Fab 4 Cricket: Definitive Guide to Kohli, Smith, Root, Williamson

No label in modern cricket sparks more debate than Fab Four. It’s shorthand for the four batting heavyweights who defined an era of Test excellence while shaping white‑ball trends and captaincy cultures: Virat Kohli, Steve Smith, Joe Root and Kane Williamson. The group is a conversation as much as it is a category—a living debate updated with every knock in England’s early season, every late-night grind in Asia, every new chapter of the World Test Championship.

This guide takes a specialist’s lens to Fab 4 cricket: who they are, why they were bundled together in the first place, how each thrives across conditions, what the context-adjusted numbers say, and how the “Fab Five” question with Babar Azam has matured. You’ll find tactical analysis, format clarity, WTC‑cycle context, and pressure metrics like fourth‑innings output and away-in-Asia work—precisely the gaps where generic listicles and outdated tables tend to fray.

What “Fab Four” means in cricket

The Fab Four in cricket refers to Virat Kohli, Steve Smith, Joe Root and Kane Williamson—four modern-era batting greats who emerged around the same time and pushed Test batting standards even as T20 leagues exploded. They became the sport’s default comparison set: right-hand virtuosos with distinct methods, recurring megascores, and long stretches leading their national sides. The term also hints at stylistic balance:

• Kohli: tempo warrior, technical classicist with a chaser’s heart.
• Smith: eccentric method, surgical run‑machine, low false‑shot bias.
• Root: touch, tempo modulation, sweep suite in Asia, engine that never cools.
• Williamson: rhythmically pure, late hands, composure as a skill.

They’re compared across formats, but their Test body of work is the spine. Every other metric—ODI/T20I output, captaincy effects, ICC events—sits on top of that foundation.

Who are the Fab Four in cricket? A quick primer with a batter’s eye

Virat Kohli

• Identity: Attacking orthodox. Hands high, pronounced press, once the game’s premier chaser in ODIs and a relentless driver in Tests.
• Signatures: Curtain-raiser cover drive in seam-friendly conditions. Rotates without risk in the middle overs, explodes late without slogging. Wide array of midwicket punches against spin once in.
• Tactical notes: Earlier career showcased a decisive front‑foot press; later phases feature a more conservative channel discipline outside off, especially in SENA countries (South Africa, England, New Zealand, Australia). Against spin, excels with the big stride and strong wrists; uses depth of crease more now than he did at the start.

Steve Smith

• Identity: Method over orthodoxy. Extreme initial movement but superb late contact, near‑telepathic judgment of off‑stump. Distills bowling plans to repeatable scoring patterns.
• Signatures: Clipped leg-side scoring to anything fractionally straight; subtle deflections; resets bowlers by constant guard readjustment. Cat‑and‑mouse with line; leaves brilliantly.
• Tactical notes: Rarely beats himself on a dry day. On green seamers, trusts judgment; in Asia, trusts patience and picks his moments to counter. For long periods, had the best Test average of the group by clear daylight, thanks to low shot error and ruthless conversion.

Joe Root

• Identity: Tempo artisan. Always busy, surgically selects singles, accelerates by changing angles. Elegant through cover and point, formidable sweeping repertoire in Asia.
• Signatures: Late dab, squared-up drive, waggle-sweep family (conventional, paddle, reverse). Rarely static; he invents scoring lanes rather than waiting for them.
• Tactical notes: Built perhaps the best dossier by a visiting batter in Asia among the four, after calibrating his sweep volume and weight transfer. In SENA, he irons out tough spells via singles and soft hands. Quietly became a high-volume century maker across WTC cycles.

Kane Williamson

• Identity: Minimalist. Late trigger, quiet head, basic shapes mastered. Turns good-length balls into scoring options with late hands, leaves with intelligence, trusts defense even under lights.
• Signatures: Neutral bat face through mid‑off, late cut, gliding on-field risk below the eye. Looks unhurried even under scoreboard pressure.
• Tactical notes: Beat strong attacks at home and away by refusing noise—very low ego in shot selection. Against spin, plays late off the back foot; rarely over-commits to big hits. His peak sessions can feel airless for bowlers.

Fab 4 Test cricket: conditions, match situations, and the things that really matter

The Fab Four debate in Test cricket needs context, not just aggregates. Different skins must be peeled:

• Home vs away, and within away: SENA vs Asia.
• Fourth-innings demand: attritional chase or handbrake-forced survival.
• Opposition strength: versus top‑ranked sides and full-strength attacks.
• WTC cycles: emergence, reinvention, and second-wind purple patches.
• Day-night adjustments: pink‑ball seam and night phases.

