The Curious Case of the Don and the Sticky Wicket

James · 30-09-2009, 05:18 PM

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 · 30-09-2009, 09:31 PM

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

Lillian Thomson · 01-10-2009, 05:43 AM

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 · 01-10-2009, 05:46 AM

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 · 01-10-2009, 10:11 AM

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 · 01-10-2009, 05:20 PM

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 · 02-10-2009, 01:01 AM

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 · 02-10-2009, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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

fredfertang · 02-10-2009, 01:21 PM

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 · 02-10-2009, 07:35 PM

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 · 02-10-2009, 08:47 PM

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 · 02-10-2009, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

Yes, impressive knowledge

Tapioca · 05-10-2009, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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 · 05-10-2009, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

Quote:

Originally Posted by archie mac

Yes, impressive knowledge

'Twas Ray Robinson, actually.

archie mac · 05-10-2009, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Sean

'Twas Ray Robinson, actually.

I won't argue

30-09-2009, 05:18 PM	#1 (permalink)
James Cricket Web Owner Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 22,291	The Curious Case of the Don and the Sticky Wicket 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 __________________ Follow Cricket Web on Facebook Follow Cricket Web on Twitter Email - james.nixon@cricketweb.net Moderators - moderators@cricketweb.net (will go to all moderators) Skype - nixonja@hotmail.com Google Talk/Facebook - cricketweb@gmail.com

30-09-2009, 09:31 PM	#2 (permalink)
Burgey Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Castle Posts: 35,138	Excellent piece there Dave. The difference in his average is really astronomical. Thanks for putting it together. __________________ WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie "People make me happy.. not places.. people" "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson "Oh my God, there's a castle! A castle!"

01-10-2009, 05:43 AM	#3 (permalink)
Lillian Thomson International Captain Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: england Posts: 5,638	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. __________________ Not now Maud, I am sprinkling the man in the tent.

01-10-2009, 10:11 AM	#5 (permalink)
BoyBrumby Englishman Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Doing the stance Posts: 42,629	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. __________________ *- As featured in The Independent.* "This is not the time for namby-pamby promising youngsters who might just do something; not the time for building for the future. Pragmatism rules and they don't come more pragmatic than Rogers." - Victor Marks makes the case for stiff-legged and stiff-armed 35 year old left-handers in Ashes squads

02-10-2009, 07:35 PM	#10 (permalink)
archie mac Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: canberra Australia Posts: 10,668	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 __________________ You know it makes sense.

01-10-2009, 05:20 PM	#6 (permalink)
Burgey Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Castle Posts: 35,138	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.

02-10-2009, 01:01 AM	#7 (permalink)
fredfertang Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: high dudgeon Posts: 9,721	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

02-10-2009, 01:21 PM	#9 (permalink)
fredfertang Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: high dudgeon Posts: 9,721	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

02-10-2009, 08:47 PM	#11 (permalink)
Michaelf7777777 International 12th Man Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Wellington, NZ Posts: 1,610	To which someone (I think it was O'Reilly) responded by saying that he'd pick Bradman and take a chance on the weather

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode