Why is Bradman the greatest ever?

[Spark]

wait wtf? "thinking" as a uni course?

 

[Burgey]

He played all his test against one country. Does that mean if Kallis played 50 matches against Bangladesh as the only other opposition with no third umpire runouts no fatigue and predictable bowling make him the greatest if he hasan inflated record?

You're an idiot.

I'm sorry, you just are.

 

[Flem274*]

wait wtf? "thinking" as a uni course?

Called philosophy iiirc

 

[The Sean]

Put me in the 'think he's trolling' camp.

Agreed, but this is far more fun than the work I should be doing so I'm clinging to the idea that he's not.

 

[Red]

Is this thread a chance to go in to the cricketweb book?


Or is it too late?

 

[Spark]

Called philosophy iiirc

you should see some of the **** i have to do.

anyway, i really should ask for this thread to go back on topic, so try to do that.

 

[Spikey]

Why isn't Mitchell Johnson the greatest ever

 

[flibbertyjibber]

This guy would probably try telling us Jack Nicklaus would be a 5 handicap hack under modern day conditions.

Wonder if this guy would say the same about Bradman had he been a Saffer?

 

[NUFAN]

Called philosophy iiirc

Yep that's it - had nothing to do with my actual degree and it was piss easy but jboss's arguments makes me think of that course every time.

 

[Noble One]

Why isn't Mitchell Johnson the greatest ever

They cannot get the measurements of the WACA spot on.

 

[NUFAN]

video technology killed the cricket star
we can't rewind we've gone too far
Whoa!
Oh - aoh – oh - oh – oh
Oh – aoh – oh - oh - oh

 

[Spark]

Oh, and video analysis is vastly overrated in Tests. Stuey Macgill to confirm.

---

!! NUFAN

 

[Red]

Bradman would have been a better fielder than Jonty Rhodes.

On at least 7 occasions I can recall, he ran someone out, but the batsman was given not out by the square leg umpire. Video assistance would have shown them to be out.

Also, Bradman would have taken at least 300 more wickets if the DRS had been in place, especially in the 1930s when he was a really quick bowler who missed out on a lot of LBWs because of incompetent umpiring decisions. Would have reached 300 wickets quicker than Steyn will iirc.

 

[Flametree]

Bradman's last innings... second ball... Hollies bowls a perfect googly and either

a) Bradman is bowled... but the umpire calls for some assistance from the onfield sketch artist. After a 10 minutes wait while the sketch artist completes his drawing, the umpire sees that Hollies in fact had just bowled a no-ball by a millimetre or two. Bradman stays on the field, and goes on to complete a majestic 300 not out, thus raising his average to 105.

or

b) Bradman, had spent his day off analysing the team-bagman's chalkboard analysis of Hollies' action, picks the googly, turns it to midwicket for a single, and goes on to score a majestic 300 not out... yada yada yada

 

[benchmark00]

Bradman's last innings... second ball... Hollies bowls a perfect googly and either

a) Bradman is bowled... but the umpire calls for some assistance from the onfield sketch artist. After a 10 minutes wait while the sketch artist completes his drawing, the umpire sees that Hollies in fact had just bowled a no-ball by a millimetre or two. Bradman stays on the field, and goes on to complete a majestic 300 not out, thus raising his average to 105.

or

b) Bradman, had spent his day off analysing the team-bagman's chalkboard analysis of Hollies' action, picks the googly, turns it to midwicket for a single, and goes on to score a majestic 300 not out... yada yada yada

Quality post. The onfield sketch artist line is genius.

 

[jboss]

I don't watch golf and G Pollock I will question too,

 

[Flametree]

Quality post. The onfield sketch artist line is genius.

Borrowed it from a Blackadder episode in all honesty...

 

[kyear2]

Could it not be that the records of Allen, Larwood, Verity, Tate et al. are all made to look far worse than is representative purely because of Bradman?

If you compare the difference between their FC records and Test records to bowlers of today (as a wide-ranging, non-scientific average), the disparity is huge. I somehow don't think that all the bowlers of the 1930s collectively decided to be incapable of stepping up, especially given County Cricket was very, very, very strong at the time.

Verity: 14->24
Larwood: 17->28
Allen: 22->29
Tate: 18->26
Farnes: 21->29

Steyn: 25->23
Warne:26->25
McGrath: 21->22
Gough: 27->28
Pollock: 23->23
Walsh: 22->24

It's a case of circular logic. In matches involving Bradman, no Englishman took a statistically-significant number of wickets without paying more than Verity's 27.22. A plethora of Australians did, against line-ups including Hutton and Hammond.

Bradman's batting devalues the record of the attack, so then, years later, we devalue his record because of the attack's performance against him.

I can assure you, Hedley Verity was no shunt. Neither was Harold Larwood. Maurice Tate was the perfect mix of Peter Siddle and Glenn McGrath, and the likes of Voce, Allen, Farnes et al. made for one hell of a supporting attack.

I never tried or meant to imply that Verity or the others were not great bowlers. Verity is top tier ATG, and while I personally feel some over rate Larwood here he too was a great bowler. With out having read the preceeding posts, I can also state that I disagree with jboss, and that Bradman was the greatest ever, just not by twice as much as many believe.

 

[uvelocity]

cant believe you ****s are wasting your time with this. go and have a pull

 

[Prince EWS]

video technology killed the cricket star
we can't rewind we've gone too far
Whoa!
Oh - aoh – oh - oh – oh
Oh – aoh – oh - oh - oh

Video killed the decoy runner as well.

Serial killer itbt.