What would Bradman average if he played in a typical (i.e. neither batsman or bowler favored) period of the modern era (1970 - current)?

[AndrewB]

We've been over this b4. He faced full strength English attacks in England in 1933 and averaged 55. He faced full English attacks in 1939 and averaged 67. Headley did just fine in England vs their full attacks. Therefore, it's logical to assume that if he faced the same attacks at home he'd do the same or better.

Regarding O'Reilly being missing, it's not , Headley’s fault that Bill debuted in 1932 ie a full year after the WI's one and only tour b4 WW2. The fact remains, he faced a full Aus attack in Australia and he came off 2nd best. Had he faced them at home, I have no doubt he'd have murdered them.

According to CLR James in Beyond a Boundary, Headley (aged 21, in his first cricket outside WI) had looked very good on the off-side in the first few FC matches in that tour, so the Australians bowled leg-theory to him; for the next 5 matches (including the first 2 Tests) he failed; after that, he'd come up with a way to play against it, and averaged 62 in the last 3 Tests (in which WI scored 193, 148, 99, 107, 350-6 and 124-5).

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Why waste time on hypotheticals? Bradman dominated the game and stood above his peers by such a huge margin that its never been replicated since. Hence, he is the GOAT. End of.

Probably the 3rd best Aussie cricketer of all time behind The Kat and Watto.

 

[Burgey]

He would not have lost some of his most productive years sitting out due to a war.

He would if he was Ukrainian.

 

[Burgey]

Or he could have gone trundler's route and never leave the house, stuck behind a computer screen watching porn all day and night

You say this as though it's a bad thing

 

[Spikey]

@Spikey making a serious post is not what I expect or want to see, frankly

not sure it was worth it anyway. all these ****s are still talking dumb ****

 

[karan_fromthestands]

Obviously none of us will ever know. Just give what you think would be your best guess.

I think he would average 65.72 throughout his career, and would still be considered the GOAT batsman, although not nearly in the statistically untouchable and incomparable sense that he currently ends up being.

It would be fun, because we could use him in drafts and sims and whatever other **** too, because his numbers wouldn't make him an autowin cheat code either, but alas he played back in the day against a bunch of posh wastemen, so we'll never know imo.

I think he would average 53.7 or below.

 

[shortpitched713]

I think he would average 53.7 or below.

A fellow lover of arbitrarily precise numbers. Nice.

 

[honestbharani]

A fellow lover of arbitrarily precise numbers. Nice.

Think its Sachin's average.

 

[ankitj]

Was Bradman a fraud?

C. L. R. James, writing about George Headley in his 1963 Beyond a Boundary, made a slightly subjective comparison of the record of Headley and Bradman on sticky pitches (which were very much a matter of opinion and hard to be objective about). James reckoned that Headley averaged 39.85, with seven fifties in 13 innings on what he termed “wet or uncertain” wickets; Bradman managed just 16.66 in similar conditions, with one fifty in 15 innings (James used a list complied by the Australian Ray Robinson for Bradman’s innings). James conceded that the figures were not conclusive but served to prove a point about Headley, who enjoyed batting in conditions which favoured the bowler as it simplified batting: “On a bad wicket, it was you and the bowler … no nonsense.”

The Sticky Wicket: How rain used to influence cricket pitches

Although they have not been part of cricket for forty years, “sticky wickets” are still mentioned both in and out of a cricket context. What was a sticky wicket, how did it arise and wh…

oldebor.wordpress.com

 

[Socerer 01]

Bradman was never the best on sticky wickets, thought this was already known

his real value came in how ****ing good he was everywhere else

 

[ankitj]

But I never saw averages before. This is quite damning and explosive.

 

[ashley bach]

B U M P
U
M
P

 

[_00_deathscar]

F R A U D
R
A
U
D

 

[Silver Silva]

Maybe around 150 or 160 with Anderson's record in Ashes.

 

[ashley bach]

66.6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 @SillyCowCorner1

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

~90ish or ~40ish depending on whether his new career overlapped with Woakes.

 

[Coronis]

Well yeah but he wouldn’t have sticky wickets to contend with today. So defs over 100.


Unpopular opinion: Bring back uncovered pitches

 

[shortpitched713]

Was Bradman a fraud?

The Sticky Wicket: How rain used to influence cricket pitches

Although they have not been part of cricket for forty years, “sticky wickets” are still mentioned both in and out of a cricket context. What was a sticky wicket, how did it arise and wh…

oldebor.wordpress.com

SIXTEEN
I
X
T
E
E
N

 

[shortpitched713]

But I never saw averages before. This is quite damning and explosive.

Aye, it calls for the "mind-blown" reaction.

Get on it, cricket web forum admins!

 

[OverratedSanity]

But I never saw averages before. This is quite damning and explosive.

His weakness on wet wickets is pretty well known. He was basically the greatest FTB of all time, and since most pitches in test cricket are pretty flat, he's going to obviously be the most valuable batsmen.