Jump to content

A list of some utterly Asinine and Hideous statements made by the Bradman Fanatics

Guest BossBhai

By Guest BossBhai
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

Lurker Newbie

Lurker

Posted
Posted
Nah. What we need to do is start a MJ v Tendulkar thread' date=' dig out the stats and analyze their contributions towards their respective sports. I am afraid that just like Bradman, MJ may have to eat crow. MJ poor fellow represented a little town called Chicago, which is smaller than Mumbai, which of course is even smaller than all of India. By that yardstick, MJ (little village idiot wearing nike shoes) should be compared with a Ranji trophy player, not someone as exalted as Tendulkar. Maybe Wasim Jaffer would be a more appropriate counterpart to MJ. However if you still insist in comparing the two- go to you tube and compare MJ highlights with SRT highlights. Now while making that comparison, please note that MJ's videos are state of the art. If you extrapolate the quality of MJ's videos to for example, SRT's Sharjah videos, you will gain a true understanding of how great SRT is...[/quote'] :giggle::giggle::giggle: dude you have serious wits about yourself, post more :hatsoff:
Link to comment
achilles Newbie

achilles

Posted
Posted
Nah. What we need to do is start a MJ v Tendulkar thread' date=' dig out the stats and analyze their contributions towards their respective sports. I am afraid that just like Bradman, MJ may have to eat crow. MJ poor fellow represented a little town called Chicago, which is smaller than Mumbai, which of course is even smaller than all of India. By that yardstick, MJ (little village idiot wearing nike shoes) should be compared with a Ranji trophy player, not someone as exalted as Tendulkar. Maybe Wasim Jaffer would be a more appropriate counterpart to MJ. However if you still insist in comparing the two- go to you tube and compare MJ highlights with SRT highlights. Now while making that comparison, please note that MJ's videos are state of the art. If you extrapolate the quality of MJ's videos to for example, SRT's Sharjah videos, you will gain a true understanding of how great SRT is...[/quote'] 41789_138297192865376_188_n.jpg
Link to comment
zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
Nah. What we need to do is start a MJ v Tendulkar thread' date=' dig out the stats and analyze their contributions towards their respective sports. I am afraid that just like Bradman, MJ may have to eat crow. MJ poor fellow represented a little town called Chicago, which is smaller than Mumbai, which of course is even smaller than all of India. By that yardstick, MJ (little village idiot wearing nike shoes) should be compared with a Ranji trophy player, not someone as exalted as Tendulkar. Maybe Wasim Jaffer would be a more appropriate counterpart to MJ. However if you still insist in comparing the two- go to you tube and compare MJ highlights with SRT highlights. Now while making that comparison, please note that MJ's videos are state of the art. If you extrapolate the quality of MJ's videos to for example, SRT's Sharjah videos, you will gain a true understanding of how great SRT is...[/quote'] a good one :hysterical:
Link to comment
Aussie-r-best Newbie

Aussie-r-best

Posted
Posted
All this has been answered time and time again ... but take a look at the clip in my previous post and answer the question i asked to mcenly. Heres some more footage : http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=61609 which bowler is bowling like the great bowlers that SRT has faced? Can you come up with a list of these bowlers from Bradmans time that are comparable to the Ambroses, Steyns, the Ws the Warnes etc etc etc ? The pitches in 30s and 40s were by and large good for batting. You can't have big scores and inns lasting way more than 100 overs if the pitches are soo dodgy as you like us to believe. Besides Bradman by his own admission was not a bad track player. Cue: Let the insults , innuendo , putdowns , random proclamations begin.
I think we are somewhere near the same page here... I am saying this comparison is mute and not relevant, you are looking for stats that probably are unquantifiable or reasonable in terms of reliability. Seems the comment supported by the cue is somewhat random and intended to create or ignite and issue. Am I wrong (happy to be proved wrong)? I guess however if I am right and I suspect I am, that earlier posts here on the tone is one that will see a response of "troll" or some other similar jibe.
Link to comment
zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted

May it's time to make this thread sticky :P Also this is a good example of what discussion is for a few ppl. It's not about making logical points but writing something, even if it nullifies a point previously made, to say the last word and thus pretend to be in the game. SRT fanatic AT11 - SRT - SRT - SRT - SRT - SRT - SRT (also an all-rounder comparable to Sobers) - WK - Bowler - Bowler - Bowler - Bowler

Link to comment
Aussie-r-best Newbie

Aussie-r-best

Posted
Posted
Not just stats ... I will actually show you some brief footage ( already did ) Yes you are wrong. What I said comes from having seen a whole truckload of Bradman fans argue. Their typical response to pointed questions is hurl ridicule insults. But here's your chance to prove me wrong.
I don't need the footage, as I said, I think we agree and are close to the same point albeit from differnt origins Happy to be wrong as I said. As for my chance to prove it, I think I already did - no insults despite the cue and continued here. I have to say I am puzzled by the underlying tone or wish for some argument???
Link to comment
vamos_rafa Newbie

