Sachin is to Kohli what Maradona is to Messi?

[SachinFan]

You sound like a hypercompetitive mentor who will never settle for the second spot.

Nah mate. Just pissed off at Kohli after he tanked in the semifinal and India made heavy weather of a modest target like 240.

 

[trundler]

The best batsmen adapt, is all I'm saying. How he goes against Anderson this year will tell us if he's really suspect against in-swingers.

 

[Kirkut]

Agreed. That innings was legendary indeed. However, as much as I want to, I cannot judge the pedigree of a batsman by T20. Particularly when the player he is being pitted against, Sachin, never played it. If Sachin played T20 in his heydays, he would have caused rampages. Just yesterday, I was watching the highlights of the 2nd or 3rd ODI from the 2001 Australia tour of India. Tendulkar scored 62 of 38 balls. The other batsmen during his tenure at the crease scored 23 of 56 balls. The opponent bowlers were Mcgrath, Warne and Fleming. Such was the dominance of Tendulkar in his heydays.

That's very hypothetical, similarly one can claim that Sachin would have had a very hard time in the 70s vs Imran, Lillee and WI pacemen, but you can't be sure of it.

I think T20 batsmanship should get the respect it deserves, I have never played competitive cricket so maybe people here who have know it better.

 

[SachinFan]

The best batsmen adapt, is all I'm saying. How he goes against Anderson this year will tell us if he's really suspect against in-swingers.

My personal opinion, which most, if not all, would disagree with - I find Anderson extremely mediocre. The bar for bowling to me was set by Mcgrath and Donald (highest echelon), Bond, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Wasim, Pollock (2nd echetierlon), Shoaib, Steyn, Ntini, Bishop, Brett Lee (3rd tier). I find Anderson at the 3rd tier at best. That is not Smith's fault though, but I would have loved to watch Smith battle true fast bowlers like Waqar and Donald. Sigh.

 

[Kirkut]

Nah mate. Just pissed off at Kohli after he tanked in the semifinal and India made heavy weather of a modest target like 240.

Happens, it's only a game and Kohli is human.

 

[SachinFan]

That's very hypothetical, similarly one can claim that Sachin would have had a very hard time in the 70s vs Imran, Lillee and WI pacemen, but you can't be sure of it.

I think T20 batsmanship should get the respect it deserves, I have never played competitive cricket so maybe people here who have know it better.

Nope. I cannot say that. Because simply said, Donald, Mcgrath, Ambrose, Walsh, Waqar, Wasim, Warne, Murali, Steyn, Pollock were a more lethal bowling attack than the 70s. By every bit of statistical analysis.

If you disagree, tell me which bowler of the 70s were better than which bowler Sachin faced, and I can try explain.

 

[trundler]

The thing with Anderson is he's essentially the pace bowling equivalent of a finger spinner. Wasim at home, Ishant away. He's averaging in the teens in England so deserves respect. Would be a challenge.

 

[SachinFan]

Happens, it's only a game and Kohli is human.

Nah mate. I am not so biased that one failure and I will start barking. It has been three WC semifinals by now. 2011, 2015 and 2019. 9, 1 and 1 are what he scored in three semifinals - the last two majorly responsible for India bowing out.

 

[SachinFan]

The thing with Anderson is he's essentially the pace bowling equivalent of a finger spinner. Wasim at home, Ishant away. He's averaging in the teens in England so deserves respect. Would be a challenge.

Nah. He averages 23 in England, not teens. That is excellent though.

 

[trundler]

In the last 4 years or so, I meant.

 

[trundler]

Still, 23 in this decade is very very good, all things considered.

 

[SachinFan]

In the last 4 years or so, I meant.

Aha. Right. Averaging 17.

 

[SachinFan]

Still, 23 in this decade is very very good, all things considered.

In ODIs, yes. That is what makes Bumrah so special. In tests, no. The quality of test batting has gone down drastically. How many drawn tests do you see these days? How many marathon double or triple centuries? Most tests get bundled in 3-4 days. Because courtesy of T20 and high scoring ODIs, batsmen are gradually losing the ability of staying longer at crease and make big runs like before. That is why tests fold out in 4-5 days these days. Thus it is a good time to be a test bowler these days. ODIs are the opposite. Run fests are the norm. So a lowly bowling average in ODIs is special.

 

[Kirkut]

Nope. I cannot say that. Because simply said, Donald, Mcgrath, Ambrose, Walsh, Waqar, Wasim, Warne, Murali, Steyn, Pollock were a more lethal bowling attack than the 70s. By every bit of statistical analysis.

If you disagree, tell me which bowler of the 70s were better than which bowler Sachin faced, and I can try explain.

