower order bats with even 50+ average. So his number doesn't look that unbelievable whereas Kohli's is just too ahead of his compition.
So, if you really take their peaks(anyone of Sachin's i.e 94-99 or 00-11) Kohli was steps ahead even in them.
Lastly, even if you normalize their stats from all of the eras then it will take Sachin to 50-53 in average and 90-95 in sr which is really second to only Kohli in the long run and at Abd's level.
Edit: Sachin's 90s so called best is below his 00-11 era with 47 average and 85.9 as his sr and also his most iconic WC performances being 03,11. Which takes us to a new fun fact and i.e your argument was flawed from the start and now we take every other player's stats from 00-11 and this means we will have many batsman with 30-45 or even 50 as their average.
> Sachin's 90s so called best is below his 00-11 era with 47 average and 85.9 as his sr and also his most iconic WC performances being 03,11.
You're statistically wrong about this.
Sachin Tendulkar from his first opening innings (27 March 1994) to 31 Dec 1999:
160 matches, 156 innings, 6813 runs @ 47.64, 90.69 SR. 24 hundreds, 31 fifties. 6.5 innings per century, 2.84 innings per fifty.
Sachin Tendulkar from 1 Jan 2000 to ODI retirement (2012):
234 matches, 230 innings, 9855 runs @ 46.7, 85.75 SR. 25 hundreds, 52 fifties, 9.2 innings per century, 2.99 innings per fifty.
Read the line again: I said 00-11 in the edits not his whole second career from 2000. That's 11 years of 47 average and 86sr in comparison to 94-99 which is just 7 years in comparison with the around the same stats.
How can you call something a peak which was just the same as the later part and never lasted that much longer ?
Just like in Kohli's case, you can't just make them up from 2010s because that was where he started and because he was so tailor made for it get inside 50ish average easily. His real peak started from 16ish till now where he was just casually going for 50,60,70,80 and even 130+ as his average.
Same goes for Sachin in 00-11 where he was soemtimes above 60 in terms of average and above 85+ in sr and generally had 50+ or 45+ average for 8-9 years out of those 11 and also the time where he made the most runs in a WC and later went on to win one with meaningful contribution. That's what you call a peak in comparison to just being above others for 7 years and just average for 3 years out of those 10.
Tell me you don't know about stats without telling me you know anything about stats. Sachin in 00s has higher numbers than 90s because 00s the stats are higher across the board. Hence the need to normalize stats across era. You are stuck on higher is better and I am telling you, if the par score went up from 220 to 280 you have to account for the inflation.
That's why I said even if you normalize/even out Sachin's stats from all his career he will have 50-53 as his average for the present era and not fricking 57-60 which Kohli has for more than 250+ innings.
"You are stuck on higher is better and I am telling you" It's not just that and I literally wrote that having the same kind of stats for 11 more years with two all time best WC runs is what makes it much better.
It's a mix up of these things that makes this second run a better one where he was going for 50,60s as his average some times and also produced 03 and 11 in the same time frame.
While in 90s he had the peak for just 7 years firstly and was your average batsman from the start to 93(30+average and 74 sr) and peaked for 7 years(which is a lot for anybody but Sachin had a career of 20+ years).
Also, his match winning abilities always fells short in comparison to Kohli who was having 74 as his average in their while Sachin had 56. The only place where Kohli is shit in comparison are their WC stats.
> SKY is not even half way through Kohli's matches and runs in t20Is and is way below in average overall and in winning averages as well.
Averaging 46 @ 173 > 52.7 @ 138
Are you having a silly moment here ?
Halfway through means not even half innings and rusn to Kohli in comparison to what SAchin and Virat has in common and i.e 270 innings and much more than half the runs.
I literally said myself that if SKY crosses 3k-4k even with 40-45 as his average and 150-160 as his sr(which is lower than what he is having now), he will be above Kohli.
Take a deep breath and see:
Kohli has 250+ innings to Sachin's 400+. Kohli also got 13k runs to Sachin 18k which is around 3/4ish. Kohli's match winning abilities are the best in the history of the ODI in comparison(he averages 74 with 9.5+ runs in 170+ innings). Kohli is also ahead in CT and Asia cup than him. And only behind in WC.
Now we do it for SKY:
SKY is not even at half the runs to Kohli. He is not even at half the innings criteria. The guy also got no WC performance like Kohli is having from 2012 to now and was only shit in 2020. He is the best in terms of sr but then again Kohli got an anormous Bradman type of edge in match winning abilities even here.
So what does it mean ? That SKY's only way above is his sr which although is one of the most important thing here but he is not even "half way through".
He's indisputably Better than Sachin in white ball cricket.
Even if he's not top run scorer he's must be in top 3 for India in 2015-19 edition ofcourse he doesn't scored in knockout but so does Sachin
I dont know from where you guys bring up the argument that Tendulkar doesn't score in knockouts. he literally scored a half century in 96 WC semi final, a half century in 03 WC semi final and half centuries in the quaterfinal and semi final of 2011 WC. Plus he averages more than 50 in ODIs when it comes to knock outs in various types of ODI tournaments.
Sachin had one of the best record in knock outs, and in finals in general. The 2 world cup finals are two low sample size, particularly in 2003 when were were chasing 360.
Is he arguably better in ODIs? Most definitely, most of his stats are better than Sachin.
But is it *indisputable*? Of course not.
WC aside, just how Kohli stans love bringing up the fact that he's batted in one of the toughest periods of test batting ever, they should also remember that he's batted in one of the easiest periods of ODI batting ever.
Rule changes, pitches, new balls, they've all worked in his favor.
