The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
Let's also assume that instead of playing three-quarters of his Test career on uncovered pitches against the strongest possible opposition, he instead got to play on perfectly prepared motorways with roped in boundaries under today's FTP and was able to cash in against Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and other minnows far more than 25% of the time, while actually getting the benefit of the doubt of the third umpire and coming out ahead rather than behind because he was correctly given not out on 32 and ended up making 285. All while training under modern coaching and fitness regimes with computer and video analysis of every bowler he was likely to come up against, and without having to stew for weeks while holed up on a ship travelling to play anywhere.By today's standards and seeing taking into account that he played long inning, lets presume he went into a series today with hours of footage for teams to expose him and find a potential weakness. Perhaps in his 36/37 series he could have scored a mere 200 runs and maybe in 1934, he could have been run out by third umpire on a 100 instead of making 300. Perhaps he would have been particularly vulnerable to spin bowling in India and could tour there 2 tournaments for a mere 600 runs in 6 matches that could take 900 runs off his total, add 600 and 12 innings which does not even take into consideration fatigue which is a major factor in a modern era. That's 6696 runs in 93 (taking into consideration an innings of not out) knocks for an average of 72. Certainly makes him more human. It's perfectly feasible to make assumptions like this seeing as he is labelled the greatest of all time which is also an assumption that people claim unless the modern era does not fall under the "all time" category.
It's perfectly feasible in this instance to assume he would have averaged about 1,000.
I like this game.