Sir Bradman was a great cricketer in his own right, and so is Sachin in contemporary cricket. It is both unfair and unwise to compare the two who played the game in different eras under very different circumstances. It would be better if both cricketers (all sportsmen, in fact) and spectators enjoy the sport than chase records to satiate their ego. It one happens to create a record in the process of playing and entertaining the spectators paying for watching them, it's a bonus.
Does the author has any sense of what he is writing ? The writer has written "Instead of his unmatched average of 99, the late Sir Don Bradman saw himself scoring at just 70 in the modern times."
On being asked how much he thought he would have averaged today ,Don said 70 , and he meant that even at the age of 90 , he would have scored at an average of 70 , and that was said in good humour by him.
Some senseless people come and write such articles
Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's era, 70 now
by Azzrooddin on Oct 30, 2010 07:09 PM
ok, this is exactly this article is meant for. Engaging Indians into unnecessary discussion on trivial issues, before Asiads. Bradman is nonentity in world of sports. What is the meaning of averages when fielders in those era would not even bend down to pick the ball? Please support our atheletes who are in China right now.
Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's era, 70 now
by Samsung on Oct 30, 2010 07:13 PM
Good Point. But how many have averaged around 99 and see how many have averaged around 54. Those days ptiches were not covered. No helmets ho shin guard lighter pads lighter gloves etc
Re: Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's era, 70 now
by sachin khatri on Oct 30, 2010 07:55 PM
It is true that pitches were uncovered in those days. but they some of the best batting pitches of all time. If a batsman could negotiate the first hour of the morning, it was full of runs afterward. Moreover, it was a taboo to ball short pitched stuff and on the body. Today's batsmen face this kind of bowling all the time. In fact, 70's & 80's were the most difficult times for batsmen because west indies bowlers used to ball a lot of short pitched stuff and there was no restriction on bouncers. That is why helmets & guards came in to use. Now a days, only two bouncers can be bowled per over in tests. The only series bradman faced short pitched stuff, he averaged 56.15, about same as a modern batsman. Also, he played only in england and australia i.e. about 7 or 8 grounds for all his tests & first class cricket. So, he was playing in a very limited set of conditions. While a modern batsman may have played on about 30 to 50 grounds in about 12 countries around the globe.
Re: Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's era, 70 now
by sachin khatri on Oct 30, 2010 07:56 PM
It is true that pitches were uncovered in those days. but they some of the best batting pitches of all time. If a batsman could negotiate the first hour of the morning, it was full of runs afterward. Moreover, it was a taboo to ball short pitched stuff and on the body. Today's batsmen face this kind of bowling all the time. In fact, 70's & 80's were the most difficult times for batsmen because west indies bowlers used to ball a lot of short pitched stuff and there was no restriction on bouncers. That is why helmets & guards came in to use. Now a days, only two bouncers can be bowled per over in tests. The only series bradman faced short pitched stuff, he averaged 56.15, about same as a modern batsman. Also, he played only in england and australia i.e. about 7 or 8 grounds for all his tests & first class cricket. So, he was playing in a very limited set of conditions. While a modern batsman may have played on about 30 to 50 grounds in about 12 countries around the globe.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's era, 70
by vikas bhardwaj on Oct 30, 2010 08:13 PM
The fastest bowlers ever produced were from the times of Bradman . Some people are in so much adulation of Tendulkar , that they are not just willing to look beyong him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's era,
by sachin khatri on Oct 30, 2010 08:46 PM
r u serious? fastest bowlers of the history have been in 1970's & 1990's. Most of the bowlers of bradman era didn't even have proper action, let alone speed. Only larwood, tate and bedser were decent fast medium bowlers, not even fast when compared to thompsons, akhtars, lee, holdings, marshals & bonds.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman's
by Samsung on Oct 30, 2010 08:53 PM
Average of around 55 - a lot of them have Sachin, dravid, ponting, richards, chappel etc. How many have average around 99 ? In those days people travel more than 2 months to reach then play matches. They did not have videos to perfect techniques. One more thing, flat pitches in Austrial and England are more livelier than the ones in India pakistan and Srilanka.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wrong Stats: Average of 99 in Bradman
by sachin khatri on Oct 30, 2010 09:07 PM
In those days, most of them were real flat ones.If you have watched the clips of that era, most of the bowlers were pedestrians. The batsmen were even more so. In fact bradman was the pioneer of the modern batting technique. That is why he was so successful. The fielding standards were poor. Most of them didn't even try to chase a ball once it passed them. Bowlers were not allowed to ball bouncers at body. If you have watched the clips, most of the short pitched balls didn't rise above waist level. Most of Bradman's pull shots are from waist level and below. He had to sometimes go real low to play those cross batted shots. That means, the pitches were not bouncy and very comfortable to play on. Any way, I have also read these opinions in the news articles of that era published in some memoirs. Also, batsmen of that era did not have to contend with reverse swing bowling and white ball which is quite different from red ball.