The following sections balance technique narratives with context-based pecking orders.

SENA vs Asia: the split that actually explains their methods

In SENA, the new‑ball plays king-maker. Movement through the air and off the seam asks questions about alignment, judgment and ego. In Asia, buying time against spin, extracting singles off good length, and manufacturing release shots off the sweep/hard-sweep/back-foot punch spectrum become decisive.

• Smith in SENA: Lives in the corridor without nicking as much as orthodoxy would suggest; unrivalled leave game; bowlers often feel they miss even with good deliveries. Prolonged control phases and high conversion once set.
• Kohli in SENA: Playoff between ambition and discipline. At his best, he picks fuller lengths to drive and lets the fifth‑stump ball go. When he leans into control mode, batting days stretch. When he chases shape early, edges creep in. He has landmark away hundreds in Australia and England that shaped series trajectories.
• Root in SENA: Best at turning 20s into 70s with ceaseless rotation. Uses late cuts and glides in England; in Australia, counters bounce by playing as late as anyone in the group. Rarely locks up entirely; scoring always in motion.
• Williamson in SENA: Uses temperament as armor. Short backlift and late decision-making help him ride bounce and seam. Not the most brutal boundary-hitter of the four, but among the best at turning good balls into safe dots rather than mistakes.

In Asia:

• Root: The benchmark. Built a sweeping empire that disarmed spin chokeholds. Picks lines for the lap early, forces captains to move fielders, then drains singles through scrambled fields. Masterclass series in Sri Lanka and India established his template.
• Williamson: Delays hands, uses soft hands even to spinners, and picks midwicket singles without venturing too far aerially. Looks most comfortable when he can sit back and trust the pitch to slow down.
• Kohli: Big-stride player at home, uses forward press and wrists to punish. On sharper turning pitches, he increasingly adds crease depth and leg‑side manipulation. When he leaves ego out of the flick-to-midwicket temptation, long stays follow.
• Smith: Understated in Asia but effective. Attacks line through decisive footwork when he wants, otherwise drains bowlers with austerity. Workmanlike, sometimes surgical rather than flamboyant.

The fourth‑innings lens: what happens when it tightens

Chasing or saving in the fourth innings is as psychological as it is technical. Ballsoften, pitch tired, fields squeeze. The question becomes: who maintains judgment for three hours when any error ends the match?

• Williamson reads chase states exceptionally well. His tempo rarely looks mismatched, and he resists panic triggers. The innings that stand out often involve him keeping the chase within one big over of control.
• Smith maintains shape; even when the ball is nibbling, he leaves for long stretches and trusts straight scoring. Once past 30, he becomes difficult to dislodge.
• Root keeps the board moving and can inhibit tension buildup. When the target is middling, his chase management is exemplary.
• Kohli brings aura. In chases or saves, bowlers know he will not let them bowl ten in the same spot. The best fourth‑innings Kohli knocks feature a spinner beaten off the length by decisive feet and a seamer made to change angles.

Versus top‑ranked teams: the right denominator

Aggregates against weaker attacks seduce. The meaningful read comes from work against the best: India’s seam-spinners axis at home, Australia’s high pace and bounce, South Africa’s relentless hard length, England’s Dukes mastery.

• Smith’s career-defining spells against full-strength pace have a gravitational pull on this debate. His long-session resilience against top-tier attacks is the closest to Bradmanesque aura the modern game has seen.
• Root has outlasted and outmaneuvered elite seamers in a variety of conditions; his hallmark is long-run consistency more than outlandish peaks.
• Kohli’s best away hundreds frequently arrived against full-strength lineups, tilting series narratives and quieting crowds.
• Williamson’s stoic runs often came in low-scoring, skill-first Tests against high-quality pace when time seemed frozen and every run carried a premium.

Fab four career arcs: early runs, reinvention phases, and late-career craft

Each of the Fab Four carried a distinct timeline with reinventions between cycles of the World Test Championship.

