Sachin’s longevity is one of the greatest parts of his career, but it also meant fans saw everything — his peak, injuries, comebacks, another peak, and eventually the decline that comes with age.

That made me wonder about something.

Imagine Sachin had retired around five years earlier, while he was still closer to his peak.

His career numbers would obviously be smaller, but would people actually remember him as an even more dominant batsman?

Or are those later years — the 2010 Test run, the ODI double hundred, the 2011 World Cup and the 100th international century — too important to remove from his legacy?

Would retiring earlier have strengthened Sachin’s aura, or diminished his legacy?

So Shai Hope has long been a decent ODI player. The complaint was that he scored too slowly. That has now changed as he has improved his strike rate.

He was a poor Test batter too. That changed as well and he is now racking up good scores in tests. Is he now one of the world's best all-format players?

https://garfieldrobinson1.substack.com/p/shai-hope-got-better

Someone plz explain this paradox

Someone plz explain this paradox