How much would have Bradman averaged against

[Sehwag1830]

He was miles better than Tendulkar. Let it go.

I am not worried about Tendulkar. :hysterical::hysterical: Funny how Bradman fans bring Sachin into every discussion of his.

[Dhonuts Dhoni]

I am not worried about Tendulkar. :hysterical::hysterical: Funny how Bradman fans bring Sachin into every discussion of his.

Oh please. Not all of us are blind to subtlety.

[Dravid_TheWall]

It is difficult to say but he would have averaged 60+ IMO from what I have read and seen of this guy. He would have played many match winning innings and would have competed for the top spot with Lara. Tindu below the pair in tests.

[jairamesh]

Bradman was an amateur playing in an amateur era so would have never played international cricket in today's professionalism driven game.

[GautiMaan]

How would the Beetle perform on today's roads?absurd to compare things from two different eras.

[coffee_rules]

60-70, the distance between him and others wouldn't be as much as it was in his time.

[mishra]

Sachin has achieved everything a modern batsman could achieve..... End of Sachn comparison Now Bradman was ancient batsman.... Assuming that he would have been well trained and very talented Aussie player and coul have coped with the competitive environment(which is a very big assumption, Because legends says unlike his beer belly counterparts he was very disciplined and took his cricket and training very seriously) he wouldnt have been any way better then top averaged Aussie batsmens of modern era...

[Utalk]

67.35.

[Trichromatic]

42.34

[thongale]

Can see many are insecure with the question.

[King Tendulkar]

I genuinley believe he would averge under 10. Should be option for that. The game of cricket was just so different and so vastly improved from 30s to 70s/90s. It would have been embarasing for him

[Dhonuts Dhoni]

ITT: Butthurt Indian supporters vainly trying to denigrate the game's greatest ever batsman. He hit a century virtually every time he walked to the crease, Sachin isn't in the same ballpark. Oh, and his team actually won games as well :thumbs_up:

[King Tendulkar]

ITT: Butthurt Indian supporters vainly trying to denigrate the game's greatest ever batsman. He hit a century virtually every time he walked to the crease, Sachin isn't in the same ballpark. Oh, and his team actually won games as well :thumbs_up:

Get the time machine out and put Bradman in current era 80 YEARS AFTER HE PLAYED and he would not get double figures most of the time. Take any sprtsman from 30s and put him in current sporting enviroments and they would not be able to compete against non proffesional players, let alone the cream of the worlds best. His team won games:hysterical:, they only had to beat the fellow goras of england, that was it, no other competition:cantstop:

[Dhonuts Dhoni]

Alternatively, take Sachin and put him back in the 1930s. Much smaller and weaker bats with reduced edges, playing on sticky, uncovered wickets against the likes of Larwood and Voce. Send him in at first drop during bodyline with no helmet and inferior padding and tell him he has to average 50+ Theoretically, he'd average 10 and pine for the days of feasting on minnows like Bangladesh. It works both ways, so your argument is completely invalid. Just give it up and admit that 99.94 is significantly better than 55.44, relative to the games each has played. You can only beat what is in front of you, something which India has never really done well (other than against said minnows).

[thongale]

Just film Tendulkar under same technology and we'll have a discussion on video evidence.

[Number]

36 posts and no other modern day batsmen apart from Sachin gets mentioned.

[mishra]

Alternatively, take Sachin and put him back in the 1930s. Much smaller and weaker bats with reduced edges, playing on sticky, uncovered wickets against the likes of Larwood and Voce. Send him in at first drop during bodyline with no helmet and inferior padding and tell him he has to average 50+ Theoretically, he'd average 10 and pine for the days of feasting on minnows like Bangladesh. It works both ways, so your argument is completely invalid. Just give it up and admit that 99.94 is significantly better than 55.44, relative to the games each has played. You can only beat what is in front of you, something which India has never really done well (other than against said minnows).

All the modern batsmen will average under 10 in gulli moalla cricket.... Extending further, If modern age man time travels it will be scared of fire :facepalm:

[Blackout_]

99.94

[Marut]

Cricket has evolved since Bradman's time. Bradman was far superior to his peers, does not mean his skills were absolutely better than modern greats. The bowlers he faced were not as venemous like the WI pace quartet. Just take 100 m records, a 10.5s was considered very good in 1930s (Jesse Owens won the Berlin gold with 10.3s) while it is an ordinary timing in international events now. That does not mean Jesse Owens was a poor runner, but we have moved on since then. Bradman would have averaged about 20-30 for his skill levels if he played now. But he would have averaged 100 by relative terms, meaning had he be born and brought up recently. Peer comparison is a better measure of greatness than absolute numbers when we compare players of different eras. Bradman stood heads and shoulders above the rest, no player these days can make that claim.

[Raghav_12]

Alternatively, take Sachin and put him back in the 1930s. Much smaller and weaker bats with reduced edges, playing on sticky, uncovered wickets against the likes of Larwood and Voce. Send him in at first drop during bodyline with no helmet and inferior padding and tell him he has to average 50+ Theoretically, he'd average 10 and pine for the days of feasting on minnows like Bangladesh. It works both ways, so your argument is completely invalid. Just give it up and admit that 99.94 is significantly better than 55.44, relative to the games each has played. You can only beat what is in front of you, something which India has never really done well (other than against said minnows).

Likes of Voce??? You would be one of very few who would have used Voce as an example for ferocity of bowling from Bradman's era. Larwood could have been one example but then he wasn't allowed to play much longer as he had created a lot of discomfort to Bradman. No fact illustrates standards of Cricket in Bradman's era then the number of players who played international cricket past age of 40 between two world wars was 46 when we had just 4-5 teams playing cricket. To compare with modern cricket, in 2000's we have had just one such player across all the teams of the world- Alec Stewart.