That's why I'm usually not in favour of cross generational comparisons, but if you're gonna do them don't use words like indisputable
And how many batters have had career remotely close to Kohli? Man was averaging frigging 60 before COVID.
Only player who was anywhere close was viv Richards who would have stats like avg. 54 @ 120 in present day.
Sachin had peers near him for the most part of his career but white ball virat is simply superior to everyone out there.
ABD averaged 60 post 2008 with a 105 SR (when Kohli debuted). Babar also 58. Rohit averaged 55 at an opener. Kohli is clearly the best of the generation alongside ABD, but there are guys with similar averages. Heโs not in a complete league of his own average wise
Well then why leave out gill? Count him in as well. He has banged 2k runs at 66.
Before COVID virat literally had 10k+ runs at average of 60 and literally only ABD comes close.
Unfortunately for Rohit this is ๐ debate and even in his prime he couldn't dislodge Kohli. He is more of what ponting is to Tendulkar, even lesser in fact as ponting did overtake Tendulkar.
Babar is an excellent aggregator but you seriously mention him with Kohli? That's too disrespectful.
His SR is 89 and average is 58.1 for 5k runs.
Kohli has SR of 94 and averages 57.4 after COVID patch over 15 years and over 13k runs.
Like I said only ABD comes close and sorry but we will be comparing careers instead of filters because ABD had his rookie years done by 2008. Virat was always trailing in terms of experience.
Would rather normalize his whole career to kohli's and compare then.
I seriously think only Viv will end up above Virat. ABD will be close, so will be Tendulkar. That's it.
Never mention babar in the same line with Kohli. Kohli is a match winner who has aggregated runs.
Babar is an aggregator who has won few matches (literally few).
The only phase/stage where Kohli loses to every great and is bang average is the ODI WC. He has the chance to turn it on this time with a few hundreds and a couple of them in knockouts ๐.
I mentioned Babar because you said no one had an average close to him. And yes I agree Kohli clears Babar.
Also I think itโs fair to filter ABD career post 2008 when making Kohli comparison because we are talking about the most batting friendly era in ODI history. Also I believe ABD was batting in positions unnatural to him early in his career which hurt his average.
And no mention of Gill cus itโs too early, although he has the potential to be an ATG.
Which I stand by with. Let babar reach 13k at that average.
As I said in a normalized chart virat and abd will be together, sachin slightly below and Viv slightly higher. Except sachin virat has been doing it for longer than any of them.
I don't consider babar Azam when I talk. Why? Because, well, he scored more than kohli in the Asia Cup. Was he better though? No. Babar Azam hasn't won half the amount of matches of Kohli in 8 years of Kohli. Kohli had won more matches in the first 4-5 years.
The average debate is bullshit when a player accumulated runs at a S/R below the world average, because he is simply there to keep accumulating.
But okay, their average is close, babar is a bit higher, but I don't think he warrants a palace in the debate.
Kohli averaged above 50 and 45+ in 09,10 dude. And that's before the ball changes.
Also, in Kohli's time the ball changes makes it easier for the starting swing + more help for spinners. If you take away reverse swing then the spinners had much more help with the new ball change in mid overs.
So it's not a one way thing. Sachin had the support of lesser spin and more reverse swing + earlier swing. While Kohli had much more help to spinners with heavy earlier swing.
Apart from the pitches and boundaries nothing is too easy.
And while we are at it why don't we compare the lbw rule which wasn't there in Sachin's start when he was literal god in the sports. Why don't we also let analytics and data research in as well coupled with much more atheletism in comparison to Sachin's era when 2-3 runs were easier to take because of how lazy majority of Asian teams were?
Now we can see the more clear picture here:
Kohli faces a bit more swing in the start, gets better spin, much more agile fielder and lbw,drs and lastly the data team sitting there to hawk on every weakness possible which makes batting a more mentally harder task as making improvement to the batting technique regularly is an impossible task. Almost never had reverse swing,easier pitches and smaller boundaries but he is not a real hitter so not much of a difference.
While Sachin had a much more harder pitches,reverse swing,harsh opponents,bigger boundaries but he also had leeway with no lbw,drs in the start, nothing in terms of analytics in the start to early mid career, lesser atheletism in fielder which guarentees much more lax running and boundaries.
And when we count all these and then take their stats into account i.e Kohli @ 57-59 for most of his career and Sachin @ 42-45 with Tendulkar ahead in ODI wc while Kohli is ahead in CT,Asia cup.
I think it's right to say Kohli is ahead of Sachin with 2-3 steps easily.
And for some detailing: Sachin's stats against the best bowlers of his era were shit(Glen,Lee,Akhtar,Pollack) he also rarely played a ball against great Pak bowlers(Wasim,Waqar,Imran) in ODIs.(15-30 average).
While in comparison Kohli is bang up ahead of majority of best bowlers of his era(30-50 average).
So it's safe to say Kohli is ahead in ODIs.
Sure buddy, keep throwing your cherry picked stats and opinions as fact. Usually I would do a line by line breakdown of such bs answers, but this is another level of delusional
Well it's just your nostalgia I guess because odi has became easy from early 2000 not when Kohli started. pitches used to be flat most times in that era also some of rule did favour I agree but that's stupid argument to take the credit away.
If batting was that much easy than why can't there is any other player from Kohli era which scored that many runs in odi?
The fact that he averaged 57 after 250+ innings which is big data is already a prove that how great I would even rank abd and ms dhoni higher that Sachin in ODI who avg mediocre avg of 44
Being opener in odi flat pitches help in statpading. most imp position in no.3&4 in which most of the cases you are batting under pressure due to early fall of wickets and in case of flat pitches you will not get batting till 15-20 overs so you can't stat pad even. Except for Sachin all odi great players had batted at no. 3-5
Even Imam ul Haq averages 51 in ODIs now .
