Sachin Tendulkar is the all time greatest batsman and better than Don - Nasser Hussain

[kabira]

Sachin Averaged over 100 when he played amateur bowlers in England, thats what Don Bradman did.

[Hitterman]

The best thing is Ponting is still far behind than Sachin Tendulkar and Sachin's records will never be broken.

[ViruFTW]

We often hear Sachin being called the greatest batsman of his era or the greatest modern batsman but I think it is about time the world acknowledged that Sachin is the greatest batsman...ever Most of Bradman's runs have come against the same team. He also scored heavily against India and SA in the solitary series he played against them but I doubt they were a match for Australia in those times. He only ever played in England and Australia. I can't imagine the pitches being too different from each other. I don't think the umpiring and fielding standards in those days would have been as good. How many times would have the umpires ruled an LBW decision in the favour of the Don because of his reputation? How many times a close runout chance ruled in favour of him? Add to the fact that they didn't have neutral umpires in those days. We won't ever know because they didn't have that technology in those days. But I'm certain he would have benefited more than Tendulkar has. I doubt that fielding(not catching) would have even been considered a serious part of the game in test matches in that era. Add to that Sachin has been on top of the game for 20 years. Played over 600 international matches and scored more centuries and runs than anyone in the history of the game. His longevity alone puts him ahead of any other player in the history of the sport. When we determine the greatness of a batsman we look at his performance in different conditions, all around the world. As great as the Don's stats are, speculating how he would have performed in different conditions against a variety of bowlers is a pointless exercise. We do know how Sachin has performed in different conditions, in different formats, against different teams. And that is evidence enough to call him the greatest batsman ever.

[Hitterman]

I would definitely like to hear comments from Ricky Ponting after Sachin's 200 :D. I just want to see his reactions.

[ViruRulez]

The best thing is Ponting is still far behind than Sachin Tendulkar and Sachin's records will never be broken.

Sachin's records at least in ODIs can NEVER be broken at least in the next century unless there is drastic changes to rules or conditions .. 17K and still running ... it will be around 20K probably till he retires and that is hell of a high wall impossible to climb

[Bradman99]

For all the "advantages" Bradman had over Tendulkar, there were many disadvantages!! They did not have the same protection, Bradman did not have the luxury of a helmet back then. There were not as many rules, which made it harder for the batsman also. For example, the series where England were bowling only bouncers at him. he still managed to average 50 odd.. Back in those days, they did not come off due to rain or whatever, so they had to play on wet surfaces.. Which again makes it harder to bat in.. At the end of the day Bradman avereaged 99.94 upon his retirement. No other batsman from his time was able to come anywhere near as close to that, so it's not because the standards were lower back then. I have great respect for Tendulkar but I don't think you can say he is a better player than Bradman. The highest I could regard him is as being level in number 1 with him.

[Desi Cartman]

Its like saying a scientist from 1800 is not as great as someone in the 2000s. you cant compare players which played 50-60 years apart. Its stupid to say that Bradman > SRT or SRT > Bradman. The reality is that both of them are legends :hatsoff:

[DomainK]

I agree that the comparisons are very difficult and will almost always be inconclusive. For that reason, lets stop calling Bradman as the greatest batsman ever. He was the best of his era. Sachin is the best of this era.

[Chalks]

I'm just grateful to have seen Sir Vivian Richards and Sachin (among others) in my lifetime.

[pappu_kanghi]

For all the "advantages" Bradman had over Tendulkar, there were many disadvantages!! They did not have the same protection, Bradman did not have the luxury of a helmet back then. There were not as many rules, which made it harder for the batsman also. For example, the series where England were bowling only bouncers at him. he still managed to average 50 odd.. Back in those days, they did not come off due to rain or whatever, so they had to play on wet surfaces.. Which again makes it harder to bat in.. At the end of the day Bradman avereaged 99.94 upon his retirement. No other batsman from his time was able to come anywhere near as close to that, so it's not because the standards were lower back then. I have great respect for Tendulkar but I don't think you can say he is a better player than Bradman. The highest I could regard him is as being level in number 1 with him.

And you cant say Bradman was better than Sachin either. The level of expectations and pressure on Sachin is unimaginable. Sachin has got hundreds against all the oppositions and in different conditions across the world. Did Bradman ever played in India or Sri lanka on spinning tracks? So its better not to compare them.

[99.94]

Lol.

[achilles]

Saare jahan se acha, Hindustan hamara

[Anakin]

Bradman's the man of amateur cricket. Nice one from Hussain, didn't expect it from him.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[achilles]

For all the "advantages" Bradman had over Tendulkar, there were many disadvantages!! They did not have the same protection, Bradman did not have the luxury of a helmet back then. There were not as many rules, which made it harder for the batsman also. For example, the series where England were bowling only bouncers at him. he still managed to average 50 odd.. Back in those days, they did not come off due to rain or whatever, so they had to play on wet surfaces.. Which again makes it harder to bat in.. At the end of the day Bradman avereaged 99.94 upon his retirement. No other batsman from his time was able to come anywhere near as close to that, so it's not because the standards were lower back then. I have great respect for Tendulkar but I don't think you can say he is a better player than Bradman. The highest I could regard him is as being level in number 1 with him.

Mate, advantages and disadvantages go both ways. We both know that, don't we? I don't deny that Bradman had it tough, but it doesn't mean Sachin had it all easy. Agreed you have the right to be nationalist, but its not like you are Bradman and Nasser is Sachin. He said what he felt like, much like Michael Slater shoots off his biased gob and says what he feels like. Nasser makes sense, end of discussion :bow:

[king2be98]

Don Bradman is the greatest by a distance, Sachin and Viv come in at joint second. So many people will say modern players are the best, but overlook the achievements of former greats. Have ytou guys ever tried batting on uncovered wickets? That to without helmets? If you have then you'd know just what a collosus Bradman is. Yeh Sachin has all the records in the book, but the one that really seperates Bradman from the rest is the 100 average, I don't care if it was only against one team, to average 100 on uncovered wickets against all sorts of unrestricted bowling without good prtotective gear, Bradman is leagues and leagues ahead of anyone else. Sachin is a great, no doubt, the greatest of the modern generation. But Bradman is light years ahead of anyone else.

[Sachinism]

Its too difficult to compare players across different era's, just get over it. Its one mans option, maybe its shared by millions of others, but its opinion at the end of the day

[achilles]

Don Bradman is the greatest by a distance, Sachin and Viv come in at joint second. So many people will say modern players are the best, but overlook the achievements of former greats. Have ytou guys ever tried batting on uncovered wickets? That to without helmets? If you have then you'd know just what a collosus Bradman is. Yeh Sachin has all the records in the book, but the one that really seperates Bradman from the rest is the 100 average, I don't care if it was only against one team, to average 100 on uncovered wickets against all sorts of unrestricted bowling without good prtotective gear, Bradman is leagues and leagues ahead of anyone else. Sachin is a great, no doubt, the greatest of the modern generation. But Bradman is light years ahead of anyone else.

Read comment 42. And what Nasser said is just an opinion.

[Anakin]

Hell, even a rare cricket reporter who saw both of them had the opinion that SRT was better than Bradman, and that was when he was 19 or around that age. Cricket is not numbers, it's much more than that. BTW, didn't Sir Hadlee have the same opinion?

[SachDan]

Hell' date= even a rare cricket reporter who saw both of them had the opinion that SRT was better than Bradman, and that was when he was 19 or around that age. Cricket is not numbers, it's much more than that. BTW, didn't Sir Hadlee have the same opinion?

John Woodcock of 'The Times' UK.