Virat Kohli was a very good Test batter but not a great one – as his average of 46.85 attests.
Some of the reaction to his retirement indicated an inability to cope with this reality. Or, more cynically, some outlets tried to bend reality to pretend he was a great – just for clicks.
And this included two of cricket’s most trusted sources: Cricinfo and Wisden.
Firstly, Cricinfo cherry-picked the very best section of Kohli’s career to claim that, at his best, he was better than the other members of the ‘big four’.
When Kohli stood out from the pack 🏏
— ESPNcricinfo (@ESPNcricinfo) May 13, 2025
More stats: https://t.co/ik2E2SgGMm pic.twitter.com/1cjkg4NLB6
This was absurd on two fronts:
1. Kohli’s average in this spell is hardly any better than Smith’s or Williamson’s. To label it ‘When Kohli stood out from the pack’ is bonkers.
2. It is so clearly cherry picked to favour Kohli. Here’s a different period – from February 2014 to March 2016. Why not include this instead and head it ‘Kohli: not really part of the ‘big 4’:
Wisden also bent over backwards – in their case, to justify picking Kohli in an ‘all-time’ Test team.
‘What about if we picked a side just of players who did not make 10,000 runs/take 400 wickets?’ they said.
And then realised Kohli would not make it.
‘Let’s limit it to post World War II – that will get rid of Bradman. And Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Headley and others.’
And so that is what they did (although for some reason they still allowed Len Hutton in):
Several legendary Test figures might have fallen short of the 10,000-run or 400-wicket mark, yet put together great careers.
— Wisden (@WisdenCricket) May 14, 2025
Here's an XI ➡️ https://t.co/UnfOonu0KP pic.twitter.com/DsJWVfY7kN
The silly thing is, Kohli still does not deserve to be in the side. Of players with more than 5,000 but less than 10,000 runs (who played after or substantively after WW2), and excluding those already in Wisden’s side, Kohli has the 21st highest average!
Sure, some were specialist openers or number sixes (which doesn’t matter to me but would to some!) but even so, there are loads who could have been preferred to Kohli at number 4. I mean, surely Greg Chappell would be a no-brainer!
And away from Cricinfo and Wisden, the cherry picking ramped up even more. Here is just one example:
Ah, yes! That time honoured mark of ‘consecutive calendar years with more than 1,000 runs at an average of 75+’. Just rolls off the tongue!
