I had relegated Bradman to a quality behind the top modern batsmen, noting that he had played 95% of his tests against England..and only a smattering against Indian the west indies and RSA...that he had not dealt with the exactions of travel and conditions the world over and the deleterious impact that has on skill and emotional strength.
yet it dawned on me recently that between 1928 and 1950 when west indies beat england in england for the first time..that england was the best team in the world..and that title devolved between the Oz and english all through those generations.
west indies, India which got test status in the late 1940', South Africa and Pakistan could not have and would not have beaten either of england and Oz in those days anyway...no matter where the games were played. there was a great quality disparity between the the Oz and english and the rest of the world.
also Bradman Played 52 tests matches and especially for those days that was a lot of matches.. he maintained his averages over 52 games.
so I cannot detract from his accepted quality on those grounds as I have before. I have given them back, re-registered Bradman as #1 but am still looking to pull him down but with more validity next time
Bradman and Greatness
-
mapoui2
- Posts: 2106
- Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:19 pm
AFRO 'livin' an' larnin' now! 
well I guess yuh right Bally. things do change
anyway..travel by old time boats over the pacific, up the Suez , up the Meditarranean and Atlantic could not have been sweet dreams in those days anyway. that mus' have had its challenges too
well I guess yuh right Bally. things do change
anyway..travel by old time boats over the pacific, up the Suez , up the Meditarranean and Atlantic could not have been sweet dreams in those days anyway. that mus' have had its challenges too
Last edited by mapoui2 on Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Rev
- Posts: 1248
- Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 9:45 am
Mappy:mapoui2 wrote: so I cannot detract from his accepted quality on those grounds as I have before. I have given them back, re-registered Bradman as #1 but am still looking to pull him down but with more validity next time
* Good post!
* Listen! There is no such thing as the best batsman of all time.
* Bradman was undoubtedly the best and greatest batsman of his era---1928-1948.
* Just like Sobers was the greatest of his era---1954-1971.
* What no one can deny is Bradman put up some extraordinary numbers----he averaged 99.94 in 52 tests.
* That 99.94 average will never be matched---no batsman has ever come close or will ever come close.
* Does that 99.94 average make Bradman the best of all time ? Well, it surely makes him the most talked about batsman of all time. 100 years from now---fans will still be talking about Bradman.
Rev
-
mapoui2
- Posts: 2106
- Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:19 pm
yes..that average man. if you making jokes in front of a mike you wont score that high..pitching marbles...doing anything at all 99 is impossible
so what is it.... a freak of nature?
except it was a human being doing it..and not one and done but over 52 games.
that 99:94 will make everybody pause man...everybody! even me, as I read this post. and I know that average for a very long time now
so what is it.... a freak of nature?
except it was a human being doing it..and not one and done but over 52 games.
that 99:94 will make everybody pause man...everybody! even me, as I read this post. and I know that average for a very long time now