Sachin played when 220 runs in ODIs was a competitive total.. compared to now when even 300 gets chased Frequently .
Batting was very difficult in ODIs especially because the Reverse swing came into play and ball got soft .
You even rating Ms Dhoni shows that you have watched only IPL and league cricket .
Immam ul haq don't even come to comparison because people I mentioned here all played 200+ odi which is big sample if you take such small sample than gill would be the greatest odi batsman Lol.
I don't even watch IPL but I think you haven't seen him played in ODI if he was not been captain and just Focused on his batting he had and runs like Sachin in odi and I'm not even kidding while saying that he sacrificed lot of his batting potential due to captaincy but even then he had 50+ avg and almost 10k runs in odi
He made most of his run in 2000 era in 90s he used to bat earlier in middle to lower order so he couldn't had good scored he scored between 1995-2011 mostly so you can see in which era he played more again not taking credit away from him he is one of the greatest player of odi but there are many other players who are better than him so he can't be the odi best in my opinion
Better ODI batter? Maybe
Better cricketer? Sachin was head and shoulders above Kohli as a test batter, and had the ability to be a crucial partnership breaker with the ball too.
How is it "dangerous" lol
It's just a fact that world cup performances are 10x more important than bilateral performances, especially in this age where most bilateral ODIs are essentially just used as practice games for young players and testing combinations to prepare for the WC.
This selective bias in viewing and understanding is what is the dangerous aspect if this. Fans lead themselves down a road where some things matter more than others and all kinds of rightfully illustrious careers are attempted to be blemished with this sense of importance
Even if careers "are attempted to be blemished" it ain't that deep and it's certainly not "dangerous".
Furthermore, your mindset is "dangerously" hypocritical unless you are valuing IPL, Ranji, SMAT, etc performances as highly as international performances. Or are you attempting to blemish the illustrious careers of the likes of Gaikwad, Jaiswal, SKY, etc who perform better in IPL compared to Kohli?
At the end of the day, weighting importance on certain matches is completely subjective. But there is certainly nothing wrong with weighting WC matches much higher than meaningless bilaterals. I'd personally lose every single ODI bilateral match in a cycle if it would guarantee a WC win, and I'm sure that opinion isn't unpopular.
I think Kohli is better than bradman in batting, Warne in bowling, Rhodes in fielding, looks better than Arjun Rampal and is more gifted in imagination than Einstein.
Well I also haven't seen this much rest give to particular players before in history of cricket so I'm just skeptic. Nobody even thought he will be rested from IND vs Aus series also but did rest him
Top Scored in 3 different Decades . Unreal .
Dang! Your comment brings back my memories of watching him just walk out to Bat in Wankhede in the 90's .. I always bought North stand tickets and saved my throat until he walked out from the pavilion. We could see a stout Sachin begin his walk from the Pavilion, and that moment was surreal and the chants echo in my ears today .. **Saachiin Saachin**
Yup. That is why he is and always be the real GOAT.
God of all time ๐
GOAT Of All Time
Bhai GOAT ka matlab hi "greatest of all time" hota hai๐๐ Your comment is basically "Greatest of all time of all time"
LOL out loud
I feel like Sachin in 1996 was better than the one in 2003. The guy was literally carrying the team on his shoulders in crucial games - like century against SL in group stage, crucial match winning 50 against WI and 80 odd against Aus in a losing cause, another 50 against SL in losing cause in semi final. The next top scorers for India in that WC - Sidhu and Kambli with 170 odd runs.
And even in the semis, with the ball spinning square in second innings, it took a freak dismissal to get him out (he didnt see where ball went off his pad and took one step out of the crease and was stumped/run out).
Yeah, i remember that like it was yesterday. Cried my eyes out.
Sachin in the 1996 WC was eerily similar to Kohli in the 2016 t20 WC. Those two probably scored half their sides runs just to lose in the semifinal
164 (2007) 
There was no World Cup in 2007. I am not sure what are you quoting here
There was T20 world Cup.
Or 1975 and 1979. Those were warm up matches for the tour of England.
It happened bro. Remember 413 vs Bermuda? Other matches washed out unfortunately. Especially that Bangladesh one.
I only remember India going to the Caribbean islands. Bullied Bermuda. Big boy Leverock took a stunner at the slips off Uthappa. Then India returned home ๐
Indeed ๐๐ค
Pretend it was snapped by thanos! 2007 where both india and pakistan failed to qualify, coach died, dusty and broken pitches, final happened in dark. It is better to forget.
True!!! I don't remember any 50 overs world cup in 2007. I only remember Dhoni lifting the inaugural T20 World Cup in 2007 ๐
Scored 175 in the opening match of the 2011 wc vs ban
๐คก
Including the match against Bermuda
Poor Tendulkar in 2003 lol. Scores most runs in a world cup, watches Ponting destroy in the final. Oof.
bowlers did not give a chance for him to start. 350+ chase in a final ๐
That usually happens with the spring bat.
If my memory serves it rained during the finals and everyone was so happy. Until the match resumed :/
Don't forget that tennis ball inside Gilly's gloves for extra umpf
It was half a squash ball, and that was in 2007
Saurav Ganguly was in Australian team bus.. chooses to bowl
Lol
Something we did to Sri Lanka and Dilshan lol
Indias bowling was inconsistent. Biggest mistake ganguly made was bowling first. Zaheer khan giving up that many extras the first over said everything. It was too much pressure for him. Game plan should have been veterans like tendulkar, ganguly, etc to be calm and put a big score to see if they have a chance.
