• 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.

Don Bradman vs Garry Sobers

Who is the better test cricketer?

  • Total voters
    35
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
shortpitched713 said:
I think it is more likely to be 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. Being all down to a supernatural (bordering on magical) level of skill of the individual seems to me less likely.
Click to expand...
Again, I provided ample facts and don't want to rinse and repeat really....
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
subshakerz said:
How much would he average then?
Click to expand...
I don't know....

What I do know is that bowling historically has impacted batting, more than batting has impacted bowling. I also know that the one series he faced aggressive shirt stuff his average was halved.

I'm guessing 60's, 70's but who knows.
 
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
kyear2 said:
I don't know....

What I do know is that bowling historically has impacted batting, more than batting has impacted bowling. I also know that the one series he faced aggressive shirt stuff his average was halved.

I'm guessing 60's, 70's but who knows.
Click to expand...
He averaged 56 facing those aggressive short stuff out of the blue, without any prior notice. Modern batsmen faced the same hostile stuff yes, but also got opportunities to acclimatize to it about a million times. Imo, Bradman would have adapted his game too to stand head and shoulders above him contemporaries in the modern era in a similar way that he did in his era.
 
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
Yeah. He almost averages as much as Sobers while facing body line on those wickets.

And Sobers average is flattered by his bashing of India. His record against other teams isn't that great (by ATG standards). And even while scoring against India, he still doesn't average as much against them as Bradman did in his whole career.
 
P

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
Swap Bradmans career into Sobers and there is no chance on earth Bradman doesn’t average at least mid 80s in those 93 matches. Those Ind, Pak, Nz teams would never get him out and the bowling from Australia, England wasn’t anything ATG either.

We may actually see Bradman average over 100. Bradman probably averages 150 against those Ind, Pak team and only god knows what he would do to Nz in those 12 matches. The game didn’t change in those 6 years that a guy averaging 100 would go down to 70. That’s nonsense.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
OverratedSanity said:
Sobers low key has a pretty unimpressive away record for an ATG.
Click to expand...
Not so sure actually. 46 in Australia, 53 in England, 99 in India, the rest is irrelevant.

In Australia he has one good series and one very good series, plus his 254 late career, awesome knock.

In England, he has two poor series, one decent series and two awesome series.

Overall, nothing wrong away.

It is true, he was a homebasher somewhat.
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
subshakerz said:
Not so sure actually. 46 in Australia, 53 in England, 99 in India, the rest is irrelevant.

In Australia he has one good series and one very good series, plus his 254 late career, awesome knock.

In England, he has two poor series, one decent series and two awesome series.

Overall, nothing wrong away.

It is true, he was a homebasher somewhat.
Click to expand...
Just because you suck against relatively weak teams doesn’t make it irrelevant. You give him credit for his performance in India but then his performances in NZ and Pakistan “don’t matter”. Does his 3 consecutive tons (including 365*) just one year earlier against Pakistan just not matter now too?
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Coronis said:
Just because you suck against relatively weak teams doesn’t make it irrelevant. You give him credit for his performance in India but then his performances in NZ and Pakistan “don’t matter”. Does his 3 consecutive tons (including 365*) just one year earlier against Pakistan just not matter now too?
Click to expand...
Yes, because to me if you are a minnow side like NZ at that time, I consider those runs irrelevant. Pakistan was only 2-3 tests away, that's why I ignore it, but they weren't a minnow.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Yes, because to me if you are a minnow side like NZ at that time, I consider those runs irrelevant. Pakistan was only 2-3 tests away, that's why I ignore it, but they weren't a minnow.
Click to expand...
Arguably the NZ team had a better bowling at home than both India and Pakistan when Sobers played them. Definitely weren't much worse than those two.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Pakistan has a worldclass pacer in Mahmood so I don't think so. India had Gupte.
Click to expand...
Only one bowler isn't enough though. Especially Indian pacers were a sob story and Pak also was too dependent on Fazal and to an extent Khan Mohammed. New Zealand had Bruce Taylor in the latter half and had Dick Motz, Richard Collinge, etc I believe. Quality pacers definitely.
 
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
subshakerz said:
Yes, because to me if you are a minnow side like NZ at that time, I consider those runs irrelevant. Pakistan was only 2-3 tests away, that's why I ignore it, but they weren't a minnow.
Click to expand...
NZ did draw the 1968-69 series against WI 1-1 in which Sobers was poor.

A couple of points to note.

When Sobers toured NZ in 1955-56, he was a teenager and wasn't all that good in his early days. He barely performed against anyone at that age.
When he toured NZ in 1968-69, he had just completed a great series in Aus when he scored around 500 runs and bowled around 1000 deliveries.
He really shouldn't have gone to NZ trip after this workload.

I wouldn't give him a free pass to him for his overall poor show in NZ. A good performance from him in the second series would have probably won WI the series rather than just a draw. But I wouldn't be overly critical either due to the above circumstances.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
Only one bowler isn't enough though. Especially Indian pacers were a sob story and Pak also was too dependent on Fazal and to an extent Khan Mohammed. New Zealand had Bruce Taylor in the latter half and had Dick Motz, Richard Collinge, etc I believe. Quality pacers definitely.
Click to expand...
It's like penalising a modern player for failing in the WI.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
It's like penalising a modern player for failing in the WI.
Click to expand...
Again, WI with Roach, Holder and Joseph does have a half decent bowling attack. So if some great fails there and his team losses/draws the series; he should definitely be penalized. More so, an attack of Bruce Taylor (aka proto Bond) and Dick Motz is actually quite good. If his record in NZ doesn't counts, then India and Pakistan shouldn't count as well.
 
P

PlayerComparisons

International Vice-Captain
WI has been tough to bat in at times over the past decade. Guys like Roach and Holder average low 20s at home.

Hopefully guys like Seales, Shamar, and Motie make the WI attack great again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top