If Sir Donald Bradman was born an Indian

[ganeshran]

As I said' date=' Abel is considered a very fine batsman. And as I also said, I have not read much about Stoddard - possibly there is a reason he is not considered in the same class as Abel despite averaging the same, I honestly don't know.[/quote'] Better than some of the other batsmen in the other side of the comparison? Most will be atleast 10-15 points behind after adjusting for the runs/wicket during their times.

[pensionplan]

Did you bother to read about Michael Jordan's dominance in Basketball?

Please...Please..Why bring MJ* into this only to be tore down here and how "International Hunderds"(Including the ones against Bangla, Kenya, Netherlands, Ireland, Zim etc etc) are best thing ever in sports. *:- Perhaps the greatest winner of all time in team sports who could let his personal brilliance co-exist with the team concept and pretty much won NBA titles at his will in an era when Basketball had its best players. Remember him stepping away from the game for couple of years then coming back and winning three more tiltles. Cannot get much better than that.

[zen]

Please don't take it personally, just an observation. Sir Outy is being ragged badly today and Rett is doing nothing to help him, rather he is rolling on the floor all the time, which he claims to be in laughter. Will remove this post if anybody finds it offensive as it is definitely off-topic.

what do you want me to reply to :dontknow: For lohmann, I presented the SJS's version which expalined stuff so well there is no point in re-writing that .... and it also has WPT column so what more can you ask :--D

[The Outsider]

Well, he played only 13 test matches - if he had played 50 and/or averaged 40+ he would have been considered in the same league as Trumper, Ranji, and Hobbs.

[pensionplan]

I am stuck on this forum being the founder of it to have to tolerate idiots - you seem to be a smart person. Here is my advice for you - quit this forum because the idiots and imbeciles on this forum will drag you down to their level very soon and you will be confronted with garbage like "time doesn't move"' date=' "I don't know jack about DFFITS, but will keep on arguing on statistical outliers with authority", "India had nuclear weapons 5000 years back" kind of nonsense.[/quote']8ankitj should heed to this advise. No point in debating with honesty when a bunch of posters with a one point agenda that are stuck in a rut foerver over that one player so much so that they are not willing to consider anything that is played before 1989 to be cricket.

[zen]

So in any analysis of this period, Tests involving South Africa should be kept aside for any meaningful comparison. If we do that for our five bowlers above, we get. . .

[B]Player	Tests	 W	 5w	 10w	 Avg	Wkts/Test[/B]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Lohmann	15	77	5	3	13	5.1[/COLOR]
Ferris	8	48	4	0	14.3	6
Turner	17	101	11	2	16.5	5.9
Peel	15	72	3	1	16.8	4.8
Briggs	20	85	7	3	17	4.3

Lohmann still tops the list, as befitting the leading bowler of his time, but the comparative figures are not startling. On these figures, if we claim Lohmann to be the greatest bowler of all time, we will have to give a spot to the other four, pretty high up on the same list and the current Indian team may not last long against any of them

The above attempts to make it clear as to why Lohmann is not regarded as the greatest The theory of drawing parallels with him is faulty and not surprised to see who brought that up in this thread as if he is making a profound statement :giggle: And then we further have to twist it up for avgs :dontknow: But there is no doubt that Lohmann must have been a pretty good bowler. In fact, there was a study done by a cric magazine to show he is the greatest. The link is on the lohmann thread

[ganeshran]

Well' date=' he played only 13 test matches - if he had played 50 and/or averaged 40+ he would have been considered in the same league as Trumper, Ranji, and Hobbs.[/quote'] It is not his fault that the number of matches he played were lesser and that others played more matches due to longevity. The fact is that the differing quality of the sport makes direct comparison of averages across eras impossible. And any technique used to normalize these will lead to some other weird conclusion for some other data point. Bobby Abel wasnt better than the likes of Gavaskar, Richards, Border and neither was Lohmann better than Marshall, but both of these conclusions wont be held true by most methods used to adjust averages despite being quite obvious to any cricketing expert. In the absence of a proper reference point to compare different eras, people argue based on what they already believe in and try to find facts to suit their beliefs.

[mishra]

OK Guys, Signing off for the year..... See you next year all you bramanfanaticsucks :finger:..... :fight: Happy Holidays.....

[ganeshran]

8ankitj should heed to this advise. No point in debating with honesty when a bunch of posters with a one point agenda that are stuck in a rut foerver over that one player so much so that they are not willing to consider anything that is played before 1989 to be cricket.

Says the guy who derails every random thread to have an argument about SRT and complains about fanaticism while not realizing that he has become a fanatic himself. You are part of the very problem which you are complaining about, just standing on the other extreme.

