If Sir Donald Bradman was born an Indian

[The Outsider]

Actually we have some decent videos of bradman' date='sobers time better than kapils first video you have shown anyway which is amateurish.All this discussion is futile fan exercise going on for years with no conclusion.[/quote'] Amateurish? That's how cricket was telecast during those times in the subcontinent. It was only after India's win in the World Cup in '83 that the video quality went up to an extent - I think the first tour when they used upgraded equipment was when West Indies toured India after the World Cup. If you can't get yourself to admit that the video quality of the 1930s and 40s videos was rubbish, there is little I can do to convince you. And yeah, technology did improve in England and Australia during the 50s and 60s and there are quite decent quality video of Sobers from that time. In fact, check out the ESPN legends series for Worrell and Sobers and they have decent clips from the tied test at Brisbane from 1960.

[punjabi_khota]

Can you tell that sports has a competitive element which leaves a little bit of room to argue/speculate about "who's better" but no such space exists in arts and music. It's about preference there. Do you work at NIMHANS or admitted there?

BAHAHAHAAAAAAAA :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Raghav_12]

Oh man, not that crappy video clips argument again! Can you even make out the ball clearly in most of the clips, forget about seeing any movement, spin etc. Here is Kapil bowling in a crappy video : 0X3j9Sp2keM Here is the same Kapil bowling in a decent video at around the same time in his career : tts2C2CTIe4 If you didn't have the second video, Kapil looks nothing more than a club level bowler going on the first video. Do you agree? So, people who watched loads and loads of cricket have credibility only when it comes to describing Bradman, but not when describing or comparing him with Sobers a few years later? Look it's not even a stretch. If you don't belong to the completely crazy category, you won't have a problem accepting that Sobers would have done just as well today as he did in his time because he has actually played and performed against the likes of Lillee, Willis etc. Sobers started his career only a few years after Bradman retired.

I have replied to your theory of continuity in another post - http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=1752537&postcount=416 This way you can very well prove that nothing has ever improved in world of sports. Also, Sobers never played a test match against Lillee or Thomson. lI didn't say that on basis of Video you declare Bradman a poor batsman. But you can't declare otherwise either.

[CG]

Amateurish? That's how cricket was telecast during those times in the subcontinent. It was only after India's win in the World Cup in '83 that the video quality went up to an extent - I think the first tour when they used upgraded equipment was when West Indies toured India after the World Cup. If you can't get yourself to admit that the video quality of the 1930s and 40s videos was rubbish, there is little I can do to convince you. And yeah, technology did improve in England and Australia during the 50s and 60s and there are quite decent quality video of Sobers from that time. In fact, check out the ESPN legends series for Worrell and Sobers and they have decent clips from the tied test at Brisbane from 1960.

I have checked and collected many videos,But technique or action does not change in videos. As i said its pointless comparing era's as pitches were uncovered and many other factors ,I have had many debates on other forums regarding pace of bowlers and so on,I am wiser to respect players and not comparing different times.

[The Outsider]

I have replied to your theory of continuity in another post - http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=1752537&postcount=416

And I've already pointed out the flaw in your reply because you are comparing a sport in which there is direct competition to a sport where only the natural elements are being challenged. It's a gradual adaptation process. True, the game today is very different from the one 60 years back but there was no quantum jump which brought us 60 years into the future. Rules, strategies, techniques etc. evolved gradually and whenever some major development happened the all time greats were able to adapt to it and perform just as well. Take Gavaskar for example, do you think he faced some 90-100 mph bowlers in domestic cricket? Going by the "game has changed theory" he should have been a sitting duck for the West Indian pace attack. Or even Tendulkar, which great fast bowler did he face in domestic cricket to equip him for the fast bowling attacks he faced in international cricket in the 90s?

This way you can very well prove that nothing has ever improved in world of sports.

Please read above - things have improved and changed. But on evidence each and every one of the all time greats has been able to successfully adapt to these changes and maintain their level of performance across the change. Take another example, the leg before law was changed during Bradman's career? Did it effect his technique? Yes. Did it effect his output? No.

Also, Sobers never played a test match against Lillee or Thomson.

Now the nitpicking starts again. Sobers did play Lillee and played one of the greatest knocks ever scoring 254 for the Rest of the World. The matches are not recognized as tests, but you can read any accounts about the level of competition in those series.

lI didn't say that on basis of Video you declare Bradman a poor batsman. But you can't declare otherwise either.

