Re: Bradman
by vadivel kumar on Oct 26, 2010 07:56 PM
Anything would have happened.may be his avg would have gone above 100 and also chance of it coming around 60. Cannot predict the things which did not happen
Re: Re: Bradman
by Juni on Oct 26, 2010 08:45 PM
He played 52 tests in 15 years. If he had played 6 more years, there is no chance that it would have come to 60...
Re: Re: Re: Bradman
by Arpit Patel on Oct 26, 2010 08:51 PM
of course it would. Bradman is no GOD. Had he played more than 120 test there was every chance that Bradman's avg would come down under 70 or even 60's.
Re: Bradman
by Jigar Mehta on Oct 26, 2010 09:09 PM
well if you put a condition like "wht if.." thn juz imagine wht if sachin converted all those scores in 90s to 100?? wht wud be his tall of 100s????
If playing against single opponent makes someone great, then every cricketer is great. We know what this Ozs are. They are worse than club level team. If they don't get help from players like Azzu, jaddu, RJ, etc, they will be defeated by bangladeshis.
Bradman had an average of 99.94 and the second best was Headley 60.83 & Sutcliffe 60.73. Sachin has an 56.96 wheras there are people like Sangakara 56.85 & Kallis 55.07 and many other players who are around 50. So that makes Bradman easily the greatest ever. If Sachin can some how get his average around 62 then he can be called the second greatest ever.
Re: There is s difference!!
by Rick Shaw on Oct 26, 2010 07:01 PM
No, this is not the way you compare!!! Bradman played only 52 testes & only in Aus / Eng pitches which is much shorter compared to 171 tests of Sachin played across the world!!! (In the short term, its easy to maintain high avg.) This is not to say Bradman was not great, but yuo can't judge it based on avg. only. If that is the case, Mike Hussey had a test avg. of more than 85 for quite along time in his initial 25 to 30 tests but now its around 50!!!
Re: Re: There is s difference!!
by Juni on Oct 26, 2010 08:48 PM
okay then take Sachin's average only in India and then compare it with Bradman who played in Aus and Eng. Sachin's average in India is less than 60 where as Bradman's career average is 99.
Re: Re: There is s difference!!
by Rick Shaw on Oct 26, 2010 07:06 PM
Had Ponting continued to play only in Aus / Eng for 50 test matches, probably his avg also would have been around 90. (But before the last tour, his avg. in India in about 10 tests was meere 20!!!). When a player plays for a long time like 20 years for Sachin & that too on all sorts of pitches, avg. is bound to be low...I can confidently say that even Bradman would not have maintained avg. of 99 had he played 170 tests across the world (again, this is not to sya Bradman was not great)
Re: Re: Re: There is s difference!!
by Arpit Patel on Oct 26, 2010 09:02 PM
that is exactly what i am saying. Bradman is a legend no doubt, but he has only played in Austrlia and England most of the time. If you see Ponting samething. Had Ponting played in Australia alone his avg would be at least 70. But he has played all over the world and his avg has reduced. So samething would happen to Bradman, had he played more matches and all over the world his avg would have been way less.
Re: Re: Re: There is s difference!!
by suryanarayan bhaskar on Oct 26, 2010 07:20 PM
But if u see Sachin is not way ahead of Ponting , kallis or Dravid who all have maninatined a good average over a long period of time.There have been times when they have had a better average than Sachin.So that is difficult to say.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: There is s difference!!
by suryanarayan bhaskar on Oct 27, 2010 12:53 AM
Sachin is the greatest batsman I have ever seen no doubt about it and I am a great Sachin admirer.It is just that Bradman was the greatest ever.
it just like comparing ARYaBat ( known indian mathmetician who invented no. 1 to 10) and Charles Babbage( father of computer). both helped in computing and the master piece of thier respective time same as sachin and bradman
No reason for brouhaha, this is not an official rating but a private one. Just like some websites that come up with the hottest 10 celebrity lists 'throwing surprises' all the time.
Sachin getting his place is obvious, but some inclusions and ommissions are laughable like Warne Vs Murali. Shows aussie bias against their one-time nemesis!
There has been a lot of comparison whether Sachin is indeed the greatest ever. The following thoughts should end it: 1) Bradman played one opponent mainly..England. Sachin against 10 countries and he has excellent records against each of them, with 50 plus avg against the best(aussies) 2) Bradman didnt travel to the subcontinent, so didnt play high class spin. In contrast tendulkar dominated warne,saqlain etc. Great player of spin,pace and swing! 3) Bradman didnt have the pressure of ODIs and 2020s.Tendulkar not only played record no of ODIs but also is the leading runs and century scorer. Mind boggling to go alongwith 15000 plus test runs 4) Bradman didnt have the pressure of 1 billion. In india, 1 billion pray that SRT scores big every time he walks out. 5) No media to rip Bradman. While aajtak,and other crappy channels blast tendulkar for any failure. 6) Tendulkar didnt have the support of a good batting order, and remember him playing with likes of somasundran,bharadwaj,noel david,ramesh,ss das and stuff. Bradman was part of invincibles, so batting was shared. 7) Finally tendulkar is a known partnership breaker..150 ODI wickets. A true genious indeed!!
Re: Re: Sachin vs Bradman...lets end this debate!
by Abhijit Nair on Oct 26, 2010 05:40 PM
Plus uncovered pitches,without helmets,really dangerous bowlers,bodyline futile to compare different generations
Re: Re: Re: Sachin vs Bradman...lets end this debate!
by Allah Army on Oct 26, 2010 05:53 PM
bodyline was somewhat curbed after 1932-33 ashes. so, this is not a big point.
Re: Re: Sachin vs Bradman...lets end this debate!
by prajyoth pradeep on Oct 26, 2010 06:05 PM
What do you mean by : 1.) Air travel: You mean Bradman would have got power to hit more centuries after seeing the Air hostesses. 2.) Quality Physios : Those days physical strain and injuries were also very less compared to today my friend. 3.)Technology : Yeah.. right he world have become out more times if there was 3rd umpire and replays. 4.)Good bats: Sachin still uses the heavy bats which are difficult to play with. You need strong arms and shoulders. Now days..hell since the early ninties itself, bats have become lighter.
Re: Sachin vs Bradman...lets end this debate!
by prash kuchimanchi on Oct 26, 2010 06:47 PM
Fantastic analysis.... SRT also has the credit of changing the versions of games between ODIs and Tests, that and Air travel only means that more back to back matches.... SRT has been in international Cricket for 21 full years now... Most of it has been extremely high scoring... Although Bradman was not a full time cricketer and had to work for a living too... another important point is he played before and after World War 2 which is a great achievement.
Re: Re: Sachin vs Bradman...lets end this debate!
by reeba on Oct 26, 2010 06:06 PM
Bradman played his cricket when there was no limits of bouncers and pitches were not batting friendly plus with helmets.
Re: Re: Re: Sachin vs Bradman...lets end this debate!
by invincible on Oct 26, 2010 07:46 PM
Reeba, just watch some stupid saas bahu TV serials. Cricket is not for you :) You seem to know about cricket more than Ekta Kapoor
