Sachin Tendulkar better than Don Bradman, new study shows

[Jono]

Yeah but who cares? That's not the debate.

 

[Arachnodouche]

He has douche in his name tbf

And you don't have **** in yours, what's your point? I'm not playing **** of the block here, I suggest you stop piping in also.

 

[Furball]

It's also complete bull****. Tendulkar, Ponting and Lara have pretty similar records to the best players of the 1930s who weren't called Don Bradman.

 

[Burgey]

I'm not deprecating Bradman's achievements for his time. Only a fool would do that (which I've been accused of being from time too). But evolution is the only constant - I am positive a Sachin or a Ponting or a Lara, with their contemporary prowess, would've had much better records some 70 years before their time.

What if Bradman had contemporary training and professionalism though? You seem to suggest his average would halve or worse for some reason?

Where do you rate Headley, Hammond and Hobbs then? A bit less than Phil Hughes', Mark Butcher, Carl Hooper or Geoff Marsh's level I suppose?

 

[Spark]

settle down folks, this thread has been ok thus far.

 

[Hurricane]

I'm not deprecating Bradman's achievements for his time. Only a fool would do that (which I've been accused of being from time too). But evolution is the only constant - I am positive a Sachin or a Ponting or a Lara, with their contemporary prowess, would've had much better records some 70 years before their time.

That is saying that FC cricket today is better than test cricket in 30s as most test batsman have similar FC and test match averages.

Maybe this is true - but this is what you are saying.

 

[GotSpin]

Stupidity at its finest. If cricket was so easy back in the day why wasn't everyone in the 90s, or heck, even in the 70s or 80s?

 

[Burgey]

Yeah that's the one part of the argument that's almost never addressed.

Well I've consistently dealt with it whenever some numpty raises this issue.

Pay attention ffs.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Bradman (1928 - 1948)
Hutton (1937 - 1955)
Sobers (1954 - 1974)
Richards (1974 - 1991)
Tendulkar (1989 - 2011)

Arguably the pre-eminent batsmen of their generation, with overlapping careers, and none of them have been able to get anywhere close to the figures that Bradman did.

 

[Jono]

And you don't have **** in yours, what's your point? I'm not playing **** of the block here, I suggest you stop piping in also.

What is **** of the block?

 

[Furball]

Stupidity at its finest. If cricket was so easy back in the day why wasn't everyone in the 90s, or heck, even in the 70s or 80s?

Bradman also held down a full time job. I therefore propose that if he'd grown up in the modern professional era he'd have been able to dedicate all of his time to cricket, and he'd therefore average 150. Thus, it is clear that Bradman is 3 times the player Tendulkar is.

Discuss.

 

[Arachnodouche]

What if Bradman had contemporary training and professionalism though? You seem to suggest his average would halve or worse for some reason?

Where do you rate Headley, Hammond and Hobbs then? A bit less than Phil Hughes', Mark Butcher, Carl Hooper or Geoff Marsh's level I suppose?

Personally speaking, if you are to compare players from different eras, I prefer taking the player under the scanner - whole & soul - and place him in the era, past or future, and then imagine how he would've fared then. So if you're taking a Lara (I'm not even saying Sachin; I don't rate him on the level of a Lara), you take his proven skills, and then place them in the earlier age with its own trends and quirks. And vice versa for a player from the olden times. IMO, that's more interesting than simply relying on averages and numerical tidbits; Samaraweera averages over 50 doesn't he? For what joy?

 

[ganeshran]

How DGB would have fared in the modern era or how SRT, Lara, Ponting would have done in the 30s is a pretty arbitrary argument. There are so many variables involved that it can be used to frame arguments for both sides.

SRT, Lara and co wouldnt have access to better infrastructure and support structures

DGB would have had to play in an era of more professional cricketers than his days (on an absolute basis). Bowlers also have more resources to devise gameplan against a star player of the opposite side.

 

[Ruckus]

What is **** of the block?

who the **** knows

 

[GotSpin]

How DGB would have fared in the modern era or how SRT, Lara, Ponting would have done in the 30s is a pretty arbitrary argument. There are so many variables involved that it can be used to frame arguments for both sides.

SRT, Lara and co wouldnt have access to better infrastructure and support structures

DGB would have had to play in an era of more professional cricketers than his days (on an absolute basis). Bowlers also have more resources to devise gameplan against a star player of the opposite side.

Just as batsmen can use said resources to plug holes in their techniques and figure out bowlers. Its not one way traffic

 

[Top_Cat]

But people seem to forget Sobers debuted less than a decade after Bradman. Played against many of Bradman's 48 side.

Not to mention he was cod ordinary against those guys until he ripped an easy triple against a crocked Pakistan attack. Was clearly a decline in the quality of bowling in the 60's, one of the pre-eminent spinners of the time was picked with a FC average in the 40's.

 

[ganeshran]

What is **** of the block?

Urban dictionary

The one who struts his stuff the most in a given vicinity

Phil has had the most girlfriends and the most financial independence amongst his peers. Clearly he is **** of the block.

 

[Burgey]

Personally speaking, if you are to compare players from different eras, I prefer taking the player under the scanner - whole & soul - and place him in the era, past or future, and then imagine how he would've fared then. So if you're taking a Lara (I'm not even saying Sachin; I don't rate him on the level of a Lara), you take his proven skills, and then place them in the earlier age with its own trends and quirks. And vice versa for a player from the olden times. IMO, that's more interesting than simply relying on averages and numerical tidbits; Samaraweera averages over 50 doesn't he? For what joy?

I'm sure he gets a lot of joy out of it.

 

[ganeshran]

Just as batsmen can use said resources to plug holes in their techniques and figure out bowlers. Its not one way traffic

That was exactly my point. Predicting how a player would do in the different era can be used to frame arguments for both sides of the debate.

 

[Hurricane]

What is **** of the block?

The one who struts his stuff the most in a given vicinity. from urban dictionary.