On the strength of the limited available footage, of which you admit to only having seen part, how can you possibly say this with any confidence? Unless you allow yourself to be swayed by contemporary accounts, of course.
Na, I've probably seen all the footage available (though not as much quality recording of Bradman in a match I'd like). But what I've seen has been enough compared to the whole career of Ponting to see he was the better batsman and more adaptable. I've never doubted Bradman's ability as a batsman, only the 99.94 average in comparison tho the great players of future eras.
Ponting has had a great career, he's not a bad player by any means but he just doesn't have the same level of talent Bradman had from what I've seen.
I'm never swayed by hear'say, "reports", and other articles by journalists- I always check myself and then if they match with articles I've read so be it. You can tell by Bradman's incredible footwork that the reports of the bodyline series were true. The footage available (not just that on You Tube.
) show us with extreme leg-side fields so there's nothing to doubt really (though of course, his legend has been buffed up to God level!).
Rivera regarding the WI XI no George Headley? Regarding South Africa I'd put Vince van der Bijl in there ahead of Ntini even though he never played a test. I would not like to face that Pakistani bowling attack, or the West Indian one at that. Don't think having Cowdrey in your post 1970 XI is right considering he was well past his best by that stage (no 100's and just 1 50 vs NZ).
RE Headley: The little footage I've seen of him has been impressive (black Bradman and all that...) but I can't put him ahead of Viv (who I've seen loads of, easily the best player to short fast bowling and the best leg side player I've seen) and Lara (who I've seen 99% of the career of and is 1 of, if not the best WI batsman ever), or even ahead of Lloyd who's in the team for both his captaincy and batting.
RE South Africa: vd Bijl's record is hard to argue with (750+ wickets @ 16 is better than Procter) and I personally wouldn't want to face a man of 6'8" bowling very accurate 85mph deliveries at me (call me stupid! Ha ha), but the record of a bowler who will end up with 400+ test wickets, especially since the majority of his career has been played on flat batsmen-friendly tracks. What would've been the SA side through the 70's (Richards, Barlow, G.Pollock, Procter, vd Bijl...) would've been a force, especially since none of those peaked by the time they were excluded from international cricket!
RE Cowdrey: Oh na, it's not a player's record in 1970- it's the era. Cowdrey played in the era which includes 1970 (just like Sobers played into the 70's). Of course, I'd have the Cowdrey of '57-67. Sorry for the confusion.
Makes it sound like you think he got injured on purpose.
Not at all, his back injuries are killers for a fast bowler and there's no legislation for injuries. Perhaps he always had an injury of sorts, but I can't help comparing him to Robin van Persie needing to be 100% fit to bowl and whenever he was fit, ODI's were his priority. I know New Zealand viewed themselves as a ODI team moreso than a test team, but Bond should've been restricted (or restricted himself) to 1 form of cricket.
It's probably not entirely his fault (the NZ board more than likely pressured him to play both forms) so maybe I'm being harsh on him. He mentioned himself that there was a lot of **** going on at board level. If it was the board's fault, then that's unforgivable.
I've always been a fan of his, people compare his with Dale Steyn but for me there's no comparison.
