Worlds greatest team

[WindieWeathers]

That's why Bradman was so hard to get out. His tactic was to reduce the opposition's chances in getting him out. This is just another case of you assuming something without contextual knowledge.

"The greatest of all time" doesn't have to be scared to take risks, he uses his TALENT to do exactly what he wants to do without boundaries, just like Sir Gary did HERE .

 

[Spark]

Well clearly i'm not the only one using "imagination" as when it comes to the level of opposition Bradman faced it seems like you believe he took on "world greats"!! , you've got no evidence concerning the fielding, the bowlers he faced where decent but not outstanding and there's still no word on how the pitches were like back then but you can keep dreaming about Bradman being some kind of "god like figure" if you wish.

You are missing the point. No, they were not the best bowlers the world has ever seen. They may or may not have been the best fielders ever (and how does one judge the overall quality of the fielding anyway?). It's not just that he was good, it's that he was so much better than everyone else! Statistically, he is the greatest exponent of any major ball game in history by a huge margin.

And I'm pretty sure Bradman did whatever he damn well pleased when he scored 300 in a day, TBF.

 

[Ikki]

"The greatest of all time" doesn't have to be scared to take risks, he uses his TALENT to do exactly what he wants to do without boundaries, just like Sir Gary did HERE .

...why did I even think you had a jot of sense in you?

 

[WindieWeathers]

...why did I even think you had a jot of sense in you?

And here we have the first signs of someone losing a debate, they get "personal" .

 

[Spark]

"The greatest of all time" doesn't have to be scared to take risks, he uses his TALENT to do exactly what he wants to do without boundaries, just like Sir Gary did HERE .

By this logic Yusuf Pathan is the greatest batsman in world cricket.

 

[Ikki]

Funny enough this discussion kinda relates to a new Cricinfo article: Cricket's turning points: Don Bradman | Highlights | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

 

[GotSpin]

"The greatest of all time" doesn't have to be scared to take risks, he uses his TALENT to do exactly what he wants to do without boundaries, just like Sir Gary did HERE .

Why would Bradman want to risk getting caught by hitting in the air when he could find gaps in the field extremely easily

 

[WindieWeathers]

You are missing the point. No, they were not the best bowlers the world has ever seen. They may or may not have been the best fielders ever (and how does one judge the overall quality of the fielding anyway?). It's not just that he was good, it's that he was so much better than everyone else! Statistically, he is the greatest exponent of any major ball game in history by a huge margin.

And I'm pretty sure Bradman did whatever he damn well pleased when he scored 300 in a day, TBF.

And you're missing the point that things were a lot different back then and the lack of evidence regarding the quality of opposition he faced means questions must be asked, the fact that he was "so much better" then the people he played with or against makes little difference if the bowling and fielding were not up to par, many of the all time greats like Lara, Tendulker etc would have had a field day too if they were playing Zimbabwe and Bang every week.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Sparks and G-S i'm not saying Bradman should have been gung ho, i'm saying a true great DOESN'T LIMIT HIMSELF to hitting five or six 6's in his ENTIRE CAREER, that's what i'm saying, Sobers could play a safe innings or destory someone like in the vid i posted, IT WAS HIS CHOICE, Bradman on the other hand seems to have stuck to one gear only.

 

[Matt79]

This thread

 

[GotSpin]

And you're missing the point that things were a lot different back then and the lack of evidence regarding the quality of opposition he faced means questions must be asked, the fact that he was "so much better" then the people he played with or against makes little difference if the bowling and fielding were not up to par, many of the all time greats like Lara, Tendulker etc would have had a field day too if they were playing Zimbabwe and Bang every week.

....

So many times have I asked you to individual point out why the bowlers I've listed are not as good as any other era. But you continue to make generalisations which tends to suggest you're not very well read in the time period

 

[Spark]

And you're missing the point that things were a lot different back then and the lack of evidence regarding the quality of opposition he faced means questions must be asked, the fact that he was "so much better" then the people he played with or against makes little difference if the bowling and fielding were not up to par, many of the all time greats like Lara, Tendulker etc would have had a field day too if they were playing Zimbabwe and Bang every week.

But the other batsmen in his team were playing exactly the same opponents! Why does your logic apply only to one player?

This thread

Oh trust me I've seen worse than this

 

[GotSpin]

Sparks and G-S i'm not saying Bradman should have been gung ho, i'm saying a true great DOESN'T LIMIT HIMSELF to hitting five or six 6's in his ENTIRE CAREER, that's what i'm saying, Sobers could play a safe innings or destory someone like in the vid i posted, IT WAS HIS CHOICE, Bradman on the other hand seems to have stuck to one gear only.

You do realise that Bradman has been recognised as a extremely fast scorer.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Why would Bradman want to risk getting caught by hitting in the air when he could find gaps in the field extremely easily

Which is why there's question marks over the quality of the fielding!! .

 

[Howsie]

Just so I have this right, it's your opinion that;

1) The greatest Windies side > any other teams greatest side

2) The current Windies Test side is the best outside the big 3 of Aust, India & Eng &;

3) Sobers is the greatest cricketer of all time, ahead of Bradman

Correct?

Just incase some people missed this

 

[99*]

And you're missing the point that things were a lot different back then and the lack of evidence regarding the quality of opposition he faced means questions must be asked, the fact that he was "so much better" then the people he played with or against makes little difference if the bowling and fielding were not up to par, many of the all time greats like Lara, Tendulker etc would have had a field day too if they were playing Zimbabwe and Bang every week.

But what proof do you have that the England side during Bradman's time is comparible to the Zimbabwe and Bangadesh sides of today? In any aspect of their cricketing skills?

And the fact there is a lack of evidence about them (iyo), doesn't that also mean you can not make any claims about how poor they were?

 

[Howsie]

Which is why there's question marks over the quality of the fielding!! .

Why do you keep bringing up the standard of fielding again? Going by some of your logic in this thread who is to say the fielding wasn't the best crickets ever seen during Bradman's era?

 

[Ikki]

FTR, Bradman has had an estimated SR of 59 and Sobers of 54.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Tbh i can't be bothered going over the same arguments over and over again, it's been done to death now, if people believe Bradman is the "greatest of all time" then good for them, i along with many other people don't agree, it's nothing to cry over.

 

[Ikki]

You and the troll are many people? Not great company you're in mate.