• Kohli went from high-tempo wunderkind to all-format superstar to technique-adjusted statesman. The off‑stump discipline arc defined his SENA progress; the Asia dominance came from precise forward press and ruthless error-minimization once set. In later phases, he added patience as a weapon—taking 70 balls to bank control if the day demanded it, setting up the team innings rather than chasing the scoreboard’s mood.
• Smith transformed from leg-spinning curiosity to batting alien. In his prime, conversion rates felt absurd; he’d turn wins into hammerings by doubling down post‑hundred. Later phases saw marginal clockspeed declines but the craft never left; opponents won brief windows, rarely entire sessions.
• Root’s career is one long argument for elasticity. Coaching speak would say “batting is a sequence of problem‑solving loops,” and Root’s loops are fast. The big change was his latitude against spin: the sweep family, reverse as a stock ball, and a comfort level with mid‑on and mid‑off openers that let him feed singles all day.
• Williamson’s arc might be the cleanest: minimal style drift, maximum outcome stability. Where others retool, he refines. Against pace, he learned to press and hold rather than press and push. Against spin, he learned to wait and ride rather than dart and punch.

Fab Four Test stats and context: who leads where (no-numbers, context-first table)

Rather than freeze numbers that age, treat this as a durable, context-adjusted leaderboard. These rankings reflect body of work across cycles and series, with weight on away and high-leverage innings.

Category leaderboards (Tests)

• Highest sustained Test average over long windows: Steve Smith
• Best away record overall: Steve Smith
• Best in SENA countries: Steve Smith
• Best in Asia (visiting batter): Joe Root
• Best fourth‑innings temperament: Kane Williamson (close with Smith/Root by scenario)
• Best big-score conversion (50→100): Steve Smith
• Most centuries in aggregate: Joe Root
• Best home dominance: Virat Kohli and Kane Williamson share this in different ways—Kohli for imposing run rate control, Williamson for consistency in low‑scoring environments
• Best record vs top‑ranked attacks across surfaces: Steve Smith, with Kohli and Root featuring prominently in different series
• Best day‑night adaptation: Steve Smith and Virat Kohli, with Root’s pink‑ball batting improving notably in recent cycles

Table: Fab Four context matrix (Tests)

Metric	Edge	Notes
SENA average and control	Smith	Leave game + conversion define the edge
Asia (away)	Root	Sweep suite and tempo control
Home consistency	Williamson	Rare low errors; tight skill in seam-friendly home spells
Fourth-innings	Williamson	Calm chases, immaculate match-state reading
Conversion rate	Smith	Turns dominance into match-bending doubles
Strike rate (controlled scoring)	Kohli	Tempo without chaos when set; innings control in both directions
Vs top‑ranked pace	Smith	Long spells of accuracy do not move him
Vs top‑ranked spin (away)	Root	Field-shifting sweeps, low-risk rotation
Big-innings match impact	Kohli	Landmark knocks that swung series momentum

Multi-format clarity: Fab 4 in ODI and T20I

Test greatness built the brand; white‑ball output rounded it. One of the common mistakes in surface‑level debates is pretending all four have symmetrical value in ODIs and T20Is. They do not.

ODIs

• Kohli is the gold standard of run-chasing. His tempo memory at different target bands is preternatural: holds the chase under control, refuses high-risk early big shots, cashes late. His bank of hundreds is the largest in the group, and he is the most decisive ODI batter of the four overall.
• Root is ODI glue with late‑phase acceleration now stronger than in his early one-day career. Won’t go aerial early often; thrives with a boundary-hitter at the other end.
• Williamson’s ODI game is similar to his Test persona but with more risk apportioning in the last fifteen. Uses angles, late cuts, and gaps; injury lay‑offs didn’t blunt his reading of tempo.
• Smith’s ODI batting is undervalued in casual chatter: he has won pressure chases and anchored many rebuilds. While he doesn’t carry the chase aura of Kohli, his high‑class middle overs against spin are irreplaceable.

T20Is

• Kohli’s T20I portfolio is headlined by chases and tournament nights where he turned improbable asks into inevitabilities without slogging. Boundary percentage plus strike rate in the back end under pressure is elite.
• Root’s T20I involvement has been intermittent, but when used as a flexible anchor, he has delivered match-shaping calm. Not a power hitter; a game-shaper.
• Williamson serves as tempo governor for New Zealand, especially on slow decks; can be overshadowed by power hitters but offers stability in unpredictable conditions.
• Smith’s T20I use case has swung between anchor and floater. At his best, he picks lanes and defends risk while the power hitters fire.

