Virat Kohli, the greatest ODI bat ever?

[smalishah84]

Today his ODI average touched 60. 10000 runs at an average of 60. 25 of them in chases and 21 of those resulting in wins. Has been even better with captaincy.

Is he the greatest ODI batsman ever? Overtaking Viv Richards now?

Thoughts

 

[Bolo]

Difficult to compare his 11 years to Sachin's 23, although i favour Kohli.
Very difficult to compare his era to Viv's.
Impossible to split Kohli and AB.

The answer to this poll is no. If there is a clear winner it would have to be Viv until we see what Kohli does over the rest of his career. But I dont think Viv is a clear winner.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

How much has his batting impacted the game? In an era where runrate are so high.

If we go clearly on the stats, he's the best ever to play the game(sorry RTD)

Viv just in the conversation because he was slaying bowlers without any mercy.

 

[trundler]

Tired old argument but you wouldn't see batsmen coming in after the 30th over and scoring centuries in Viv's day.

I dunno, possibly. It's either him or Viv for sure tho

 

[smalishah84]

yeah, i think i would put him above AB now. It's between him and Viv for mine too. Not sure when do we hand it to him? When he has a stellar world cup?

 

[srbhkshk]

The bilateral ODI GOAT - quite easily.
Overall GOAT - Needs one world cup knock out match winning innings.

 

[Slifer]

The question I ask myself, could viv average 60+ in this day and age vs the likes of oz, bang, India, nz, RSA, Ireland etc. Could he do this under current conditions and with current equipment?? My gut is saying yes no doubt in my mind!! I also think viv would easily have a 95 + sr. Viv probably wouldnt have the century conversion though imo, kohli is on another level in this respect. Would kohli have averaged 47 + and struck at 90+ in the 80s under 80s conditions, 80s equipment and without restrictions on bouncers?? Haha unlikely imo. I could see him doing 45 at high 70s low 80s though. Anyway, as it is, if kohli retired right now I'd probably consider him the goat in odis. Even with everything I wrote above. Dude is just on another level atm

 

[harsh.ag]

No. Viv still GOAT.

 

[Zinzan]

He's getting up there. Tough to compare him with Viv's average of just under 50 & SR of 90 considering his era though. Considering that, Viv's record is probably equivalent to averaging 60 with a SR of 120 today.

My order would be;

Viv
Kohli
AB
Sachin

 

[Red Hill]

For me it's still Viv.

The top 5 batting at 3/4 in ODIs between 75-91 (Viv's era)

Viv - Avg 52 : SR 91
Miandad - Avg 44 : SR 67
D. Jones - Avg 49 : SR 75
Border - Avg 32 : SR 69
R.Richardson -Avg 37 : Sr 65

Viv was such a level above his peers in terms of scoring power and attitude that he was about 4 generations ahead of the development of the game. I'm not sure Kohli is that far ahead of the curve.

Kohli is outstanding though....for me it's a three way argument between Viv, Kohli and AB DeVilliers now.

 

[mr_mister]

Easily yes. Take off the rose coloured glasses

 

[Daemon]

Viv for me too. But I will say that it’s easier to be far ahead of the curve when most people haven’t really figured out the format.

 

[trundler]

Comparing Grace and Hobbs, eh

 

[Senile Sentry]

Yep. He's definitely getting there. Can hardly argue with 10k rins at over 60. Unreal stuff.

 

[Senile Sentry]

Difficult to compare his 11 years to Sachin's 23, although i favour Kohli.
Very difficult to compare his era to Viv's.
Impossible to split Kohli and AB.

The answer to this poll is no. If there is a clear winner it would have to be Viv until we see what Kohli does over the rest of his career. But I dont think Viv is a clear winner.

Ab is clearly a rung below Kohli.

 

[Zinzan]

Easily yes. Take off the rose coloured glasses

Is there an argument along with that statement?

Legitimately, and especially highlighted in Red Hill's 75-91 analysis, how is Kohli even close to be as far ahead of the pack today as Richards' was against his peers. Richard's SR of 90 came in an era where 70 was outstanding... I mean even the great Gordon Greenidge had a SR of 64 IIRC. Kohli's average is brilliant, but his SR is just up with his peers, it's not really outstanding.

 

[Zinzan]

Viv for me too. But I will say that it’s easier to be far ahead of the curve when most people haven’t really figured out the format.

I don't know if I agree with that. How do we know that in 20 years the expected/par batting SR in ODI isn't 130? Would we then hold it against Kohli in only striking around 90 in his era, and say they hadn't really figured out the right batting approach back then?

 

[Daemon]

For me it's still Viv.

The top 5 batting at 3/4 in ODIs between 75-91 (Viv's era)

Viv - Avg 52 : SR 91
Miandad - Avg 44 : SR 67
D. Jones - Avg 49 : SR 75
Border - Avg 32 : SR 69
R.Richardson -Avg 37 : Sr 65

Viv was such a level above his peers in terms of scoring power and attitude that he was about 4 generations ahead of the development of the game. I'm not sure Kohli is that far ahead of the curve.

Kohli is outstanding though....for me it's a three way argument between Viv, Kohli and AB DeVilliers now.

Viv averaged 47 in ODIs, not 52. His SR was what put him ahead of the pack more than the average imo, as brilliant as it was. For Kohli it's the other way around.

We also always leave out Abbas (I don't know where he usually batted tbf) who averaged 47 at an SR of 85 in the same era as Viv. The only peer who can match his stats, albeit playing only 1/3 of the games.

 

[Daemon]

I don't know if I agree with that. How do we know that in 20 years the expected/par batting SR in ODI isn't 130? Would we then hold it against Kohli in only striking around 90 in his era, and say they hadn't really figured out the right batting approach back then?

Not really because the format has been around for a long time now.

ODIs were much younger back then, which leaves room for that argument. Not saying that the other players just needed to flick a switch and instantly add 10 runs to their SR but it could have had a bit of effect. We saw this effect with T20Is as well, plenty of international players just didn't know how to approach the format.

 

[srbhkshk]

Is there an argument along with that statement?

Legitimately, and especially highlighted in Red Hill's 75-91 analysis, how is Kohli even close to be as far ahead of the pack today as Richards' was against his peers. Richard's SR of 90 came in an era where 70 was outstanding... I mean even the great Gordon Greenidge had a SR of 64 IIRC. Kohli's average is brilliant, but his SR is just up with his peers, it's not really outstanding.

It's not just up with his peers - it's consistently been ~8-9 points higher than average era SR, and his average is a lot higher than the era average compared to Viv.