Sachin Tendulkar Retires

[Nige]

Above comments and the poll = biased.

Both Don Bradman and Sachin Tendulkar had simply brilliant careers. They're both amazing in every aspect and should be revered as such. I don't think either one is better than the other and it's totally unfair to compare them. However, one could say that they're both on a level of their own that I doubt any cricketer will ever come close to reaching.

[elephants]

Stats ain't bias brah!

[Nige]

Stats ain't bias brah!

Still can't compare them when they played into two different eras...

[Torpedo10]

sachin's been a good player, but gotta say, im absolutely sick of people trying to compare him to bradman... he's definitely not the best cricketer of all time and you'd struggle to mount an argument that he's even the best cricketer of the last 10 - 15 years (i'd take someone like warne or kallis over him every day), in the context of history there are a good number of players ahead of him in my books and there is absolutely no comparison of him to bradman... bradman is on a completely different level that sachin could only dream of.

I disagree with this. Don even compared Sachin to himself when he was alive. I actully think Sachin is better than Don. Bradman played Against England, and that was about it. Tendulkar played against almost every country who playes cricket and dominated against them all, not just one country.

Exactly, plays against the lesser cricketing countries and smashes them to lift his average.  ;)

[elephants]

Stats ain't bias brah!

Still can't compare them when they played into two different eras...

Ah, so in other words, Sir Donald is the greatest. :D

[me]

i'd put tendulkar in the same category as dravid/lara/ponting/kallis --- bradman is on a different level altogether

tendulkar (53 avg, 46 wickets, 115 catches) vs kallis (55 avg, 288 wickets, 198 catches in the slips)

who would you take based on that?

[BB67th]

Yes, Kallis is very underrated still which continues to surprise me. He is one of the great all-rounders of all time, right up there, but not quite as good as, Gary Sobers.

[Nige]

Stats ain't bias brah!

Still can't compare them when they played into two different eras...

Ah, so in other words, Sir Donald is the greatest. :D

[Nige]

i'd put tendulkar in the same category as dravid/lara/ponting/kallis --- bradman is on a different level altogether

tendulkar (53 avg, 46 wickets, 115 catches) vs kallis (55 avg, 288 wickets, 198 catches in the slips)

who would you take based on that?

Comparing a batsman to an all-rounder.

While you're at it, compare apples to bananas.

[me]

i'd put tendulkar in the same category as dravid/lara/ponting/kallis --- bradman is on a different level altogether

tendulkar (53 avg, 46 wickets, 115 catches) vs kallis (55 avg, 288 wickets, 198 catches in the slips)

who would you take based on that?

Comparing a batsman to an all-rounder.

While you're at it, compare apples to bananas.

my point is kallis is equally as good a batsman, and yet is an infinitely better bowler/fielder ... so he's ahead of tendulkar as a better cricketer don't you think?

[Nige]

i'd put tendulkar in the same category as dravid/lara/ponting/kallis --- bradman is on a different level altogether

tendulkar (53 avg, 46 wickets, 115 catches) vs kallis (55 avg, 288 wickets, 198 catches in the slips)

who would you take based on that?

Comparing a batsman to an all-rounder.

While you're at it, compare apples to bananas.

my point is kallis is equally as good a batsman, and yet is an infinitely better bowler/fielder ... so he's ahead of tendulkar as a better cricketer don't you think?

It's fine to compare Kallis if he was solely a batsman, but Tendulkar was never a bowler and a very occasional part-timer. If Tendulkar bowled on a constant basis then it would be fine to compare.

I just don't get how people try to compare two people/things/whatever when there are so many different circumstances/clear differences etc... It's just not possible.

[BB67th]

Take Kallis' wickets away then and look at it like that. He still averages more than Tendulkar and is a better fieldsman.

[Torpedo10]

i'd put tendulkar in the same category as dravid/lara/ponting/kallis --- bradman is on a different level altogether

tendulkar (53 avg, 46 wickets, 115 catches) vs kallis (55 avg, 288 wickets, 198 catches in the slips)

who would you take based on that?

Comparing a batsman to an all-rounder.

While you're at it, compare apples to bananas.

my point is kallis is equally as good a batsman, and yet is an infinitely better bowler/fielder ... so he's ahead of tendulkar as a better cricketer don't you think?

It's fine to compare Kallis if he was solely a batsman, but Tendulkar was never a bowler and a very occasional part-timer. If Tendulkar bowled on a constant basis then it would be fine to compare.

I just don't get how people try to compare two people/things/whatever when there are so many different circumstances/clear differences etc... It's just not possible.

Does that mean it's possible to compare anything? IMO you could compare Tendulkar and Kallis, if you would take the All-Rounder over the pure batsmen that's purely on your comparison, it goes both ways. It's basically up to opinion, you can't judge it on a scale.

[Mailman the 2nd]

Although Nige is partly right in that you can't really compare players from different eras, it still makes the poll valid as then if no one can be determined as the "best cricketer" therefore Sachin isn't the best player ever :)

While Sachin is a better batter than Kallis (obvious), Kallis actually had to put the effort in every game to bowl , whereas Tendulkar didn't have that at all. Kallis also a much better fielder.

Sachin better batsman, but I'd much rather have Kallis in a team.

[CrowsFan]

Although Nige is partly right in that you can't really compare players from different eras, it still makes the poll valid as then if no one can be determined as the "best cricketer" therefore Sachin isn't the best player ever :)

While Sachin is a better batter than Kallis (obvious), Kallis actually had to put the effort in every game to bowl , whereas Tendulkar didn't have that at all. Kallis also a much better fielder.

Sachin better batsman, but I'd much rather have Kallis in a team.

See you say Sachin is obviously a better batter (which I would agree he is a better batter), but looking at stats says otherwise... Kallis average of 55, Tendulkar only 53. (Kallis better)
Kallis 44 hundreds in 164 matches, equates to scoring a hundred every 3.7 matches, Tendulkar 51 hundreds from 200 matches, equates to scoring a hundred every 3.9 matches. (Kallis better)
Tendulkar 15,921 runs from 200 matches = 79.6 runs a test. Kallis 13,140 runs from 164 matches = 80.1 runs a test (Kallis better)

Stats say that Kallis is actually the better batter as well. Which is interesting since I've always regarded Tendulkar as the second best batter of the generation (behind Ponting, but that may be bias).