Why cant there be another Bradman again??

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[yoda]

This thread is so hilarious. After 10 pages of going back and forth, no one has moved an inch. :giggle:

[King Tendulkar]

This thread is so hilarious. After 10 pages of going back and forth, no one has moved an inch. :giggle:

The tide is turning. Bradman untouchable status is no more, he only has his average to fall back on. The rest is with sachin. Sachin superiorty is being openly stated by many all over world from players, journalists to fans. I have posted an article were it is discussed today in The Times. Sachin is starting to win the battle! :two_thumbs_up:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

This thread is so hilarious. After 10 pages of going back and forth, no one has moved an inch. :giggle:

That shows no one buys the arguments of those who have tendulkar's pic in their avatar, Tendulkar related siggy, Tendulkar related user names. Poor souls, tried so hard to manipulate things to show Tendulkar is the greatest :giggle:

[yoda]

that was bound to happen when idiots here value runs scored against absolute bonafide trundlers like Bedser as being of the same value as those scored against most of the very best bowling stock world cricket has ever seen. :hysterical:

or when idiots think that people in the 1930s must go back in time and play with the same technique they use in the 2000s for us to not laugh at their performance... or when idiots think that we need to include ODI runs in the calculation even though the oldies never got to play ODIs... or when idiots think we need to assume that Bradman was the only pro in the land of Amateurs so his performance vs the rest of his peers is just a bully against a bunch of school kids.... or when idiots well just want to stay as idiots :hysterical:

[zen]

or when idiots think that people in the 1930s must go back in time and play with the same technique they use in the 2000s for us to not laugh at their performance... or when idiots think that we need to include ODI runs in the calculation even though the oldies never got to play ODIs... or when idiots think we need to assume that Bradman was the only pro in the land of Amateurs so his performance vs the rest of his peers is just a bully against a bunch of school kids.... or when idiots well just want to stay as idiots :hysterical:

you forgot to add the point on sledging. That was so .... :hysterical:

[King Tendulkar]

That shows no one buys the arguments of those who have tendulkar's pic in their avatar' date=' Tendulkar related siggy, Tendulkar related user names. Poor souls, tried so hard to manipulate things to show Tendulkar is the greatest :giggle:[/quote'] Really Viv Richards say Tendulkar best ever. Article today questioning Bradman as best ever. The tide is turning

[King Tendulkar]

or when idiots think that people in the 1930s must go back in time and play with the same technique they use in the 2000s for us to not laugh at their performance... :

So you were impressed by technique you saw in videos?

[yoda]

So you were impressed by technique you saw in videos?

actually I am more impressed by your comment that you are better than Hobbs cause he won't even make your club's 5th level team. :winky:

[zen]

actually I am more impressed by your comment that you are better than Hobbs cause he won't even make your club's 5th level team. :winky:

Oh boy! Just imagine how good his club's first team would be. May be a bunch of future AT greats :giggle:

[yoda]

Oh boy! Just imagine how good his club's first team would be. May be a bunch of future AT greats :giggle:

:hysterical:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Nirvanam]

The best quote about the Buddha (for the uninitiated, Buddha is a Human Being who becomes one with the universe...Buddhism is atheistic so the reference to someone as a Buddha does not mean we are calling him a God but we are calling that person as the one who has become one with the universe...ahim bramhasmin!) It was 1992. The 18-year-old was up on his toes, carving bowlers like cuts of prime Australian beef to all parts of the ground. The murmurs around the press box grew. The boy had ability, potential, even the makings of a world-class batsman. John Woodcock could bear it no longer. The cricket correspondent of the London Times, wearing his 70s well, stood up, put out his hands and called for silence. “Gentlemen,” he declared, “he is the best batsman I have seen in my life.” A pause later: “And unlike most of you, I have seen Bradman.” He is the closest we have come to a Human Being who has watched both virtuosos bat. And till today he maintains Sachin is no lesser than Bradman. So let's please cut this 99.94 crap and move on with life. Bradman is not sacrosanct and neither is Tendulkar. As John Wright says that by the time he hangs up his boots we will have to place Sachin in the same rack as the Don. There's also the matter of the 2 most respected Antipodeans: Benaud and Hadlee. While Hadlee goes all out and says Sachin is the best ever, ahead of Bradman, Benaud plays it safe from incurring the wrath of his countrymen by saying Sachin is the best he has seen. Listen to his very well calculated words... [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vthfSPF_LCw]YouTube - Tendulkar is the best batsman since Bradman - Richie Benaud[/ame] he says "I am assured by the people who have played with him and against him that he was way ahead...don't even put anyone near him" about Bradman. However he never says that he himself regards Bradman as the best he has seen play. So the same story plays over and over again...gospel taught in schools and by parents have to be considered as truth coz if they aren't then its blasphemy. Look at what the Aussies have done to Ian Chappell...they hate him coz he has the balls to openly say Gary Sobers is the best cricketer ever.

