October 9, 2011

Kohli and Warner prove T20's got class

The two have shown the format is no longer a hit-and-giggle fest. We can look forward to seeing them face each other in longer versions of the game
59

This year's Champions League has been by far the best of the three played. It has not only enhanced the reputation of the tournament but also of Twenty20 in general and that of a couple of talented young batsmen. Any game where one player scores a century and another produces a five-wicket haul and they end up on the losing side has to be chock full of cricketing skills and extremely competitive. In the end it's the quality of the contest that decides the future of a game.

The knockout game between the Royal Challengers Bangalore and South Australia had everything you could want in a cricket match, right down to a last-ball six sealing the win.

There have been times when the naysayers have argued the entertainment quotient at a T20 match overshadows the game. That is not an accusation cricket should take lightly, as the dancing girls and DJs will always find another venue to ply their trade, but it is not a criticism that applies to this tournament. In addition to the nailbiting contests, the Champions League has produced some incredible individual performances.

Considering every sport needs a constant influx of youthful talent, the exceptional batting of David Warner and Virat Kohli has been a very pleasing aspect of the Champions League. Both India and Australia need to rebuild following devastating losses to England, and these two stand out as players for the future. The first thing selectors look for in a young cricketer is skill, and then they want to see consistent performances.

The latest back-to-back efforts of Warner and Kohli have been impressive. In scoring consecutive T20 centuries Warner has achieved something that was regarded as nearly impossible. Having built his international reputation as a hard-hitting T20 batsman, he has matured into a highly skilful player who must be given serious consideration for Australian selection in all forms of the game. His balance as a batsman is such that he has been able to adapt his play to all circumstances, and his stroke range is mostly traditional and now becoming more selective. In addition, his fielding is outstanding, and at a time when Australia are crying out for young batsmen who are not a liability in the field, Warner's credentials are tempting.

Kohli has a lot in common with Warner. He has made his reputation in the shorter forms of the game and has an enticing stroke range. The fact that he took the Royal Challengers into the final after falling just short of being the finisher in his previous knock is a sign of his maturity.

Like Australia, India need talented young batsmen who can field. Kohli fits that description perfectly and he's making all the right moves to impress knowledgeable selectors. It would be no surprise to see this pair meet up as opponents again in the near future, only this time while representing their respective countries and in a longer form of the game. If players like Warner and Kohli can make the jump from short-form players to genuine international cricketers, it will do even more to enhance the reputation of T20 as a bonafide game rather than just excellent entertainment.

T20 is evolving quickly and some of the innovations seen in the batting, bowling and fielding make for exciting cricket. What is patently clear when you witness a number of exciting contests like we've seen in the Champions League is that the game has progressed to the point where it no longer needs gimmicks to attract supporters. The duty of the officials now is to ensure that T20's reputation as credible cricket is enhanced rather than diminished. It has become obvious that played well, T20 is an exciting game of cricket, rather than just another way to enjoy a night on the town.

Former Australia captain Ian Chappell is now a cricket commentator and columnist

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Yevghenny on October 12, 2011, 9:43 GMT

    Might have helped Warner and Kohli playing on a road, and also apparently the atmospheric conditions in Bangalor are more conducive to big hitting, the ball travels further. Let's see them dig themselves into their foxhole and bat 10 hours, then we'll say they've got class. Great shot making, but all down to the pitch. If it's a slow low turner, we just get to watch one batsman after the other come out swinging their bat all over the place before they get frustrated and go for one they shouldn't. t20 is entertainment but nothing more than that.

  • SaravananIsTheBest on October 11, 2011, 21:37 GMT

    @crikbuff, right said, especially the way last few articles of Harsha & Ian articulated, I really doubt it. @RandyOZ, are you sure about what you're talking check out his ODI performance for last 2 yrs & come back. And, if you're talking about Test, sorry mate, he has just started getting chances.

  • on October 11, 2011, 20:00 GMT

    I did not expect Kohli to score at the rate he did! Warner - you come to expect this from him. Kohli has the technique to succeed at the test level - but he needs more time to focus on his test skills. One can make the judgment only after he performs in testing conditions. With his test results so far - we can't make that conclusion! One for the future - sure! Is he there yet ? - No!

  • crikbuff on October 11, 2011, 19:43 GMT

    Warner & Kohli are perfect examples of how T20 can fool people into thinking that class belongs here. These 2 and the likes of Raina, Pathan, White can never make it big in test cricket. The so called 'experts' should stop fooling cricket fans. Chappell wants to join Gavaskar, Shastri and Bhogle in the "League of Zero Credibility"!

