Guest HariSampath Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 There are ZERO triple 100s IN INDIA . I gotta run too ... be back in a hour or soo. What you mean is that if Triple hundreds alone are standards to judge bradman in India ( hypothetically, that too, saying he MIGHT not have scored), then I have to say that Sachin tendulkar has not got a single triple ton ANYWHERE... so argument closed ???? I think you are on the run anyway :yay:
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 this will rage on for quite sometime ... Why ? Because you think you know more about batsmanship than Tendulkar does ? Oh the arrogance ! Your hero has already conceded that he is inferior to Bradman. When Tendulkar HIMSELF can say with aplomb that Bradman was better than him by far, it should be a far easier task for you to accept it.
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 then I have to say that Sachin tendulkar has not got a single triple ton ANYWHERE... so argument closed ???? Way too logical, Hari. Way too logical! The poster Bheem himself unwittingly concedes his argument when he brings up points like 'what were the chances Bradman would've scored 300 in India?'. See, when Bradman is concerned, standards are of impossible height. Tendy has never scored a triple ton, not in India or anywhere, not against even a total patta side like Bangladesh- so even by Bheemie's own 'logic', Tendy is inferior. And guess what ? Tendy himself realizes this! But we have a poster here who thinks he knows more about batsmanship than Tendulkar does.
yoda Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Q: Bradman Hype or Real? Bheem: Bradman Australian or Indian?
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 BD have platyed Zero Tests IN INDIA. So what ? Tendulkar has played more tests outside of India than Bradman has played in his entire career! Still no triple tons ?!
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 with no track record of playing in Subcontinent type pitches to back up Incorrect. As it has already been pointed out to you, batting on uncovered wickets on the 4th day is harder than batting on subcontinental pitches of today: the uncovered pitches had far more wear & tear, which is what makes subcontinent pitches so spin-friendly in the latter stages of the game. As i said, for someone who's batted and averaged 99 on uncovered pitches, batting on ANY pitch today-subcontinental or otherwise- would seem like batting on a batting paradise. That is a fact you keep running away from.
Guest HariSampath Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I did ... you probably missed it. I told ya its going to get crazy to keep track. :haha: Please consider that option again .... we both dont need external propping or distractions ... people can still read this thread. Will get there eventually ... BTW dont expect this to be concluded today .... this will rage on for quite sometime ... You haven't answered anything except raise one objection to the probablity that Bradman would have scored 300s and 200s in India. But also you haven't come up with ONE answer yet on any of the questions I raised and my counters to your 300 theory too ( which you couldn't answer others too). You are still in square zero, and yes you don't have to repond to others, I had said just respond to my questions. Further you haven't been able to counter anything on the first question thread. So although I know and hope you can drag this for a week, this is already over when it began. Cricketers all fall under 2 categories. Donald Bradman ( comparision is even considered stupid) All others ( the greats belong here and comparisions are possible)
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Q: Bradman Hype or Real? Bheem: Bradman Australian or Indian? :haha::haha::haha: You hit the nail square on the head. But now now, play nice with our short-tempered 'moderator' here.
coffee_rules Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Incorrect. As it has already been pointed out to you' date=' batting on uncovered wickets on the 4th day [b']is harder than batting on subcontinental pitches of today: the uncovered pitches had far more wear & tear, which is what makes subcontinent pitches so spin-friendly in the latter stages of the game. As i said, for someone who's batted and averaged 99 on uncovered pitches, batting on ANY pitch today-subcontinental or otherwise- would seem like batting on a batting paradise. That is a fact you keep running away from. How about the quality of bowling faced? who were the sub-23 average bowlers that Bradman faced?
Gambit Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I remember doing some research a long while back and found only one or two bowlers from Bradman's era having sub 25 bowling averages. BTW why is this turning into a DGB v SRT debate?
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Uncovered pitches are Demons IF It rains .... lets see some stats on how many matches had rain interruption while DGB played .... very very few.False. Uncovered pitches are demons PERIOD. They are downright unbattable on when it rains,where even Tendulkar would struggle to average more than teens with the bat. Uncovered pitches are FAR HARDER than covered pitches to bat on in the best of times- simply because the pitch does NOT get rolled every day and all the cracks, bumps, furrows etc. arnt just smoothed over like today. Plus exposure to the elements 24 hours every day, instead of just nine means there is FAR MORE PITCH DEGRADATION. I suggest you educate yourself better on the nature of cricket played in the bygone days and if you want, i can recommend some very nice books on it. Or you can talk to Salil, he is far more knowledgable than you or me on the batting of that era. Feel free to remind me when that event occured.I just did. You are still running away from the uncovered pitches aspect.Feel free to show us a single thread where you conceded a point- for it is in your nature to be arrogant and think you are always right. And don't get personal with me lest i report you for abuse of power. Clear ?
yoda Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Bradman's greatness lies in the difference between him and his peers. Things obviously will be different from one era to another. You will not find the same exact "sub-xyz" bowlers or the exact number of countries or surfaces played in. What we have to accept is that the gap between him and his peers was so vast that he has to be considered infinitely superior unless someone from the current era can also distinguish himself from peers with such a distance. If we had a bunch of 80, 90 and 95 averagers from that era, then one can say that bowling was utter cr@p in that era. Not otherwise. It is not possible for one man alone to find that bowling easy to play against unless he was superior in talent and batsmanship as well.
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 How about the quality of bowling faced? who were the sub-23 average bowlers that Bradman faced? I already spelt out the equation clearly. Tendulkar = superior bowling + easier wickets to bat on Bradman = inferior bowling + harder wickets to bat on. This aspect more or less evens out since batting on far harder wickets versus lesser bowlers is just as challenging as batting on easier wickets with greater bowlers.
Guest HariSampath Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 What about the fact that Shane Warneone of the greatest bowlers as claimed by Sachin is himself not a sub-23 bowler ??( I mean I know he is great, but just applying your twisted logic) :finger:
Bongosamaj Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Any chance we can do this without the rhetorics ? Refer rule # 2 post number 10 first page. Any chance i will see a rebuttal or an acknowledgement of my explanation of uncovered pitches ? Or will you continue to run away ?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now