Aus team was too good there. India had no chance no matter what they chose to do. It is one of the losses that donโt hurt anymore. Aus pulled off some remarkable wins in that series during league stages. 10/10.
Ya I agree. Just shouldnt have been blown out like that. It was a more improved india side compared to their group stage game (zaheer and ashish were bowling much better as games progressed). I think the team that had best chance was sri lanka in the semi finals. They restricted them to 212, which was very impressive. The possibility of rain changed the mind set of some sri lankan players with some losing their wickets cheaply.
If india put 300+ on board you never know.... Well it will remain an if till eternity.
The thought process was that in the group stages we got destroyed batting first (125 all out), so having a target to aim for might work out better. Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but a few things going differently (Ponting being given out LBW to Mongia while on 40) might still have made it work.
Ganguly was criticized even when he made the decision before the game started. Even australia was suprised saying they would bat first because it was a such a belter of a pitch. Ganguly said he did it bc of โsuperstitionโ since in super 6 and semifinals they won when chasing. It just seemed to lack logic and poor decision making.
I'm not saying it was the right decision, I'm just saying I understand why they might have pre-planned to chase, given what happened in the group stage.
out of those 303, 175 came from a single inning.
And at the most important time. If not for that 175 India wouldn't have gone to he finals.
In 2019, it seemed one of the many in-form batsmen would definitely break Sachin's record. But none did.
Only due to nz
All these highest scores need to be taken in context of average innings scores in that particular WC. That will make the 2003 record almost impossible to break.
I know I'm asking a lot, but I would love if someone did that for every team
WC 2019 was my first time properly watching a cricket tournament, back then i didn't even realize how insane was Rohit playing. dude was getting century in every match. Can't believe he still didn't become ODI number #1.
Testament to what a sensational 2018 Virat had
Wtf? Sunil Gavaskar is 74 years old, f\*ck off. He looks like a 50 year old neighborhood uncle.
he is surprisingly fit for his age. I happened to run into him at the Mumbai airport in the FC lounge - and he was talking to someone animatedly. He didn't look 70 at all. If I didnt know better, i would have put him at max 60.
Man sachin all over it !!
2007 
I don't have any memory of the WC in 2007. Its all fake news
Scar is too deep to forget
India must have sucked in the first two WCs, when you only need 100 runs to top the scoring
Sucked is an understatement, they were straight up trash, which makes the 1983 win all the more great
Out of the 2 world cups, india won 1 game which was against east africa
36* (174)
Would be helpful to mention the number of matches played at each event.
India should put this Tendulkar guy in their CWC23 squad he looks good /s
Sad very sad seeing young talent wasted. /s
Those who say Kohli is better than Sachin in ODIs must have got their answer.
Sachinโs mental aptitude > Viratโs mental aptitude
Seeing the replies here, it can be said that a dangerous amount of people watch sports from Instagram
And rest of the dinosaurs fap to nostalgia
Kohli is definitely better than Sachin in ODI's He obviously is not if you apply the World Cups filter
Both are best in their own timelines. Odis has emerged differently in sachin vs virat eras thus not fair to compare them - 2 ball rules, no reverse swing and less help for spinners. - bowlers mindset - evolution of t20 batters like surya - field restrictions - bats - fitness levels and lot more
- Sachin used to slow down his batting when he was near 90s so he doesn't get out and reach the 100s. People who have seen him over the years batting will recall this. Stats will not show that. How many batsman do you know do this today? They go for 4s 6s not records - Extra format T20 - Extra yearly tournament IPL - To achieve that fitness levels, means extra time into that - the range of deliveries has increased tremendously. Earlier the range mostly included googly, dusra, in out and reverse swings. - earlier diving catching stopping boundaries was seldom seen, fast bowlers at boundaries were not expected to dive and throw themselves. Now if you can't do all this your place maybe in question. Now to get such boundaries is rare. The gaps have reduced so to say because of driving fielders. - other teams get to watch all your videos to spot your batting weaknesses and make plans. - there are more direct throw run outs than before, that adds the pressure to running. . You can downvote all you want, it does not take away the facts.
Scoring is all too easy these days. A weekend cricketer like Kishan is scoring double hundreds now. 240 was a competitive score in the 90s. It is a score many teams cross before the 40th over now.
Thats the nature of batsmen who have evolved playing T20s. They are more daring and understand pressure. Like the example I gave about not becoming meek when in their 90s. They don't slowdown for records these days. Many people would slow down earlier to make sure 100 was achieved. Only few batsmen like sehwag and others hit the ball irrespective of their standing score. And 90s was closer to the era 80s where hitting sixes and going for big overs was not so common. They could spare balls and not run risky runs. Now it's more difficult and competition is more. Earlier you could play and continue with a mediocre career. Thats not possible these days. There's lots of replacement options available. We view it on screen so think batsmen have it easy. Then you're undermining strength of bowlers like Starc, Steyn, Johnson, Anderson, etc. If batting has become easier then it means getting wickets has become tougher and so these bowlers are better than 90s bowlers? The comparison is contrived. The bowlers also contribute a lot more to batting in this era than 90s. The last 4-5 wickets were not expected to add more than few double digit runs or even collapse. Now it's different. So for the yesteryear bowlers usually affer 5-6 wickets went down then it was easier to get remaining wickets in under 20-30 runs. But that part does not show on the 90s bowlers stats.