Yes Sachin did face high quality bowlers but it is not that he creamed them for runs every time he faced, sometimes he won the battles and sometimes he lost. all part of game. Also in the 70s he would have probably curbed his attacking game more when facing WI quartet, because bad balls were non existent hence higher price on the wicket. It's hard to tell if he did well back then.

 

[SachinFan]

Yes Sachin did face high quality bowlers but it is not that he creamed them for runs every time he faced, sometimes he won the battles and sometimes he lost. all part of game. Also in the 70s he would have probably curbed his attacking game more when facing WI quartet, because bad balls were non existent hence higher price on the wicket. It's hard to tell if he did well back then.

Nobody can cream those bowlers consistently. But he played a lot against them. So if he still maintains a healthy average after that, it stands to reason that he handled them well enough. Not to mention, Sachin did cream quite a few. He did cream Warne. Warne was an enigma before 1998. The 1998 Aus tour of India was advertized as an epic showdown between the maverick Warne and the maestro Sachin. Sachin decimated him, and continued to do for the rest of Warne's career. Sachin played Ambrose and Walsh quite well (although not many), he played Pollock and Steyn really well. Wasim, Waqar and Donald - a mix of both, he played some great knocks, never quite got owned by them, but he tanked in many matches and hence the overall records are not great. The only bowler who owned Sachin was Mcgrath.

The WI quartet was not more lethal than Shoaib-Lee. He invented the bent over late upper cut specifically to tackle Lee's express bouncers. He would have adapted to tackle the quartet s well.

 

[Kirkut]

Nobody can cream those bowlers consistently. But he played a lot against them. So if he still maintains a healthy average after that, it stands to reason that he handled them well enough. Not to mention, Sachin did cream quite a few. He did cream Warne. Warne was an enigma before 1998. The 1998 Aus tour of India was advertized as an epic showdown between the maverick Warne and the maestro Sachin. Sachin decimated him, and continued to do for the rest of Warne's career. Sachin played Ambrose and Walsh quite well (although not many), he played Pollock and Steyn really well. Wasim, Waqar and Donald - a mix of both, he played some great knocks, never quite got owned by them, but he tanked in many matches and hence the overall records are not great. The only bowler who owned Sachin was Mcgrath.

The WI quartet was not more lethal than Shoaib-Lee. He invented the bent over late upper cut specifically to tackle Lee's express bouncers. He would have adapted to tackle the quartet s well.

You are wrong there but let's just assume 4 Shoaib Akhtars as per your point. Yes, try facing 4 Akhtars for 90 overs at a time when bouncers had no limits, as a batsman you had to be very alert every over of every session and very patiently wait for a bad ball to time it for a four. It was that tough to face WI quartet.

Back to your opening post, most here in CW are aware that Kohli is not superior to Tendulkar. But as far as I know Kohli of 2016 was batsmanship at another level, he set his own standards of greatness.

 

[SachinFan]

You are wrong there but let's just assume 4 Shoaib Akhtars as per your point. Yes, try facing 4 Akhtars for 90 overs at a time when bouncers had no limits, as a batsman you had to be very alert every over of every session and very patiently wait for a bad ball to time it for a four. It was that tough to face WI quartet.

Back to your opening post, most here in CW are aware that Kohli is not superior to Tendulkar. But as far as I know Kohli of 2016 was batsmanship at another level, he set his own standards of greatness.

All the four of the pace quarter played together in just 11 matches in their career. 3 of them played together in many matches though. Sachin faced Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, then Donald-Pollock-Ntini. Of the four in the pace quarter, Andy Roberts is slightly overhyped. He is at best as good as Ntini or Gillespie.

Yes, 2016 T20 WC was Kohli's own. I just want him to own an ODI WC like that as well, I will be the first one to hail him as the greatest ODI batsman after tat.

 

[harsh.ag]

All the four of the pace quarter played together in just 11 matches in their career. 3 of them played together in many matches though. Sachin faced Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, then Donald-Pollock-Ntini. Of the four in the pace quarter, Andy Roberts is slightly overhyped. He is at best as good as Ntini or Gillespie.
Yes, 2016 T20 WC was Kohli's own. I just want him to own an ODI WC like that as well, I will be the first one to hail him as the greatest ODI batsman after tat.

Gavaskar reckons he was the best of them.

 

[SachinFan]

Gavaskar reckons he was the best of them.

Ah. Didn't know that. Gavaskar had probably mentioned all four of them in Idols, but cannot recall if he declared any of them as the best of the lot.

 

[CricAddict]

Followed this conversation just today and Sachinfan, you are a good addition to the forum. - A co-Sachin fan