Kohli vs Tendulkar, who was more selfish?

[reyrey]

Yeah for an extra half and hour. Would have made such a huge difference lol

What you are doing is finding ways to go around the obvious fact that he only decided to keep the game alive for a personal milestone

Him chasing that personal milestone wouldn't cost his team anything. If he went for a personal milestone and it would cost the team something, like make it more difficult for his team to win a match then it would be selfish.

What Sachin did was egotistical not selfish. Learn the difference.

 

[Gob]

Him chasing that personal milestone wouldn't cost his team anything. If he went for a personal milestone and it would cost the team something, like make it more difficult for his team to win a match then it would be selfish.

What Sachin did was egotistical not selfish. Learn the difference.

Ok

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

since when is scoring at 90 strike rate slowing down the team scoring?

When other team members scoring at 140.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Sachin was way more selfish

Remember refusing to settle for a draw in a test match against Sri Lanka with an hour or so to go on an absolute road when the game was going nowhere because he was closing in on a hundred

That cause no harm to the team

 

[Jumno]

Didn't Tendulkar bring up is hundred with a 6, 6 times?

 

[shortpitched713]

Which prolific run machine is more selfish tho

Why does this matter? No one thinks these guys are ever really hurting their teams through their playstyle. Both clearly try in the field, an well known place for selfish players to switch off if they wanted to.

We're not talking about Boycott here. Generally for both guys, their runs = better chances for India.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Why does this matter?

It doesn’t

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

When other team members scoring at 140.

Rest of the team members weren't scoring at 140. Only Rohit was consistently scoring faster than Kohli. Iyer did it in two matches max.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Ind wouldn't have won the NZ league match, Aus league, SA match(let the other be more free in their approach by holding up one end). In the Bang match, he scored faster than nearly everyone, and in the NZ SF, it wasn't 100% sure that any number three would have hit a hundred. Conditions were insanely hot when Kohli was batting(Gill retired out) plus Santner was bowling really well in the middle overs, and there was some awkward bounce here and there. Iyer performed better, but he was there later in the innings, when it was cooler plus Iyer is a beast at Wankhede. Ultimately he got a hundred in a SF @ an SR of 100+. Heck even Mitchell, who got better conditions in the second half, didn't bat much faster than Kohli.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

There are good reasons to take SRT ahead of Kohli, but one can't ignore Kohli was Ind's joint best or best player this WC(cause of Shami's pedestrian performance in the final).

 

[Victor Ian]

Ind wouldn't have won the NZ league match, Aus league, SA match....

Did it matter?

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Him chasing that personal milestone wouldn't cost his team anything. If he went for a personal milestone and it would cost the team something, like make it more difficult for his team to win a match then it would be selfish.

What Sachin did was egotistical not selfish. Learn the difference.

So basically he was selfish

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Did it matter?

Obviously it did. There is a large, irreconcilable gap between finishing first and second, but you’d finish second rather than last. And all of it would have mattered if ***** like Gill, Iyer would’ve contributed a little in the final. But I guess you’ll only blame the guy who scored a fluent fifty in the final for choking.