• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

110 years ago today...

OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
sledger said:
Yeah, there's often a debate about who the best batsman is, but there is no denying that he just about shades it. Lara unlucky to come in second.
Click to expand...
Good to see you finally came to your senses and agree Sachin was the greatest batsman ever.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
trundler said:
Headley mostly faced 2nd string English attacks. Touring sides to the Caribbean weren't anywhere close to full strength. Bradman, on the other hand, had to face Bodyline devised especially to curb his run scoring. Huge difference there. Bradman's dominance is still unparalleled.

I'd say you're not rating all rounders properly. All rounders have to be compared with other all-rounders relatively. You can't just add up their individual disciplines. Sobers is the greatest all rounder of all time no doubt but I wouldn't say he's Bradmanesquely better than Imran, or Miller.
Click to expand...
Whilst I dont think Headley is newhere close to bradman the English attacks Headley faced were nowhere as dire as the South African or Indian attacks that the don faced. Also , though he failed Headley also did face off against the best team of his time (Australia) given all that and the fact that he never faced any minnows (particularly at home) I give him lots of kudos.
 
A

AndrewB

International Vice-Captain
To say Headley "failed" in Australia is harsh - he played one series there, aged 21; he failed in the 1st Test, in the 2nd Test WI were caught on a sticky wicket, in the last 3 Tests he averaged 62. (They weren't especially high scoring matches; Bradman averaged over 100, but no-one else on either side, other than Headley, averaged over 50).
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Despite Sir Garry's status as the greatest pre-Kallisball allrounder, he is never in the sporting GOAT discussions with the likes of Pele, Bolt, Nicklaus, Federer, Jordan etc., while Bradman is often mentioned as a contender.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
AndrewB said:
To say Headley "failed" in Australia is harsh - he played one series there, aged 21; he failed in the 1st Test, in the 2nd Test WI were caught on a sticky wicket, in the last 3 Tests he averaged 62. (They weren't especially high scoring matches; Bradman averaged over 100, but no-one else on either side, other than Headley, averaged over 50).
Click to expand...
Actually Bradman averaged 70 odd.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
Fuller Pilch said:
Despite Sir Garry's status as the greatest pre-Kallisball allrounder, he is never in the sporting GOAT discussions with the likes of Pele, Bolt, Nicklaus, Federer, Jordan etc., while Bradman is often mentioned as a contender.
Click to expand...
Afaic Bradman is in his own category relative to other sportsmen. Only person remotely close would've been Wilt b4 the nba literally created rules to curtail his dominance
 
the big bambino

the big bambino

International Captain
Slifer said:
Whilst I dont think Headley is newhere close to bradman the English attacks Headley faced were nowhere as dire as the South African or Indian attacks that the don faced.
Click to expand...
The SA team in Bradman's time is absurdly underrated. The SA attack Bradman specifically faced, while not great was closer to that description in standard than to dire. Bell, Quinn, Vincent and McMillan had career averages btwn 31 and 34. Those figures are actually pretty good as they played almost exclusively against Eng and Aus and then Bradman as a degree of difficulty on top of that. They never had the prolonged opportunity of bowling to sides of a lower standard to ameliorate their averages. However you can get some idea how much their averages would have improved when looking at their couple of games in NZ. Quinn and McMillan averaged 16 and 20 against that side so its reasonable to assume their averages would have settled in the late 20s if they had more matches against lesser sides. The SA team was certainly owned by Australia at the time but I think that can be explained by the fact we had exactly the type of bowlers SA traditionally dislikes playing. SA beat Eng twice in 5 test series though so they can't be classed as minnows. The Indian attack was dire though.
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Bradman was a lie convicted by the liberal media to show that the public were able to swallow massive lies in an attempt to curb the rise of fascism during the great depression. Unfortunately their work was cut short due to the outbreak of WW2 but they restarted the experiment after the war to save face.

There is no way any person could score that many runs that quickly against all opposition.
 
Pap Finn Keighl

Pap Finn Keighl

International Debutant
trundler said:
Haha you really do like arbitrarily slicing careers to argue for vastly inferior players.
Click to expand...
1.What was my argument?

2.Vastly inferior..? Sure.. Headly is.. Compared to Bradman.
Kapil the Batsman is not.. Compared to Imran.. Kapil was the Superior batsman actually. If you are referring to that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top