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

[vvvslaxman]

because people always tend to remember the innings where 600 runs are made ... they never bother to check that somewhere else a side got bundled out for 250 .... I cant believe that you guys pay soo much importance to these hacks who are paid to churn out stuff on a daily basis to fill up the column-inches.

Look at the performance of different countries in different countries. I have sorted in the order of most runs per wicket by a country in a specific country http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=team_average;template=results;type=team;view=host SA in Zimbabwe is the most dominating performance. Just look at the list and see how many such dominating performances by different countries in another country or their own country in the post 1990 era. You don't need "hacks" to tell you that. You can see for it yourself. This is the performance of each country in different countries between 1920 and 1949 http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=team_average;spanmax1=31+Dec+1949;spanmin1=01+Jan+1920;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team;view=host This is the performance of each country post 1970 (demonic fast bowler era) http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;orderby=team_average;spanmax1=31+Dec+2010;spanmin1=01+Jan+1970;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team;view=host You can't even say it is equal.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

The no.of Aussie batsmen that avg more than 50 in India will not be more than a dozen IIRC .. you can check it out yourself .... By and large the aussies find it very hard to score in India ... even Hayden could not repeat his 2001 heroics in the next 2 series.

How do you say Bradman would not average 100 plus here. He just pounded us in Australia which is supposed to have better pitches. Aussies find it very hard to score in India? :cantstop: You forgot how Dean Jones, Geoff Marsh pounded us at chennai? I can show so many Indians who sucked big time in Australia. Does that mean every Indian will suck there?

[patriot]

Bossbhai, How hard do you find to reconcile to the fact that someone has scored a 100 runs everytime he has walked out to bat for 80 innings in 52 tests. A number that is 70% more than the closest competitor from any era. Here is someone who has scored over 28,000 first class runs @ 95. Again an average about 50 % more than anyone anywhere in the world in 150 years of cricket. Sachin does not even average 60 in first class cricket. Seriously, you need to give up with the facile arguments. Comparisons with the incomparable.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

What do these one-off innings prove ?

You keep coming with these exceptions when we put up a stat of sachin's performance in 2 countries where he had the highest average you said Bradman didn't face Murali. When we put up stat for sachin's performance in pitches where he played the most you said .. well.. nothing When we put up stat for Sachin's peformance in a series you danced around it and said nothing When we put up Sachin's performance in matches the fast bowlers you mentioned were part of, you basically had no answer. Sachin averaged only 30. When we put up sachin's performance against bowlers excluding those "demonic" bowlers there also you had no answer You kept going back to this stupid, ridiculous , childish theories like bradman played with old people, bradman didn't play super fast demonic bowling, bradman didn't play this bradman didn't play that.. I mean.. none of them ever made sense. You can never convince 90% of the cricketing fraternity with your BS theories. If you take out Indians you cannot convince 99% of the cricketing fraternity. You couldn't even convince us. We are Indian fans!!

[patriot]

thats because you dont like to scrutinize it .... check post#105

Even If i were to partake your facile logic, do you think it is a coincidence that someone is so far far ahead of his peers and that to over 2 decades ? Is Sachin even 5 % ahead of his peers ? Heck no. For 60 % of his career he has been bettered by half a dozen players. Let him even better his peers first before warranting a comparison with someone like Bradman. You can scrutinize any era in that manner, but I would'nt wager against you coming up with more facile arguments. 1) Did Bradman have the 7 star luxury and care takers that Sachin has for his every small need ? 2) Din't Bradman have a full time job and serve in war ? You think you can underestimate the effects of these by any stretch of the imagination ? 3) Does Sachin have anythign to think about than his own game ? Did he have the b@lls to fathom captaincy ? Any damn great batsman worth his salt has been a captain and some - please revisit your cricket history. Sachin has been an utter utter failure - ( ...now now please come up with excuses, like they are for all of Sachin's many failures) . His failure in burdening the captaincy only reflects on his game , when the going gets tough. he just can't handle pressure beyond his game. Compare this with Ponting, who is taking the bull with the horns. He could so easily selfishly focus on extending his playing career and bettering his game with nothing else to worry about than his batting - just like Sachin. He has taken the onus of rebuilding his side after a mass exodus of greats onto himself. No mean feat. Take out the massive massive hype about Indian sportsmen ( the hype is because we hardly have sporting heroes. Here even a Sania Mirza is a superstar. LOL) purely on achivements , Sachin is not fit to clean Ponting's dirty linen. He doesn't even warrant a comparison with someone like Bradman.

