Virat Kohli vs Sachin Tendulkar Batting Comparison

[jtrs]

 

[Burgey]

Oh God. It's begun.

 

[Daemon]

It began a long time ago.

Kohli only needs to score 3 more centuries before comparisons with Bradman begin.

 

[sledger]

Can't really compare properly just yet. Kohli not quite at the stage where he's being selected on reputation and past glories (tbf he doesn't have many past glories on which he could rely, so this isn't really his fault), denying opportunities to younger and more deserving players, and playing in pursuit of his own personal milestones rather than the best interests of the team. Once he's done all this he'll probably have a very similar record to Sachin.

 

[trundler]

JAMODIS mean jack ****. Kohli just hit his prime (in tests) and as far as peaks go, his peak is great but not godly. It's too soon. Plus, he's a prick so there's that.
Although, Sachin was getting rated very highly mid-way in his career too. Benaud rated him as the best since Bradman, above Greg Chappell and Bradman himself included him in his XI.

 

[Borges]

Who are these JAMODI characters who apparently are obsessed with these ungodly peaks?

 

[trundler]

Who are these JAMODI characters who apparently are obsessed with these ungodly peaks?

What I meant to say he hasn't done anything otherwordly to merit a comparison with established ATGs. Needs to have a full career pan out well before he's compared to Sachin.

 

[Black_Warrior]

It began a long time ago.

Kohli only needs to score 3 more centuries before comparisons with Bradman begin.

If he's being compared with Tendulkar now, hasn't he already surpassed Bradman?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Kohli's a prick

 

[Jack1]

Across all formats Kohli is a superior player for me

You can also add fielding in and Kohli is a better fielder too. I don't want either of them bowling overs that's for sure.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The best players are often pricks. Warne, Ponting (young), Steve Smith. Even Bradman had a bit of a reputation.

Hmm maybe it's just Australians.

 

[Shri]

Bs. Sachin was way better in slips. In fact, Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag and Sachin were all better in the slips than any of the current players except for maybe Rahane. Back then, our problem was finding bowlers good enough to get an edge off a batsman and now its taking catches when our bowlers do get an edged chance.

 

[trundler]

The best players are often pricks. Warne, Ponting (young), Steve Smith. Even Bradman had a bit of a reputation.

Hmm maybe it's just Australians.

There's WG Grace, too. Probably should have been deported as well.

 

[trundler]

Sachin was truly sensational. I don't care if it's cliched to say so. No one else has averaged over 40 everywhere and I think that's one of the stats which define him. Virat has a long, long way to go before he even deserves to be compared. Plus he's a prick.

 

[marc71178]

Across all formats Kohli is a superior player for me

You can also add fielding in and Kohli is a better fielder too. I don't want either of them bowling overs that's for sure.

Struggling to see whether you think he’s a better player when you combine all 3 formats (which would be wrong because Tendulkar was a far superior Test bat and a better ODI batsman which Kohli’s dominance over him in T20s wouldn’t cover for) or if you think he’s a better player in all 3 formats (which again would be wrong).

 

[Jack1]

Sachin was truly sensational. I don't care if it's cliched to say so. No one else has averaged over 40 everywhere and I think that's one of the stats which define him. Virat has a long, long way to go before he even deserves to be compared. Plus he's a prick.

Sachin was in my ATG team of the last 25 years. He was obviously a great player.

Kohli is a prick yes. I met Sachin, have his autograph and he couldn't stop smiling. He just got out cheaply, still had a smile on his face and was very nice. Despite him obviously being small..he was also surprisingly small in person. He's one of my favourite ever players. That being said Kohli wins over Sachin every time in limited overs for me. In tests I prefer Tendulkar. Overall Kohli for me.

Struggling to see whether you think he’s a better player when you combine all 3 formats (which would be wrong because Tendulkar was a far superior Test bat and a better ODI batsman which Kohli’s dominance over him in T20s wouldn’t cover for) or if you think he’s a better player in all 3 formats (which again would be wrong).

Kohli has huge dominance over him in both limited overs formats. Their test record is similar.

Test averages
Tendulkar 53.78
vs
Kohli 53.4

ODI averages

Kohli 58.1 with 94.14 strike rate
Tendulkar 44.83 with 86.23 strike rate

T20
Kohli 50.84 with 137.32 strike rate

If you are struggling to see why I prefer Kohli then I think you are just ridiculous biased towards Sachin and against Kohli to be honest. It's pretty clear why I think Kohli is the better player across all formats. Kohli averages over 50 in all three with a very good strike rate in limited overs cricket.

 

[Daemon]

'Their Test record is similar'

...not sure if srs

 

[OverratedSanity]

Kohli has been Amla-esque in WCs

 

[OverratedSanity]

'Their Test record is similar'

...not sure if srs

Mate only average matters, literally no other stat is to be considered.

 

[marc71178]

Wow, that's the first time I've been accused of being ridiculously biased towards Tendulkar. Like the rest of his opinions it's a crock of **** but whatever.