Jump to content

Bradman is the greatest, Sachin comes only second: Waugh, Benaud


Feed

Bradman is the greatest, Sachin comes only second: Waugh, Benaud  

2 members have voted

  1. 1.



Recommended Posts

We have to stop being naive by comparing pioneers of cricket who were source of inspirations for so many generations of cricketers with current players. If i am right Bradman was self-taught cricketer practicing in the backyard with a stick and a ball in an era of depression. Look at the dedication he showed in mastering the game. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEo-7Q5XA_k]YouTube- Sir Donald Bradman: A Tribute[/ame]

Link to comment

I agree to the above fact. But among indian crickters sachin is considered as the god of cricket when he later achieved the victory by 200 runs in second ODI's held in FEB 2010..but a player like sachin ......its not a big deal by marking such a performance. More

Link to comment

Comparing players of completely different eras is a impossible task. Bradman was the best and probably would have been the best in the modern era as well. The fact that he almost had a 100 average in tests and 95+ in first class cricket is astounding. No one is even close in any era. I love Sachin and I think he is the best player in the modern era, but Bradman's record speaks VOLUMES!

Link to comment

I would put Bradman in a league of his own. Ideally, we should keep Bradman out of such comparisions. But when someone like Sachin, who has a remarkable record in Tests and ODIs, keeps performing so well for so many games, some people are bound to make comparisions. It's credit to Sachin to be able to bring out such a comparision but there is no threat to Bradman's position, which is a league of his own

Link to comment
this topic has been done to death soo many times but FWIW heres the full list of reasons why DGB cant be simply considered beyond question ... 1. Lack of quality strike bowlers (As in sub 25 avg , sub 55-60 strike rate ) 2. No real super fast express bowlers who bowl regularly in the 87+ mph category 3. Lack of quality spinners 4. Never played in India, Pak, SL, SAF,WI (in fact he played in a grand total of 10 grounds in his entire career .... 5 each in Eng & Aus) 5. Never tested against reverse swing. 6. Advantage of lax fielding standards. 7. Advantage of playing just one format of the game. 8. Advantage of numerous first class tour matches throughout the tour ( compare that to Indias recent tour of Australia where the only practice match was by and large washed out ) 9. No taxing travel schedules. 10. Batsman friendly lbw law and umpires being very pro-batsman for lbws. More discussion can be found here in this thread: http://indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=97689&page=7 PS : I think the mods should think about making one big Bradman-vs-ModernBatsmen thread by moving such posts from various threads and archiving it for easy access. :--D
And what about the disadvantages of playing in that era? Let's not ignore the advantages/disadvantages of playing in this era too. Below is the table that shows how batsmen did from 1 Jan 1927 to 1 Jan 1950. It includes those who have scored close to 2000 runs or more
Overall figures 
Player Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0  
WR Hammond (Eng) 1927-1947 85 140 16 7249 336* 58.45 22 24 4  
DG Bradman (Aus) 1928-1948 52 80 10 6996 334 99.94 29 13 7  
L Hutton (Eng) 1937-1949 41 72 5 3788 364 56.53 11 17 3  
B Mitchell (SA) 1929-1949 42 80 9 3471 189* 48.88 8 21 3  
DCS Compton (Eng) 1937-1949 36 60 8 3132 208 60.23 13 12 2  
H Sutcliffe (Eng) 1927-1935 39 63 7 3046 194 54.39 10 16 1  
M Leyland (Eng) 1928-1938 41 65 5 2764 187 46.06 9 10 6  
SJ McCabe (Aus) 1930-1938 39 62 5 2748 232 48.21 6 13 4  
AD Nourse (SA) 1935-1950 26 49 7 2469 231 58.78 8 12 3  
LEG Ames (Eng) 1929-1939 47 72 12 2434 149 40.56 8 7 5  
EH Hendren (Eng) 1928-1935 29 50 4 2291 205* 49.80 4 13 1  
GA Headley (WI) 1930-1948 21 38 4 2173 270* 63.91 10 5 2  
WJ Edrich (Eng) 1938-1949 29 45 1 2006 219 45.59 6 9 2  
WM Woodfull (Aus) 1928-1934 30 48 4 1994 161 45.31 5 13 4  
C Washbrook (Eng) 1937-1949 26 48 6 1979 195 47.11 4 10 1  

That's^ what tells the story as to why he is in the league of his own!

Link to comment

If you take the averages of guys who have played 20 tests or more in the period I mentioned in my last post, this is how they stand: (Avg rounded off) Don 52T, 100A G Hadley 21T, 64A (also known as Black Bradman) Compton 36T, 60A Paynter 20T, 59A Nourse 26T, 59A Hammond 85T, 58A Duleepsinji, who played in 12T for Eng, averaged 59. As I said earlier that it's credit to Sachin that he has been able to bring out such comparisions but Don remains in the league of his own, in my humble opinion.

Link to comment
All discussed in that thread or many others on that topic.... uncovered pitches and no helmets. If you read the wisden almanck match reports from that time you will find that most pitches in that era were heavily batsmen friendly. Helmets will protect from grevious injury but they will not suddenly remove the fear of a Cricket ball to the extent that batsman no longer need a technique to counter short pitch bowling as the helmet will take care of that. Ask Dravid Ponting etc. Plus its hardly comfortable wearing a heavy helmet. Again answered in that thread. It only means he was far better than his peers and not everybody that played the game after him.
Wearing a helmet is not an issue, old batsman didnt know about helmets so its not an issue and modern batsmen grew up wearing it so it becomes second nature. And I fail to see how wisden can call pitches batsman friendly in those days, its impossible to produce a batsman friendly wicket in England without covering, there will always be something in the pitch. At the end of the day you are trying to compare the incomparable.
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...