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

[Dhondy]

Actually you cant simply turn a blind eye to facts. Thats a cornerstone of any analysis. Bucknor met a very sad end to his career - Fact. Harper has been reprimanded - Fact. Tendulkar attracted almost every single worthless Umpire under the sun to bask in the 15 minutes of sadistic pleasure at having sawed of the great man and having made him look mortal - including Taufel. Thats a universal fact that anyone who has minutely followed his career will attest to without thinking twice. Footage is readily available.

In that case, you will have to take into consideration all the bad decisions all the other batsmen above and below him have ever suffered. Further, you will have to factor in all the occasions when all of those batsmen were lucky not to be given out despite being palpably out. Go for it!:--D

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

Calm down. Dont hide behind the patloons of others ... Feel free to ask what Doc thinks about post#105 and your now legendary statement.

First give me the stat i asked. Show me a series where he dominated a team even the most mediocre team. You just hid behind your same old imaginary lame excuses. You were yet to come up with an answer.

[vvvslaxman]

Bradman's worst series average > Tendulkar's career average

[zen]

One has to remember that if you think that Bradman has skeletons in his cupboard then you be rest assured that others have far too many. Which is also one of the reasons why one shouldn't be debating against Don While Don is in a league of his own, the difference b/w Tendulkar and the rest is not much so anyone can argue his PoV based on the criteria he selects. The clear advantage for Tendulkar was in the fact that Don compared Tendulkar with him. Now when you try to show Tendulkar > Don, you lose that advantage because being compared with the Don (an honor and something to leverage up on in this close race amongst others) loses its meaning As they say a bird in hand is better than two in the bush :winky:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

Yeah but in this discussion where we are comparing DGB vs Modern batsmen DGB enjoys a distinct advantage on that count. The man had 4 times as many Clean bowleds as lbws .... a very odd stat considering that mainly tailenders and lesser batsmen have that sort of a ratio. Not saying he was any of that but perhaps he benefitted from the largess of umpires who in those days were quite reluctant to give him out.

Tamim iqbal is yet to be given leg before. Bowled 7 times. He is playing in UDRS era. Explain to me. Why that is the case.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[King Tendulkar]

Posters here who are saying Bradman is better. Please clarify when you have seen him bat and where? What tv footage(was the tv invented when he played?) have you seen of him batting that convinced you he was best?

[Dhondy]

My final stat on this thread. A rank order of batsmen by batting average, who have played against McGrath or Donald or Pollock or Shoaib or Wasim. Tendulkar appears at number 55 with an average of 37.23. You will find him on the second page. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=7;orderby=batting_average;player_involve=1775;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;player_involve=5649;qualmax1=50;qualmin1=5;qualval1=matches;template=results;type=batting Career average 55.56. I rest my case.

[King Tendulkar]

^ O dear basis his judgements on players from cricinfo stats.

[King Tendulkar]

Most tons in tests. Most runs in tests. Most tons in odis. Most runs in odis. The greates ever no dobut. Despite what the 1930s fans think!

[vvvslaxman]

Dude I asked my question about fast bowlers and great spinners much much before you asked yours and your responses have been to either hide behind others or post some inane smilies and along with silly one-liners followed by some legendary statements are you saying that he never topped the run aggregate list in any series ?

Nope.. aggregate is nowhere close to what Bradman achieved. His best in a test series is 494. There are so many players aggregated more than that in a test series. When it comes to dominating a series you don't really bring up those demonic bowlers into argument do you because you know he has played in so many series where there were lot more mediocre bowlers. Paul Jarvis, Chris Lewis, Ian salisbury :cantstop:

[thevortex]

My final stat on this thread. A rank order of batsmen by batting average, who have played against McGrath or Donald or Pollock or Shoaib or Wasim. Tendulkar appears at number 55 with an average of 37.23. You will find him on the second page. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=7;orderby=batting_average;player_involve=1775;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;player_involve=5649;qualmax1=50;qualmin1=5;qualval1=matches;template=results;type=batting Career average 55.56. I rest my case.

Dhondy - consider the irony in your numbers and this coming from somebody who thinks numbers are cold and devoid of emotion. You dont care about knowing whether one of these bowlers got Sachin. You dont care about knowing how many balls each of these bowlers bowled to Sachin and in what situation. And you dont care about the fact that the Australians and South Africans are in a far more advantageous position given that their team mates (2 of them) are in that list of bowlers you have up there. Given all this what exactly do you want for us to infer from this piece of statistic?

[thevortex]

Nope.. aggregate is nowhere close to what Bradman achieved. His best in a test series is 494. There are so many players aggregated more than that in a test series. When it comes to dominating a series you don't really bring up those demonic bowlers into argument do you because you know he has played in so many series where there were lot more mediocre bowlers. Paul Jarvis' date=' Chris Lewis, Ian salisbury :cantstop:[/quote'] Chris Lewis was an under-achieving bowler. Not a mediocre one. There is a difference :).

[Dhondy]

Yeah but in this discussion where we are comparing DGB vs Modern batsmen DGB enjoys a distinct advantage on that count. The man had 4 times as many Clean bowleds as lbws .... a very odd stat considering that mainly tailenders and lesser batsmen have that sort of a ratio. Not saying he was any of that but perhaps he benefitted from the largess of umpires who in those days were quite reluctant to give him out.

Top dog syndrome. Top batsman, top side. We have discussed this before- you make your own luck. Betcha there were more LBWs in the first half of his career than in the second.

[vvvslaxman]

The answer is in that post itself. Dont worry you will never understand it. That was meant for Doc.

Why do you think lesser batsman cannot get leg before? lol You added that just to bypass this Tamim argument. :hysterical: Not so clever. So a batsman who gets bowled 10 times should also get leg before 10 times. Great logic. Is that what you call "lahori logic" :hysterical:

[King Tendulkar]

My god whats next? Gone with the wind had better special effects then avatar. Cars in 30s were faster then cars now. NO SPORTSMAN IN 30s WAS BETTER THEN SPORTSMAN NOW. Charlie Chaplin era get a life. Things have moved on big time.

[Dhondy]

Dhondy - consider the irony in your numbers and this coming from somebody who thinks numbers are cold and devoid of emotion. You dont care about knowing whether one of these bowlers got Sachin. You dont care about knowing how many balls each of these bowlers bowled to Sachin and in what situation. And you dont care about the fact that the Australians and South Africans are in a far more advantageous position given that their team mates (2 of them) are in that list of bowlers you have up there. Given all this what exactly do you want for us to infer from this piece of statistic?

That wouldn't explain why 4 members of the current Indian team appear ahead of him, would it? It really wouldn't matter, because nothing I say can change your mind. I did post the breakup by individual bowler as well. Obviously you couldn't seize upon anything to comment.