The annals of cricket history are positively brimming with players who transcended the art of batting, maestros whose names are now synonymous with the sport.
Every generation has contributed a few select batsmen, players who are perceived as the game’s elite. The 80s were blessed with Allan Border, Sunil Gavaskar and Viv Richards.
While the 90s and early noughties were a proverbial gold mine for batting talent, it was a generation that saw the likes of Steve Waugh, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Inzamam Ul-Huq, Ricky Ponting, Rahul Dravid, Kumar Sangakkara, and Jacques Kallis come to the fore. Those names represent the very best the game has to offer, batting wise. The recent retirement of Sangakkara signalled the end of that generation’s reign.
A changing of the guard is in order, and a new generation of batsmen are ready to stake their claim. Four men, in particular, have shown the ability and desire to be seen as the best among their peers. Virat Kohli, Steven Smith, Joe Root and Kane Williamson are the brightest batting lights.
But just who is the best of the lot? Who is going to be considered the Sachin or the Lara of this generation? Who is going to take over once AB De Villiers vacates the throne? The numbers should shed some light on the matter.
Tests
| Player | Matches | Innings | Not outs | Runs | Average | High score | Strike rate | 100s | 50s |
| Kohli | 45 | 76 | 4 | 3245 | 45.06 | 200 | 53.59 | 12 | 12 |
| Smith | 44 | 81 | 11 | 4099 | 58.55 | 215 | 57.16 | 15 | 17 |
| Root | 46 | 84 | 11 | 4005 | 54.86 | 254 | 55.05 | 10 | 22 |
| Williamson | 52 | 95 | 9 | 4393 | 51.08 | 242* | 48.88 | 14 | 22 |
As can be inferred from the numbers, the race to the top is an extremely tight one. But, if averages are the main criteria, Smith emerges as the clear winner. The pugnacious Australian captain has been in the form of his life during the last couple of years, and his average only recently dropped below 60 due to his slightly underwhelming series in Sri Lanka. He has scored runs against every opposition and in every country he has plays in.
Root and Williamson are neck-and-neck and continue to catch up to Smith. Root, however, is still yet to prove himself outside of England, especially in the subcontinent. Williamson, on the other hand, has barely put a foot wrong in the last couple of years. He has calmly accumulated phenomenal numbers, with the only chink in his armour being his average in South Africa, a paltry 21.16.
Virat Kohli has yet to fully establish himself in the Test arena and, at present, the Indian captain is slightly behind in terms of numbers. His recent double hundred in the West Indies is an indication that he is preparing to up the ante, as his abundant talent has never been in doubt.
Going by the numbers, though, Steven Smith emerges as the winner here.
ODIs
| Player | Matches | Innings | Not outs | Runs | Average | High score | Strike rate | 100s | 50s |
| Kohli | 171 | 163 | 23 | 7212 | 51.51 | 183 | 89.97 | 25 | 36 |
| Smith | 81 | 67 | 8 | 2434 | 41.25 | 149 | 87.02 | 5 | 13 |
| Root | 78 | 73 | 7 | 3017 | 45.71 | 125 | 85.81 | 8 | 17 |
| Williamson | 93 | 87 | 9 | 3666 | 47 | 145* | 84.02 | 7 | 25 |
Three of the four batsmen have similar numbers, however, it is quite obvious that Virat Kohli is overwhelmingly in the lead here. He emerges on top on every single metric, from runs to the number of hundreds.
The fact that he has participated in more ODIs than the other three might have had a part to play, but that doesn’t take anything away from the phenomenal statistics he has managed to amass. His otherworldly ability to chase down seemingly impossible scores add further gloss to his statistics.
Smith, Root and Williamson have great numbers in their own right, but they need to go up another gear if they are to catch up to Kohli.
T20s
| Player | Matches | Innings | Not outs | Runs | Average | High score | Strike rate | 100s | 50s |
| Kohli | 45 | 41 | 12 | 1657 | 57.13 | 90* | 135.48 | 0 | 16 |
| Smith | 30 | 25 | 5 | 431 | 21.55 | 90 | 122.44 | 0 | 2 |
| Root | 21 | 19 | 3 | 600 | 37.5 | 125 | 137.29 | 0 | 4 |
| Williamson | 35 | 33 | 5 | 967 | 34.53 | 72* | 124.29 | 0 | 5 |
Once again, Kohli is significantly ahead of the pack, his average a full 20 runs above his closest competitor, Joe Root. Averaging 57.13 in this format of the game is unheard of and this, combined with his regular chasing heroics, such as the masterclass against Australia in the recent World T20, has firmly established him as the best T20 batsman in the world.