Table: White‑ball “edge meter” (qualitative)

White‑ball category	Edge	Why it matters
ODI chasing	Kohli	Target bands managed like an equation; late power without risky early lifts
ODI spin handling in middle overs	Smith/Root	Minimal dot-ball build‑up, high-quality rotation
ODI anchoring through collapses	Williamson	Composure; turns 240‑ish into defendable
T20I chasing in big tournaments	Kohli	Back-end finishing with orthodox strokes
T20I power-hitting	None among four	Not their primary superpower; each leans on timing/placement
Tournament knockout temperament	Kohli/Williamson	Unflappable, reads scoreboard states beautifully

Fab 4 captains: leadership fingerprints and impact

Leadership changes a player’s time budget: less technical tweak time, more human management. All four have worn the armband in Tests; three have led deeply into white‑ball knockouts. The captaincy record should not be reduced to a win percentage; look at cultural shifts and tactical tell.

• Kohli as captain brought fast-bowling supremacy to India in red‑ball cricket. Fitness culture, relentless lengths, and aggressive field sets defined his tenure. He rarely settled for draws; his away series wins and competitiveness in SENA reshaped how India approached Tests abroad. His ODI sides were ruthless in bilateral play and assured in most ICC league stages.
• Smith’s captaincy rode on incisive field plans and the freedom he gave his quicks to attack. On-field problem solving was crisp. Leadership phases around off‑field turbulence don’t erase his tactical acumen in real time: his game awareness is sharp, and his control of tempo mirrors his batting.
• Root’s leadership navigated transition phases and injury stacks, often with imperfect resources. As a batter‑captain, he carried weight without letting the average drift too far. He is among the sport’s better communicators mid‑session; his best wins were carefully plotted rather than adrenaline-fueled.
• Williamson’s captaincy is almost a world-view: empathy, clarity, simplicity. New Zealand’s Test side under him routinely outperformed their resource envelope. In ICC tournaments, his steady hand under pressure has been a hallmark—big decisions never felt rushed.

Table: Captaincy snapshot (qualitative)

Trait	Kohli	Smith	Root	Williamson
Aggression	High	High	Medium	Medium
Bowling usage	Bold rotation	Surgical	Adaptive	Patient but precise
Field plans	Audacious	Targeted	Flexible	Calm pressure
Man-management	Demanding	Clear	Supportive	Empathic
Impact on national identity	Fitness and pace first	Tactical sharpness	Resilience in transition	Understated excellence

Fab Four since the first WTC: what changed

The World Test Championship layered a tournament narrative onto bilateral Tests. What it changed for the Fab Four:

• Weight of away wins rose. Teams prioritized selection for conditions, and batting pools had to deal with higher‑quality attack rotations on the road.
• Run value inflated. Batting days became more targeted: building first-innings control and threatening three‑session collapses grew more common.
• Root unlocked his Asia script; Williamson leaned harder into absurd consistency; Smith kept his run machine humming with occasional dips counterbalanced by massive innings; Kohli recalibrated, then reasserted, often in statement knocks that anchored India’s race in the table.

Home vs away, SENA vs Asia: a fuller articulation

Home comfort

• Kohli at home: Drives through the line, wrist‑whips to midwicket, and punishes the fractionally full. Seamers who err early get punished; spinners who miss length get hustled. When he chooses control, he donates nothing for the first 40 balls and then cashes.
• Smith at home: Australia’s surfaces are true; he takes you to the attrition zone. Bowls of fourth‑stump channel without late nibble don’t work. He ticks.
• Root at home: Nibbly new ball in England can mess anyone; he copes by stealing singles at third man and mid‑wicket with deft hands. Stays busier than the conditions allow bowlers to handle.
• Williamson at home: New Zealand’s green‑tinged mornings beg an edge; he restores equilibrium with leaves and softness. When conditions ease, he turns 40s into match-shaping hundreds.

Away, SENA

• Kohli’s best away centuries re‑centered narratives in Australia and England. Judgment outside off decided series arcs.
• Smith in England is a ritual for bowlers: plans collapse after his first hour. In South Africa’s hard length, he’s equally stubborn.
• Root in Australia learned bounce and back-foot scoring; in New Zealand and South Africa, he smooths dips with strike-rotation.
• Williamson plays time, not bowlers. He pushes attacks to fourth spells.

Away, Asia

• Root’s sweeps re‑wrote orthodoxy: he hit spin out of its comfort zone without slogging.
• Williamson is so late that even on dusters, he remains mostly error-free.
• Kohli’s control innings in India and Sri Lanka made the ball look older than it was.
• Smith is patience personified, punching gaps and waiting.

