How good was that batsman?

[Square Drive]

Great effort thongale. :hatsoff: But anyway, Aravinda was the greatest.

[Lurker]

Great effort thongale. :hatsoff: But anyway, Aravinda was the greatest.

:facepalm: Saliya Ahangama was the best fast bowler :nice: Back to OP. How goos was that batsman? Best ever. Everybody on this board agrees...or stops voting in the polls soon as they see his name :winky:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thongale]

when you come up with a stats analysis that uses player stats from those who played about 80+ yrs ago and assume that the value of runs scored and wkts taken is the same as the value of runs scored/wkts taken today you are doing pretty much what I said in my earlier post ( even if you some how accounted for no.of tests played by the player ).

There is a catch I agree. But from what we have heard, and from stats we see, we could conclude that Cricket has become a much closer game to today around 1930s. Before that, batsmen just sucked, and pitches were god awful. But Since 30s there had been some sanity in the proceedings. After going through MANY accounts, videos and stats we may be able to get a qualitative idea on vintage cricket, but still, unless it is quantified, it is not useful for a statistical analysis. Simply there are too many unknowns to even make a guess.

Iam talking about Bradman IN ( not vs ) Ind,WI,SAF,SL,PAK ( which obviously did not happen ).

Bradman might have sucked or might have destroyed them. There is too much to be imagined about it. In 50 years time when finally China, afghanisthan and US decides to play cricket and Chin Chou Lu scores 20,000 test runs at 50 are we going to say that Chin is better than Tendulkar because he never played in those three countries? Just think about it, because any argument is bidirectional.

which you would have saved had you asked me to crunch it as it is very easy to do in sql ... but never mind. :--D

Nice to know, obviously, I am not a software geek.:--D

[vamos_rafa]

There is a catch I agree. But from what we have heard, and from stats we see, we could conclude that Cricket has become a much closer game to today around 1930s. Before that, batsmen just sucked, and pitches were god awful. But Since 30s there had been some sanity in the proceedings. After going through MANY accounts, videos and stats we may be able to get a qualitative idea on vintage cricket, but still, unless it is quantified, it is not useful for a statistical analysis. Simply there are too many unknowns to even make a guess. Bradman might have sucked or might have destroyed them. There is too much to be imagined about it. In 50 years time when finally China, afghanisthan and US decides to play cricket and Chin Chou Lu scores 20,000 test runs at 50 are we going to say that Chin is better than Tendulkar because he never played in those three countries? Just think about it, because any argument is bidirectional. Nice to know, obviously, I am not a software geek.:--D

:two_thumbs_up: BTW, the headlines 100 years onwards would look like: Was Chin better than Sachin? Or, Who was better Chin or SaChin?

[carnish]

:two_thumbs_up: BTW, the headlines 100 years onwards would look like: Was Chin better than Sachin? Or, Who was better Chin or SaChin?

Who the hell is Chin?? :idunno: Is he a future chinese cricketeer??

[Needforspeed]

^^ His full name has to be Chin Chang. Cant have a Chinese who is not Chang. Wouldn't be surprised to see scoreboards like Chang c Chang bowled Chang. And DRS will become very cheap as it will be Made in China

[vamos_rafa]

Who the hell is Chin?? :idunno: Is he a future chinese cricketeer??

Thongale has mentioned it in his post. I just took it across from there.

[carnish]

Thongale has mentioned it in his post. I just took it across from there.

OOPS didnt read his post .. It was too lengthy for me.. Guilty

[Dhoni_fan]

there have been some great batters past and present but to be honest Dhoni is the greatest right now selfless player and he could easily open for any side in the world no doubt about that he has re writen the way batters approach their inniins a legend of the game and we should be blessed he is from India

[Crookbond]

there have been some great batters past and present but to be honest Dhoni is the greatest right now selfless player and he could easily open for any side in the world no doubt about that he has re writen the way batters approach their inniins a legend of the game and we should be blessed he is from India

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thongale]

thats the main problem you don't realize the powers of unfettered and notoriously emebellished written accounts ... I hope you now realize why I prefer to debate based on video evidence. It remains the only truly neutral account of the cricket.

