Jump to content

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

Feed

By Feed
in Cricket Talk

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

2 members have voted

  1. 1.


Recommended Posts

King Tendulkar Newbie

King Tendulkar

Posted
Posted

Although Bardman was most dominat era player ever. It should be noted he was in a non competitive era were he only basically had one other team to play against! Cricket as a sport truly become global and competitive in late 60s/early 70s with emnergence of windies and sub continent teams to actulay provide genuine competition. Now its the fault of bradman he was in a non competitive era but still its a fact he was. Thus he was not testes against a variety of teams/styles/conditions

Link to comment
King Tendulkar Newbie

King Tendulkar

Posted
Posted
Well I don't think it's clear cut' date=' he would certainly be top 5. Then again in 200 years people may look back at Tendulkar and laugh.[/quote'] They may well do. But I will dead by then so not bothered:cantstop: However generally in sports they wont get that much better then now. They have developed to such a lhigh level that I feel in a 2010 sportsman would be able to compete successfully in 50 years time.
Link to comment
99.94 Newbie

99.94

Posted
Posted

Yes, but do you really think if Bradman had travelled to India, South Africa etc. he would have struggled? There is nothing to suggest he would have. Sure, his average may have fallen to around 90, but even an average of 90 is ridiculous.

Link to comment
King Tendulkar Newbie

King Tendulkar

Posted
Posted
Yes' date=' but do you really think if Bradman had travelled to India, South Africa etc. he would have struggled? There is nothing to suggest he would have. Sure, his average may have fallen to around 90, but even an average of 90 is ridiculous.[/quote'] Well if India and SA had actually decent teams at that time. Then he may had have more difficulties then England presented. But yes he would not have struggled imo. But it is still an unknown quantity of would he coulkd he etc etc. While a player like Tendulkar is proven in all conditions/countries/formats etc There are no could he / would he variables. Its all proven.
Link to comment
fuub Newbie

fuub

Posted
Posted
Who was ALL?? Her played against one competitive team in England. Also I am still amazed at the retarded pots from people who actually think that if you put a 1930s sportsmen in a time machine and let them play tommorow in modern sports that they would actually be any good. Frankly they would be a comedy show! Again I repeat. You can say a 30s sportsmen was the moxt dominat player of his era and was more dominant in his era in comparison to other players domination of their eras. But to actually say that a 1930s players would do well today and technically was as good etc etc is the stuff of an idiot. I mean the way some are saying above that Bradman would do well against the 2010 SA attack is ridiculous and in their hearts they know it. The way some are arguing over the brilliance of bowlers and bats from 50 years ago and saying that Sachin would struggle against players from 50 years ago is delusional and intellectually dishonest.
so what, DB played against the best cricket bowlers a country could muster over 20years, they practiced the art to be the best of their time, why wouldnt they be great bowlers if time machined to the future? they will have more base knowledge to work with , sure , but i dont think humans have evolved so fast that someone born 50 years in the future will automatically be more accurate, co ordinated, faster etc. Pretty sure you take whoever won the 220yard dash (200meters) in the 1938 commonwealth games their time will still be better than alot of runners doing the 200m now with a whole bunch of aids technology gives us. If that same runner was given the advantages tech & science gives us today he would likely win the 200m in the next commonwealth games.
Link to comment
teacup Newbie

teacup

Posted
Posted
In 1948 the winner of the 100m sprint ran it in 10.3. Not too shabby. In 1935 Jesse Owens ran the 100-yard (91 m) sprint in (9.4 seconds).
10.3 is so far behind 9.5 that the two cannot be seen together in a wide-screen picture frame at the finish line.
Link to comment
fuub Newbie

fuub

Posted
Posted
you are saying Bolt had better technology than Carl Lewis ?
Bolt has access to better steroids better protein suppliements etc than Carl Lewis .. sure. Would Carl Lewis run faster than he did in 1988 with all the things developed in the last 20 years in sports science? I think he could. Would Lewis beat Bolt? Im not sure. Considering how much further ahead of the other runners Bolt was and he was celebrating before he crossed the finished line, I doubt it.
Link to comment
King Tendulkar Newbie

King Tendulkar

Posted
Posted

Bradman 99 And now there is much bigger pool of talent to choose from world wide. Like Jamcia for example who would not have any decent athletics programmes or athletes being developed at all in 30s and 48. Now they do and they unearth a freak like Bolt. Who knows how many Bolts were around Jamacia in 48. Just an example of sport becoming so much more competitive in 2010 compared to corinthinan days of 30s were select few elite countries indulged in these games. This also shows the lack of competitvness when Bradman played as the pool of talent was from england and aus and thats it. Now the cricket talent can come from variety of countries so to be dominat in this era is in many respects a greater acievment then to dominate in the old days were select few elite countries played

Link to comment
99.94 Newbie

99.94

Posted
Posted
Bradman 99 And now there is much bigger pool of talent to choose from world wide. Like Jamcia for example who would not have any decent athletics programmes or athletes being developed at all in 30s and 48. Now they do and they unearth a freak like Bolt. Who knows how many Bolts were around Jamacia in 48. Just an example of sport becoming so much more competitive in 2010 compared to corinthinan days of 30s were select few elite countries indulged in these games
This has never been an issue when considering other sporting greats who played during a time when the sport was still relitively amateur.
Link to comment
King Tendulkar Newbie

King Tendulkar

Posted
Posted
Bolt has access to better steroids better protein suppliements etc than Carl Lewis .. sure. Would Carl Lewis run faster than he did in 1988 with all the things developed in the last 20 years in sports science? I think he could. Would Lewis beat Bolt? Im not sure. Considering how much further ahead of the other runners Bolt was and he was celebrating before he crossed the finished line, I doubt it.
Are you saying Bolt takes steriods?
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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...