Smith, Root and Kohli have a lot of ground to cover in this format of the game, as they are considerably behind Kohli.
Rankings
The International Cricket Council Rankings are a good indicator of just who is in the ascendancy currently. Below is a table with the rankings in all three formats of the game, the ‘average ranking’ is also provided, a crude measure perhaps, but effective nonetheless.
Rankings
| Batsman | Test ranking | ODI ranking | T20 ranking | Average ranking |
| Kohli | 16th | 2nd | 1st | 6.33 |
| Smith | 1st | 16th | 81st | 32.66 |
| Root | 2nd | 7th | 5th | 4.66 |
| Williamson | 3rd | 4th | 6th | 4.33 |
Conclusion
Virat Kohli emerges on top in two of the three formats but falls behind in Test cricket, which is widely considered the premier format of the game. Steven Smith is top dog in Tests but is significantly behind in the other two formats. Kane Williamson and Joe Root have proven their consistency across all three formats, and this is perhaps the reason they both have the highest ‘average ranking’.
All four of these players have many more years left in their careers and only when the dust is settled will a clear victor emerge. For now, considering all the three formats, one would think that Virat Kohli slightly edges the other three, but time will decide which one of these men will be crowned king.
Sarthak Raj Baral
Roar Rookie
Well Homer Gain, what say you now? :D
Brasstacks
Guest
I would rate Rohit Sharma among the top 5 idi and t20 batsmen of this era
twodogs
Guest
Bait's been tossed. Now waiting for the bite.☺
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
G'day ColinP, how are you buddy? How's the rest of the gang?
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
1. No my point was that Williamson is the only one of he, Root, Smith and Kohli who has played Zimbabwe (and the other 3 may never play Zim in their whole Test careers.... Aus and Eng haven't played Zim for 13 years now, India for 11 years). 2. As for you implying Smith gets to play the West Indies more than Williamson ..... actually Williamson has played more Tests against the Windies - 7 Tests vs 5 for Smith. 3. You say Windies are "as embarrassing a rabble as Zimbabwe" yet Zim have never beaten the Windies in a Test and when those two teams played in Zimbabwe 3 years ago, the Windies smashed them 3-0 by margins of an innings and 65 runs, nine wickets, and 128 runs.
ColinP
Guest
Classic Ronan nonsense, I'm starting to think he's a statistics computer (who can't count) who the roar have programmers have written to pad out their "expert" section
spruce moose
Guest
Hmm, I see where you are heading with this Ronan, You rag on Williamson playing against the Zimmers but lovingly ignore that Smith played against the West Indies both at home and away. They are as embarrassing a rabble as Zimbabwe. You play who you play. Simple as that.
Homer Gain
Guest
The assumption that Kohli's test trajectory is inevitably on an upward curve is highly questionable. And of course his "metrics" in ODIs outrun the others; just look how many games he has played (one possible reason why his test career hasn't taken off as it might have). I'm not sure Kohli is even the best Indian test prospect let alone comparable in test terms with the other three mentioned here.
Giovanni Torre
Guest
There was a time Pujara was the best batsman in the world. His technique was flawless, his endurance phenomenal and he had a vast appetite for runs. Kohli made a much slowler start in tests... indeed for a while he and Ashwin had the same batting average, whereas Pujara's test average started high and pushed 60 for a long time... What happened? He is still young enough to rebuild and return to his best.
Andy
Guest
Dont be so butthurt, my point was that Smith is alot better at home than he is away, i think its an interesting point. Comparing just averages is fun but it doesnt take into account opposition, game situation, how good a day the bowlers are having and heaps of other things, whereas comparing a player to themself removes some of those variables and i think its interesting how different Smiths home and away scores are whlist Kholi especially seems just as effective home and away. Does this mean that you become a better batsman if you primarily face spin or what. Tendulkars home and away batting is 53/55 whilst Hussey is 61/41, Lara 59/48, Cook is 46/49, whilst Mark Taylor only only has a .2 differences in his home and away average 43.4, 43.6 and Amla is 50/53. Hayden 58/43, Ponting 57/46 whilst Martyn is another very close one with less than a run in it at 47/46. Comparing players to each other has too many variables but to themselves there are less and its just interesting how different some are. My point was Smith in Australia is much better than Smith not in Australia whilst Kholi and Root are about the same anywhere. Also where are you getting Roots 48 from? im on howstats and it says Smith's away average is 53.39 and Roots is 51.55 not 48. Doesnt matter as both are all near enough to be statistically irrelevant just want to know if howstat is wrong and what i should be using.
Andrew B
Guest
Kohli is far and away the most skilful batsman in the world. His stroke play, mental strength and mastery of a run chase is a thing of true beauty. I know his test numbers underwhelm a bit but I'm sure they'll start going up until he becomes #1 ranked in each format in the next couple of years. This from an Aussie
Sarthak Raj Baral
Roar Rookie
Interesting. Kohli against Australia, England and South Africa : 1398 runs (15 matches) at 46.60 with 6 hundreds and 3 fifties. Joe Root against Austrlia, South Africa and India : 671 runs (9 matches) at 44.73 with a single hundred and 5 fifties. It seems that Smith comes out on top on almost every metric, but this particular comparison also shows that Kohli is not as far as everyone seems to think he is, that career average of 45 is only going one way, up.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
"We also have to talk about Smith and Williams to a lesser extent feasting on runs at home and not so much abroad." Smith averages 53.38 away from Australia, comfortably better than the away averages of Root (48), Williamson (48) and Kohli (45). Smith is the only member of the top 15 ranked Test batsmen who averages 40-plus in every country he's played (India, Eng, SA, SL, NZ, Windies and Australia). Williamson's away average of 48 is a bit misleading - it is padded by playing against minnows Zimbabwe, who none of Smith, Root or Kohli have ever played against (or may ever play against). Williamson averages 43 away from home when you remove those "Tests" against Zimbabwe so his away record pales in comparison to Smith's. How about this for a Smith vs Williamson comparison ..... how about comparing their respective averages against the Big 3 of England, India and South Africa? Smith .............2538 runs at 56 Williamson.....1312 runs at 37
Andy
Guest
Also interesting to see the difference in the guys average home and away form. Smith is way out in front inconsistency wise with a 67/53, Williams averages 58/48 home away, Root is 57/52 and Kholi has the least difference with 46/45 split. Can ofcourse break them down more bu country and how good the opponents are but when we talk about Root not having proven himself on the subcontinent we also have to talk about Smith and Williams to a lesser extent feasting on runs at home and not so much abroad. And Kholi i am very surprised is so far back, am i just remembering history differently but wasnt he way closer a year ago or so?
William
Guest
The problem with AB and Amla is not their form its the fact that SA does not play as much as the other big teams. Also they hardly play 4/5 test match series while India, England and Australia do, thats why we can never gauge their consistency. So those are the 4 given their ages and the current schedule will surpass both of them in terms of numbers, might not be in average or strike rate but matches and runs
matth
Guest
Agree on ABDV currently. The greatest talent of his generation (although Amla's overall stats are just as good). Yes, if Kholi gets to over 50 in tests then he could be the man, but at the same time if Smith pushes his test average back over 60 and improves his others, or if his ODI stats are still inferior but he leads Australia to a second world cup crown, then the conversation changes. Same can said for any of the four. What is in no doubt is that it's a great time for a fan seeing four such exciting players with 10 years in front of them. Kholi no doubt has the ability to finish with a 50+ average. He was brilliant on his last Australian tour, so he really only needs to sort out English conditions to be the complete package.
Sarthak Raj Baral
Roar Rookie
Definitely agree with you on the 'talent' front. If he can elevate his performances in tests, surely he would be seen as the best of his era.
Sarthak Raj Baral
Roar Rookie
Well, I wanted to focus on who might be the 'next' best, considering that Ab and Amla are 32 and 33 repectively. Kohli, Smith, Root and Williamson are in pretty much the same age bracket. Yes the three fortmats are very different but if say Kohli were to get his test average up to 50, would he not be the best across formats?, hypothetically speaking, but ofcourse, its not all about the numbers. I personally think AB is the finest batsman in the world, he can score a 44 of 144 in tests and vice versa in ODIs. Now, that's a pretty special player.
matth
Guest
No doubt Kohli is the best limited overs player in the world. the next in line are probably Amla and ABDV, rather than the other young guys here. Australia did win the ODI World Cup, but that was more due to the bowling than batting. In tests it has to be Smith at this point, but there is very very little between Smith, Root and Williamson. Kohli is not really in this conversation. and in tests Amla and ABDV are at best just behind these three. Who is the best? I don't think you can judge as T20 and Tests are so different.
jamesw
Guest
I think overall, based on numbers and giving a bit more weight to test cricket, then Joe Root for me is currently the best batsman. However, I think Kohli is the most 'talented' player of the lot. He has definitely underwhelmed in test cricket to date (still pretty good), and will not have lived up to his potential if he doesn't finish as the greatest test, odi and t20 batsman of this era.