  • Praxis on October 11, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    We don't need Ian Chappell or any other columnist to convince us that T20 got class, we spectators can decide that by ourselves. This format is batsman's paradise, just when the balance of this game is tilted slightly in the right direction(test cricket) these class players suddenly become so pathetic; superheroes with heavy bats, field restrictions, free-hits, all-rounders for strike bowlers, shorter boundaries, featherbeds for pitch.... It will be interesting to see if any of the less recognized domestic or club level T20 players become established cricketers in the longer format of the game & international level. We'll probably have to wait 5 or 6 years to see if T20 brings new set of skills considered useful to this game.

  • bumsonseats on October 11, 2011, 10:53 GMT

    a good test player can make a good T20 player, because he has had the grooming of the longer game. warner as a test player im not sure, has he earned the place in his state side yet ? . he is not a slogger by nature but can slog the ball his hitting is very good and and his ground shots can be very crisp. perhaps hes the exception to the rule.dpk

  • RandyOZ on October 11, 2011, 8:41 GMT

    Kohli is rubbish, an ipl lackie in the mould of Malinga. Does not care about playing for India at all

  • RightArmEverything on October 11, 2011, 3:18 GMT

    Hyclass, on cricinfo it says Warner's first class avg is about 53. What is the 36 you mention? He's scored 2 centuries and 2 half centuries in 15 innings which is not bad. Obviously he hasn't played a lot of first class cricket and I think it would be wise for selectors to see that he does if he's seen as a potential future test player. I don't think Chappelli is saying Warner should be in the Test squad now, just that he should be seen as more than a T20 prospect. He said in a recent interview that NSW should have been opening with Warner in Sheffield Shield ages ago. Obviously some people will agree and some won't, I just think Ian's article is being misinterpreted by a few people.

  • JG2704 on October 10, 2011, 21:20 GMT

    Warner got the edge on Kohli from what I saw. Warner scored 2 unbeaten centuries and sure it's only 20 over cricket but to do that 2 matches running. He was playing proper cricket shots and hardly played a false shot and looked very controlled at the crease. I'd have fancied him to keep his form during the final too as he seemed to be able to pace his innings very well

  • PiyushD on October 10, 2011, 14:48 GMT

    Any format can throw up exciting match, we have had nail biting ODIs as well as some exciting Test Match finish, same is for T20, what if the last ball 6 was not hit, this match would have lost most of the fizzz. All batsmen no matter who are comfortable batting in flat conditions and then those who grew up on green fields are more comfortable there in comaprision to the turners and vice versa.

  • Yevghenny on October 12, 2011, 9:43 GMT

    Might have helped Warner and Kohli playing on a road, and also apparently the atmospheric conditions in Bangalor are more conducive to big hitting, the ball travels further. Let's see them dig themselves into their foxhole and bat 10 hours, then we'll say they've got class. Great shot making, but all down to the pitch. If it's a slow low turner, we just get to watch one batsman after the other come out swinging their bat all over the place before they get frustrated and go for one they shouldn't. t20 is entertainment but nothing more than that.

  • SaravananIsTheBest on October 11, 2011, 21:37 GMT

    @crikbuff, right said, especially the way last few articles of Harsha & Ian articulated, I really doubt it. @RandyOZ, are you sure about what you're talking check out his ODI performance for last 2 yrs & come back. And, if you're talking about Test, sorry mate, he has just started getting chances.

  • on October 11, 2011, 20:00 GMT

    I did not expect Kohli to score at the rate he did! Warner - you come to expect this from him. Kohli has the technique to succeed at the test level - but he needs more time to focus on his test skills. One can make the judgment only after he performs in testing conditions. With his test results so far - we can't make that conclusion! One for the future - sure! Is he there yet ? - No!

  • crikbuff on October 11, 2011, 19:43 GMT

    Warner & Kohli are perfect examples of how T20 can fool people into thinking that class belongs here. These 2 and the likes of Raina, Pathan, White can never make it big in test cricket. The so called 'experts' should stop fooling cricket fans. Chappell wants to join Gavaskar, Shastri and Bhogle in the "League of Zero Credibility"!

  • Praxis on October 11, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    We don't need Ian Chappell or any other columnist to convince us that T20 got class, we spectators can decide that by ourselves. This format is batsman's paradise, just when the balance of this game is tilted slightly in the right direction(test cricket) these class players suddenly become so pathetic; superheroes with heavy bats, field restrictions, free-hits, all-rounders for strike bowlers, shorter boundaries, featherbeds for pitch.... It will be interesting to see if any of the less recognized domestic or club level T20 players become established cricketers in the longer format of the game & international level. We'll probably have to wait 5 or 6 years to see if T20 brings new set of skills considered useful to this game.