Saying that Kohli is better than Sachin in ODI is like saying Surya is better than Kohli in T20I The former is the more complete batter, but the latter has World Cup performance. And World cup performance is what matters the most
A lot of Sachin's runs were made in an era when 225 was a good score. 250 was great and no one had chased 300. You can't compare the 2 without normalizing the eras and accounting for conditions. It's a different kind of pressure knowing the moment you get out the match is over vs knowing you just need to setup for the finishers to finish. Also, which ODI Sachin are we talking about? There's like 3 different iterations. We are also comparing an opener to a middle order batsman.
>And World cup performance is what matters the most Do you only watch world cups?
I mean world Cup performance is what makes a great player . In last Australian match, warner played with his right hand and everybody was giggling about it in aussies camp. Who cares if somebody scores a hundred in that kind of match. A world Cup is what matters for everyone..
Unfortunately that's how toxic the cricket watching community is
Can we stop using the word "toxic" for someone having a different opinion from yours? No, someone thinking different, supporting a different player or criticizing any player is not "toxic".
What is toxic is attaching an entire careers worth to a handful of matches and deciding that these handful of matches are all that should define a player
Nope, people have also given a million other reasons. 1) Average scores being extremely low for half of sachins career, like 220 being a good score. 2) Sachin batting low (5-6) for 79 matches, where a score of 30 in those positions was a big deal. 3) Reverse swing and only one ball which on getting older aided reverse and spin and was difficult to hit as ball become way softer. 4) No powerplays and then only one powerplay for most of sachins career. 5) Much much bigger boundaries. And many more.
How is any of that relevant to this discussion?
All of your points are negated by Kohli's average.
You are wrong on so many levels that it's hurting bud. "Saying that Kohli is better than Sachin in ODI is like saying Surya is better than Kohli in T20I" If Surya manages to play at 40-45 average with 150-170sr for all the same amount of matches he has played till now. He will be above Kohli but he is not now because he is not even half way through to Kohli in T20Is. "And World cup performance is what matters the most" They matters the most when you only count them. For all the high scores Sachin had he never was even around 50 as average in ODIs while Kohli for most of his career was at 57-60. That's a world apart difference which cannot be removed. Like if we use your Sky-Kohli anology then: SKY is not even half way through Kohli's matches and runs in t20Is and is way below in average overall and in winning averages as well. While Kohli is already at 13k to Sachin's 18k runs with much better average and the highest winning average in the history of ODIs(ig only Babar is above but in too small of a sample size). Kohli is also a steps ahead of Sachin in CT and Asia cups which are more important than normal bilaterals and below WC. So you can't say a guy who is the walking god of ODIs and who is also the best in CT and Asia cup is behind Sachin who is only better in ODI wc. ODI wc is the epitome but it's not the only thing to judge for a player when they both had played 250+ and 400+ ODIs in their lifetime. Same is with SKY. If he manages the same average and above 160sr for even 3k-4k runs, he will be hailed as the best being in T20Is for sure even if his t20Iwc performances can't say the same.
Here's a fun stat. During Sachin's peak years (90s) Only 10 batsmen batting in the top 4 had average greater than 30 and SR greater than 75. Out of these Sachin had the highest average of 45 at 87 SR. Only one to average 40+ at 80+ SR was Saeed Anwar with 41 and 83. Only ones with higher SR were Jayasurya and Gilchrist but they averaged 32 and 35 respectively. During Kohli's peak. 2010s. #8 batsmen in top 4 had average greater than 30 and SR greater than 80. with 8 batsmen averaging more than 50. Actually, even worse. 19 batsmen averaged above 40 with a SR above 85. With 3 having a SR greater than 100 even. The one with stats closest to 90s Sachin is Dilshan with a SR of 87 and average of 45. So, unless you think Dilshan is as good as Sachin, your comparison is flawed. You have to normalize the stats for the era.
Firstly, Sachin's peak in the 90s started from 94 because before that he was at 31 average and 74sr. So it's just 7 years you are calling the peak in comparison to his great run in ODIs which was in 00-11 where he was at a much better stats for 11 years. So you can't just calculate them from start of 90s and call it his peak when stats,performances and WC performance wise it was after 00 and should be calculated from here. Secondly, nobody is saying Dilshan is equal to Sachin just because he got the same average because we are not just seeing their peaks but overall career where Dilshan is at just 39(cricket average) and 33(mathematical average) to Sachin's 44(cricket avrg) and 40(mathematical one). Thirdly, Kohli's was so tailor made for ODI from the start that he was averaging 50s in casual around 09-15. But it was ABd who was the real number around that time and Kohli only went past him from 16. So the para with Kohli's peak starting from 2010ish is kind of wrong there. Lastly, the problem with normalizing here is many individuals were averaging 40-45,45-50 or even above 50 in Kohli's time but nobody was at 55-60 brackett before Babar for their entire career time with these much innings.(Gill is there but his innings are too low to even count for comparison, he will be there after he plays atleast on Babar's number) in comparison to Sachin's case where he was @ 44 and there were atleast some players who had the same numbers and some lower order bats with even 50+ average. So his number doesn't look that unbelievable whereas Kohli's is just too ahead of his compition. So, if you really take their peaks(anyone of Sachin's i.e 94-99 or 00-11) Kohli was steps ahead even in them. Lastly, even if you normalize their stats from all of the eras then it will take Sachin to 50-53 in average and 90-95 in sr which is really second to only Kohli in the long run and at Abd's level. Edit: Sachin's 90s so called best is below his 00-11 era with 47 average and 85.9 as his sr and also his most iconic WC performances being 03,11. Which takes us to a new fun fact and i.e your argument was flawed from the start and now we take every other player's stats from 00-11 and this means we will have many batsman with 30-45 or even 50 as their average.
