these comments dont appply to batsman who only score against piechuckers and useleess bowlers.look at thilan samarweera,all his runs r against useless attacks.(if i can use that word).such type of batsman make a career out of such opportunities,which are at plenty today.(courtesy -flat pitches ,bangladesh even india sometimes 2 teams against whom lanka plays 90% of there cricket).

haven't you seen his batting in the 3rd test... after laxman he was the best batsman in that test... get your fact right kapil bhai. but if you say this abt mahela its understandable i sai

Kapil & Vinoth both are saying same thing but for different players. But both are forgetting that its even not easy to bat against weak attack.

The picture shows Hayden's name. Though I am from India, as a keen observer of cricket, I would like to mention Tendulkar's double century against SL recently. He scored a double century in placid track and only when Murali and Malinga was not in the team!! Yet people keep telling he is the greatest batsman after Bradman. Wonder what about all those greats who played in UNKNOWN pitches, GREAT QUALITY FAST BOWLING and no restrictions of the number of bouncers per over and with inferior gears... and yet have avereages over 45 and some of them have ovr 50 !!!!!

Shaumik: One cannot use isolated few matches and generalize using a cherry picking method. As to matches of 30 or even 50+ years ago, many of those pitches were feather beds too. It is quite well documented, for they played 6 day and timeless Tests and scores were large. Body line itself was invented by frustrated bowlers for just that reason. During a short era of uncovered pitches things became sticky and erratic and the toss and or luck (e.g. overnight extra moisture) played too large a part. Hence covered pitches were introduced. However, your point regarding inferior equipment is valid. This is why it is very difficult if not impossible to do cross generational comparisons.

Whatever you all may say about different batsmen, but one thing is for sure that Virender Sehwag is the one who relishes strong attacks and fares much less when playing against weaker teams...

Some people pick Tendulkar's one or two matches and criticise him. That shows their envy to him. He is the only player to score century against all teams and particularly against Australia. He did not play too many matches against Canada, Bangala Desh, Zimbawe like some players and take credit for batting abd bowling averages. Despite undergoing worst operations he performed well. If I say Tendulkar is good that does not mean others are bad.

Vivek: I think Sehwag, brilliant as he is, takes things a little lightly against weak teams and ends up making a mistake. This is partly the point that Samir makes in this blog. I am sure if he changes his mental approach he will easily score big against weaker teams as well.

"Kapil & Vinoth both are saying same thing but for different players. But both are forgetting that its even not easy to bat against weak attack."

This was a hilarious statement :)
The problem with batting against weak bowling is not just that it's easy, it is easy after all it's "weak" bowling. The problem is maintaining concentration and not throwing away your wicket trying to hit a pie out the park.
I also agree with Shaumik. Tendulkar has made a business out of making "cheap" runs, that is runs made on dead wickets.
People forget that the bowling attack is only one part of the equation, some pitches now can drive bowlers insane. Bowlers who can exploit dead tracks are few and far between, the best was probably Malcolm Marshall.

Tendulkar is a class of his own. He can not be compared with Sehwag. But coming to performance, Sehwag seems to be the present era Bradman. Look at his big scores against tough oppositions like AUS,SA & SL. He has scored against the best of bowling attacks in the world. He has a triple 100 against Pak,SA & 200 against spinning wizard Murli. Then if you look his hundreds are always big hundreds. Either he doesnot score or if he scores then he scores it heavily. Most of his hundreds are over 150 & the brutality with which he scores his runs is worth watching.

Tendulkar has his own style of playing.this is true that he cannot be compared with sehwag.Sehwag plays aggresively.recently he scored 110 runs off just 93 balls.when he scored tripple century against south afarica.it seemed to me that it was a highlight package.on the other hand tendulkar plays diffensively and times the ball to perfection.