  • bumsonseats on October 11, 2011, 10:53 GMT

    a good test player can make a good T20 player, because he has had the grooming of the longer game. warner as a test player im not sure, has he earned the place in his state side yet ? . he is not a slogger by nature but can slog the ball his hitting is very good and and his ground shots can be very crisp. perhaps hes the exception to the rule.dpk

  • RandyOZ on October 11, 2011, 8:41 GMT

    Kohli is rubbish, an ipl lackie in the mould of Malinga. Does not care about playing for India at all

  • RightArmEverything on October 11, 2011, 3:18 GMT

    Hyclass, on cricinfo it says Warner's first class avg is about 53. What is the 36 you mention? He's scored 2 centuries and 2 half centuries in 15 innings which is not bad. Obviously he hasn't played a lot of first class cricket and I think it would be wise for selectors to see that he does if he's seen as a potential future test player. I don't think Chappelli is saying Warner should be in the Test squad now, just that he should be seen as more than a T20 prospect. He said in a recent interview that NSW should have been opening with Warner in Sheffield Shield ages ago. Obviously some people will agree and some won't, I just think Ian's article is being misinterpreted by a few people.

  • JG2704 on October 10, 2011, 21:20 GMT

    Warner got the edge on Kohli from what I saw. Warner scored 2 unbeaten centuries and sure it's only 20 over cricket but to do that 2 matches running. He was playing proper cricket shots and hardly played a false shot and looked very controlled at the crease. I'd have fancied him to keep his form during the final too as he seemed to be able to pace his innings very well

  • PiyushD on October 10, 2011, 14:48 GMT

    Any format can throw up exciting match, we have had nail biting ODIs as well as some exciting Test Match finish, same is for T20, what if the last ball 6 was not hit, this match would have lost most of the fizzz. All batsmen no matter who are comfortable batting in flat conditions and then those who grew up on green fields are more comfortable there in comaprision to the turners and vice versa.

  • on October 10, 2011, 14:47 GMT

    Test Cricket is the ultimate form of the game. The Supreme. The classic. The gold standard. Ian Chappell, are you thinking right mate? Think about what you are writing.

  • on October 10, 2011, 14:22 GMT

    Can we all have a little break from cricket? Now you are not even getting crowds when chennai played matches at home and even for a T-20 final featuring 2 top teams.. that too in a cricket crazy country like india..

  • on October 10, 2011, 13:47 GMT

    I dont believe its Chappel and that too, Ian Chappel saying this.Since when he is liking this 'Donkey Cricket' ?

  • here2rock on October 10, 2011, 12:54 GMT

    Not sure Ian, I rather see a lot less of T20 and more of Test Match Cricket. There is an excessive dose of T20.

  • CricketMaan on October 10, 2011, 11:21 GMT

    OMG, Mr.Chappell said/wrote similarly about Rohit Sharma after that CBS in Aust whcih India won and since then Rohit has been out of ODI team, now what Kholi also jinxed????

  • on October 10, 2011, 9:55 GMT

    @ MaruthuDelft , Are you kidding me dude? Sehwag is the ultimate cricket player. He is Viv Richards, Sachin Tendulkar & Brian Lara rolled into one. Only Donald Bradman comes close to Sehwag in sheer ability. What I love about him is that he never plays for records. He will hit a six on 294, and even if he gets out, he will do it again. These Warners, Kohlis et al dont even come close to Vireder Sehwag, the most exciting player in the world in all forms of the game.

  • montys_muse on October 10, 2011, 9:19 GMT

    Spot on Ian! a very good article for cricket enthusiasts.

  • azzaman333 on October 10, 2011, 4:48 GMT

    The day Dave Warner plays test cricket is the day I stop supporting the Australian cricket team.

  • Raju_Iyer on October 10, 2011, 4:13 GMT

    Hey guys mourning about T20 sounding the death knell for bowlers, heard of a boy called Ravichandran Ashiwn...? And I will not be surprised if Bhajji's stand out performance in the final gets him back in when the teams for the rest of the ODIs with England is announced. To Dr_SC : If you are suggesting that the advent of T20 would lead to a paucity of fast bowlers from India, how many genuine fast bowlers have we produced in history anyway? To me, T 20 serves three useful purposes : 1. Gives young cricketers good financial returns which will induce more kids to the game. 2. Helps throw up some good talent (e.g. Yusuf Pathan) who may otherwise take much longer to get noticed. 3. Increases the following of the game (do you seriously think someone like Mukesh Ambani would have attended the WC final in the pre IPL era) all of which do no harm at all to the cause of cricket. Managing overload from all these new forms of cricket, now that's a different story

  • subbass on October 10, 2011, 4:01 GMT

    Chapple proving how utterly stupid he is again i see.

