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

[teacup]

Well, frankly those who use Sehwag's ODI record as proof that he cannot excel in that format do not understand his game - beyond the numbers, that is. It is only a matter of time before he corrects that record. Or did you not watch him play T20s? I am sure you would agree that when a player excels in Tests as well as T20s he is not going to be a dud at ODIs. All this though has no relation to the original subject. Bradman did NOT play ODIs and it is not our job to predict what would have happened had he played. Test cricket is the highest/toughest form of the game and I would much rather grade batsmen on that basis.

I am not predicting how Bradman would have played ODIs. On the contrary, my point was exactly the opposite. For whatever reason, you seem to have a problem in interpreting my statements correctly. So, Bradman did not play ODIs but how can anyone hold that against Tendulkar or Richards in the debate on who the greatest batsman of all time is? Answer this, then, If Bradman had played ODIs you wouldn't have any problem including that format in the debate, would you? Do you see the absurdity in your argument?

[thevortex]

Teacup - there is no absurdity. To answer your pointed question, even if Bradman had played ODIs I would still have preferred to compare Test performances to decide upon the best batsman ever. I am sure you understand the reasoning. About Bradman not playing ODIs - start comparing apples with apples. You dont compare apples with a dozen oranges and then say that the oranges are heavier, do you? It follows that the discussion makes more sense when it is limited to Test performances.

[thevortex]

Its already such a huge what-if exercise. Why would you want to introduce one more make-believe factor in the equation - as in what if Bradman had played ODIs?

[teacup]

Teacup - there is no absurdity. To answer your pointed question, even if Bradman had played ODIs I would still have preferred to compare Test performances to decide upon the best batsman ever. I am sure you understand the reasoning. About Bradman not playing ODIs - start comparing apples with apples. You dont compare apples with a dozen oranges and then say that the oranges are heavier, do you? It follows that the discussion makes more sense when it is limited to Test performances.

One of the key virtues of Tendulkar and Richards is the ability they have shown in adapting to different formats of the game without losing any sheen off their greatness. You seem to want to remove that virtue when discussing who the greatest batsman is. I would be surprised if anyone really agrees with you.

[Gambit]

Bloody hell.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

One of the key virtues of Tendulkar and Richards is the ability they have shown in adapting to different formats of the game without losing any sheen off their greatness. You seem to want to remove that virtue when discussing who the greatest batsman is. I would be surprised if anyone really agrees with you.

Versatility is something I deeply appreciate. But versatility is something that can be judged only when the practitioner himself indulges in various different dimensions of the craft. Versatility is the reason why I hold somebody like Kishore Kumar higher than say a Rafi. Just to give you an inkling. By all means, use versatility as a measure of judging the greatest batsman ever. But how are you going to go about that when Bradman did not play a single ODI???? Does that not appear to you to be even a little significant? And you would be surprised how many people here (or anywhere else) disagree with you when you try to use Tendulkar's ODI record to help him get a leg up over Bradman. As much as I enjoyed that Tendulkar double century, I did not for example appreciate Nasser Hussain placing Tendulkar above Bradman on the basis of that knock. That knock did not do it for me. To me, I do rate Tendulkar above Bradman - if you want to know. But not for the reasons you are laying out.

vortex' date=' the issue here is the Bradman gang using his firstclass record to fill holes in his test record.[/quote'] Seriously where are the holes in his record, Bossbhai?

[zen]

I quoted your own post to show that you have selective amnesia! :cantstop: Does that afflict you only when you get into a debate? When you talk of modern day players you cannot exclude ODIs. Cricinfo's player of the decade selection included ODI performances as well. Nasser Hussain and Hadlee called Tendulkar the Greatest Batsman of all time for his excellence in both forms of the game. I think you know all this but your zeal to win a debate clouds your thinking.

Appears as if you didn't get the point :winky: The debate is already won, it's you guys who are trying to salvage something out of it but in that process making things more comical :--D If you want to include ODIs then to make it in to apples to apples, you have to assume that Don would be right up there with the best (if not better). If not then you leave them out. In both cases, it boils down to test cricket, which is what people imply when discussing the greatest batsmen of all time With people like you around, Gavaskar would be shivering as he wouldn't ever be rated amongst the best because of his not that great performances in ODIs :hysterical:

[The Outsider]

teacup ' date=' its ok to bring in records from a lower format (first class) but not from a higher level like ODI's ... dont ask why :winky:[/quote']

That is expected in keeping with the pedigree of their arguments.

Maybe instead of something profound it's got to do with the simple fact that both Bradman and Tendulkar played First Class Cricket whereas Bradman did not play ODIs. :idea: :hysterical:

[zen]

Well, frankly those who use Sehwag's ODI record as proof that he cannot excel in that format do not understand his game - beyond the numbers, that is. It is only a matter of time before he corrects that record.

I agree. Since 1 Jan 2008, Viru averages 45 at an amazing SR of 128!!!!!!