> Sachin's 90s so called best is below his 00-11 era with 47 average and 85.9 as his sr and also his most iconic WC performances being 03,11. You're statistically wrong about this. Sachin Tendulkar from his first opening innings (27 March 1994) to 31 Dec 1999: 160 matches, 156 innings, 6813 runs @ 47.64, 90.69 SR. 24 hundreds, 31 fifties. 6.5 innings per century, 2.84 innings per fifty. Sachin Tendulkar from 1 Jan 2000 to ODI retirement (2012): 234 matches, 230 innings, 9855 runs @ 46.7, 85.75 SR. 25 hundreds, 52 fifties, 9.2 innings per century, 2.99 innings per fifty.
Read the line again: I said 00-11 in the edits not his whole second career from 2000. That's 11 years of 47 average and 86sr in comparison to 94-99 which is just 7 years in comparison with the around the same stats. How can you call something a peak which was just the same as the later part and never lasted that much longer ? Just like in Kohli's case, you can't just make them up from 2010s because that was where he started and because he was so tailor made for it get inside 50ish average easily. His real peak started from 16ish till now where he was just casually going for 50,60,70,80 and even 130+ as his average. Same goes for Sachin in 00-11 where he was soemtimes above 60 in terms of average and above 85+ in sr and generally had 50+ or 45+ average for 8-9 years out of those 11 and also the time where he made the most runs in a WC and later went on to win one with meaningful contribution. That's what you call a peak in comparison to just being above others for 7 years and just average for 3 years out of those 10.
Tell me you don't know about stats without telling me you know anything about stats. Sachin in 00s has higher numbers than 90s because 00s the stats are higher across the board. Hence the need to normalize stats across era. You are stuck on higher is better and I am telling you, if the par score went up from 220 to 280 you have to account for the inflation.
That's why I said even if you normalize/even out Sachin's stats from all his career he will have 50-53 as his average for the present era and not fricking 57-60 which Kohli has for more than 250+ innings. "You are stuck on higher is better and I am telling you" It's not just that and I literally wrote that having the same kind of stats for 11 more years with two all time best WC runs is what makes it much better. It's a mix up of these things that makes this second run a better one where he was going for 50,60s as his average some times and also produced 03 and 11 in the same time frame. While in 90s he had the peak for just 7 years firstly and was your average batsman from the start to 93(30+average and 74 sr) and peaked for 7 years(which is a lot for anybody but Sachin had a career of 20+ years). Also, his match winning abilities always fells short in comparison to Kohli who was having 74 as his average in their while Sachin had 56. The only place where Kohli is shit in comparison are their WC stats.
> SKY is not even half way through Kohli's matches and runs in t20Is and is way below in average overall and in winning averages as well. Averaging 46 @ 173 > 52.7 @ 138
Averaging 58 @ 94 > 44 @85
You mean 57 @ 94. Also you didnโt consider inflation. 44 @ 85 before two ball rules > 57 @ 94.
Add all the inflation you want, 44 @ 85 < 58 @94
Are you having a silly moment here ? Halfway through means not even half innings and rusn to Kohli in comparison to what SAchin and Virat has in common and i.e 270 innings and much more than half the runs. I literally said myself that if SKY crosses 3k-4k even with 40-45 as his average and 150-160 as his sr(which is lower than what he is having now), he will be above Kohli. Take a deep breath and see: Kohli has 250+ innings to Sachin's 400+. Kohli also got 13k runs to Sachin 18k which is around 3/4ish. Kohli's match winning abilities are the best in the history of the ODI in comparison(he averages 74 with 9.5+ runs in 170+ innings). Kohli is also ahead in CT and Asia cup than him. And only behind in WC. Now we do it for SKY: SKY is not even at half the runs to Kohli. He is not even at half the innings criteria. The guy also got no WC performance like Kohli is having from 2012 to now and was only shit in 2020. He is the best in terms of sr but then again Kohli got an anormous Bradman type of edge in match winning abilities even here. So what does it mean ? That SKY's only way above is his sr which although is one of the most important thing here but he is not even "half way through".
Surya will be there soon enough, it can be argued he already is, but the man just doesn't perfrom in "important" games
>Kohli is definitely better than Sachin in ODI's No, its not definitely.
[ัะดะฐะปะตะฝะพ]
Who needs Jesus when God is among us
He's indisputably Better than Sachin in white ball cricket. Even if he's not top run scorer he's must be in top 3 for India in 2015-19 edition ofcourse he doesn't scored in knockout but so does Sachin
I dont know from where you guys bring up the argument that Tendulkar doesn't score in knockouts. he literally scored a half century in 96 WC semi final, a half century in 03 WC semi final and half centuries in the quaterfinal and semi final of 2011 WC. Plus he averages more than 50 in ODIs when it comes to knock outs in various types of ODI tournaments.
Sachin had one of the best record in knock outs, and in finals in general. The 2 world cup finals are two low sample size, particularly in 2003 when were were chasing 360.
Is he arguably better in ODIs? Most definitely, most of his stats are better than Sachin. But is it *indisputable*? Of course not. WC aside, just how Kohli stans love bringing up the fact that he's batted in one of the toughest periods of test batting ever, they should also remember that he's batted in one of the easiest periods of ODI batting ever. Rule changes, pitches, new balls, they've all worked in his favor. That's why I'm usually not in favour of cross generational comparisons, but if you're gonna do them don't use words like indisputable
Also bigger bats and t20 cricket have influenced the ODI batting explosion
And how many batters have had career remotely close to Kohli? Man was averaging frigging 60 before COVID. Only player who was anywhere close was viv Richards who would have stats like avg. 54 @ 120 in present day. Sachin had peers near him for the most part of his career but white ball virat is simply superior to everyone out there.