    Oh well.

  • rko_rules on October 10, 2011, 3:27 GMT

    Spot on Mr Chappell..!! I agree people basically come to watch T20 game, not for DJ and entertainment coz it is so exciting and thrill to watch. So, officials will have to see that T20 no longer need that unnecessary stuff like DJ and dancing girls on the field.

  • hyclass on October 10, 2011, 1:45 GMT

    I couldnt think of a less compelling arguement.Bowlers in 20/20 are hamstrung by having only 4 overs.Endurance?Patience?Tactics?Most results are a lottery.The measure of success or otherwise of these bowlers has no correlation with ODI or Test cricket.Fields are relevent only to this format.Warners entire log of 100s amount to 2 in 1st class cricket,2 in List A over 4.5 years & his 20/20. His 100s came at the SCG,Hurstville Oval,NSW,Zimbabwe,SL and India.It must be obvious that he isnt scoring any on fast,bouncy or seaming wickets,only on flat turners.Until such time as his record proclaims him able to handle more than one set of conditions,announcing one set of results is simply hype.Career records exist to give a picture under ALL conditions.He is yet to play a full Shield season and has only 406 1st class runs ever,in Australia at 36.90.NSW were unable to select him more as he had been ordinary in List A and 1st class cricket when selected previously.20/20 is dumbing down cricket.

  • johnathonjosephs on October 10, 2011, 1:09 GMT

    Must agree with nalinwj here.... MALINGA is definitely turning into a legend. I feel when he retires (perhaps in 3-4 years), he will have attained legend status similar to that of Akram/Younus, even though his Test career stint was short. Will never forget that game against Aus when he and matthews defied all odds and in the WC Final, when his wickets of Tendulkar and Sehwag in the first 4-5 overs sent 1.2 billion people in complete silence and awe. That aside, Warner is a great player and would love to see him in the ODI side for Aus in the upcoming series (it is a crime to omit him from the T20 games next week). Kohli, on the other hand, is a very strange fellow.He has a decent first class record, but his games in the West Indies (against a depleted side i might add) was horrible. In England, he did his job with the bat again, but in the ODIs. In this tournament, he was unstoppable in the flat tracks of bangalore, but died in chennai. whats up with this guy? def. has potential tho

  • ygkd on October 10, 2011, 0:38 GMT

    Yes, T20 can be good cricket. But if Australia gets carried away with it, it will become an obsession - a bit like the WACA wicket. Yes, Perth is a good international wicket where Australia tends to win but it's only 1 of 6 in 1 country. By deifying it, Australia has tended to lose focus on other conditions and this has cost them dearly, especially overseas. Now we see a growing obsession with T20. Some good can come of it with scoring rates & out-fielding, but the effect on attacking bowling, close-catching & keeping is unwelcome and the shot selection is often terrible. T20 is a product of roped-in boundaries, flat pitches and tree-trunk bats as much as any skill. That doesn't mean that T20 players can't succeed elsewhere - we just shouldn't read too much into their exploits. After all, a lot of T20 runs just come off mishits, edges and a general lack of attacking pressure. As for bowlers, their incentive is purely to get through their overs without anything going too wrong.

  • Gilliana on October 9, 2011, 23:24 GMT

    @Raj_759, I beg to differ, I think Saurav Ganguly is a better ODI batsman

  • on October 9, 2011, 23:11 GMT

    I agree that Warner and Kohli have done enough to warrant being tried at test level. Whether they'll succeed is another matter. It's one thing to score runs when there are no fielders around the bat and the bowlers are not interested in taking wickets. It's another when every edge or false stroke is likely to be snapped up and the game lasts 450 overs, not 40. You'll also notice that the players Chappell picks out are batsmen. I defy anyone to find a good test-quality bowler who came up through T20 cricket. Bowlers have to learn their craft at first-class or, at the very least, ODI level to have a chance of succeeding in test cricket. If your aim as a bowler is to restrict the batsman to a run a ball (which would be a fantastic economy rate for a T20 bowler) then the skills needed to succeed at test level just aren't going to be there. When T20 produces bowlers or batsmen who succeed at test level, I'll give some respect as cricket. Until then, it's just entertainment.

