Sachin Tendulkar on Mount Everest of International cricket. Even if someone achieves this height in future, the flag with Tendulkar's name will be flattering for ever.
OK agreed they play in different era and under different circumstances. But these playing itself makes Sachin much better than Bradman. To me these are key differentiators are as given below, u judge who is the best: 1. Bradman played 37 out of his 52 matches against one opponent, England i.e. he batted against same style of attack. So one can argue that he got accustomed to play against the English attack. Whereas Sachin played against all test plying nations i.e. varied style and attack. 2. Technology was not used in cricket then. Whereas Sachin was the first player to be judged run-out by the third umpire. The point is with advent of technology it is more difficult to get the benefit of doubt. Let's accept, if technology was used in Bradman's time he might have been run-out few extra times than what he did and therefore his final batting avg. would not have been 99.94. 3. Bradman scored 18 out of his 29 centuries and 61% of his total runs at home. Sachin scored 22 out oh his 50 centuries (till date) and 45% of his total runs at home. It is usually considered that there is a "home advantage" is cricket. 4. People do argue that Bradman played fast bowlers without helmet and other guards. Well but using guards is and added burden and it only slows down the speed of attack. BTW.. Sachin also played the fierce attack of fast blowers like Ambrose, Walsh, Imran, Akram, Waqar and some of the best spinners cricket has ever produced Murli and Warne.
