Surpose there was a batsmen as good or perhaps even better than Bradman. He was a certainty to average around 100 in test matches just as Bradman did.
He couldnt field at all. He was the worst fieldsman you could possibly imagine. Ten, twenty times worse than the the worst you can think of. He's big, fat and slow. Has trouble bending down to field etc. Appalling catching, will drop absolute sitters and no amount of practise can make him better.
Now my question is, in this day and age where fielding is so important and the standards of fielding are so high, would this brilliant batsmen be selected to play test cricket?