How good would Bradman have been at ODIs?

[abmk]

I purposely said that his strike rate is 29.7 and I said it before aswell, so that all the Bradman fans can go and check statsguru and say that he had a strike rate of around 58, and the truth is that strike rate wasn't taken seriously at that time nor was it recorded properly, so you can never find out his true strike rate.
And that was the reason why the most of the bowlers of that era and the eras before it had a great economy rate , the number of balls bowled or played weren't recorded properly.

Records | Test matches | Bowling records | Best career bowling average | ESPN Cricinfo

So assuming that Bradman would have been effective in ODIs wouldn't be right.

I gave you the benefit of doubt first time around, but this is totally clueless.

Firstly most of the scorecards in Bradman's day had no of balls recorded ...

Secondly most of the top bowlers in that list are *NOT* from bradman's era ..

 

[Spikey]

Remind me how many players have scored 300 runs in a day of test cricket.

 

[Burgey]

I purposely said that his strike rate is 29.7 and I said it before aswell, so that all the Bradman fans can go and check statsguru and say that he had a strike rate of around 58, and the truth is that strike rate wasn't taken seriously at that time nor was it recorded properly, so you can never find out his true strike rate.
And that was the reason why the most of the bowlers of that era and the eras before it had a great economy rate and Strike Rate , the number of balls bowled or played weren't recorded properly.

Records | Test matches | Bowling records | Best career strike rate | ESPN Cricinfo

Records | Test matches | Bowling records | Best career economy rate | ESPN Cricinfo

So assuming that Bradman would have been effective in ODIs wouldn't be right.

Again we invite you to just say Cochlear > Bradman then bugger off and be done with it.

 

[ganeshran]

There is no way to scientifically predict Bradman's performance in the modern era in ODIs. Too many variables.

 

[smash84]

why does the word scientifically have to be used everywhere?

 

[Jono]

Of course he would have.

Sledger you get way too much enjoyment from trolling Indian posters here in CC though. Some sort of fetish.

 

[Furball]

I purposely said that his strike rate is 29.7 and I said it before aswell, so that all the Bradman fans can go and check statsguru and say that he had a strike rate of around 58, and the truth is that strike rate wasn't taken seriously at that time nor was it recorded properly, so you can never find out his true strike rate.
And that was the reason why the most of the bowlers of that era and the eras before it had a great economy rate and Strike Rate , the number of balls bowled or played weren't recorded properly.

Records | Test matches | Bowling records | Best career strike rate | ESPN Cricinfo

Records | Test matches | Bowling records | Best career economy rate | ESPN Cricinfo

So assuming that Bradman would have been effective in ODIs wouldn't be right.

I don't see how any of what you've posted is at relevant. Bradman has scored 300 runs in a day, something Sehwag has never managed. I dard say Bradman would have adapted to ODI cricket quite easily.

 

[Flem274*]

Remind me how many players have scored 300 runs in a day of test cricket.

I should have closed the thread after this post.

 

[ganeshran]

why does the word scientifically have to be used everywhere?

Because the other sort of prediction is what based on gut feeling and personal opinion - which isnt scientific.

 

[Burgey]

Because the other sort of prediction is what based on gut feeling and personal opinion - which isnt scientific.

If you have enough data to tell what will happen to a level of scientific proof, you don't have a prediction, you Jane an extrapolation don't you?

 

[andruid]

I'm gonna say he'd average more than Frank Worrel if he had played One Day International

 

[_Ed_]

My favourite gif yet.

 

[ankitj]

Karan - If you keep repeating it, it won't become true. Bradman was a level above any of your idols. Live with it.

 

[Furball]

My favourite gif yet.

 

[GotSpin]

Haha what a thread.

 

[Cabinet96]

Remind me how many players have scored 300 runs in a day of test cricket.

My exact thoughts when seeing the thread. All great players can adjust, Bradman wouldn't have been an exception IMO.

 

[Nate]

sledger316!

 

[Turbinator]

Honestly speaking, Bradman would've been quite poor had he played ODIs. In fact, had he been playing in today's era, he'd go largely unnoticed. Darren Sammy and Mithun would definitely exploit his weakness against the moving ball, and inability to play bounce.

 

[Burgey]

Lol

 

[juro]

I doubt he would have been very good at ODI cricket. He would have been in his 60s by the time it came about...

He would have been even worse at T20s!