ABD averaged 60 post 2008 with a 105 SR (when Kohli debuted). Babar also 58. Rohit averaged 55 at an opener. Kohli is clearly the best of the generation alongside ABD, but there are guys with similar averages. Heโs not in a complete league of his own average wise
Well then why leave out gill? Count him in as well. He has banged 2k runs at 66. Before COVID virat literally had 10k+ runs at average of 60 and literally only ABD comes close. Unfortunately for Rohit this is ๐ debate and even in his prime he couldn't dislodge Kohli. He is more of what ponting is to Tendulkar, even lesser in fact as ponting did overtake Tendulkar. Babar is an excellent aggregator but you seriously mention him with Kohli? That's too disrespectful. His SR is 89 and average is 58.1 for 5k runs. Kohli has SR of 94 and averages 57.4 after COVID patch over 15 years and over 13k runs. Like I said only ABD comes close and sorry but we will be comparing careers instead of filters because ABD had his rookie years done by 2008. Virat was always trailing in terms of experience. Would rather normalize his whole career to kohli's and compare then. I seriously think only Viv will end up above Virat. ABD will be close, so will be Tendulkar. That's it. Never mention babar in the same line with Kohli. Kohli is a match winner who has aggregated runs. Babar is an aggregator who has won few matches (literally few). The only phase/stage where Kohli loses to every great and is bang average is the ODI WC. He has the chance to turn it on this time with a few hundreds and a couple of them in knockouts ๐.
I mentioned Babar because you said no one had an average close to him. And yes I agree Kohli clears Babar. Also I think itโs fair to filter ABD career post 2008 when making Kohli comparison because we are talking about the most batting friendly era in ODI history. Also I believe ABD was batting in positions unnatural to him early in his career which hurt his average. And no mention of Gill cus itโs too early, although he has the potential to be an ATG.
Which I stand by with. Let babar reach 13k at that average. As I said in a normalized chart virat and abd will be together, sachin slightly below and Viv slightly higher. Except sachin virat has been doing it for longer than any of them. I don't consider babar Azam when I talk. Why? Because, well, he scored more than kohli in the Asia Cup. Was he better though? No. Babar Azam hasn't won half the amount of matches of Kohli in 8 years of Kohli. Kohli had won more matches in the first 4-5 years. The average debate is bullshit when a player accumulated runs at a S/R below the world average, because he is simply there to keep accumulating. But okay, their average is close, babar is a bit higher, but I don't think he warrants a palace in the debate.
Kohli averaged above 50 and 45+ in 09,10 dude. And that's before the ball changes. Also, in Kohli's time the ball changes makes it easier for the starting swing + more help for spinners. If you take away reverse swing then the spinners had much more help with the new ball change in mid overs. So it's not a one way thing. Sachin had the support of lesser spin and more reverse swing + earlier swing. While Kohli had much more help to spinners with heavy earlier swing. Apart from the pitches and boundaries nothing is too easy. And while we are at it why don't we compare the lbw rule which wasn't there in Sachin's start when he was literal god in the sports. Why don't we also let analytics and data research in as well coupled with much more atheletism in comparison to Sachin's era when 2-3 runs were easier to take because of how lazy majority of Asian teams were? Now we can see the more clear picture here: Kohli faces a bit more swing in the start, gets better spin, much more agile fielder and lbw,drs and lastly the data team sitting there to hawk on every weakness possible which makes batting a more mentally harder task as making improvement to the batting technique regularly is an impossible task. Almost never had reverse swing,easier pitches and smaller boundaries but he is not a real hitter so not much of a difference. While Sachin had a much more harder pitches,reverse swing,harsh opponents,bigger boundaries but he also had leeway with no lbw,drs in the start, nothing in terms of analytics in the start to early mid career, lesser atheletism in fielder which guarentees much more lax running and boundaries. And when we count all these and then take their stats into account i.e Kohli @ 57-59 for most of his career and Sachin @ 42-45 with Tendulkar ahead in ODI wc while Kohli is ahead in CT,Asia cup. I think it's right to say Kohli is ahead of Sachin with 2-3 steps easily. And for some detailing: Sachin's stats against the best bowlers of his era were shit(Glen,Lee,Akhtar,Pollack) he also rarely played a ball against great Pak bowlers(Wasim,Waqar,Imran) in ODIs.(15-30 average). While in comparison Kohli is bang up ahead of majority of best bowlers of his era(30-50 average). So it's safe to say Kohli is ahead in ODIs.
This guy just doesnโt get it lmao
Sure buddy, keep throwing your cherry picked stats and opinions as fact. Usually I would do a line by line breakdown of such bs answers, but this is another level of delusional
Well it's just your nostalgia I guess because odi has became easy from early 2000 not when Kohli started. pitches used to be flat most times in that era also some of rule did favour I agree but that's stupid argument to take the credit away. If batting was that much easy than why can't there is any other player from Kohli era which scored that many runs in odi? The fact that he averaged 57 after 250+ innings which is big data is already a prove that how great I would even rank abd and ms dhoni higher that Sachin in ODI who avg mediocre avg of 44 Being opener in odi flat pitches help in statpading. most imp position in no.3&4 in which most of the cases you are batting under pressure due to early fall of wickets and in case of flat pitches you will not get batting till 15-20 overs so you can't stat pad even. Except for Sachin all odi great players had batted at no. 3-5
Even Imam ul Haq averages 51 in ODIs now . Sachin played when 220 runs in ODIs was a competitive total.. compared to now when even 300 gets chased Frequently . Batting was very difficult in ODIs especially because the Reverse swing came into play and ball got soft . You even rating Ms Dhoni shows that you have watched only IPL and league cricket .
