Cricket’s great Bradman barrier

[Jono]

Valid point. Thats where the 'you should have seen him play' point creeps into I guess.

Not really. It obviously helps to have seen a player to know when their decline is, but you can look at stats.

If a player improves and improves and improves and then reaches their peak, and then declines and declines, and their age or a well known injury results in this decline, it's not rocket science to realise that their final average isn't indicative of the player they are.

I reckon Dravid could end up averaging 50-52 by the end of his career. I dont' think many would think he was a lows 50s average player. You can look at his stats to figure that out.

 

[chicane]

Tendulkar has not been miles above his competitors though. Just 18 months ago I would have happily put Ponting ahead of him.

Haha that's the whole point. The Don is freakish. Is there anything else like him in sport? I'm struggling to think of human beings who were so freakishly superior to others at anything.

 

[Jono]

 

[Maximus0723]

But what's the difference

First Class was often the top level of competition.

FC runs are horribly underrated pre 1970.

Moreover,

In domestic you are playing vs. greats of the town but when playing against a country, you are playing greats of a country. Whole different lvl of competition.

Internationally, you face variety of conditions as you travel. In domestic, things aren't much different.

 

[Teja.]

@Cricketgod

We don't have to imagine Bradman being born in another era or Tendulkar playing in Bradman's era to compare the batsmen.

Quoting PEWS now, "A batsman's job - or responsibility if you like - is to find a technique that optimises his scoring in his own era; not develop a technique that'd work in any era at the expense of maximum output in current conditions just to satisfy people who wish to compare him with former players."

IMO, It's ridiculous to mentally transport a batsman(and his technique) without taking into account that a batsman's technique is a direct product of the environment where they play cricket in. Comparing Bradman's performances in relation to his contemporaries with Tendulkar's performances in relation to Tendulkar's contemporaries will show that Bradman was about twice the batsman Tendulkar is.

 

[vcs]

Found something interesting here. Only 15 players in the history of the game average above 55 if we make a 20 test cut off limit. With the way everyone has been talking about the lack of challenge in batting during the Bradman days and this decade, I thought there would be a lot more players averaging ridiculously high. Will I be wrong if I set the benchmark of greatness in batting to be an average of 55 after a long career?

Everton Weekes seems to be very underrated. I don't see him mentioned often in the greatest batsmen stakes.

 

[Jono]

Averaged less than 25 in Australia and less than 34 in England. Overall averaged less than 40 vs. Australia.

His average is inflated India, NZ and Pak, who weren't that during his time.

He's still obviously a great batsman, but there are holes in his record compared to his contemporaries.

 

[vcs]

Averaged less than 25 in Australia and less than 34 in England. Overall averaged less than 40 vs. Australia.

His average is inflated India, NZ and Pak, who weren't that during his time.

He's still obviously a great batsman, but there are holes in his record compared to his contemporaries.

Ah, I didn't look at his record in detail. Fair enough then considering those were the strong teams. Still must have bashed the minnows amazingly to get his average up to 58.

 

[Jono]

Averaged over 100 against India. 7 out of his 15 centuries were against them.

Indians must have gotten sick of bowling to him.

 

[Ikki]

I don't think that's really the point the article was trying to make.

Even in the point it is trying to make it falls short. Tendulkar has never, in any way, been that much better than his rivals...ever.

 

[Migara]

And forget the Bradman barrier. I would like to see the first batsman break the 60 barrier in terms of career average after the end of a long career (100+tests). No one has done it many have come close in the last decade: Sachin, Ponting, Dravid and Kallis. Ponting has been the closest actually breaking the 60 barrier during the first innings of one of the Ashes 2006 tests but it was almost like a curse and his career average has been moving steadily south since then. Now it's not looking likely that any of the current greats will do it. I suppose the way he is going Sachin has a small chance if he plays for 2-3 more years but I wouldn't bet on it.

Sachin and Sanga both can go for that elusive 60 IMO. I am not sure whether Sehwag or Jayawardane can do it, because they have too many technical shortcomings when playing the moving ball. The tussle for the best batsman in ICC rankings will be very interesting with WI and NZ tours for each player. They might be in for leather hunts (NZ with Sachin at #1 and Sehwag #3, and Laxman at #8, & WI with Sangakkara #2, Jayawardane #4 and Samaraweera at #11)

 

[Migara]

I'm not really getting your point...Bradman and his mates played without modern day protection equipment against extremely fast and accurate bowling?

Wicket keeper was standing up to Fred "Demon" Spofforth.

 

[vcs]

Even in the point it is trying to make it falls short. Tendulkar has never, in any way, been that much better than his rivals...ever.

In terms of longevity he is ahead of his contemporaries by a considerable margin.

 

[Migara]

In terms of longevity he is ahead of his contemporaries by a considerable margin.

Still hell no. Wasim played for 18 years as a fast bowler (1984 - 2003), and so is Murali. Javed played for 19 years, de Silva for 19, and Jayasuriya also 19 years of test cricket and 20 years of ODI cricket. I think Ranatunga also played for 18 years (1982 - 2000). Richard Haldlee also may have a big shout here with Kapil Dev. Sachin is in his 21st year, and if he plays two more seasons it will be 23. Bradman averages 80% more than Sachin. But Sachin has not played 70% longer than anyone of his fellow players.

 

[vcs]

Still hell no. Wasim played for 18 years as a fast bowler (1984 - 2003), and so is Murali. Javed played for 19 years, de Silva for 19, and Jayasuriya also 19 years of test cricket and 20 years of ODI cricket. I think Ranatunga also played for 18 years (1982 - 2000). Richard Haldlee also may have a big shout here with Kapil Dev. Sachin is in his 21st year, and if he plays two more seasons it will be 23. Bradman averages 80% more than Sachin. But Sachin has not played 70% longer than anyone of his fellow players.

Yes, all that is true. He is not ahead of everyone else by a wide margin. But it is still noticeably better than most players who came in around and after his time, especially with the glut of ODI cricket in the '90s.

 

[Ikki]

In terms of longevity he is ahead of his contemporaries by a considerable margin.

Not really, and it depends on when his contemporaries retire themselves. Ponting has already played about 15 and is likely to go on even after Tendulkar retires. Outside of his contemporaries, there are many players who've played close to or as much as 20 years of cricket. Sobers being one I brought up in another thread. Hobbs played for about 22 years. Sunil played for about 16, Viv for about 17, Boycott 18, Waugh played for more than 18...just at the top of my head. Then you can get into bowlers. Whilst he's in the lead and will continue to keep going it's not really that big.

Bradman himself played about 20 years. He's just not close.

 

[Jono]

It's cool. When Sachin is still playing in 2025 we'll bump this thread

 

[vcs]

Not really, and it depends on when his contemporaries retire themselves. Outside of his contemporaries, there are many players who've played close to or as much as 20 years of cricket. Sobers being one I brought up in another thread. Hobbs played for about 22 years. Sunil played for about 16, Viv for about 17, Boycott 18, Waugh played for more than 18...just at the top of my head. Then you can get into bowlers. Whilst he's in the lead and will continue to keep going

Never anything like Bradman, really. He's just not close.

I'm comparing only with his contemporaries. While the previous players you mention also did very well, it's hard to get an apples vs. apples comparison because they probably played more first class cricket and less international cricket. I believe he is ahead of all of his contemporaries by a comfortable margin.

 

[weldone]

Wicket keeper was standing up to Fred "Demon" Spofforth.

Are you being sarcastic?

Or, does your cricket knowledge really tell you that Spofforth was a contemporary of Bradman? I'm not sure if Spofforth was older than Bradman's grandfather.

Here is a bowler whom Bradman faced http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwL1VOBG6Vo , named a certain Harold Larwood - not as famous as Farvez Maharoof, though!

 

[Burgey]

Why are you posting pics of Conan The Barbarian, Joni?