Why sachin tendulker deserves his distinction?

Answer 1

Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar pronunciation (born 24 April 1973) affectionately called 'The Little Master' or 'The Master Blaster' is a current Indian cricketer who was rated by Wisden in 2002 as the second greatest Test Cricket and ODI batsman of all time after the legendary Sir Don Bradman and Sir Viv Richards respectively. He holds multiple records such as the leading Test century scorer, leading ODI century scorer, one of only three batsmen to surpass 11,000 runs in test cricket as well as being the first Indian to do so and the most career ODI runs and most overall career run tally.

Tendulkar made his international debut in 1989 and is an all-time crowd-favorite. He is the only Indian cricketer to receive the Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna, India's highest sporting honour for his performance in 1997-1998. Many of his fellow players, past and present, and cricket experts, regard him as one of the greatest batsmen the game has ever seen.

Answer 2

Since it is not clear what distinction you are referring to, unable to give any positive answer.

Answer 3

DOES'NT ONE BIT, I think he is not only the MOST overrated player EVER in Indian cricket and Indian sports but also in International cricket and International sport. Not only as a player, furthermore as an Indian and as a person too is he VERY overrated.

Don Bradman, George Headley, Len Hutton, Wally Hammond, Rohan Kanhai, Gary Sobers, Barry Richards, Emperor Vivian Richards etc are amongst the many who have been greater than him. In Indian cricket alone, at least two men - Gundappa Vishwanath and Sunil Gavaskar are far above him. The reasons for my view I have below, having just copied and pasted from another thread where I had given it as answer a couple of days back.

Gundappa Vishwanath and Sunil Gavaskar remain the greatest batsmen ever in Indian cricket. They are far above Sachin Tendulkar who is singularly the most hyped and most overrated batsman, player, talent, and person ever in all of modern sport and not just cricket.

When I say the above I would like to list briefly the differences in conditions, which people seldom look at while talking of T'kar - 'conditions' meaning those circumstances in which cricket has been played - how drastically they changed around 89-90-91 when the game went from a 50-50 (to minorly in favor of the ball) contest to a 60-40 to totally in favor of the bat matchup.

1) Tons of protective gear (90 and after) to absence of protective gear including the helmet (pre-90).
2) Many batsman-protecting rules like one bouncer per over, no crease-popping, no-ball above chest-level, no legside deliveries etc (90 and after) to total absence of any such rules (pre-90).
3) Meatier and easier to use and thus much better quality bats (90s and now) to lower quality bats which often broke on the field (pre-90).
4) Smaller boundaries using ropes and faster outfields (90s and now) to much larger boundaries till the fence with slower outfields (pre-90).
5) Above all, good to very good to excellent batting pitches (90s and now) to uncovered, fast, bouncy, treacherous tracks (pre-90).
6) Lastly the financial security today (90s and now) to very little then(pre-90).

The above should just about sum up the MUCH easier batting conditions that T'kar, Lara etc of the 90s and now played/play in compared to those that pre-90 men performed in - and that includes Vishy and Sunny - AND also Bradman, Headley, Hammond, Kanhai, Sobers, Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards, and the Batting Emperor Vivian Richards and many such, ALL of whom are FAR greater geniuses and players than T'kar ever was, is, or will be.

T'kar's records are inflated, thanks to not just great batting conditions but over and above ****-poor bowling attacks like those of Namibia, Kenya, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, New Zealand (without Shane Bond), England (before Andrew Flintoff and Steve Harmison) etc against whom he has plundered many. But when the chips are down, even in good batting conditions, against relatively good attacks, he has failed again and again.

His innings were/are never forceful and don't save matches, let alone win them. Gavaskar saved matches and Vishwanath even won some. And that against MUCH faster, better, greater attacks in MUCH more difficult batting conditions.

So much is said of his Sharjah knocks in '98, they were in excellent batting conditions, on the best ever batting pitch, against a third-rate Aus attack that missed three of the four best bowlers of the then Aus cricket (McGrath, Gillespie and Lee); All that attack had was a out-of-form Warne with cub-level bowlers like Kasperowicz and Fleming.

Finally, I think in terms of pure natural talent - as a cricketer - and also as a batsman - Kapil Dev was easily the best to emerge from India - in fact from outside WI, Aus, Eng and SA. He would have been above Gavaskar and Vishwanath if he had been a fulltime batsman. He would have been up there in the company of Bradman, Kanhai, Sobers and Emperor Vivian as the greatest ever. For now, Indian cricket's best remain Gavaskar and Vishwanath.

Answer 4

he is playing well so do not need distinction.

Answer 5

HE IS THE ALL TIME GREATEST MAN .
All hail THE GREAT SACHIN.

Answer 6

he bats very well

Answer 7

wat distinction u talking abt ???
make ur question more clear mate..