Lets take all these claims one by one
- Umpires would have been frightened to give him out
There is no mention anywhere in history of umpires being intimidated by Bradman and adjudging in his favour. Cricketers who played with him have been alive (some still are) till very recntly and there is more written about the DON than any other cricketer (bar WG I suppose) and a lot of it is not very complimentary for a man of his stature did attract all kinds of negative emotions also but no one talks of this.
Secondly, he played a very large part of his cricket in England where his record surpasses his record elsewhere (including in Australia). On all the tours 1930, 34, 38 and 48 ( the last at the ripe old age of 48) he scored runs that one wouldnt dream of writing about in a schoolboy heroes fictional accounts. Surely, you are not claiming that the English umpires were scared of him too ??
- Close decisions on run-outs, stumpings, and catches were all given in favour of the batsmen
Says who ? Yes there was an unwritten law (and still is) on the benefit of the doubt going to the batsman. It has been so down the ages. You might be refering to the recent use of the third umpire but it is too recent to have affected most of the later day greats batting averages the way you are talking. It is preposterous to suggest that Pollock (who never played with a third umpire) or Richards ( who played very little) would have had their averages affected dramatically by this !!
- Playing long tours (6 tests) against the same opposition (usually England with the same bowlers) allows great players to build such prolific averages
Just shows how some people will use anything including imagined/fabricated information masquerading as facts to 'prove' their fixed notions !!
1. Bradman NEVER played in a six test series !!
2. The proposition that somehow longer series are easier to handle is a load of poppycock. Go and ask any test cricketer and he will tell you that exactly the opposite is true. To maintain a high average in a three (or less tests series) is surely easier than a longer one spread over months when injury as well are more likely to affect your performance. His career series averages of
66.9, 139.2, 74.5, 201.5, 56.6, 94.8, 90.0, 108.5, 97.1, 178.8 and 72.6 show that he was remarkable in his consistency over twenty years. The fact that these were 5 test series makes the figures more remarkable not less !!
3. To say that the same opposition England and that this devalues his performance only reinforces what I said above about selective use of information.
a) England were NOT an easy opposition. They were the oldest cricketing nation (alongwith Australia and had therefore, a huge pool of experienced and gifted cricketers coming from a mature cricketing environment and a well established first class domestic cricket set up. Today the cricketers are better off with having some new (and struggling minnows always available to hammer and inflate there averages).
All cricketing nations take time to become the equals of the existing ones. This is a slow process and in the mean time, players from the established countries benefit from it.
Here are some revealing statistics of how countries have fared against Australia at the begining of their test matches.
S AFRICA : Won only 1 test out of the first 30 against Australia spread over 50 years !
WEST INDIES : : Won only one test in 17 over 30 years !
NZLAND : Won only one test in first 36 years. (Had a pretty long break after the first test which they won.)
INDIA : Won their first test after 12 years.
PAKISTAN : Won only 1 test in first 20 years !
SRI LANKA : Have won only one test in their 22 year history !
Surely playing these countries(in their early years) only boosts the averages of modern cricketers.
England on the other hand were the only worthy opponents to Australia all through history and this starts from the very early test matches !!
19th Century : 56 test matches Australia won 20, England 26
20th century upto 1928-29(Bradman's debut series) : 58 tests. Australia 26, England 20
Clearly, England were no push overs !!
But what happpened during Bradmans career is extremely revealing.
ENGLAND WERE NO PUSHOVERS EVEN DURING BRADMAN'S HEY DAYS !!
b) Of the 29 tests from 1928-29 series (in which Bradman made his debut (playing 4 of the 5 tests) till the outbreak of the 2nd world war, Australia actually won fewer matches (10) than England who won 13 !!
Shocked ?? Well its a fact.
Its only after the war, that a depleted England side with both the first class game and the test side suffering from the loss of young men and cricketers in the war, really proved no match to the Aussies. In the 10 matches played after the war, England did not win any and lost 7. Bradman whose combined average on his three pre world war tours of England was a mind boggling 113.4 actually dropped to a more Lara(or any modern great)-like 72.6 in his only tour after the war at the ripe old age of 40 !!
Really me friend, you do not know your history .
This is not all.
Bradman did play the then minnows (West Indies)in 1930-31 in the only series in his playing days and averaged 74.5.
Played India in at the age of 39 in the penultimate series of his career and averaged 178.8 !
Played South Africa in 1931-32 (they had already been a test playing nation for 30 years and averaged 201.5. He did not travel to South Africa in 1935-36 due to business reasons other wise he would have perhaps had a three figure career average after all !
c) Clearly if he had more opportunities against teams other than England his average would have been, if anything, even higher !!
3. England couldnt possibly have played with same bowlers during his career !!
For a career spread over 20 years (1928-1948) From the end of the Hobbs era in England to the beginning of the new age with the fifties, a generation of cricketers had changed and you claim he played the same England bowlers !!
- Very few GREAT bowlers during his period
Oh Really. I do not know how you classify a great bowler. Let me go by authority. Take out any of the half a dozen or so books on the gam's all time great bowlers, starting from Spoofforth to Imran or Marshall depending on when the book was written and there are a few names that you will find in all of them. I hope you too have heard of them
- Harold Larwood
- Bill Voce
- Alec Bedser
- Hedley Verity
- Jim Laker
- Maurice tate.
These are six of the greatest bowlers in the entire history of the game.
If you ever buy a book of all time great bowlers and it doesnt include these six, dont throw away good money on that book.
In addition there were others whom many a test side ,today would welcome with open arms.
- Ian Peebles
- George Geary
- Bill Bowes
- RWV Robbins
- Ken Farnes
- Gubby Allen
- DWP Wright
Heard of them ? They were no pushovers too.
at the dig!