McGrath. Marshall. Hadlee.

[DrWolverine]

You didn’t know? kyear thinks Bradman’s overrated

Bradman’s overrated?

He thinks Sobers might be ahead of Bradman.

Seriously?

 

[capt_Luffy]

I bet majority of people don’t even know who this is

A majority of people will rate Anderson over Marshall

 

[Coronis]

Bradman’s overrated?


Seriously?

I don’t think he’s said ahead. He believes they’re comparable though.

 

[subshakerz]

Seriously?

Yes. Also rated McGrath ahead of Hadlee...as a cricketer, not a bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

I don’t think he’s said ahead. He believes they’re comparable though.

Yes said Sobers has an argument. Which probably means he thinks Sobers is better but is too embarassed to say so, since he thinks Bradmans adjusted average today would be in the 60s like Smith in the 2000s.

 

[Coronis]

Yes said Sobers has an argument. Which probably means he thinks Sobers is better but is too embarassed to say so, since he thinks Bradmans adjusted average today would be in the 60s like Smith in the 2000s.

But then doesn’t adjust Bradman’s peers accordingly

 

[smash84]

You didn’t know? kyear thinks Bradman’s overrated

One of his more outlandish takes, and he has many.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

But then doesn’t adjust Bradman’s peers accordingly

Plus Sobers average somehow doesn’t get adjustment in these argument.

 

[kyear2]

He's actually trying to convey the faith of general people, I believe. All other players are flawed, only their favourites are flawless.

And speaking of him, I think Hutton was pretty flawless, as I do not have problems with S.R.

There's no flawless cricketers, athletes in general basically.


With that being said, to even be close to a flawless batsman though, it not enough to say you don't have a problem with s/r.

To be in that absolute top tier for me you don't have to be a Viv, but you have to be capable and have demonstrated the ability to do everything and anything. That includes being able to escalate the tempo and rate when required and demonstrate the ability to dictate to the opposition.

The ability to turn the tide and alter the dynamics in a session is an underrated skill, here at least. To put the opponents on the back foot and make them alter their tactics, lines, fields and rotation isn't something to dismiss. It make life easier for those coming behind you, and harder for the opposing captain.

So yeah, to be "flawless", that has to be part of your game. To adapt to the game and be able to adjust as required, including that.

 

[capt_Luffy]

He's actually trying to convey the faith of general people, I believe. All other players are flawed, only their favourites are flawless.

And speaking of him, I think Hutton was pretty flawless, as I do not have problems with S.R.

So big of you to not have a problem with *checks notes* a 50s English Opener striking slowly.

 

[Johan]

Hutton is flawless for his job.

 

[sayon basak]

To be in that absolute top tier for me you don't have to be a Viv, but you have to be capable and have demonstrated the ability to do everything and anything. That includes being able to escalate the tempo and rate when required and demonstrate the ability to dictate to the opposition.

But what if the team needed the player to be more defensive in approach? Definitely agree that having the ability to accelerate quickly is pretty useful, but don't think it's too big of an issue as long as he's not costing a lot of matches.

 

[kyear2]

My credible XI without them

Sutcliffe
Hutton
Bradman*
Lara
Hammond
Sobers
Gilchrist+
Hadlee
Warne
Steyn
McGrath

This is where you and I obviously disagree and you fail to grasp that there's a difference a credible XI without them and the best possible team. That's what you're going for.

And there aren't three names mentioned, it was 7, and 5 below Bradman and Sobers, so take all 5 out.

Marshall * Tendulkar * Hobbs * Warne * Gilchrist.

Even though Hobbs isn't one of my choices, he's an obvious one and that's the 5 all day everyday.

 

[kyear2]

Bradman stands at the top of the mountain.
Sobers is great but doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as The Don.

And we will agree to disagree on same.

That view is also not borne out historically nor anecdotally. Regardless how much many here would like that to be the case.

 

[kyear2]

You didn’t know? kyear thinks Bradman’s overrated

We've had this discussion on many occasions and again, a view that's only perpetuated here.

When as late as the 50's when there were players and media who had seen both, the view was that Hobbs was the equal of Bradman if not that far behind. The view that's believed here that he's twice as good as even Hobbs, Tendulkar, Sobers etc was one that's derived only thereafter and totally based on average devoid of context.

You believe he's twice as good as Hobbs and Tendulkar. I do not, if you believe that means overrated, knock yourself out.

I believe he's unquestionably the best and by a bigger lead that others in their categories.

 

[kyear2]

But what if the team needed the player to be more defensive in approach? Definitely agree that having the ability to accelerate quickly is pretty useful, but don't think it's too big of an issue as long as he's not costing a lot of matches.

First off he was most the captain during those periods, the team objective was primarily what he deemed it to be, and he was noted somewhat to be a defensive captain.

But we're not talking about team asks, we're talking about demonstrating the ability to change the course of a game in a session.

None of this is saying the dude wasn't elite, but if there's a restriction in your game, it's, to quote I think Coronis, "a hole". At least a deficit.

But I love the player and he has a role to play in any team.

 

[capt_Luffy]

So now it's captaincy...... I can entertain Hutton being limited if someone can provide me a scorecard of their favourite attacking player saving a game batting one whole day.

 

[subshakerz]

So big of you to not have a problem with *checks notes* a 50s English Opener striking slowly.

I told you I don't. He was fine in how he did as opener. I prefer other types of bats.

 

[subshakerz]

We've had this discussion on many occasions and again, a view that's only perpetuated here.

When as late as the 50's when there were players and media who had seen both, the view was that Hobbs was the equal of Bradman if not that far behind. The view that's believed here that he's twice as good as even Hobbs, Tendulkar, Sobers etc was one that's derived only thereafter and totally based on average devoid of context.

You believe he's twice as good as Hobbs and Tendulkar. I do not, if you believe that means overrated, knock yourself out.

I believe he's unquestionably the best and by a bigger lead that others in their categories.

You believe he is a 60s average bat.

 

[Johan]

Hutton's captaincy is the Allan Border equivalent of English Cricket.