  • on October 9, 2011, 21:50 GMT

    Ask them to show their class in longer formats of the game. Even in international T20, most of these explosive players of the hyped tournaments like IPL & CLT20 failed to perform. Most of the matches that I have watched seems to have scenes adapted from some hollywood sport flick. The only differences I see are the characters,set and of course they play baseball. I have never seen such string of drama in cricket before. Let us all wait and watch them perform in the upcoming international duties for their respective countries.

  • Raj_759 on October 9, 2011, 17:37 GMT

    what 10 years back.................gavaskar retired 24 years ago for ur kind info.... anyways i think sachin is the best odi batsman ever but dravid when he comes into his own is the classiest test batsman

  • Sydney_sider on October 9, 2011, 15:42 GMT

    You are wrong Chappel. The way to cricketing success starts with FC cricket, graduates to Tests (preferrebly) & / or ODIs .. & only then to T20 circus. If you suggest the exact opposite direction of career flow, I should doubt its your employer speaking through you. I've no issues with T20 cricket & its riches .. its one form of the game that has provided opportunities to fringe players to earn a livelihood & have fun. But suggesting it to be a stepping stone towards a cricketing career .. BIG NO.

  • MaruthuDelft on October 9, 2011, 15:27 GMT

    @ mathewjohn2176, Raghav Karthik, Satwik Roy, henchart...Tendulkar is the only great batsman India produced; Gavaskar and Dravid are too slow in scoring. Sehwag is on the verge but has not quite proved it yet; he has failed in 3 most important series back to back recently; Ind-Aus(2010), SA-Ind(2010/11) and Eng-Ind(2010). You see Sehwag actually scored his runs in SA, Aus and Eng when the radar was not on him; but when he was targeted he failed; may be due to his shoulder but it could also be due to his inability to pul short balls. Let us see in the coming Aus series.

  • ahmedabbasi69 on October 9, 2011, 14:59 GMT

    Sorry Mr chappell,Class is something that you associate with players like Lara,Sachin Dravid etc. If warner and kohli are such classy batsmen than why are they not playing test cricket for their respective countries. This T20 format can give you rides of entertainment,but u cant judge a player from his performance in this format.

  • FallsDown on October 9, 2011, 14:11 GMT

    I'm just going to ignore the fact that Ian Chappell wrote this article. I expect such cash-influenced IPL-fellating from Gavaskar, Shastri and Bhogle but not from Chappelli. Next!

  • kishorecv on October 9, 2011, 13:48 GMT

    We all saw how Kolee struggled in the Windies and England. One (or maybe 2) T20 inning(s) and all the struggles in Test cricket is brushed beneath the carpet. And lo behold! We have a new STAR. If Kolee was really such a STAR, why didn't he score 3 centuries in WI ???

  • NALINWIJ on October 9, 2011, 13:44 GMT

    There has been the likes of Warner and Kohli in T20 in the past but there is one man who stands uniquely in this game and that is MALINGA without him Mumbai Indians would have done badly and he even had to save the team with his bat.

  • SooperDooper on October 9, 2011, 13:38 GMT

    I agree Kohli and Warner are good player. If its the best of last 3 years why there are empty seats all around. Also, i feel Harsha being part of star sports team would have recommended Chappel's name as one of the commentators. Chappel's a great commentator. But him mentioning that "This year's Champions League has been by far the best of the three played" is very unfair to the bowlers. We expect a even contest between bat and ball

  • Herath-UK on October 9, 2011, 13:37 GMT

    Isn't this the same hype to keep some fans happy;kholi was non existent in England so was the case with Warner in Sri Lanka.They have more to prove outside their comfort zones to be regarded as Ian to portray. Ranil Herath -Kent

  • mathewjohn2176 on October 9, 2011, 13:15 GMT

    @maruthudelft, NO..sehwag did succeed in Australia..He has the better strike rate and have a good average to go along with that strike rate.When warner didn't play any single test match,there no question of comparing sehwag to warner and say warner has the mettle to play ,its really funny though,when you say no indian batsmen are great.India produced many great batsmen ,if its not in your book then I don't have anything to say further more.But regarding warner and kohli,they should play test cricket first,then we' ll come to know about their mettle.

  • on October 9, 2011, 13:08 GMT

    Dear Ian please note the following points.

    10 years back - "Short of good length delivery ,out side the off stump, WELL LEFT BY Sunil Gavaskar" This is irrelevant to the spectator and batting team. Today - "Short of good length delivery ,out side the off stump, Kohli goes to the back foot and hoist over 3rd man for SIX" .

    Past is gone, people are not interested to see " Well Left", "Taken on the Pad" etc. T20 will change the dimensions of the Cricket in the future. Let us respect entertainment value demanded by the audience.

  • on October 9, 2011, 12:56 GMT

    @MaruthuDelft Sehwag has an impressive record in Australia.2 big hundreds and an average of 59.I think you gotta watch the highlights of his 195 during the Boxing Day Test in 2003 and his 151 during the Australia Day Test 2008.Both times the Aussie attack was led by Brett Lee.He has hit hundreds in England and South Africa too and struggled in recent series only due to his shoulder.Can't forget his debut hundred in SA against Pollock,Donald,Kallis,Ntini and Klusener.When he gets going he can be unstoppable but early on when he gets out he can look comical.He has a very different mindset in Tests compared to ODI's.ODI's he may throw his wicket away after getting 30-40 quick runs but in tests he won't be satisfied even with a hundred and of course hates the nervous 90's.Coming to Sachin and Lara,both are good in their own right.

  • Ameega on October 9, 2011, 12:51 GMT

    Ian Chappel has all of a sudden realized the class of this version after Warner and Tait did some good work. This is just an Aussie Appraisal Report and Kohli is just an attachment.

  • India_boy on October 9, 2011, 12:50 GMT

    @Cummins....u r contradicting urself, on one hand u say hes a kid and then u say he plays for the camera and has a ridiculous attitude. he is 22 yet, give him a break, he hasnt had a shot at responsibility barring last year WC final, where he played a satisfactory innings.He hasnt been, what u call, in the thick of the things, im sure in abt another 1 year he will show the kind of player he oughta be for the rest of his career.

  • on October 9, 2011, 12:47 GMT

    Warner was superb in innings.. Hpe he makes it big in the bigger stage - test cricket... Kholi is a good player but sometimes ur attitude brings u down, even though u have talent.. He has to work on that... Thats where lara , sachin , dravid - stand out... How u carry urself will get u respect even from the opposition and in the dressing room.. If u shout and showoff , then u will lose it and it will also affect urself..

  • on October 9, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    @maruthudelft: If u r talking about Sehwag's performance in Australia, then u mustn't forget the Boxing Day test match of 2003, where within the first day in about 70-75 overs he had blasted his way to 195 with so many overs left, unfortuantely he got out trying to get his double with a six or Australia had almost been crushed in the first day itself. Then in 2008 in Adelaide, he scored a match saving century and this was when he had just been recalled into the team in Perth. So Sehwag is obviously a potent weapon and I wud say that he has improved further since his return, so no doubt he will be a big challenge for the aussies come the series.

  • henchart on October 9, 2011, 12:02 GMT

    @Maruthudelft:'Tendulkar was second to Lara '--By no means.Lara was more flamboyant but Tendulkar far more consistent .Tendulkar is still going on in international arena.Lara is also going on ---in night clubs of T and T.

  • MaruthuDelft on October 9, 2011, 11:04 GMT

    @ Ashwini Raju Kumar...No...after critics and opposition bowlers targeted Sehwag has not been able to succeed in South African and England; let us see what he does in Australia. I think Sehwag doesn't have the mettle but Warner has. No Indian batsman was ever strong enough to be the world's best. Tendulkar was second to Lara because he got tired quickly and could not continue the majestic style with which he would score his first 50-80 runs.

  • uglyhunK on October 9, 2011, 10:46 GMT

    Warner is a better player in any format any day than Phil Hughes. Jeeez...what Aus selectors saw in Hughes other than awkward shots? Kohli, he is kinda regular member of Indian team nyway. Just needs to grab his test spot when time comes.

  • dr_sachinfan_chennai on October 9, 2011, 10:33 GMT

    @Dr_SC : U say a tournament that excludes best T20 cricketers of world.. Whom do u mean here? Firstly agree with ur view on Chapell over praising Warner. But tell me who are the best? England are reigning Champs and they had 2 teams.. If u wanna say the Pakistani players are best, am sorry.. Thats just ur fantasy. They are no more so..

  • on October 9, 2011, 9:50 GMT

    Warner is good, but I think the best test for any batsman is Test Cricket. Thats the ultimate form of the game, the ultimate battle, the Supreme test of ones abilty, determination, temprament, attitude & class. Thats where Virender Sehwag rules. He is the the best overall player ever in all forms of the game.

  • on October 9, 2011, 9:12 GMT

    A good article,Ian.I've always felt that if Sehwag can play long innings in Tests,even Warner can.Kohli has some good timing and technique.Its just that he has got to temper himself down and not be too flashy.Both these players surely are more than just short format players.

  • on October 9, 2011, 9:00 GMT

    This is ridiculous. Ian Chappel views make me feel how good an expert he is. The concept of cricket game is the contest between bat and ball. when the bowlers are handicapped like it happened in Bengaluru, where there was nothing in the pitch for both spinners and seamers then it isn't cricket. Then how can we think of talent evolving out of T20 games.

  • chilled_avenger on October 9, 2011, 8:29 GMT

    Sometimes it seems like Kohli is goes too far in showing his tough or cool dude attitude! I remember in World Cup,how he started hurling abuses after taking AB's catch or in IPL3,he had a small incident with teammate KP during a match and after the match KP approached him to put the incident behind,he refused to even look at him!All in all,he should concentrate on his batting rather than creating a cool image! But then again,the future belongs to the Yuvrajs,Kohlis and Rohits,so the Sachins,Dravids,Kumbles,Laxmans are gonna be obsolete now!

  • nagasaicricinfo on October 9, 2011, 8:04 GMT

    Conclusive article. A charecterestic of Mr.Chappell. Teams like India and Australia should nurture this incredible young talent.For me, I can see a prospective Gilchrist (if not for the wicketkeeping skills) and Rahul Dravid (kohli being a better fielder and more attacking kind of batsman) in Warner and Kohli.

  • maddinson on October 9, 2011, 7:22 GMT

    Kohli may have the talent but he is a kid who plays for cameras. I doubt whether he will be successful for longer duration with this kind of ridiculous attitude.

  • johnathonjosephs on October 9, 2011, 6:20 GMT

    Kohli and Warner are class players. Yes, indeed, they are great class players. The one fallacy the author is making is bringing in their T20 exploits as the example. To Mr. Ian Chappell, the T20 innings they have played were in Bangalore. A batting paradise. Though they are class acts, you are looking at the wrong examples to make such conclusions from

  • on October 9, 2011, 5:54 GMT

    What is Chappell trying to say? That Kohli needs these performances to help raise his name in front of the selectors? Doesn't he know that unlike Warner who is yet to place his spot in the team, Kohli is the mainstay of Indian lineup?

  • Dr_SC on October 9, 2011, 5:13 GMT

    Is there a conflict of interest in an employee for CLT20 writing articles for CI boasting the 'class' of players in T20? Especially in a tournament that excludes the best T20 cricketers of the world. Mr Chappell is well past his days as an astute analyst, he was gloating about Warner being one of the cleanest strikers of the ball alongside Gary Sobers and Adam Gilchrist. These are bizarre thoughts for any purist to digest. Interestingly enough, Chris Gayle did not make Mr. Chappell's short list of cleanest hitters in the game, neither is he mentioned in this article. Nor will we hear a balanced view on flat tracks, short boundaries and the empty stadium which witnessed the second semi final. Am I surprised? Not at all. The fluff is generating revenue which is what matters to BCCI. In the long run the well deserved loser of all this fluff is Indian cricket. Do you seriously think any young lad in India will want to become a fast bowler after watching this debacle?

  • Woody111 on October 9, 2011, 5:07 GMT

    No Ian they haven't proved anything other than the fact they're talented cricketers. Good cricketers will succeed in any format but this has nothing to do 20/20 as a faction of cricket. If people have enjoyed this edition of the champions league then good luck to them. I'm one of those 'nay-sayers' you refer to. It adds nothing to the game and doesn't bring across new followers to the game. It satisfies those who like 6s and weird shots that produce runs. It also adds to the workload cricketers carry and is another opportunity for stars to become injured. When Aus line up against South Africa minus De Villiers we'll see the outcome from 20/20 and the stupid scheduling that the ICC is doing nothing about.

  • Percy_Fender on October 9, 2011, 5:01 GMT

    David Warner is a good batsman on wickets like the Bangalore one is. I am not too sure how successful he will be in the traditional formats of the game where the game is not so heavily loaded in favour of batsmen. It could be argued that he scored a hundred on the Chennai wicket as well which is slow and restrictive to big hitting. He is definitely going to do as well as Phil Hughes at least and I agree with Ian that he is definitely worth a chance on the basis of his exploits in the CL. Kohli on the other hand looks probably good enough for all the formats of the game and could be a good Captain as well. His game was in a bit of a tangle in the West Indies though just a couple of months ago. I am glad that he seems to have overcome the mind related problems as seen from the century he hit in the ODIs in England and his batting in th CL. Yes I do think these two could be future opponents and not to mention stars if they are given the chance by their selectors.

