If Bradman played in today's era?

[Chrish]

Not much different from Smith IMO..

 

[Red]

Good analysis, but you did not mention that, current bowlers are exceptionally fitter than what Bradman played, and will keep the pressure on whole day. Then fielding would be light years better than during his time, short singles and boundaries will be cut short more often. And there would be few more additional run outs as well. Then the variability of the pitch conditions is much more than his day. We have hard bouncy perth and Durban to dust bowls of Chennai and Galle. Next, current bowlers have far more variations like reverse swing, and this makes the chances of getting a corker at any time of the innings equally possible. Another consideration is that bowling actions differ from country to country slightly. This may be the reason Bradman averaged less against Martindale and Constantine, who were allegedly, open chested bowlers. Finally, you can dissect techniques of a batsman better now. Once a deficiency is found all the bowlers will home on it.

I would pay anything to see Bradman playing WI pace quartet or him taking on Wasim and Waqar with the old ball, or Murali and Warne from two ends.

I dont accept two things. Players are not necessarily fitter now than they were back then. The bowlers of his day were ox-strong men who did manual labour. The bowlers of today are athletes. Might be a different type of fitness, but it was fitness nonetheless.

And there were plenty of variations in pitch conditions in Bradman's day. Far more than there are now.

 

[Bolo]

I dont accept two things. Players are not necessarily fitter now than they were back then. The bowlers of his day were ox-strong men who did manual labour. The bowlers of today are athletes. Might be a different type of fitness, but it was fitness nonetheless.

And there were plenty of variations in pitch conditions in Bradman's day. Far more than there are now.

Bowlers today are test match (exclusively) fitter than in Bradman's era . The fact that they dont have to subject themselves to non-cricket work or grueling non-international schedules for a payday means they are so much fresher on bowling.

Fair comment on the piches.

 

[srbhkshk]

I never understand the he will average 70-80 sort of numbers, either he continues being head and shoulder above every other batsmen and averages 100 or the current ATGs are all as good as Bradman and he averages the same high 50-60.

 

[NUFAN]

I never understand the he will average 70-80 sort of numbers, either he continues being head and shoulder above every other batsmen and averages 100 or the current ATGs are all as good as Bradman and he averages the same high 50-60.

Why cant you understand it? Youve created a high and low for Bradles and people are suggesting he will be in the middle. Seems very logical.

Who even knows if Don was born late 1990s hed even like cricket?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Why cant you understand it? Youve created a high and low for Bradles and people are suggesting he will be in the middle. Seems very logical.

Who even knows if Don was born late 1990s hed even like cricket?

He'd probably be named Ethan Bradman instead of Donald.

 

[Victor Ian]

If Bradman played today having grown up in modern life he'd be ****. We all know the reason he was better than everyone else is the corrugated water tank. Today it would be a flat plastic tank.

 

[srbhkshk]

Why cant you understand it? Youve created a high and low for Bradles and people are suggesting he will be in the middle. Seems very logical.

Who even knows if Don was born late 1990s hed even like cricket?

Because batsman have continued to average 50+ even after the advances we have had in bowling, which is same/similar to the second best in Bradman times, why will these advances hurt him in ways that they haven't hurt the others? Or are we implicitly saying that the current best batsmen are worse than Bradman but better than someone like Hobbs?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Why cant you understand it? Youve created a high and low for Bradles and people are suggesting he will be in the middle. Seems very logical.

A more logical high and low would be something like guessing that he would average 120 v averaging 80 and then suggesting he would be in the middle (~100) would be logical.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

God someone hurry up and necromance Bradman so he can get owned repeatedly by like Taskin Ahmed and I never have to hear these arguments again.

 

[Starfighter]

The 'bowlers have gotten fitter whatever' thing doesn't stack up anyway. Even as your average bowler has gotten fitter and skills such as reverse swing have emerged batting averages have mainly gotten higher.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

The 'bowlers have gotten fitter whatever' thing doesn't stack up anyway. Even as your average bowler has gotten fitter and skills such as reverse swing have emerged batting averages have mainly gotten higher.

It's a batsman's game after all

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

How would have Bradman preferred the T20 leagues?

 

[mr_mister]

I've always thought unless you think that Headley, Hammond, Hutton etc would have only averaged 35 against modern bowlers (and nobody thinks this) then you can't really say it's likely Bradman would average under 80. He'd still be the greatest ever

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I've always thought unless you think that Headley, Hammond, Hutton etc would have only averaged 35 against modern bowlers (and nobody thinks this) then you can't really say it's likely Bradman would average under 80. He'd still be the greatest ever

Yeah, it's like asking Democritus to solve calculus based problems.

 

[the big bambino]

Bowlers today are test match (exclusively) fitter than in Bradman's era . The fact that they dont have to subject themselves to non-cricket work or grueling non-international schedules for a payday means they are so much fresher on bowling.

And yet the average of the time from his debut up to the war was little different to the 90s. And as a fan of the team that's been trying to get the meme four on the park for the best part of a decade I find the comment of bowler fitness a little ironic.

 

[morgieb]

How would have Bradman preferred the T20 leagues?

Short ball formats don't seem like his jam. Like it would take away from what makes him so special.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Short ball formats don't seem like his jam. Like it would take away from what makes him so special.

Ahhh, he loves to ground and pound!

 

[NUFAN]

I've always thought unless you think that Headley, Hammond, Hutton etc would have only averaged 35 against modern bowlers (and nobody thinks this) then you can't really say it's likely Bradman would average under 80. He'd still be the greatest ever

So your suggesting everyone would be rated in the same tier in any era? Seems unlikely but impossible to predict.

 

[NUFAN]

Think about Hammond. He would probably be a 3 format player batting and bowling in each. Headley would be in a weak WI lineup looking at Brathwaite and co being rich for leaving the red ball game. Im not trying to downplay the performances of atgs but I find it really unlikely that all gold tier players from previous eras would bengold in this era and that silver tier would be silver too.