The Curious Case of the Don and the Sticky Wicket

[James]

The Curious Case of the Don and the Sticky Wicket
If there is a blemish on his amazing record it is the absence of a significant innings on one of those "sticky dogs" of old - so wrote Wisden about Don Bradman as one of the Five Cricketer's of the Century. Here we see how true that was.
by Dave Wilson

 

[Burgey]

Excellent piece there Dave. The difference in his average is really astronomical. Thanks for putting it together.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Who's Dave Wilson? Assuming that the majority of "stickies" were in Australia the whole thing is irrevevant. Whilst a batsman with skill and determination can make runs on a sticky in England, the same isn't true in Australia where it's a complete lottery.

 

[Uppercut]

It's a very interesting piece of analysis, but I don't think his uncovered pitch average should be used instead of his overall average. Once you go down that road, you would end up having to account for all kinds of advantages and disadvantages of batting in each era.

For me, they're all too much to decipher, trying to weigh off the difficulty of (say) having to bat against 7 different teams of quality bowlers against the difficulty of having to play on the odd rain-affected humdinger. As far as I'm concerned his average of 99.94 makes him comfortably the best batsman of all time. I'd rather just leave it at that.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Pleased to see the overrated hack cut down a peg or two finally; we knew he was windy against fast bowling, he's now proven to be clueless against spin on recepetive pitches.

Nah, seriously, an interesting article, always impressed when someone does the legwork to back up a hunch or contention. Know it would've effectively doubled the work, but a comparison for a contemporary (Hammond perhaps the obvious subject) on stickies might've be illuminating too.

 

[Burgey]

I have read that Bradman's innings at The Oval in 1930 as played on a partly rain-affected wicket, not sure if that's right though.

 

[fredfertang]

He was 130* overnight before the fourth day started - there had been overnight rain and Warner described the wicket as "not a sticky but soft on top and hard underneath" - Warner said the ball didn't turn for the spinners nor move sideways for the quicker bowlers but that Larwood did get some lift - this was supposedly the session when the bodyline idea was conceived

 

[Tapioca]

He was 130* overnight before the fourth day started - there had been overnight rain and Warner described the wicket as "not a sticky but soft on top and hard underneath" - Warner said the ball didn't turn for the spinners nor move sideways for the quicker bowlers but that Larwood did get some lift - this was supposedly the session when the bodyline idea was conceived

What about Old Trafford 1930 ? It did rain but did the wicket become a sticky ?

 

[fredfertang]

Fender descibes "oceans" of rain falling on Manchester in the days leading up to the match (no surprise there then) but they made a prompt start on the first day - the weather was fine but the sun didn't shine so the wicket was described as "slow and easy paced" - Warner said it started to get sticky briefly in the late afternoon when the sun came out but that that didn't last long - Bradman was back in the hutch by then though

 

[archie mac]

I think it was Woolley who left Bradman out of his all time team because of his batting on sticky wickets. But tbh I think he was (and I have read it more than once) still able to play an innings if needed

 

[Michaelf7777777]

To which someone (I think it was O'Reilly) responded by saying that he'd pick Bradman and take a chance on the weather

 

[archie mac]

To which someone (I think it was O'Reilly) responded by saying that he'd pick Bradman and take a chance on the weather

Yes, impressive knowledge

 

[Tapioca]

I think it was Woolley who left Bradman out of his all time team because of his batting on sticky wickets. But tbh I think he was (and I have read it more than once) still able to play an innings if needed

I think his contemporaries often acknowledged Bradman's superiority with some condition attached. Most effective batsman, greatest run-scorer etc, and stopping short of unconditionally calling him the greatest batsman.

Compared to that, these days acceptance of him as the greatest is almost without question.

The only (extremely lame, IMNSHO) opinion that you hear against Bradman these days (and that mostly on messageboards) is that he did not play in the subcontinent. If Hazares, Merchants and Modis could regularly average 100+ a season on the dead wickets in India at the time, I shudder to think what Bradman would have done here.

 

[The Sean]

To which someone (I think it was O'Reilly) responded by saying that he'd pick Bradman and take a chance on the weather

Yes, impressive knowledge

'Twas Ray Robinson, actually.

 

[archie mac]

'Twas Ray Robinson, actually.

I won't argue