Fourth‑innings and chasing record: pressure decoding

A fourth‑innings is a match within a match: a scoreboard asking awkward questions, surfaces drying or misbehaving, and every fielding side smelling blood. The Fab Four split here by temperament:

• Williamson has the least pulse variability. Even if dots mount, his method doesn’t get jumpy. He chooses bowlers and overs to take chances. His late‑game serenity translates directly into chase probability.
• Root plays for flow. He won’t let you lock him down across six deliveries; you will give a single. That reduces collapse contagion.
• Smith shrinks the strike‑zone. Bowlers tire of not getting a nick. He makes them blink first.
• Kohli as a chaser taps into rhythm: singles through midwicket and point, a postage-stamp cover drive to make bowlers aim straighter, and then a late dash that looks inevitable.

Fab 4 vs top‑ranked teams: a strength-of-schedule reality check

When the attack quality rises, bad habits surface. That’s where Smith’s method yields gaps so small bowlers lose heart. Root’s answer is in alchemy: single here, two there, nudge fielders into impatience. Kohli’s method relies on batting’s clean lines—glorious when he plays them; vulnerable only when the fifth‑stump temptation sneaks in early. Williamson farms calm and sells it to his partner in bulk.

What to watch within this lens:

• In India vs Australia, who moves first—bowler or batter? Smith often wins the “first move” war.
• In England vs India, does Kohli chase shape or wait? His innings length correlates with that answer.
• In South Africa, does Root stay leg-side of the ball or let it come? His best knocks there are late-contact clinics.
• Against New Zealand’s lateral movement, Williamson’s leave is a masterclass in scoring by not playing.

Conversion rate and big-score economy

Conversion rate is the habit of century-making once you’ve done the hard work to reach fifty. It’s also about how often those hundreds become platforms for wins or draws from behind. In that domain:

• Smith rules the conversion habit.
• Root wins on volume over cycles, with growing conversion.
• Kohli’s best conversion phases aligned with series-defining away knocks and brutal home doubles.
• Williamson’s conversion is stealthy; he quietly builds and kills the contest with the patience of a mountain.

Fab 4 ODI and ICC events: knockout clarity

ICC knockouts test nerve and method. Across the four:

• Kohli: tournament chases, mirage‑like late accelerations, and an aura that forces captains to misplace a fielder. The safest pair of hands when a must‑win requires a chase blueprint.
• Williamson: matches where a 70 felt like 140 because of timing and control. Captaincy interventions that doubled the effect.
• Smith: knockout calm; innings that healed collapses, leaving finishers room to explode.
• Root: perfect partner for a power hitter’s surge, especially against spin.

T20I tournament nights tilt toward Kohli’s chasing mastery; Williamson’s influence is more captaincy‑tactical and risk‑budgeted batting; Root and Smith have had streaks of impact but not as anchors of national T20I identity the way Kohli has for India.

Fab four cricket rankings right now: a consolidated expert call

Tests (long‑run valuation)

1. Steve Smith
2. Joe Root
3. Kane Williamson
4. Virat Kohli

Explanation: Smith’s SENA and conversion resume remains the strongest anchor. Root’s Asia excellence plus volume puts him full‑throated in the challenge. Williamson’s chase temperament and low‑error package push him close. Kohli’s pure impact and white‑ball superiority keep him a holistic GOAT‑tier modern, even if the Test pecking order places him fourth on long-run context.

Across formats (all‑format weight)

1. Virat Kohli
2. Steve Smith
3. Joe Root
4. Kane Williamson

Explanation: ODI and T20I impact widen Kohli’s lead; Smith’s ODI class and Test supremacy keep him narrow second; Root and Williamson are close—choose Root for pure run‑making, Williamson for captaincy‑infused tournament value.

New Fab Four in cricket? The chasing pack and how to think about it

Era labels refresh. If you’re projecting a new four based on talent plus trajectory, candidates include Babar Azam, Marnus Labuschagne, Travis Head, Shubman Gill, Harry Brook, Abdullah Shafique, and a couple of steadily improving openers from Asia and South Africa. None yet combine away‑across‑continents Test volume and white‑ball heft like the original four, but the conversation is alive. Head’s big‑match power, Brook’s thirty‑to‑eighty rocket, Gill’s classical repertoire, Shafique’s away calm—pieces are on the board.

How to watch the Fab Four like an insider

• Track their first twenty balls. You can often call the day from that micro‑phase. Is Kohli leaving? Is Smith refusing to follow line? Is Root reverse‑sweeping as a stock ball? Is Williamson waiting late? Those answers predict innings length.
• Watch the field. The number of catchers in front of square versus behind tells you who is in control. Fab Four innings often move fielders early; the game changes in that quiet migration.
• Notice partnerships. Each of the four makes partners better: singles appear, dot clusters disappear, and bowlers are pushed into fourth‑spell plans they didn’t want.