  • jonesy2 on October 9, 2011, 4:27 GMT

    warner is better, haha nah both these guys should be in their respective nations test side

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • jonesy2 on October 9, 2011, 4:27 GMT

    warner is better, haha nah both these guys should be in their respective nations test side

  • Percy_Fender on October 9, 2011, 5:01 GMT

    David Warner is a good batsman on wickets like the Bangalore one is. I am not too sure how successful he will be in the traditional formats of the game where the game is not so heavily loaded in favour of batsmen. It could be argued that he scored a hundred on the Chennai wicket as well which is slow and restrictive to big hitting. He is definitely going to do as well as Phil Hughes at least and I agree with Ian that he is definitely worth a chance on the basis of his exploits in the CL. Kohli on the other hand looks probably good enough for all the formats of the game and could be a good Captain as well. His game was in a bit of a tangle in the West Indies though just a couple of months ago. I am glad that he seems to have overcome the mind related problems as seen from the century he hit in the ODIs in England and his batting in th CL. Yes I do think these two could be future opponents and not to mention stars if they are given the chance by their selectors.

  • Woody111 on October 9, 2011, 5:07 GMT

    No Ian they haven't proved anything other than the fact they're talented cricketers. Good cricketers will succeed in any format but this has nothing to do 20/20 as a faction of cricket. If people have enjoyed this edition of the champions league then good luck to them. I'm one of those 'nay-sayers' you refer to. It adds nothing to the game and doesn't bring across new followers to the game. It satisfies those who like 6s and weird shots that produce runs. It also adds to the workload cricketers carry and is another opportunity for stars to become injured. When Aus line up against South Africa minus De Villiers we'll see the outcome from 20/20 and the stupid scheduling that the ICC is doing nothing about.

  • Dr_SC on October 9, 2011, 5:13 GMT

    Is there a conflict of interest in an employee for CLT20 writing articles for CI boasting the 'class' of players in T20? Especially in a tournament that excludes the best T20 cricketers of the world. Mr Chappell is well past his days as an astute analyst, he was gloating about Warner being one of the cleanest strikers of the ball alongside Gary Sobers and Adam Gilchrist. These are bizarre thoughts for any purist to digest. Interestingly enough, Chris Gayle did not make Mr. Chappell's short list of cleanest hitters in the game, neither is he mentioned in this article. Nor will we hear a balanced view on flat tracks, short boundaries and the empty stadium which witnessed the second semi final. Am I surprised? Not at all. The fluff is generating revenue which is what matters to BCCI. In the long run the well deserved loser of all this fluff is Indian cricket. Do you seriously think any young lad in India will want to become a fast bowler after watching this debacle?

  • on October 9, 2011, 5:54 GMT

    What is Chappell trying to say? That Kohli needs these performances to help raise his name in front of the selectors? Doesn't he know that unlike Warner who is yet to place his spot in the team, Kohli is the mainstay of Indian lineup?

  • johnathonjosephs on October 9, 2011, 6:20 GMT

    Kohli and Warner are class players. Yes, indeed, they are great class players. The one fallacy the author is making is bringing in their T20 exploits as the example. To Mr. Ian Chappell, the T20 innings they have played were in Bangalore. A batting paradise. Though they are class acts, you are looking at the wrong examples to make such conclusions from

  • maddinson on October 9, 2011, 7:22 GMT

    Kohli may have the talent but he is a kid who plays for cameras. I doubt whether he will be successful for longer duration with this kind of ridiculous attitude.

  • nagasaicricinfo on October 9, 2011, 8:04 GMT

    Conclusive article. A charecterestic of Mr.Chappell. Teams like India and Australia should nurture this incredible young talent.For me, I can see a prospective Gilchrist (if not for the wicketkeeping skills) and Rahul Dravid (kohli being a better fielder and more attacking kind of batsman) in Warner and Kohli.

  • chilled_avenger on October 9, 2011, 8:29 GMT

    Sometimes it seems like Kohli is goes too far in showing his tough or cool dude attitude! I remember in World Cup,how he started hurling abuses after taking AB's catch or in IPL3,he had a small incident with teammate KP during a match and after the match KP approached him to put the incident behind,he refused to even look at him!All in all,he should concentrate on his batting rather than creating a cool image! But then again,the future belongs to the Yuvrajs,Kohlis and Rohits,so the Sachins,Dravids,Kumbles,Laxmans are gonna be obsolete now!

  • on October 9, 2011, 9:00 GMT

    This is ridiculous. Ian Chappel views make me feel how good an expert he is. The concept of cricket game is the contest between bat and ball. when the bowlers are handicapped like it happened in Bengaluru, where there was nothing in the pitch for both spinners and seamers then it isn't cricket. Then how can we think of talent evolving out of T20 games.