[Nirvanam]

So Sachin Tendulkar must be averaging 100 against NZ and in Ranji :P

:yay::yay::yay::yay::yay::yay: Chandler Bing the great :two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Nirvanam]

This thread is so hilarious. After 10 pages of going back and forth, no one has moved an inch. :giggle:

And that's how it is always going to be, I guess. We believe in what we want to believe...all of us, none the better :winky: All of us can rationalize whatever we want to rationalize (except of course chandler bing who thinks he is funny) but its fun to engage in these conversations, don't ya think?

[Nirvanam]

The tide is turning. Bradman untouchable status is no more, he only has his average to fall back on. The rest is with sachin. Sachin superiorty is being openly stated by many all over world from players, journalists to fans. I have posted an article were it is discussed today in The Times. Sachin is starting to win the battle! :two_thumbs_up:

Link please

[yoda]

And that's how it is always going to be, I guess. We believe in what we want to believe...all of us, none the better :winky: All of us can rationalize whatever we want to rationalize (except of course chandler bing who thinks he is funny) but its fun to engage in these conversations, don't ya think?

Fun as long as it doesn't get personal, which it invariably does when you have life time Bhakthas like Anakin entering the fray. I am not talking this thread, in general. Overall this thread has been fun. :icflove:

[Raghav_12]

This thread is so hilarious. After 10 pages of going back and forth, no one has moved an inch. :giggle:

People don't have an open mind from both sides. But anyways it wasn't expected that we'll reach to a conclusion at end of this thread. Points to be considered by Bradman Bhakts -

• 1. It has been proven beyond doubt that quality of cricket was definitely poor in Bradman's time. Batting wasn't that difficult and bowlers were not supposed to threaten batsmen. Overall cricket had an ameteurish look. Purely batting skill-wise it's hard to argue that batsmen of that era were greater than this era (though that is natural course of evolution). 2. Lack of competitiveness, comfort of tons of tour matches, few quality bowlers, sub-standard fielding, relatively poor strategies would definitely have helped Bradman to achieve thta iconic average number. There is no point in looking at 99.94 as an absolute number while comparing with averages of current players. It is a known fact that batsmen from that era are the one who occupy most of the highest positions in pecking order of batting averages. That can't be just a coincidence.

Points to be considered by Sachin Bhakts (Me being one of them) -

• 1. We can create a case for 99.94 of that era being equal to current 56.97. But problem with that argument is that it would relegate every single batsmen (other that Bradman) of that era as being s**t. And it is hard to believe that one whole generation barring one person can be crappy. God doesn't do things in that manner.While we make a case for Sachin being better than Bradman then indirectly we are making case for all modern mediocre-greats being greater than super-greats of that era. 2. While we can laugh at batting techniques of cricketers from that era, but there is more to batting then just technique. Batsman's temperament, powers of concentration, courage and hunger to excel play equally important role. And if some person had these in abundance in that era then that person would have had same in this era.

Personally I would very much like to see Tendulkar being considered as greatest of all time but somehow that clinching argument is missing. But good thing is whispers are getting louder, tide is turning and to say that Sachin is at par with Bradman or even better is not considered a sacrilege any more.