The Perdurable Mr Tendulkar

[GIMH]

Well... yeah, it is really TBH. I can't off the top of my head think of anyone that old (from a serious cricketing country) who's played in a World Cup, though there may of course be some.

Only the very best batsmen (like Tendulkar) would be likely to be able to do it.

Paul Nixon at 36 is the best I can think of. What's more he had only just made his debut

 

[Sanz]

I can only think of two who were close - both Wasim (2003) and Inzi (2007) were 37.

Graham Gooch was 38 in the 1992 WC, Imran was 39 in the 92 WC. Javed Miandad was 39 in 1996 WC.

 

[bagapath]

just read the mike coward article. "2111" is more likely to be a typo. the tone of the article suggests he would have meant 2011. 2011 is a very realistic goal for tendulkar as long as he can maintain his body cricket-ready. i always feel that beyond 5000 runs or 300 wickets, aggregate totals of runs or wickets dont matter while judging the class of a player. similarly 70 tests is a complete career in my opinion (about one full year of your life playing test cricket ). so whether a player plays 192 tests or 163 doesnt matter. beyond a certain level, you have proved your durability and consistency. now other factors need to be considered to rank you in terms of greatness

 

[Richard]

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more.

At least, in the context of post-1970. Possibly lower the bar 1930-1970, and lower it again 1900-1930.

 

[Barney Rubble]

If he can maintain his form, there's absolutely no reason why one of the greatest of all time shouldn't continue to play for as long as he can. The cricketing public will enjoy watching him for as long as he graces our fields and television screens with his presence.

Here's to another 103 years of Sachin.