CW Ranks the Batsmen

[fredfertang]

You've been reading "Brave New World" again haven't you?

 

[SJS]

You've been reading "Brave New World" again haven't you?

Actually I haven't read it. I needed a google search just now to learn about Huxley's book. I am an ignoramus

 

[fredfertang]

I am an ignoramus

I think not

 

[SJS]

I think not

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Actually I haven't read it. I needed a google search just now to learn about Huxley's book.

 

[zaremba]

A famous chart showing the career batting averages of everyone who's played Test cricket (I think it excludes those still playing) as at 31.12.08. Bradman is, of course, on the extreme right at 99.94.

 

[weldone]

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Clyde Walcott

Wanted Gavaskar to win this over Sutcliffe, so voted for him. Otherwise Walcott (or Graeme Pollock?) would have been my primary vote.

Just reminding voters here that Walcott, Weekes, Steve Waugh are some batsmen who are not getting any votes and who deserve to be in the top 25, definitely (besides those who are getting votes).

 

[rivera213]

Its easy to deny history after all there are those who deny the holocaust and that took place (if it did) a decade after Bradman made his debut. The beauty of such denials is that if you do it long enough and often enough, you will find enough people who are too intellectually lazy to find out for themselves whether the denial stands the an objective and thoughtful scrutiny. Again we have millions who now believe the holocaust never took place just as there are millions who believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy hatched in the USA by the Jews.

I met Mr Cricket-Loving-Ahmedi-Nijad the other day and our discussion ran something like this . . . .

CLAN : Bradman never existed. What proof do you have of there ever being a person of that name?

SJS : Well, sir, someone by that name did and many of us have seen pictures and movies and even live telecast of an old man supposed to be of that name and a player from Australia so we have to assume that much is true.

CLAN : How do we know he is the guy who played for Australia ?

SJS : Well there are those who played with and against him who lived like him beyond his playing days, kept in touch with him and were seen with him on many occasions and in pictures and videos so unless we assume all of them are a part of a conspiracy, we would have to concede this old man was the same cricketer.

CLAN : Aha ! So there are those who actually saw him play? What do they think of him a batsman?

SJS : Well, without a single exception all of them think he is the greatest batsmen they ever saw.

CLAN : That doesn't prove a thing. Who else did they see? What do they know of players in the 70's ? What do they know of Sobers, Pollock, Viv Richards, Boycott and Gavaskar?

SJS : Well, many of them have written extensively on the game till well into the 70's and beyond and they continue to maintain their opinion on Bradman's supremacy over all others by a massive distance. Cricketer writers like Fingleton (1908 - 1981) , Bailey (1923 - ), Bedser(1918 - ), O'Reilly (1905 - 1992), Hutton (1916 - 1990), Miller (1919-2004) and Lindwall (1921-1996) come readily to mind. There are many others too.

CLAN : Ha! What do these ignoramuses know of cricket? They aren't even members of any cricket forum ?​

SJS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ​

I'm not denying history, just the credability of people who never saw Bradman saying he's the best ever.

He may very welll have been the best ever, or "only" as good as the best batsmen from every era, not necessarily BETTER than all of those like some "pundits" and "experts" say he was.

It's simply impossible to compare Bradman to Sobers to B.Richards to Tendulkar but people who never saw the Don bat extensively take stats and the words (aka OPINIONS) of journalists as gospel.

I've seen footage of the Don and no doubt he had all the attriibutes to be a top batsman in any era, but to say he is without question THE best of ANY era is stupid IMHO.

 

[rivera213]

A famout chart showing the career batting averages of everyone who's played Test cricket (I think it excludes those still playing) as at 31.12.08. Bradman is, of course, on the extreme right at 99.94.

You do realise that chart is meaningless since they didn't all play in the same era, right?

 

[fredfertang]

You do realise that chart is meaningless since they didn't all play in the same era, right?

How come that makes it meaningless ?

 

[Indipper]

Rivera, are you by any chance interested in history?

 

[zaremba]

You do realise that chart is meaningless since they didn't all play in the same era, right?

It includes all of Don Bradman's contemporaries.

So no, I don't realise that it's meaningless. You'll have to explain for me why it is.

 

[zaremba]

Sorry, I've just realised that you may be joking, Rivera. Apologies if you are and I've missed it.

 

[Indipper]

I dread the day when people look at pictures/descriptions/skeletons of tigers and the like and say "Surely those must be fake. No cat could ever have been that big!"

 

[adharcric]

Vote for #13 batsman of all-time

Gavaskar's got this one.

1. Don Bradman
2. Jack Hobbs
3. Garry Sobers
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Viv Richards
6. WG Grace
7. Wally Hammond
8. Brian Lara
9. Greg Chappell
10. Len Hutton
11. George Headley
12. Sunil Gavaskar

The vote for the #13 batsman of all-time begins now.

 

[pasag]

Reckon it's time Ponting got in.

Ponting.

 

[Fusion]

Sutcliffe
Miandad

 

[BoyBrumby]

1) KS Ranjitsinhji
2) H Sutcliffe

Don't want to sound like the broken record, but think it's criminal Ranji isn't getting more support. Herb the only man other than Sir Donald to end with over 4000 test runs at over 60, which must count for something. Can only think his lack of a second initial has irked the southern snobs.

Not giving up yet.

Once again, Mr Adjudicator.

A statistical nudge to help people come to the correct choices, perhaps?

Best test averages in the 1890s.

Most test runs 1920s.

Ranji averages fully nine runs more per innings than any of his peers & over 50 in a decade noted for the treachery of its pitches; whereas Sutcliffe scored more runs than any of Hobbs, Hammond, Hendren, etc in the 1920s. Both of the players I've been advocating compare pretty favourably with their peers which, I've always believed, is the most one can ask of any sportspersons.

 

[silentstriker]

Ranji
Sutcliffe

Convinced. Will vote for Weekes, Barrington, Trumper, Boycott, Ponting and Miandad next, in that order.

 

[silentstriker]

Oh, and definitely will throw in Inzamam soon after too, along with a few others.