This is the prblem with you it seems, that you dismiss every account that has been written in the past without even considering. As a SQL programmer, you'll be very well educated on the AND operator, and here I am asking to consider all the possible inputs we have. None of them is taken as biblical truths as well as dumped without any regard. All the sources has to be taken in to account to gain a fair idea of proceedings.

but you have conveniently assumed that performing in Asia/WI/SAF is inconsequential ... this contradicts conventional wisdom (backed by facts ) in cricket.

I never said performing in Asia was not important. What I've said is that we don't know how he would have performed there and we are in a no position to assume how he would have performed too. Your POV has merit if he actually did suck in Asia. But what happens if he was a monster on Asian pitches? Simply we don't know. And in the example of Chin Chou Lu, chinese in 50 years will tell that performing in US and China is very important for a cricketer and dismiss Tendulkar as having not played in China and US. Now will that make Tendulkar any lesser player who simply had no chance to play in said countries?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thongale]

go ahead ... give me a list of bowlers from that era who are equivalent in absolute skills to the likes Amby' date=Walsh,Donald ,Ws,Mcgra,Steyn,Warne,MuMu etcFair point. But not playing in a given condition and unavailability of such conditions are two different things. Players who had the given conditions unavailable to them could not be penalized for no fault of theirs. Don't run away from the argument. "Let's see when it happens" stuff is just postponing and wriggling out of the argument. Do you penalize players if they did not have particular country unavailable for them to play? yes or No?

Bill O'Riely, Clarrie Grimmet, Harold Larwood, Sydney Barnes, Frank Tyson, Fred Trueman, Alan Davidson, Jim Laker are few of them. Probably there are few I have missed too. These guys may be slightly inferior to a Marshall, Hadlee, Imran, Ambrose or a Steyn. But definitely superior to Asif, Sreesanth, Khans, Southee, Anderson, Tremlett co. 90s was a freak pretiod for bowlers, 2000s is not. Other than Steyn and Morkel I cannot see any bowler better than the list I have given.

[Raghav_12]

When I played cricket with my cousins and brothers in backyard of my house, I used to average @ 80 and none of my cousins/brothers could average more than 32 with a SD of 8. That way I was 6 SD clear of my cousin. Sachin is not that much clear as a batsman of his peer group. Even Bradman wasn't. So defintely I am better than Bradman who in term was greater than Sachin. I don't see any reason for which my numbers can not be extrapolated to current international standards.

[Guest]

When I played cricket with my cousins and brothers in backyard of my house, I used to average @ 80 and none of my cousins/brothers could average more than 32 with a SD of 8. That way I was 6 SD clear of my cousin. Sachin is not that much clear as a batsman of his peer group. Even Bradman wasn't. So defintely I am better than Bradman who in term was greater than Sachin. I don't see any reason for which my numbers can not be extrapolated to current international standards.

are your cousins 1 and 2 year olds :hmmm:

[velu]

When I played cricket with my cousins and brothers in backyard of my house, I used to average @ 80 and none of my cousins/brothers could average more than 32 with a SD of 8. That way I was 6 SD clear of my cousin. Sachin is not that much clear as a batsman of his peer group. Even Bradman wasn't. So defintely I am better than Bradman who in term was greater than Sachin. I don't see any reason for which my numbers can not be extrapolated to current international standards.

you are far more greater than your cousins and brothers and the stats is for your backyard cricket and not internationals :finger: and how many centuries you scored ?? :--D

[Crookbond]

When I played cricket with my cousins and brothers in backyard of my house, I used to average @ 80 and none of my cousins/brothers could average more than 32 with a SD of 8. That way I was 6 SD clear of my cousin. Sachin is not that much clear as a batsman of his peer group. Even Bradman wasn't. So defintely I am better than Bradman who in term was greater than Sachin. I don't see any reason for which my numbers can not be extrapolated to current international standards.

I'm sure you played Test matches in your backyard over five days with a season ball.

[vamos_rafa]

When I played cricket with my cousins and brothers in backyard of my house, I used to average @ 80 and none of my cousins/brothers could average more than 32 with a SD of 8. That way I was 6 SD clear of my cousin. Sachin is not that much clear as a batsman of his peer group. Even Bradman wasn't. So defintely I am better than Bradman who in term was greater than Sachin. I don't see any reason for which my numbers can not be extrapolated to current international standards.

Your record does not count. the only country the backyard of which is competitive is Australia. Rest all of no use.