Great article on Virat Kohli

[tennisluvr]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

meaning? you haven't read it even after posting it twice?

That was my bad, I thought it was a different article. 

[uttermost]

2 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

What you forgot to mention conveniently is that Sachin has scored most of those as an opener. 

Please bring up statistics of the position Sachin has batted when he scored most of these centuries vs the ones scored by a middle order batsman like Virat Kohli. 

hmm.. how does it matter when you are comparing a player with the best 7 batsmen in that era?

It means that openers in Tendulkar's era were not in his league. They perhaps had impact like Gilchrist etc, but lacked his consistency.

[uttermost]

Just now, tennisluvr said:

That was my bad, I thought it was a different article. 

yes. The article I posted was different from the one Bali posted. And the one I posted I had posted already in a conversation I think. you specifically asked for it when I mentioned it.

[uttermost]

tennislvr,

you keep trying to make comparison with Tendulkar. Its unfair to Tendulkar. you can only make comparison between peers.

 

[Batman_fan]

9 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

What you forgot to mention conveniently is that Sachin has scored most of those as an opener. 

Please bring up statistics of the position Sachin has batted when he scored most of these centuries vs the ones scored by a middle order batsman like Virat Kohli. 

lol...Is that so? Kohli is one down, which means he has that opportunity and time to play less harder ball and read the bowlers line and length before he comes to crease. I could argue everything in favor of Tendulkar, but I don't want to. I am not trying to prove Tendulkar's greatness. 

Read the article above. It put everything in context. 

[uttermost]

Amla's stroke play is amazing, Develliers is inventive, Warner is destructive, Kohli is doggedly determined.

[tennisluvr]

5 minutes ago, Batman_fan said:

lol...Is that so? Kohli is one down, which means he has that opportunity and time to play less harder ball and read the bowlers line and length before he comes to crease. I could argue everything in favor of Tendulkar, but I don't want to. I am not trying to prove Tendulkar's greatness. 

Read the article above. It put everything in context. 

Okay but then even in the 1990s an opener would have the advantage of playing when there are only 2 fielders in the outfield thereby allowing them to score more boundaries. But then again, it's also true that since the field restrictions have changed now and even the middle order batsmen can afford to play aggressively, that might be an advantage to Kohli. 

I agree with the overall point though, it's perhaps unfair to compare them both. It's just that I had never thought a team like India would produce a player of the caliber of Kohli who can dominate all 3 formats of the game with such consummate ease, and am pleasantly surprised at his strength growing by the day. 

Not knocking against Sachin, I would take Dravid anyday over Sachin if I had my own test team anyway. That doesn't make Sachin any less a player than Dravid, but makes Dravid that much more solid as a player and a team man than Sachin in my opinion. 

[uttermost]

Just now, tennisluvr said:

Okay but then even in the 1990s an opener would have the advantage of playing when there are only 2 fielders in the outfield thereby allowing them to score more boundaries. But then again, it's also true that since the field restrictions have changed now and even the middle order batsmen can afford to play aggressively, that might be an advantage to Kohli. 

I agree with the overall point though, it's perhaps unfair to compare them both. It's just that I had never thought a team like India would produce a player of the caliber of Kohli who can dominate all 3 formats of the game with such consummate ease, and am pleasantly surprised at his strength growing by the day. 

Not knocking against Sachin, I would take Dravid anyday over Sachin if I had my own test team anyway. 

pretty sure if T20 existed in the 90s, Sachin would have aced it too.

kohli hasn't dominated. He's knocking off singles more than his peers from what I notice randomly. pretty sure if someone took the stats of boundaries in his runs, his will be the lowest among the top batsmen of this era.

[uttermost]

3 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Okay but then even in the 1990s an opener would have the advantage of playing when there are only 2 fielders in the outfield thereby allowing them to score more boundaries. But then again, it's also true that since the field restrictions have changed now and even the middle order batsmen can afford to play aggressively, that might be an advantage to Kohli. 

I agree with the overall point though, it's perhaps unfair to compare them both. It's just that I had never thought a team like India would produce a player of the caliber of Kohli who can dominate all 3 formats of the game with such consummate ease, and am pleasantly surprised at his strength growing by the day. 

Not knocking against Sachin, I would take Dravid anyday over Sachin if I had my own test team anyway. 

you agree now, and after a couple days post another thread if Kohli scores a century in SA.

[uttermost]

5 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Okay but then even in the 1990s an opener would have the advantage of playing when there are only 2 fielders in the outfield thereby allowing them to score more boundaries. But then again, it's also true that since the field restrictions have changed now and even the middle order batsmen can afford to play aggressively, that might be an advantage to Kohli. 

I agree with the overall point though, it's perhaps unfair to compare them both. It's just that I had never thought a team like India would produce a player of the caliber of Kohli who can dominate all 3 formats of the game with such consummate ease, and am pleasantly surprised at his strength growing by the day. 

Not knocking against Sachin, I would take Dravid anyday over Sachin if I had my own test team anyway. 

Kohli has figured out the nitty gritties of cricket. and is calculated.

Tendulkar is a child prodigy. Just watch the guy bat @16 yrs. 

[Kool_SRG]

50 minutes ago, uttermost said:

pretty sure if T20 existed in the 90s, Sachin would have aced it too.

kohli hasn't dominated. He's knocking off singles more than his peers from what I notice randomly. pretty sure if someone took the stats of boundaries in his runs, his will be the lowest among the top batsmen of this era.

He did in IPL and was leading/top run scorer in entire season few times.

[chatra]

Look at the attacks Sachin faced. And on trickier wickets. Wasim and Waqar. Murali. Warne and McGrath. Ambrose and Walsh. Donald and Kallis. Plus Heath, McDermott, Pollack, Akhtar...there is plenty more. Name me 5 bowlers that good right now.

[tennisluvr]

4 minutes ago, chatra said:

Look at the attacks Sachin faced. And on trickier wickets. Wasim and Waqar. Murali. Warne and McGrath. Ambrose and Walsh. Donald and Kallis. Plus Heath, McDermott, Pollack, Akhtar...there is plenty more. Name me 5 bowlers that good right now.

Steyn, Starc, Mitchell Johnson(although he's retired now), Boult and Morkel. 

[Demigod]

4 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Steyn, Starc, Mitchell Johnson(although he's retired now), Boult and Morkel. 

Amir, Ajmal, Narine, malinga, Tahir, musthafizur, 

[Satakarni_bali]

3 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Steyn, Starc, Mitchell Johnson(although he's retired now), Boult and Morkel. 

apart from STARC, rest have passed their prime including James Anderson before KOHLI (from 2014)stamped his presence.

Real test is next 18 months... If he does well he can be the best in his era. lets hope he does