I am not using videos to declare Bradman a great batsman - there are tons of other factors which I have outlined on multiple occasions, many times in this thread itself. On the contrary, it's you and others using crappy videos to discredit him.

[tothepoint]

@tothepoint, 8ankit and other newcommers .. can you tell us the name of the bowler you see at the very begining of this clip and guess his bowling average without using google / cricinfo ? http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=74604

Well I can hardly make out anything from that clip. And you are asking me to guess his career bowling average based on just that? Sorry to disappoint you but I'm not a genius,as you would expect. And if your question has got anything to do with pace, I would like you to notice for that particular bowler the keeper is standing up :winky: (strategic?). Anyways,Who is he? Besides that,Bossbhai I asked you something in some other thread which you had bumped specially for newcommers like us. Can you please go through this link and answer it for me(to save precious time,pardon me for just doing copy and paste) :- http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/86029.html Wearing two or three sweaters, Tyson clocked 89mph. Bossbhai,do you claim that you are more accurate using whatever video player you have than what they did at the NZ Aeronautical College? And one more thing,how much the great athelete Munaf would have clocked wearing three set of sweaters?

[bulbul]

Well I can hardly make out anything from that clip. And you are asking me to guess his career bowling average based on just that? Sorry to disappoint you but I'm not a genius,as you would expect. And if your question has got anything to do with pace, I would like you to notice for that particular bowler the keeper is standing up :winky: (strategic?). Anyways,Who is he? Besides that,Bossbhai I asked you something in some other thread which you had bumped specially for newcommers like us. Can you please go through this link and answer it for me(to save precious time,pardon me for just doing copy and paste) :- http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/86029.html Wearing two or three sweaters, Tyson clocked 89mph. Bossbhai,do you claim that you are more accurate using whatever video player you have than what they did at the NZ Aeronautical College? And one more thing,how much the great athelete Munaf would have clocked wearing three set of sweaters?

NZ is famous for sheeps...what can u expect from them :winky: those are Kph....some print mistake happened

[Raghav_12]

And I've already pointed out the flaw in your reply because you are comparing a sport in which there is direct competition to a sport where only the natural elements are being challenged.

I am not talking about results or peformance parameters here. Here also we discussing natural skills which required to compete against fellow sportpersons. You claimed that Bradman was skillful enough to compete with the likes of Sobers and then Sobers with Richards and Richards with Sachin. I pointed out that if one player was able to compete against other on isolated occassions doesn't mean, he would have done on sustainable basis.

It's a gradual adaptation process. True, the game today is very different from the one 60 years back but there was no quantum jump which brought us 60 years into the future. Rules, strategies, techniques etc. evolved gradually and whenever some major development happened the all time greats were able to adapt to it and perform just as well. Take Gavaskar for example, do you think he faced some 90-100 mph bowlers in domestic cricket? Going by the "game has changed theory" he should have been a sitting duck for the West Indian pace attack. Or even Tendulkar, which great fast bowler did he face in domestic cricket to equip him for the fast bowling attacks he faced in international cricket in the 90s? Please read above - things have improved and changed. But on evidence each and every one of the all time greats has been able to successfully adapt to these changes and maintain their level of performance across the change. Take another example, the leg before law was changed during Bradman's career? Did it effect his technique? Yes. Did it effect his output? No.

That is some blank chit I am not ready to give to Bradman. He may have adapted to modern cricket, may have not. Examples you gave are of the successful ones who could adapt. But there are examples like Graeme Hick and Kamble who could not adapt. Indian domestic cricket is replete with examples of batsmen who keep whipping domestic bowlers (and they do it better than Sachin) but are found out at international level. Ajay Sharma has an average of some 70 in domestic cricket.

Now the nitpicking starts again. Sobers did play Lillee and played one of the greatest knocks ever scoring 254 for the Rest of the World. The matches are not recognized as tests, but you can read any accounts about the level of competition in those series.

Sorry. Nitpicking wasn't my aim, but I brought this point as you mentioned same Lillee example on multiple occassions.

I am not using videos to declare Bradman a great batsman - there are tons of other factors which I have outlined on multiple occasions, many times in this thread itself. On the contrary, it's you and others using crappy videos to discredit him.