[yoda]

Even If i were to partake your facile logic, do you think it is a coincidence that someone is so far far ahead of his peers and that to over 2 decades ? Is Sachin even 5 % ahead of his peers ? Heck no. For 60 % of his career he has been bettered by half a dozen players. Let him even better his peers first before warranting a comparison with someone like Bradman. You can scrutinize any era in that manner, but I would'nt wager against you coming up with more facile arguments. 1) Did Bradman have the 7 star luxury and care takers that Sachin has for his every small need ? 2) Din't Bradman have a full time job and serve in war ? You think you can underestimate the effects of these by any stretch of the imagination ? 3) Does Sachin have anythign to think about than his own game ? Did he have the b@lls to fathom captaincy ? Any damn great batsman worth his salt has been a captain and some - please revisit your cricket history. Sachin has been an utter utter failure - ( ...now now please come up with excuses, like they are for all of Sachin's many failures) . His failure in burdening the captaincy only reflects on his game , when the going gets tough. he just can't handle pressure beyond his game. Compare this with Ponting, who is taking the bull with the horns. He could so easily selfishly focus on extending his playing career and bettering his game with nothing else to worry about than his batting - just like Sachin. He has taken the onus of rebuilding his side after a mass exodus of greats onto himself. No mean feat. Take out the massive massive hype about Indian sportsmen ( the hype is because we hardly have sporting heroes. Here even a Sania Mirza is a superstar. LOL) purely on achivements , Sachin is not fit to clean Ponting's dirty linen. He doesn't even warrant a comparison with someone like Bradman.

:giggle: don't tell me you typed that with a straight face. :omg:

[patriot]

^ Team achievements. Most winningest captain ever , winningest player ever , multiple WC champion....etc etc. You are probably referring to personal achievements. Let's discuss that after Ponting retires.

[thevortex]

Patriot - could we not put across points without abusing the players who give their all for the game that we so love? About Tendulkar's captaincy I believe you are sorely mistaken. A captain is as good as the team at the end of it all. Take a moment and check out the squads that Sachin was given to lead. And tell me if you think that squad would have won abroad. Kumble was the sole genuine match winner that he had for most of his time as captain. Apart from himself of course.

[patriot]

Patriot - could we not put across points without abusing the players who give their all for the game that we so love? About Tendulkar's captaincy I believe you are sorely mistaken. A captain is as good as the team at the end of it all. Take a moment and check out the squads that Sachin was given to lead. And tell me if you think that squad would have won abroad. Kumble was the sole genuine match winner that he had for most of his time as captain. Apart from himself of course.

Like I said. There is no shortage of facile excuses for the lousiest of Sachin's failures. He had the clout to get what he wanted - so don't give me factually non sensical things like " squads he was given to lead" . He had 2 stints at captaincy and he could have got players that he asked for. At one point he did have a Marathi mandal in the playing XI during his captaincy. Fact is he can't think and do beyond his own game. Harsh but truth. It reflect's on what motivates him and how he responds to pressure situations in matches. It takes alot of b@lls to absorb captaincy and lead a side and also be the leading batsman of the side. This is the reason why Aussies have this kind of respect for Allan Border, who lead a rag a tag side through their worst time , was its leading batsman. Ponting lead legends and now is part of the rebuilding. It takes alot out of one's individuals game. Some can focus only on their game. Sachin falls in that category.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[patriot]

Patriot if you follow this thread ( lol) you will find that I have said many modern players would score just as heavily if they were to play against the bowling attacks of the 30s and 40s. You can use Sehwag if you care. SRT vs XYZ has been done to death elsewhere.

You base assumption which is: Players form the 30's and 40's cannot adjust to the modern era but players from the modern era would toy with the playing conditions in the 30's and 40's. - is utterly prejudiced and wrong. The arguments that you present are so one eyed and facile that it does not warrant any further discussion.

[patriot]

Bossbhai's arguments are akin to saying that Einstein would have been an average academic in this day and age where quantum physics have gotten far more complex and there is so much compitetion.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[King Tendulkar]

No one who is claiming that Bradman was the greatest batsman in history is conducting this exercise of putting players in time machines. This moronic exercise is being done by the Tendulkar fanboys here. Bradman is the greatest because his dominance over his peers is unparalleled, not only in cricket, but any other sport for that matter. Who knows what would happen if you put players in time machines - it's just a guessing game. Greatness needs to be measured in the context of the circumstances it was achieved in and the level of separation a person could achieve from other competitors. Bradman is simply peerless in that regard.

Wrong vvslaxman claims that if Bradman went in a time machine he would still be best in world now! You should take your buddy to task over this nonsenical claim! Instaed you are so wrapped in politics(allies/non allies) on this board, that you won't take to task certain posters even when they spout utter nonsense. And in this post you still hint that the time machine Bradman may be still the best! That is MORONIC stuff from the Bradman bootlicker! Just come out and speak common sense and clarify that time machine bradman would not be best in the world and then you might regain some dignity. In terms of greatness some will not want to know who dominated their peers the most. Some will simply want to know if they all played tommorow who will be the BEST. That clearly will not be Bradman. Thus some will say how can he actually be the best batsman ever, when he would not actually be the best batsman if the greats played!

[King Tendulkar]

I keep asking this question but still Bradman fans do not answer! Bradman fans please state when you have seen Bradman bat? Give specifics on any live games you have seen or any TV footage you have seen of him?

[King Tendulkar]

Yes Bradman dominated his peers. The question is who were his peers? 1. There was only one other team in England. Rest were awful. So actually yes he dominated but there was only one other team in world cricket!! Thus he dominated a very small pool of players. 2. He toured only one country England. Again because of lack of peers. Thus not testesd against variety of teams in variety of countries. So yes he dominated. But he doiminated at a very uncompetitive time and when hardly any peers to dominate. He dominated when only one other team. He dominated a very small bunch of players. This creates a massive hole in his CV and creates masive doubt to his domination.