Overall figures   Player  	Span  	Mat  	Inns  	NO  	RunsDescending  	HS  	Ave  	BF  	SR  	100  	50  	0  	4s  	6s  	
MS Dhoni (India) 	2008-2010 	66 	57 	16 	2582 	124 	62.97 	3035 	85.07 	4 	18 	0 	180 	37 	investigate this query
MEK Hussey (Aus) 	2008-2010 	65 	60 	15 	2301 	85 	51.13 	2644 	87.02 	0 	20 	0 	145 	24 	investigate this query
KC Sangakkara (SL) 	2008-2010 	59 	58 	4 	2135 	128 	39.53 	2691 	79.33 	4 	14 	2 	215 	9 	investigate this query
G Gambhir (India) 	2008-2010 	59 	55 	5 	2105 	150* 	42.10 	2322 	90.65 	5 	13 	4 	219 	11 	investigate this query
RT Ponting (Aus) 	2008-2010 	57 	57 	2 	2060 	126 	37.45 	2548 	80.84 	4 	15 	3 	192 	22 	investigate this query
[B]V Sehwag (India) 	2008-2010 	43 	42 	1 	1860 	146 	45.36 	1451 	128.18 	4 	10 	0 	260 	44 [/B]	investigate this query
Tamim Iqbal (Ban) 	2008-2010 	55 	55 	0 	1773 	154 	32.23 	2167 	81.81 	3 	10 	7 	209 	21 	investigate this query
Yuvraj Singh (India) 	2008-2010 	55 	53 	6 	1772 	138* 	37.70 	1830 	96.83 	4 	9 	4 	177 	54 	investigate this query
SR Watson (Aus) 	2008-2010 	43 	43 	4 	1763 	136* 	45.20 	2028 	86.93 	4 	8 	5 	194 	31 	investigate this query
MJ Clarke (Aus) 	2008-2010 	51 	51 	7 	1683 	100* 	38.25 	2463 	68.33 	1 	14 	2 	123 	3 	investigate this query
SR Tendulkar (India) 	2008-2010 	35 	34 	4 	1636 	200* 	54.53 	1732 	94.45 	5 	6 	1 	180 	16 	investigate this query
SK Raina (India) 	2008-2010 	54 	45 	10 	1602 	116* 	45.77 	1628 	98.40 	3 	12 	3 	131 	46 	investigate this query

[vvvslaxman]

Fact is Bradman pwns tendulkar in every statistical front. It is not even 5 or 10 point difference. It is whopping 40 plus point difference. To say that these "imaginary factors" were the reason is downright nonsense. If anything difference between Tendulkar and Bradman might even be higher had both played in the 1930s!!

[zen]

Below is what would probably happen if ODI performances are given same weightage as test performances: Dean Jones: "Gavaskar, mate, even though you have some 10K, 34 H and an avg of 65 against one of the best bowling attacks of all time, I am equal to you because I have a better record than you in ODIs :yay: " Bevan: "Sir Gary Sobers, have you seen my average in ODIs. :--D "

[The Outsider]

Admittedly this is conjecture, but you can't blame me for discussing the hypothetical Bradman in ODIs here. Given all evidence, there is no reason to believe he would have suffered in ODIs - in fact would probably have dominated that game as well. He was one of the quickest scorers of his times and his quick scoring was devoid of risks - in fact his batting strike rate from 70 years back is better than Tendulkar's. He hardly used to hit the ball in the air and the basis of his quick scoring was finding the gaps. Bradman was also one of the most astute judge of a run from those days and a supposed master at strike rotation. He was quick to improvise to situations when things did not go to his liking. For example, while the rest of his teammates were trying to fend and hook during the Bodyline series, he quickly devised a way of backing away from the ball and cutting it through point or gliding it through slips and gully. He scored his runs at a strike rate of 75 in the Bodyline series. Nothing in his career suggests that he would have struggled in ODIs, bringing up the subject in the comparison is pretty nonsensical in itself though.

[King Tendulkar]

^ How do you know his strike rate? Back in the black and white era when Bradman played they never did ball by ball recordings. Thus 80 years ago when Bradman played in ancient times with their 8 ball overs and timeless tests they did not record stike rate. Are you sure you are not making things up when you refer to strike rate of bradman!!!

[The Outsider]

^ How do you know his strike rate? Back in the black and white era when Bradman played they never did ball by ball recordings. Thus 80 years ago when Bradman played in ancient times with their 8 ball overs and timeless tests they did not record stike rate. Are you sure you are not making things up when you refer to strike rate of bradman!!!

LOL! Why would I make things up? The balls were not recorded in all his innings but were recorded in quite a significant number of them. Here is a list of them : http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/4188.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting;view=innings I think vaurn had run the numbers a while back and his strike rate was around 60. Here are the Bodyline stats showing his strike rate to be 75 : http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=62;type=series

[Gunner_Mania]

Statistics are the only way of comparing today’s players with those of the past and when averages become distorted because of substandard cricket, so these comparisons are rendered useless.

Michael Atherton writing in the Times today on a completely different subject, but this quote caught my eye.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

Where is the record where Tendulkra made 500 runs in a series!! You cannot hide behind that super fast bowler, super spinner excuse. !!!

[bhanu]

bradman is just amazing batsman man...he owns everybody in all ball games including michael jordan and tiger golf( read that in wiki)...sorry to any sachin fan but this is the truth sachin comes 2nd though...but i kno a guy whos owns both of dem, he is umar akmal :finger:...b4 u guys throw a gernade in my house i wana say jk :hysterical:

[CSK Fan]

Where is the record where Tendulkra made 500 runs in a series!! You cannot hide behind that super fast bowler' date=' super spinner excuse. !!![/quote'] How many 5 match test series did Sachin play? i have seen this stat being used to compare Sachin and Ponting and am surprised to see that people ignore the fact that Sachin has been playing 2-3 match test series and Ponting has been playing 5 match test series