vamos_rafa

Posted
Posted
sample size. basic stats error. your work won't be apssed by a fourthgrade teacher. even reliable Data can only be used as reference and has to be intrepreted correctly. you ahve to udnerstand the game. FIRST AND FOREMOST. neither have you provided data with acceptable quality(step 1 is a fail in the basics). that is your biased and dubious intrepretation .i saw all those games and i find/recall no such evidence. name the struggle please. for example cullinan clearly struggled to read warne and suffered against them. what was the struggle that SRT had against mcgrath and donald for example? these things does not need stats at all. it can be done by observing the game. the reason sachin's average reduces to 36 is ebcause two of those games were played on minefields in delhi and mumbai and he played the 2004 series underdone. because of a small sample size, those numbers unduly affects the overall picture.in statistics as taught in school, you ahve to get sample size and distribution right. that's the reason this particular stat is useless and failure in step 1.
You have hit the nail on the head with your Sachin v/s McGrath analysis. The only 2 series in which they both were on their respective peaks were the 2 series in 1999 and 2001. And Sachin's score read a s follows: 76,65,10,10,126,12,61,0,116,52,45,4. That's an average of 48.08. Now, that's not what we call struggling do we?
Link to comment
zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
OK, did this again for the following: vs Aus: McGrath+Warne vs Pak: Waqar+Wasim vs SA: Donald+Pollock vs SL: Murali+Vaas vs WI: Ambrose+Walsh 
	M	I	No	R	Avg
BCLara	36	68	3	3370	51.85
sWaugh	42	66	7	2745	46.53
Inzama	33	56	3	2365	44.62
Anwar	20	33	0	1402	42.48
Sachin	29	49	1	2020	42.08
mWaugh	39	63	2	2408	39.48
Flower	24	44	7	1396	37.73
Dravid	33	58	4	2034	37.67

Notes: * Dravid had just started out when he played Pak. * Flower didn't play much against teams like Aus * Inzi has done very well against SL and WI but poorly against Aus and SA * Sachin, who has a record 304 innings so far, has only played 49 innings against these combinations * Lara has the most number of innings (68), followed by the Waughs Considering playing when the best combinations from each of the 5 sides, who are rated for their attack, are in the opposition, Lara triumphs (3370 runs from 65 completed innings @ 52, which to an extent is like being in a league of his own)

More .... If the SRT vs DGB debate is for the greatest w/ SRT portrayed as better based on facing better bowling attack (with quality of bowlers in Bradman time being crap, see bowlers list and videos) then SRT shouldn't be in this debate based on the above Now the 2nd question is 'ability to adjust', an ATG by defination is someone who can do well in any time! If we are putting a question mark on the ability to adjust, then we are not only making a mockery of ATGs but also on theories of evolution Bradman (1928-1948) Hutton (1937-1955) Sobers (1954-1974) Richards (1971/2-1991) Tendulkar (1989-present) ^ in the above, we can see an overlap and how the players have adjusted
Link to comment
zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
Viv Richards average 45 over a period that spanned 70% of his playing career ... ATG my ass :laugh:
Ok so now even Richards is not an ATG .... time for you to see a shrink :hysterical: ***** Answer yes or no to the below: :orderorder: 1. SRT avg 56 in test cricket and is considered to be the greatest ever by you, but based on facing and doing well against better bowling attacks (as discussed previously) per the table below: 

vs Aus: McGrath+Warne
vs Pak: Waqar+Wasim
vs SA: Donald+Pollock
vs SL: Murali+Vaas
vs WI: Ambrose+Walsh 

	M	I	No	R	Avg
BCLara	36	68	3	3370	51.85
sWaugh	42	66	7	2745	46.53
Inzama	33	56	3	2365	44.62
Anwar	20	33	0	1402	42.48
Sachin	29	49	1	2020	42.08
mWaugh	39	63	2	2408	39.48
Flower	24	44	7	1396	37.73
Dravid	33	58	4	2034	37.67
Would you say that Lara is the best test player of his generation and ahead of Tendulkar? Please read the implications below: If YES ----> it implies that you don't consider Sachin to be the greatest batsman. It's Lara. This closes the SRT chances of being considered as the greatest in any discussions. In your opinion, it would be someone else (either DBG or someone else, but NOT definitely SRT) If NO ----> it implies that you cannot say that DBG is not the greatest because in your opinion he faced crap bowlers. DBG's runs or avg will NOT be undervalued .... It also means that the 'list' you are asking for becomes irrelevant . since his runs are not undervalued, DBG automatically is the greatest. And this closes this debate. So in either case the list is irrelevant and SRT is out of the debate .... Next Step(s): A - If the response to the above is 'yes', then the main focus would be on will the previous generation be able to adjust to the standards of the next. * if 'yes' , then DBG is the greatest * if it is 'no, then it casts a serious doubt on not only evolution but also on the greatness of all the greats and whether there is any point in even discussing this. Who would even want to bother with ATG list, just pick from the current players :P
Link to comment
Lurker Newbie

Lurker

Posted
Posted
Richards is not an all time great' date=' but Ramiz Raja is because he scored 50 runs against Marshall, Walsh, and Ambrose! [b']Don't you guys read the chewtiyapa that you type on this forum to sink it greater depths. :laugh:
Okay you clarify what chewtiyapa you are talking about? Okay maybe here is one. Ever since 2003-4 anytime a fan says " **** we are screwed, time for the master to show up"...the chewtiyas start yapping "Hasn't he done enough..sure we are effed..but he already saved us in 1987..and I have Britishpathe video for that". :beee::beee:
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...