Is Kohli better than Ponting?

[Zinzan]

Kohli is going to fall off a cliff IMO

He’ll start nicking off all the time once his eye isn’t as good

I reckon that'll happen to Smith before Kohli when he comes back tbh. He seems to be more reliance of a good eye than most of the other top bats around.

 

[Burner]

I don't think his eyes are going to be the only thing that's going to be not as good if he falls off from a cliff

 

[OverratedSanity]

For someone who is considered so fit, Kohli also has had numerous minor injuries. His shoulder and back issues have been recurring at an alarming rate and I don't think his peak will last much longer. Bit of a shame that so far, many of the best innings he's played in his current purple patch have been wasted because of piss poor support from his teammates.

 

[trundler]

Nah Smith will get hungrier and secure his place as Bradman reincarnate.

 

[trundler]

Kohli will probably retire at 35 or so because of his back.

 

[Zinzan]

Nah Smith will get hungrier and secure his place as Bradman reincarnate.

I'm willing to put a long-term sportsman's bet/avatar challenge on the fact that assuming Smith plays another 40 tests minimum, his overall career average will drop below 55, just like so many others who averaged on or near 60 for periods of their careers, hence putting him in a bigger group of the top averages of all time, as opposed to somewhere near the very top where he is right now. He'll def end up below the likes of Sanga and Kallis imo.

We'll know in 5-6 years, so this can be dug up then.

 

[Top_Cat]

For someone who is considered so fit, Kohli also has had numerous minor injuries. His shoulder and back issues have been recurring at an alarming rate and I don't think his peak will last much longer. Bit of a shame that so far, many of the best innings he's played in his current purple patch have been wasted because of piss poor support from his teammates.

This is actually a really great point. Huge part of Ponting's success for as long as it was comes from just being on the park longer.

My working theory is that Ponting played a lot more junior sport than Kohli. Kohli was, in comparison to now, a tubby junior player whereas Ponting was a pretty good junior footballer and always lean. Even now he'd probably still do a job on the ball.

 

[TheJediBrah]

This is actually a really great point. Huge part of Ponting's success comes from just being on the park longer.

My working theory is that Ponting played a lot more junior sport than Kohli. Kohli was, in comparison to now, a tubby junior player whereas Ponting was a pretty good junior footballer and always lean.

Genetics a big part of that too. Ponting was naturally very fit, healthy and most importantly durable. Compare that to someone like Michael Clarke who just had a **** back and hamstrings, and a lot of that is just genetics.

 

[Burner]

I don't think Kohli's had injuries that have seen him miss out on many games though. I can only recall him missing out on just 1 test. I was actually amazed at just how many games he plays on the trot. Back injuries are an issue for the future but until now I would say Kohli is among the fittest cricketers game attendance wise.

 

[Top_Cat]

Genetics a big part of that too. Ponting was naturally very fit, healthy and most importantly durable. Compare that to someone like Michael Clarke who just had a **** back and hamstrings, and a lot of that is just genetics.

Sure but we're talking about Kohli here. Bloke's a slug tbh.

 

[Zinzan]

Kohli strikes me as one who'd tough it out through an injury or niggle though. In the Brendon McCullum vain in that respect.

 

[GotSpin]

I reckon that'll happen to Smith before Kohli when he comes back tbh. He seems to be more reliance of a good eye than most of the other top bats around.

With his tendency to push at the ball outside off so much Im kind of surprised he doesn’t nick off all the time already

 

[GotSpin]

I don't think Kohli's had injuries that have seen him miss out on many games though. I can only recall him missing out on just 1 test. I was actually amazed at just how many games he plays on the trot. Back injuries are an issue for the future but until now I would say Kohli is among the fittest cricketers game attendance wise.

Doesn’t mean he isn’t playing through niggles

His workload is just massive isn’t it though

 

[TheJediBrah]

I reckon that'll happen to Smith before Kohli when he comes back tbh. He seems to be more reliance of a good eye than most of the other top bats around.

Tbh I think it's more like the opposite. Smith's technique & method is so effective because it works for him even when he's not in best form. He's more likely to stay productive with a loss of eye than almost anyone else in world cricket IMO

 

[cnerd123]

This is actually a really great point. Huge part of Ponting's success for as long as it was comes from just being on the park longer.

My working theory is that Ponting played a lot more junior sport than Kohli. Kohli was, in comparison to now, a tubby junior player whereas Ponting was a pretty good junior footballer and always lean. Even now he'd probably still do a job on the ball.

yea Kohli's injury issues remind me of people who find fitness late in life. Their bodies just aren't as durable as those who have been physically active from a young age, and despite being fitter they are also quite injury prone.

Having said that, I don't quite agree with the premise. Kohli was regarded as an electric fielder coming up through junior, U19 and domestic cricket, and he played a **** ton of cricket growing up not just as a batsman, but as an allrounder with that weird action of his. I think he had plenty of physical activity as a kid. His issues now, to some extent, could simply be down to decades of stress placed on a body that's probably not built for it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Sure but we're talking about Kohli here. Bloke's a slug tbh.

pretty athletic for a sub-continental person though

 

[Zinzan]

Tbh I think it's more like the opposite. Smith's technique & method is so effective because it works for him even when he's not in best form. He's more likely to stay productive with a loss of eye than almost anyone else in world cricket IMO

I don't think you can get a more hand-eye reliance technique than one where your default movement is across to off-stump aiming to hit middle & off deliveries through midwicket. The fact he's not LBW more often is simply due to the fact he so rarely misses.

That said, he's proved to be adaptable before, so he could very well find a new way once his eye deteriorates 5-10% from his peak.

Anyway, time will tell.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I don't think you can get a more hand-eye reliance technique than one where your default movement is across to off-stump aiming to hit middle & off deliveries through midwicket. The fact he's not LBW more often is simply due to the fact he so rarely misses.

That's because his head's directly over the ball. It takes some real mental gymnastics to look at a guy's technique and decide that the reason he's so good is because he has unparalleled hand-eye coordination in spite of a dodgy technique, rather than just accept that he's clearly got an effective technique.

It's the blokes that play at balls away from their body, with minimal footwork, flashing at wide ones etc. that are more likely to have issues if they lose their eye. Like the opposite of Steve Smith.

 

[OverratedSanity]

That's because his head's directly over the ball. It takes some real mental gymnastics to look at a guy's technique and decide that the reason he's so good is because he has unparalleled hand-eye coordination in spite of a dodgy technique, rather than just accept that he's clearly got an effective technique.

It's the blokes that play at balls away from their body, with minimal footwork, flashing at wide ones etc. that are more likely to have issues if they lose their eye. Like the opposite of Steve Smith.

His head is over the ball because he has superb hand eye co ordination. Ponting was the same. Then his eye went and his head started falling over.

 

[Zinzan]

That's because his head's directly over the ball. It takes some real mental gymnastics to look at a guy's technique and decide that the reason he's so good is because he has unparalleled hand-eye coordination in spite of a dodgy technique, rather than just accept that he's clearly got an effective technique.

It's the blokes that play at balls away from their body, with minimal footwork, flashing at wide ones etc. that are more likely to have issues if they lose their eye. Like the opposite of Steve Smith.

I see it completely the other way around, guys without an unbelievable eye wouldn't last 10 deliveries trying to bat like Smith, even if they practiced for a long time.