Sachin Tendulkar vs Garry Sobers

[subshakerz]

Sobers himself averaged 60+ for like 17-18 years.

Yeah but Tendulkar played twice as many tests in that time so it's a much bigger sample size. So it doesn't seem a fair comparison.

 

[fredfertang]

Sobers = The Greatest

bar none

 

[subshakerz]

Sobers = The Greatest

bar none

We are not talking about Bradman here.

I think Sobers, Viv and Sachin all have very strong cases to be the best since Bradman and we should acknowledge it is close between them.

 

[anil1405]

Yeah but Tendulkar played twice as many tests in that time so it's a much bigger sample size. So it doesn't seem a fair comparison.

This. Plus the weight of expectations on his shoulders , turns it slightly in favour of Sachin for me.

 

[Slifer]

Yeah but Sobers did all that while at times being asked to open the attack which takes a toll. And he didn't have any of the modern comforts in the way of bats, helmets etc.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

We are not talking about Bradman here.

I think Sobers, Viv and Sachin all have very strong cases to be the best since Bradman and we should acknowledge it is close between them.

The best since Bradman is obviously the great Adam Voges

 

[anil1405]

Yeah but Sobers did all that while at times being asked to open the attack which takes a toll. And he didn't have any of the modern comforts in the way of bats, helmets etc.

Apart from playing double the number of tests Sachin also played 463 games in another format. To sustain that form for so long is pretty impressive.

It comes down to minute details when these two are so close and both arguments are justified.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah but Sobers did all that while at times being asked to open the attack which takes a toll. And he didn't have any of the modern comforts in the way of bats, helmets etc.

I think Tendulkar playing a different format and Sobers bowling can be counted as side factors which makes their individual efforts more impressive.

However, in a direct comparison, playing nearly twice as many tests while maintaining a 60 or around average over the same period is a much more difficult task.

 

[smash84]

To me it's Bradman Naseem Shah Sobers Lara Sachin in that order.

Ftfy

 

[smash84]

Statchin today, Sobers tomorrow. It's tough to choose. Both have a valid stake as best since Bradman. Interestingly, Richie Benaud, who had the chance to watch both of them chose Tendulkar over Sobers.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

We are not talking about Bradman here.

I think Sobers, Viv and Sachin all have very strong cases to be the best since Bradman and we should acknowledge it is close between them.

Steve Smith as well.Only the 3rd batsman in history of test cricket after Hobbs and Bradman that anyone has stood head and shoulders above everyone.

 

[subshakerz]

Steve Smith as well.Only the 3rd batsman in history of test cricket after Hobbs and Bradman that anyone has stood head and shoulders above everyone.

Smith is 33. Next 3-4 years will determine where Smith ends up.

 

[Coronis]

Yeah but Tendulkar played twice as many tests in that time so it's a much bigger sample size. So it doesn't seem a fair comparison.

This is why modern batsmen > past batsmen. They get to play more tests so they’re naturally better.

 

[subshakerz]

This is why modern batsmen > past batsmen. They get to play more tests so they’re naturally better.

Tendulkar is more of an exception in playing 200 tests. Even modern batsmen will max out at 150/160 tests

 

[mr_mister]

Sachin never having that 3 ton or 500 run series... Was a good(well, great I guess) support player rather than a leading man. Never stole the show

Steve Buscemi to Sobers' Tom Cruise

 

[a massive zebra]

Tendulkar is more of an exception in playing 200 tests. Even modern batsmen will max out at 150/160 tests

But one could argue, in the last 30 or so Tests of Tendulkar's career, he exploited his god like status to selfishly play on when he was past it and not worth his place in the team. In his last 23 Tests, Tendulkar made 1,229 runs @ 32.34 with 0 centuries. So he was essentially wasting a valuable batting spot which could have been filled by a younger talent who probably would have done better and possibly developed his career more quickly. If we look at the actual reasons why Tendulkar played 200 Tests, its hardly worthy of praise.

 

[subshakerz]

But one could argue the last 30 or so Tests of Tendulkar's career, he exploited his god like status to selfishly play on when he was past it and not worth his place in the team. In his last 23 Tests, Tendulkar made 1,229 runs @ 32.34 with 0 centuries. So he was essentially taking up a valuable batting spot which could have been filled by a younger talent who probably would have done better. Hardly something worth praise.

Yeah but its not like you know from the beginning that you are in decline, nor is he the only one to decline at the end. Viv had the same issue.

 

[subshakerz]

Sachin never having that 3 ton or 500 run series... Was a good(well, great I guess) support player rather than a leading man. Never stole the show

Steve Buscemi to Sobers' Tom Cruise

I wouldn't go that far. I remember his series against Australia in 98 when he butchered Warne, and then the series in Australia when in 2007-8 when he was the star throughout the series. Ended up just under 500 runs. Even his series in SA in 2011 was exceptional. I would rate those ahead of Dravid's runathons in England in 2002 and Australia in 2004.

Having standout series is important but the 500 runs thing is a bit arbitrary.

 

[trundler]

Sobers over Tendulkar and Donald over Wasim is some lmao nerdy CW contrarianism.

 

[srbhkshk]

Sachin never having that 3 ton or 500 run series... Was a good(well, great I guess) support player rather than a leading man. Never stole the show

mate....