I am not using videos to declare Bradman a poor technician. But these video's don't provide anything for which I should credit Bradman. I am again at same point that Bradman did very best under the circumstances he played with. But those circumstances have changed a lot now. You don't know how he would have responded to new set.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[tothepoint]

Can you atleast tell us what sort of bowling he is doing ? Left arm slow/medium/fast/super fast and compare him to some modern greats based on your cricketing knowledge ? There is no reference to this event other than Tysons own claims. Iam sorry but I aint that naive to buy stuff like that at face value. Nor is there any material available about this technique of measuring speed. I believe what my eyes are telling me about Tyson and its based on these videos of the man in action : http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=38954 http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=38952 I can tell you how to calculate speeds but I suspect you wouldn't be interested in trusting your own eyes.

I can hardly see the ball but IMO he is bowling medium. By just looking at that,I'm sorry I can't compare him with any bowler,that is something beyond my cricketing knowledge. So you are saying Tyson was lying and I should go and verify that. I wonder why would he do that! Also the technique used in measuring speed at the NZ Aeronautical College may have been primitive(as per your standards),but I can assure you it must have been pretty accurate. And Bossbhai,if you have accompalished so much that you can calculate speeds by looking at just the video clip, then you are the "go-to" man to solve a lot of problems in cricket and baseball.

[ganeshran]

Dont want to derail the thread , but why is Lohmann not treated as a bowling great. He had a spectacular average of 10.75, one of the best strike rates in the world and far better than what any other modern bowler can hope to achieve?

[8ankitj]

Dont want to derail the thread , but why is Lohmann not treated as a bowling great. He had a spectacular average of 10.75, one of the best strike rates in the world and far better than what any other modern bowler can hope to achieve?

From all accounts, he is regarded as a great.

[ganeshran]

From all accounts' date=' he is regarded as a great.[/quote'] He is certainly not considered the gold standard of bowling. That would be windies pace battery of the 70s and 80s.

[tothepoint]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! How would you assure him? Going on a fanciful rant like Tyson did and when questioned about it just say - why would I lie? Your blind faith in Tyson might be unshakeable but don't expect the rest not to question his fluff.

Not again! I would like to quote The Outsider here: "each and every person who has seen Lindwall and subsequent bowlers or played with or against him ranks him in the top league. For everyone to be wrong, they are either all lying or it's a hindu, yahoodi, and amreeki conspiracy." Peace!

[tothepoint]

Dont want to derail the thread , but why is Lohmann not treated as a bowling great. He had a spectacular average of 10.75, one of the best strike rates in the world and far better than what any other modern bowler can hope to achieve?

That is because his contemporaries were doing just as well. Ferries(12.7), Barnes(15.5), Wates(16.4) and Turner(16.5) to name a few.

[Old guy]

lmfao...if bradman was born in india most people right now would be defending his technique and these videos people are posting would be used to show his greatness!

[ganeshran]

That is because his contemporaries were doing just as well. Ferries(12.7)' date=' Barnes(15.5), Wates(16.4) and Turner(16.5) to name a few.[/quote'] 16.5 compared to 10.75 is like a 64 bating average compared to 99.94. Huge difference Is Lohmann and Ferries and W Barnes better than Andy Robers, Malcolm Marshall, Holding etc because he has an average of 10 (and 12,15) odd compared to their 20s

[tothepoint]

You didn't have to quote anyone. You're asking someone to disbelieve what's on video and instead listen to his own exaggerated account of his speed. And your best defence is he has no reason lie. Like I said, try again and try harder.

No my best defence is that each and every cricketer(not ICFer) who has seen them bowl rates them as one of the fastest<-Something which you are not going to reply. As far as that video clip is concerned,can you say that Agarkar and Prabhakar > Lindwall and Tyson based on that?

[tothepoint]

16.5 compared to 10.75 is like a 64 bating average compared to 99.94. Huge difference Is Lohmann and Ferries and W Barnes better than Andy Robers, Malcolm Marshall, Holding etc because he has an average of 10 (and 12,15) odd compared to their 20s

Not so huge if you compare 12.7 to 10.75. I dont know whether Lohmann was better than Andy Robers or not but I would like to point out that the batting averages in those days were also relatively low,you wont find a single batsman averaging in 50s.

[ganeshran]

Not so huge if you compare 12.7 to 10.75. I dont know whether Lohmann was better than Andy Robers or not but I would like to point out that the batting averages in those days were also relatively low,you wont find a single batsman averaging in 50s.

So what you are saying is that conditions were different in the era that Lohmann bowled, making his average not same as that of modern era bowlers?