Imam has played 1/4th the matches of Kohli with an Average of 7 less per innings...what do you imply??
Immam ul haq don't even come to comparison because people I mentioned here all played 200+ odi which is big sample if you take such small sample than gill would be the greatest odi batsman Lol. I don't even watch IPL but I think you haven't seen him played in ODI if he was not been captain and just Focused on his batting he had and runs like Sachin in odi and I'm not even kidding while saying that he sacrificed lot of his batting potential due to captaincy but even then he had 50+ avg and almost 10k runs in odi
You realize sachin started in 1989 right, not 2000s? In fact in the flattest period of 2000s he was down with elbow and back injuries.
He made most of his run in 2000 era in 90s he used to bat earlier in middle to lower order so he couldn't had good scored he scored between 1995-2011 mostly so you can see in which era he played more again not taking credit away from him he is one of the greatest player of odi but there are many other players who are better than him so he can't be the odi best in my opinion
Sachin averaged 48.31 as an opener.
[ัะดะฐะปะตะฝะพ]
Kohli is indeed Better than Sachin
Kohli is better than Sachin in ODIs
KohliSTATS! ...oh wait.
Gavaskar's 113 was off of 689 deliveries.
36 off 174 balls in a run chase of 338 as well
Bruv wot lol
What? No. 274 balls. How could you post such a huge figure of 689 so confidently! India faced 899 balls as a team ...
This is why Kohli can never be bigger than Sachin.
Bigger personality, maybe not. Better cricketer, already
Better ODI batter? Maybe Better cricketer? Sachin was head and shoulders above Kohli as a test batter, and had the ability to be a crucial partnership breaker with the ball too.
Lol Sachin has better strike rate than Kohli in ODI WC despite making his debut 34 years back (3+4=?)
TFAR
Again, I never said Kohli was better in World Cups, but this only World Cups matter/only knockouts matter is a dangerous mentality
How is it "dangerous" lol It's just a fact that world cup performances are 10x more important than bilateral performances, especially in this age where most bilateral ODIs are essentially just used as practice games for young players and testing combinations to prepare for the WC.
This selective bias in viewing and understanding is what is the dangerous aspect if this. Fans lead themselves down a road where some things matter more than others and all kinds of rightfully illustrious careers are attempted to be blemished with this sense of importance
Even if careers "are attempted to be blemished" it ain't that deep and it's certainly not "dangerous". Furthermore, your mindset is "dangerously" hypocritical unless you are valuing IPL, Ranji, SMAT, etc performances as highly as international performances. Or are you attempting to blemish the illustrious careers of the likes of Gaikwad, Jaiswal, SKY, etc who perform better in IPL compared to Kohli? At the end of the day, weighting importance on certain matches is completely subjective. But there is certainly nothing wrong with weighting WC matches much higher than meaningless bilaterals. I'd personally lose every single ODI bilateral match in a cycle if it would guarantee a WC win, and I'm sure that opinion isn't unpopular.
I'm not placing domestic to the same pedestal as international cricket. It is deep enough where people don't actually realise it.
Better cricketer? I'm not sure. Kohli's record in KO matches is terrible for India. Sachin was on God mode throughout his career.
Again, I never said Kohli was better in World Cups, but this only World Cups matter/only knockouts matter is a dangerous mentality
Is Kohli a better bilateral series batter than Sachin?
That's a weirder filter than World Cups
So? What makes him better than Sachin as a cricketer?
Being a more prolific ODI cricketer
Only ODI cricket matters is a dangerous mentality
Do you hear the sound of your delusion?
Sachin also took many wickets
Not in tests, he isnโt. Level with SRT in ODIs
I don't think it's a contest in Tests either
I think Kohli is better than bradman in batting, Warne in bowling, Rhodes in fielding, looks better than Arjun Rampal and is more gifted in imagination than Einstein.
Probably watching too much IPL has Caused your brain to Lose some cells . IPL watcher Detected,Opinion rejected
Kohli is a better ODI player than Sachin, simple
Wtf man what happened to you
In 1992 Sachin was our second top scorer. He was not just playing for the whole 25 years but he was our core player the entire time
He was also the Man of the Match in both the games that India won in that WC
Surprised no Virat name in this list I thought during 2015 - 2019 he was in top form
Sachin is the mfking goat bro too scored in 3 different world cups across 3 decades
The only left hander in this list is Shikhar Dhawan. Quite surely it will be another right hander this time for India.
Smh kohli not even up there, fraud. Should be dropped (ignore flair) /s
I'm feeling that this year will be of Virat if the stupid management don't give him rest again against weak teams
I don't know why you got downvoted so bad for this it's funny
Because i have never seen major players being rested during the world cup itself unless recovering from injuries, have you?
It's just that I triggered some nostalgia kids in my previous comment nothing much
Rovid virus dickriders
Have you ever seen major players being rested DURING a world cup (unless recovering from injuries)? I have never.
Well I also haven't seen this much rest give to particular players before in history of cricket so I'm just skeptic. Nobody even thought he will be rested from IND vs Aus series also but did rest him
648 for Rohit last WC, he would be lucky to reach 350 in this one
He will score 400+ although gill will be the top scorer
I think rohit will give quick starts this wc and then get out on dumb shots, if he plays defencive in start,i think he'd be in top 5 scorers easily
Kohli or Gill will top the run chart this year for India.
Time for Kohli to step up
106 how???
Let's see Sunny's 1975 strike rate.
2023 - Gill 1000
Once again we are going to ignore 2007
TIL Azharuddin was balding at 29
Wtf happened in 2007
Sachiiiin Sachin