Tendulkar played well after ages ....yes ....agter ages that why this post is here.

I agree with the guy who says statistics are underwear. If you are talking about stat, look at Hussey's. tendulakar avarage- 50s, husseys -80s. Does it prove Hussey is father of cricket or Tendy is a kid in front of Mr. Cricket? That doesnt prove anything.

Tendulkar is there for ages. And he is In IIIIndian team not Australian. If he was in Australia he would not be even chosen to play test at his age in the first place.

I know he is a good player. But no one cna claim that he is the best. No one is best. Ricky, Hyden, Inzi, Gilly, Warne, Muralitharan, Lara and all others are great players but they can play crapy at times. Tendy is no different. He never quits even though he scores 50 run in 10 innings. He is still there because someday he made a century. His position is garaunteed. It doesn't happen in Aus team.

Brian Lara once made 40O ....nobody have dont that afterwards....does that make him the greatest. His 400 didnt do no good if you remember.

Tendy is there for ages and the number of centuries he made looks good but any quality batsman who will be there is and will be capable to make more centuries than he did. Ricky has 30 some, Hyden is moving on. But as I said they don;t get oppertunities like Tendy gets to play for ages.

Whatsoever, Tendy is a good player.