Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
That's an opinion with no support other than your arse.I do realise, but given how stratospheric his average is it's probably inflated beyond its "genuine" value.
That's an opinion with no support other than your arse.I do realise, but given how stratospheric his average is it's probably inflated beyond its "genuine" value.
Pretty sure it makes statistical sense, so I believe it extends to the upper thighs tooThat's an opinion with no support other than your arse.
No it doesn't.Pretty sure it makes statistical sense
'Upper thigh' is a euphemism for arse, so you're agreeing with Starfighter.Pretty sure it makes statistical sense, so I believe it extends to the upper thighs too
Thanks for that.No it doesn't.
No, it doesn't. You're basing it purely on the fact that you don't believe he could have been that good, so you're rounding his average down when rounding it up would be equally as viablePretty sure it makes statistical sense, so I believe it extends to the upper thighs too
Again, the point is for the last time, you can't arbitrarily lower Bradman's average by 20-25% and not do the same for people like Hutton and Hammond who played around the same time is that better??If his career were simmed 1000 times, I think his average test average would be around 95 rather than 100.
Man, saying Hobbs, Bradman, and Hutton are of the same general era and thus must be treated the exact same as each other is just weird. Logically, you seem to think that Viv and Younis Khan are of the same general era. Should they therefore be treated equivalently, and Younis Khan rated above Viv due to his superior average? Not unless you're trundler.
Because he played in the most batting friendly era and before there were true fast bowlers.Yeh I just don’t understand this. Do you mean if he played in the modern era or what? He WAS a 99 averaging batsman in an era where the other best batsmen averaged 50 with a few averaging a bit more. Same as today
And he also played on uncovered pitches and with far smaller bats than current players (amongst other factors).Because he played in the most batting friendly era and before there were true fast bowlers.
Hey this has Hill above Trumper too woo.I've actually got his average doing him a disservice:
Standardised Averages - updated 15/8/2019
docs.google.com
Bradman's record on uncovered pitches are pisspoor compared to other oldies like Headley, Hobbs and Hammond.And he also played on uncovered pitches and with far smaller bats than current players (amongst other factors).
Could swear we’ve had this crap ass circular argument before.
If you're adjusting for era adjust blokes he played against as well. Adjust the likes of Hammond and Hutton.You know what's a worse argument than my perceived underrating of Sir Braddles? Not adjusting for era. Like, ffs.
I always called Hammond overrated. As for Hutton he did played against quality bowlers like Lindwall, Miller and Davidson. So not a fair comparison.If you're adjusting for era adjust blokes he played against as well. Adjust the likes of Hammond and Hutton.
It is fair because he overlapped with the Don ie they are from similar eras. And Bradman averaged 56 in bodyline where Hammond and Sutcliffe averaged less. Think about that. I'm not saying you can't adjust for eras but what you can't or shouldn't do is adjust for one man by some arbitrary percentage and not do the same for players from his era: Hammond, Hutton, Sutcliffe (Sutcliffe played extensively with Hobbs fwiw).I always called Hammond overrated. As for Hutton he did played against quality bowlers like Lindwall, Miller and Davidson. So not a fair comparison.
What was Sutcliffe average in that series?It is fair because he overlapped with the Don ie they are from similar eras. And Bradman averaged 56 in bodyline where Hammond and Sutcliffe averaged less. Think about that.
55. But he wasn't facing Bodyline bowling!!What was Sutcliffe average in that series?
I forgot Grimmett and O’Reilly weren’t quality bowlers.I always called Hammond overrated. As for Hutton he did played against quality bowlers like Lindwall, Miller and Davidson. So not a fair comparison.
Tbh I meant Kohli but all g.The point being you can down grade Bradman’s average without doing the same to his near contemporaries.