How much would have Bradman averaged against

[mishra]

Oh Lord! :headshake: What were the other batsmen doing then? Going by the same logic -- Tiger Pataudi, Vinoo Mankad and Vijay Manjrekar were also crap as they played piss poor bowling. :facepalm:

Since when did the become best batsmen?

[Crookbond]

Since when did the become best batsmen?

Did I say they were best? :hitler: If a guy like Bradman is piss poor these batsmen must he horse cr@p.

[rkt.india]

Oh Lord! :headshake: What were the other batsmen doing then? Going by the same logic -- Tiger Pataudi, Vinoo Mankad and Vijay Manjrekar were also crap as they played piss poor bowling. :facepalm:

They were greats of their times as Bradman was great of his time but comparing him to today's master batsman is insanity. Guys like Pataudi, Mankad, and Manjerkar are great batsmen for Indian standards back then, not for world standards.

[mishra]

They were greats of their times as Bradman was great of his time but comparing him to today's master batsman is insanity. Guys like Pataudi, Mankad, and Manjerkar are great batsmen for Indian standards back then, not for world standards.

Not a argument but to contextualize, have you checked dullep Singhjis average. He played against Bradmans fast bowlers and averaged around 65 for England I have no issue in playing a bradman trophy or something like that in australian home league.... Its aussie attitude that he is best. he is greatest. which definitely he is not. That is bringing down Bradman.

[Crookbond]

They were greats of their times as Bradman was great of his time but comparing him to today's master batsman is insanity.

You can't be sure he succeeds, you can' be sure he fails. It works both ways. So, I ain't comparing and saying "Bradman will score 200 x 100s today". But, at the same time neither am I saying "Bradman will average 8 or 9 today". Why? There's no way to know.

Guys like Pataudi, Mankad, and Manjerkar are great batsmen for Indian standards back then, not for world standards.

Still, considering world standard batsmen were piss poor; Indian standard batsmen now become worse than horse cr@p. Probably like whale sperm or something like that.

[Marut]

The only cricketing forum in the world where people try to pull down the legs of Bradman are some indian forums! Do you know why?:winky: Nobody else seems to have any doubts regarding Don.

[Crookbond]

Not a argument but to contextualize' date=' have you checked dullep Singhjis average. He played against Bradmans fast bowlers and averaged around 65 for England[/quote'] Are you talking about http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/11951.html ? If yes, he averaged around 58. So? Bradman still averaged 40 runs more per innings. So if Bradman was piss poor, Duleepsinghi was horse (no I used that word a lot now) bull cr@p.

[mishra]

The only cricketing forum in the world where people try to pull down the legs of Bradman are some indian forums! Do you know why?:winky: Nobody else seems to have any doubts regarding Don.

Not exactly... No one else got that midget... 20-30 yrs later if PCB becomes big player and they get someone better then midget. They will start pulling the legs of Tendulkar. No one else would be bothered. Its common sense

[rkt.india]

You can't be sure he succeeds, you can' be sure he fails. It works both ways. So, I ain't comparing and saying "Bradman will score 200 x 100s today". But, at the same time neither am I saying "Bradman will average 8 or 9 today". Why? There's no way to know. Still, considering world standard batsmen were piss poor; Indian standard batsmen now become worse than horse cr@p. Probably like whale sperm or something like that.

Indian team was nothing back then. You are talking about batsmen. They were great in that era and will still be called greats of the game, but I never compare anyone to anyone. It is not logical.

[King Tendulkar]

They were greats of their times as Bradman was great of his time but comparing him to today's master batsman is insanity. .

THIS

[Crookbond]

Indian team was nothing back then. You are talking about batsmen. They were great in that era and will still be called greats of the game' date= but I never compare anyone to anyone. It is not logical.

So, do I. We are both on the same page now. :cheers:

[mishra]

Are you talking about http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/11951.html ? If yes, he averaged around 58. So? Bradman still averaged 40 runs more per innings. So if Bradman was piss poor, Duleepsinghi was horse (no I used that word a lot now) bull cr@p.

He must have had some level of command to be selected over local boys under British rule. So you are calling all his English collegues (including Hobbs)are bull cr@p too. Absolutely not But As i said problem is with Aussie attitude. We play Duleep trophy . We dont go gung ho. We dont prepare documentary where Gavaskar picks his favourite and declares them top 11. We havent got Wisden/ESPN (journalist) to keep on rating ATGs.

[mishra]

So' date=' do I. We are both on the same page now. :cheers:[/quote'] We compare the quality of cricket in ancient age vs today. :dontknow: whats harm there?

[Crookbond]

He must have had some level of command to be selected over local boys under British rule. So you are calling all his English collegues (including Hobbs)are bull cr@p too. Absolutely not But As i said problem is with Aussie attitude. We play Duleep trophy . We dont go gung ho. We dont prepare documentary where Gavaskar picks his favourite and declares them top 11. We havent got Wisden/ESPN (journalist) to keep on rating ATGs.

Dude, I am just drawing out inferences from statements by other posts here like Bradman was piss poor. That statement implies that people like Hobbs were horse cr@p and Tiger Pataudi, Vijay Manjrekar etc. where whale sperm. The problem is not with Australian attitude the problem is us. They respect and appreciate their history, we don't. It's same attitude that has destroyed (or in the process of destruction) of important monuments, heritage sites in India (if you can understand that analogy). It will be fun having this argument 40 years down the line with folks, if there would be a Tendulkar like player born from a different country. I'm not Australian but I respect cricket be it from Australia, England or India. Australia for what it's worth has produced many more quality cricketers than any other country in this sport. I would love India's name on the list but that's how it is.

[Crookbond]

We compare the quality of cricket in ancient age vs today. :dontknow: whats harm there?

No harm except the fact that you fail to take into a/c the gazillion things which have changed from the 'ancient age' as you call it. The only way to do it is to time travel which I can't.

[mishra]

.. The problem is not with Australian attitude the problem is us. They respect and appreciate their history, we don't. It's same attitude that has destroyed (or in the process of destruction) of important monuments, heritage sites in India (if you can understand that analogy). ..

I know you arent Aussie.... I still remember facing sticks because i used to run away to the near by park 150X100 yards grounds. My dad used to say there are just 11 players... Rest all will end up cutting grass. So better study. From there now at least cricket is slowly becoming a profession in India. So things will change. If not greatest they regard Bradman as among their greatest Hero. That why they are so emotional about him. There in lies the diffrence. No issues with Indian attitude. What you are complaining is actually behavioral aspect of individuals in developing society

[Crookbond]

I know you arent Aussie.... I still remember facing sticks because i used to run away to the near by park 150X100 yards grounds. My dad used to say there are just 11 players... Rest all will end up cutting grass. So better study. From there now at least cricket is slowly becoming a profession in India. So things will change. If not greatest they regard Bradman as among their greatest Hero. That why they are so emotional about him. There in lies the diffrence. No issues with Indian attitude. What you are complaining is actually behavioral aspect of individuals in developing society

And there exists more than just emotions. No matter how emotional they are about Bradman they don't come shy of showering praises on Indian heroes - be it Tendulkar, Gavaskar or Kapil.

[mishra]

And there exists more than just emotions. No matter how emotional they are about Bradman they don't come shy of showering praises on Indian heroes - be it Tendulkar' date=' Gavaskar or Kapil.[/quote'] :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Pot calling kettle Black. When likes of Benaud,Waugh,Wisden and espn are allready there openly taking sides you blame Indians of double standards. :hatsoff: let me know if you find another indian who doesnt regard Bradman as cricketing great?

[mishra]

^ Also I dont know if there is any site likeAustralian cricket phorum, and if there are some Aussies backing Tendulkar against Bradman. Or just because some Ausise dont like Bradmania Boss bhai on that phorum they will go down any length to proove Bradman sucks.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --