I am not sure I get what
@pardus s point here is. If he is trying to prove that Sachin has just as many holes in his record as most of the others who are considered in the "only next to Bradman" bracket, then sure. But I dont think anyone ever seriously argued against it. When people bring out reasons why Sachin is no lesser to Smith, of course they are going to bring the number of years they played etc. I do not see
@pardus pointing out that Smith's record in England is inflated coz he did not play Anderson, for instance, in a series. Literally every player in that bracket has holes in their resume, which is why they are all in the same bloody bracket. Seems
@pardus is confusing SC fans behaviour from FB or YouTube with their behaviour here, where it is obvious even the most biased Indian poster here at least accepts the reasonings that put blokes like Smith, Richards, Pollock, Lara etc. in the same bracket as him. There maybe some back and forth as we keep chipping down in terms of granularity of the argument, but overall, I feel that point is well taken. So not sure what
@pardus agenda here really is, as he is arguing a straw-man, at best.
And all this from one of the oldest proponent of Lara > Sachin as a test batsman here and an Indian.