[pensionplan]

You are part of the very problem which you are complaining about

Where did I complain? I was just endorsing something suggested to a guy who seems to know what he is talking about. Looks like a case of yellow jaundice.

[The Outsider]

It is not his fault that the number of matches he played were lesser and that others played more matches due to longevity. The fact is that the differing quality of the sport makes direct comparison of averages across eras impossible. And any technique used to normalize these will lead to some other weird conclusion for some other data point. Bobby Abel wasnt better than the likes of Gavaskar, Richards, Border and neither was Lohmann better than Marshall, but both of these conclusions wont be held true by most methods used to adjust averages despite being quite obvious to any cricketing expert. In the absence of a proper reference point to compare different eras, people argue based on what they already believe in and try to find facts to suit their beliefs.

Let's forget about any subjective readings and deal with pure numbers even, as you are insisting. Abel averaged 35 and the batting average during his time was 23 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax1=01+Jan+1903;spanmin1=01+Jan+1888;spanval1=span;template=results;type=aggregate Meanwhile Gavaskar and Richards averaged 50 when the mean of their times was 32 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax2=01+Jan+1988;spanmin2=01+Jan+1971;spanval2=span;template=results;type=aggregate I am sure you can do the Math.

[ganeshran]

Let's forget about any subjective readings and deal with pure numbers even, as you are insisting. Abel averaged 35 and the batting average during his time was 23 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax1=01+Jan+1903;spanmin1=01+Jan+1888;spanval1=span;template=results;type=aggregate Meanwhile Gavaskar and Richards averaged 50 when the mean of their times was 32 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax2=01+Jan+1988;spanmin2=01+Jan+1971;spanval2=span;template=results;type=aggregate I am sure you can do the Math.

I used the same time periods that you posted in the marshall and lohmann links. You want other numbers, AG Steel, Murdoch - I am sure others are there too. Any batsmen whose entire careers in the Lohmann era and averaging in 30s would qualify

[bulbul]

OK Guys, Signing off for the year..... See you next year all you bramanfanaticsucks :finger:..... :fight: Happy Holidays.....

happy holidays..any way you left a replacement here to continue Fight..Lohman Lover :giggle:

[CG]

Let's forget about any subjective readings and deal with pure numbers even, as you are insisting. Abel averaged 35 and the batting average during his time was 23 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax1=01+Jan+1903;spanmin1=01+Jan+1888;spanval1=span;template=results;type=aggregate Meanwhile Gavaskar and Richards averaged 50 when the mean of their times was 32 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax2=01+Jan+1988;spanmin2=01+Jan+1971;spanval2=span;template=results;type=aggregate I am sure you can do the Math.

People will point out simple fact the amount of tests played and no of players playing been compared has huge differences and affect the results.

[bulbul]

Please don't take it personally, just an observation. Sir Outy is being ragged badly today and Rett is doing nothing to help him, rather he is rolling on the floor all the time, which he claims to be in laughter. Will remove this post if anybody finds it offensive as it is definitely off-topic.

i dont think Outsider need any supporters to take on guys like you :giggle: Nothing offtopic here compare to some of the logics u people...

[bulbul]

i read some where today debate regarding No helmets during Bradman era.. one Fantaic acknowedge its brave of Bradman to play without a Helmet...but we also have to take into account the additional weight helmet puts into players... :hysterical: donno this logic already used here in ICF

[The Outsider]

I used the same time periods that you posted in the marshall and lohmann links. You want other numbers, AG Steel, Murdoch - I am sure others are there too. Any batsmen whose entire careers in the Lohmann era and averaging in 30s would qualify

Would qualify for what? As I said the greats of that era are the likes of Hobbs, Ranji, and Trumper and all averaged significantly more than 35. You have got yourself into the classic ICF rut where your original point has a been disproved but you can't accept it and have now resorted to throwing one loony bin qualification after another. You don't have to attempt so hard to save face, I won't reply to your next post on the topic so you can sleep sound in your supposed victory and have the final word.

[CG]

Coming to topic ,Bradman being a australian whom nobody posting against or for has seen has such debates,If he was an indian outsider would have been defending tendulkar and bossbhai Bradman.

[mishra]

happy holidays..any way you left a replacement here to continue Fight..Lohman Lover :giggle:

Thanks... Its the egg which came first not the chicken, But that doesnt matter on icf :haha:

[bulbul]

Thanks... Its the egg which came first not the chicken' date=' But that doesnt matter on icf :haha:[/quote'] but how that egg came ? :hmmm: