Cricket Season Thread

Stevec said:
Never found out why your big dislike for Uzzie ? Ethnicity ?
I like Uzzie but admit he batted like shit today
Slow scoring and out to a rank full toss which is actually a bad ball
Click to expand...
not ethnicity thats for sure so don't play that rubbish. Tendulkar and Lara are my 2 favourite batsmen I have seen.
a mate had a bit to do with Uzi back in his younger days, just not a fan.
 
Charred said:
And only 1400 odd runs away from the great Don 😮 (for reference Smith has scored 3600, Don 5000)
Click to expand...

Well, cricket is more than statistics but how Bradman compares with Steve Smith or anyone else for that matter, it is the other way round.
It's how others compared with Bradman.
He set the bar very high till the end of his incredible career. The only thing that places modern players above him is the amount of matches being played - many against second rate teams and the runs they all subsequently scored.

Bradman only played 52 tests over a 20 year career or 52 tests in 13 years if one takes World War 2 into consideration where no test cricket was played.
There where some 8 summers in Australia in his time where no test cricket had been scheduled to be played. Ill health affected him badly during the 1934 tour to England and yet he still topped just over 2000 runs for the tour. Under great stress he still managed 758 runs in the test matches at 94.75.

He missed the 1934-35 season where no tests were scheduled and he missed the tour of South Africa in 1935-36 because of his illness.
In 1938 during his tour to England the 3rd test was washed out without a ball being bowled and he suffered a broken ankle in the 5th test at the Oval - whilst, ironically bowling - which prevented him from batting on a very flat shirt front wicket which England scored 903 - 7dec.

The English created bodyline to combat his unbelievable skill, and he was able to adjust without padding and helmet. He was head and shoulders above any batsman, and any comparison is just showing who is second best.
I wonder how Smith would have handled uncovered sticky wickets, and Bodyline without a helmet, and all the current padding?
And the actual bats used now compared to back in the day - the modern bats promote high scores with thicker edges, larger sweet spots, and different weight distribution to facilitate power hitting, in contrast to the slimmer, lighter bats used back in the day, which prioritized timing and control.

It boggles the mind to think what he might have achieved if test cricket been played as regularly in his time is it is today!!
 
tiger_one said:
Well, cricket is more than statistics but how Bradman compares with Steve Smith or anyone else for that matter, it is the other way round.
It's how others compared with Bradman.
He set the bar very high till the end of his incredible career. The only thing that places modern players above him is the amount of matches being played - many against second rate teams and the runs they all subsequently scored.

Bradman only played 52 tests over a 20 year career or 52 tests in 13 years if one takes World War 2 into consideration where no test cricket was played.
There where some 8 summers in Australia in his time where no test cricket had been scheduled to be played. Ill health affected him badly during the 1934 tour to England and yet he still topped just over 2000 runs for the tour. Under great stress he still managed 758 runs in the test matches at 94.75.

He missed the 1934-35 season where no tests were scheduled and he missed the tour of South Africa in 1935-36 because of his illness.
In 1938 during his tour to England the 3rd test was washed out without a ball being bowled and he suffered a broken ankle in the 5th test at the Oval - whilst, ironically bowling - which prevented him from batting on a very flat shirt front wicket which England scored 903 - 7dec.

The English created bodyline to combat his unbelievable skill, and he was able to adjust without padding and helmet. He was head and shoulders above any batsman, and any comparison is just showing who is second best.
I wonder how Smith would have handled uncovered sticky wickets, and Bodyline without a helmet, and all the current padding?
And the actual bats used now compared to back in the day - the modern bats promote high scores with thicker edges, larger sweet spots, and different weight distribution to facilitate power hitting, in contrast to the slimmer, lighter bats used back in the day, which prioritized timing and control.

It boggles the mind to think what he might have achieved if test cricket been played as regularly in his time is it is today!!
Click to expand...
nobody beats Bradman given the conditions he faces uncovered wickets bodyline no helmets etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 1,399 (members: 14, guests: 1,385)
Back
Top