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

[vvvslaxman]

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

Dravid has two 600 plus records. So no excuse there mate. Even Laxman got one.

[vvvslaxman]

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' date=' he is umar akmal :finger:...b4 u guys throw a gernade in my house i wana say jk :hysterical:[/quote'] UMar Akmal yea.. right.. closest he will come to an Indian batsman is concerned is Irfan Pathan :cantstop:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

Any and all hiding is done by you and your tribe .... you can twist and turn as much as you like but absolutely NOBODY other than some no name idiots consider that good fast bowlers and spinners dont affect run making. Try to deal with it.

And NOBODY other than some no name idiots consider anyone else but Bradman as the greatest batsman in cricketing history. Try to deal with it. :hysterical:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

Nasser Hussain isnt a nobody nor are the 1000s who voted in that Guardian poll ... Right here on your poll you got 16 people who dont ..... DGB himself said SRT was just like him. try to deal with it.

Guardian poll? Are you reduced to a bot now? This is a public poll on ICF, where fellow admins can certify genuine voting, and the majority favor Bradman.... try to deal with it. On any other forum such a thread and poll would have been in the jokes section.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[teacup]

Guardian poll? Are you reduced to a bot now? This is a public poll on ICF, where fellow admins can certify genuine voting, and the majority favor Bradman.... try to deal with it. On any other forum such a thread and poll would have been in the jokes section.

Man...you are unbelievable! 91% of the voters voted for Tendulkar in the Guardian poll and you are questioning the outcome of the poll? :cantstop:

[teacup]

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.

Bradman may or may not have been successful had he played in ODIs. That is the not the point. Why should you not consider ODI performances when assessing modern players because someone 80 years back did not get to play in that format? Viv Richards edges out Gavaskar in most rankings because he dominated both formats. Gavaskar, great as he was, had limitations as a batsman which made it difficult for him to adapt to ODIs.

[thevortex]

Man...you are unbelievable! 91% of the voters voted for Tendulkar in the Guardian poll and you are questioning the outcome of the poll? :cantstop:

How many of those voters were Indian? :) Public polls will lay out very many things. It is up to you to see if you want to believe all of them.

Bradman may or may not have been successful had he played in ODIs. That is the not the point. Why should you not consider ODI performances when assessing modern players because someone 80 years back did not get to play in that format? Viv Richards edges out Gavaskar in most rankings because he dominated both formats. Gavaskar' date=' great as he was, had limitations as a batsman which made it difficult for him to adapt to ODIs.[/quote'] So what is your point? That one extrapolate how one would play ODIs based on their Test record? Whatever happened to playing according to the situation and according to the format? By all accounts Bradman's rate of scoring was very high even in Test matches. In fact even in this respect he was head and shoulders above his peers.

[Rajiv]

Bradman was a super cricketer who will never be born again or seen on TV ( to judge him ), we can have Einstein play out a formula if necessary but for god sake, shut the door on this already

[Roshanrocks]

this problem will be resolved on december 21st 2012 :D

[vvvslaxman]

Any and all hiding is done by you and your tribe .... you can twist and turn as much as you like but absolutely NOBODY other than some no name idiots consider that good fast bowlers and spinners dont affect run making. Try to deal with it.

:cantstop: Again you lost your cool. I was not twisting or turning anything. I was just asking a simple question.

[zen]

On the other thread, I posted the list of batting averages adjusted to account for bowling strengths and what it showed was: - Bradman's average of 100 went down to 90 - Tendulkar's average of 54 (at that time) went down to 47 Despite taking in to account the 'factors' here, analysis like the above show the difference in averages b/w the two is still over 40 runs! And surprising Tendulkar's average has gone done instead of going up (which is what would have happened the points made my some here were to be accurate)! Ofc, I tend to take such analysis with a pinch of salt but this is to show that the difference b/w the averages of the two batsmen being discussed here is so huge that such factors (no matter how hard you dig) become irrelevant. Thus it renders such debates pointless :winky:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

The PWC ratings take into account all these supposed intangibles like strength of bowling attack, how others performed on the same pitch etc. etc. and Bradman smokes any other batsman in cricketing history by a margin which should openly shame anyone claiming Tendulkar to be the best, but jingoism knows no shame : http://www.reliancemobileiccrankings.com/playerdisplay/test/batting/?id=572 :giggle:

[Sachinism]

:cantstop: Again you lost your cool. I was not twisting or turning anything. I was just asking a simple question.

How you gonna accuse him of losing his cool because he said 'tribe' I've seen you use the word fanboys numerous times in the last few days. Maybe you've been losing your cool a bit too often

[Roshanrocks]

ooops....deleted :D

[The Outsider]

Are you not in favour of such extrapolation? In which case' date=' this thread is probably not for you because comparisons across eras are precisely that.[/quote'] And extrapolating from Bradman's test record it is safe to say he would have kicked Tendulkar's behind in ODIs as well because not only did he score twice as many runs in tests he scored them at a better strike rate than Tendulkar 70 years back when the average run rate in tests was about three fourths it is today.

[thevortex]

Are you not in favour of such extrapolation? In which case' date=' this thread is probably not for you because comparisons across eras are precisely that.[/quote'] Nope, Sarchasm. And I am OK with comparison across eras, not necessarily comparison across different formats of the game. Especially when one of the players in the comparison has not had the opportunity of playing in that format of the game! You compare Tests to Tests. Where is the sense in comparing a player's Test record with another's ODI record or even a composite Test + ODI record?