Compact comparison tables to bookmark

Fab Four at a glance (role clarity)

Format	Primary edge
Test	Smith: conversion/SENA; Root: Asia; Williamson: chase temperament; Kohli: momentum innings and home control
ODI	Kohli: chases; Root/Williamson: anchors; Smith: middle-overs class
T20I	Kohli: tournament chases; others: situational anchors

Context leader tags (Tests)

Situation	Tag	Batter
Away in SENA	Master of leave	Smith
Away in Asia	Sweep architect	Root
Fourth‑innings	Calm closer	Williamson
Home dominance	Tone-setter	Kohli

Fab 4 debate: beyond numbers, into feel

Numbers won’t capture the visceral: the sound of a Kohli cover drive off the middle, the way Smith walks you into a cul‑de‑sac, Root’s hush‑hush sprints between wickets, Williamson’s unblinking eyes as the ball seams past. The debate survives because each has a quality the others admire. Their peaks overlap; their dips are short. The reason the term stuck was not marketing—it was the steady rinse of excellence across regions while modern cricket fought calendars, formats, and fatigue.

FAQ: crisp answers to the most asked Fab Four questions

Who is best in the Fab 4 in Test cricket?

On long-run evidence and context splits, Steve Smith holds the narrow edge, with Joe Root the strongest challenger thanks to an unmatched away‑in‑Asia portfolio.

Why are they called the Fab Four in cricket?

It’s a shorthand for the era’s four outstanding Test batters—Kohli, Smith, Root, Williamson—who combined longevity, away success, and captaincy clout, becoming the default comparison set across formats.

Is Babar Azam part of the Fab Four or Fab Five?

He’s the driver of the Fab Five idea. On white‑ball output, he sits comfortably with the group; his Test away portfolio is building toward full parity.

Who has the most centuries in the Fab 4?

Joe Root leads on total centuries, with Smith and Kohli close depending on the split and format emphasis.

Who has the highest Test average among the Fab 4?

Steve Smith owns the highest sustained Test average over meaningful windows.

Who has the best away record among the Fab 4?

Smith across all away regions; Root if you specifically emphasize away in Asia.

Who performs best in fourth innings?

Kane Williamson for match‑state control and serenity, with Smith and Root close by different strengths.

Who is the most consistent across formats?

Virat Kohli, for combining Test impact with supreme ODI and T20I portfolios.

What are Fab Four World Test Championship records like?

Smith remains the conversion leader; Root’s WTC era featured generational away‑in‑Asia batting; Williamson’s side punched above weight under his captaincy, and Kohli set cultural and tactical standards while producing statement knocks.

Who among the Fab Four has the better day‑night Test record?

Smith and Kohli have the cleanest pink‑ball adaptations, with Root’s trajectory trending up and Williamson steady as conditions demand.

Fab 4 captains: who had the best win percentage?

Raw percentage varies with team cycles and resources, but impact-wise: Kohli reshaped India’s Test identity around fast bowling; Williamson’s New Zealand maximized resources; Smith’s on-field tactical sharpness stands out; Root stabilized through transition.

Closing reflections: the living index of batting greatness

The Fab Four started as a clever label. It morphed into a running ledger of modern greatness under conditions that chew up technique and attention spans. They thrived despite travel hogs, compressed calendars, and formats that could have split their focus. Each found a way to solve different cricket problems:

• Kohli enforced rhythm and gave India’s batting an identity in every format. When a chase felt tangled, he unknotted it with timing and certainty.
• Smith rewrote what control looks like, teaching a generation that aesthetics are secondary to repeatable solutions.
• Root proved that Test batting could be hyper‑modern without being reckless—angles, tempo, and innovation as stability tools.
• Williamson reminded everyone that calm isn’t the absence of pressure; it’s mastery over it.

Has the Fab 4 era ended? Not while those names still bend sessions, tournaments, and timelines. The cast around them will evolve. The fifth seat will keep being auditioned. But whenever a red‑ball morning smells of seam or a chase slips from manageable to menacing, the sport still asks: which one of the four do you want walking out now?

And that is why Fab Four isn’t just a tag. It’s a choice in your mind every time a wicket falls, a standard you test new stars against, a rhythm you recognize even before the scoreboard tells you it’s returning. It’s the modern game’s heartbeat—measurable by context splits and knockout nights, felt in cover drives and quiet leaves that turn chaos back into cricket.