Was the don that good ?

[distributer of pain]

Originally Posted by sadspinner

I agree perfectly with you. From what I read he was not an elegant player, but the fact that no one in any continent at his time, before or after his time came anywhere close means he was something really special. In comparison there is no bowler who can be credited as being so superior to his peers. I do not know in Australia at the dons time whether anyone came anywhere close to his average in shield games. After all his local average was much worse than his test average. I believe it was only about 95. And Macca I think the spanish flu was around 1919, I am not sure he played test matches in those days.But I may be horribly wrong. At least the leggies got him out at will, after getting the odd 70, so we are happy that he was a common mortal to us!

i think his ist class average was more impressive than his test average, through weight of runs, 28000 at 95

[MV!]

I think you'd be surprised by how little the War and the Great Depression impacted upon playing stocks at the time. Yes, many players were lost to the War - but Test Cricket was also suspended during that period. Playing stocks Post- War would have taken a while to replenish, and many (inc. the Don) were past it when they came back. But the Don did the majority of his boot- filling prior to that period anyway, and was well past it. And few of the very good players (pro/ semi-pro/ of high class) would have been greatly effected by either the Great Depression or World War II.

Hell, all you need to hear is one of Thommos anecdotes. I think it was the late 70s, the Don - in his 60s - was facing up to some of the net bowlers at a training session without pads and smashing them around completely. Thommo decided to test him out (of course, by his claims only bowling around 60%) and the Don predictably smashed him around to the point where Thommo asked "why the f**k" he wasn't still playing for Australia.

Seriously though, he just was that much better than everyone that has ever played the game.

[A.B De Villiers]

Originally Posted by MV!

I think you'd be surprised by how little the War and the Great Depression impacted upon playing stocks at the time. Yes, many players were lost to the War - but Test Cricket was also suspended during that period. Playing stocks Post- War would have taken a while to replenish, and many (inc. the Don) were past it when they came back. But the Don did the majority of his boot- filling prior to that period anyway, and was well past it. And few of the very good players (pro/ semi-pro/ of high class) would have been greatly effected by either the Great Depression or World War II.

Hell, all you need to hear is one of Thommos anecdotes. I think it was the late 70s, the Don - in his 60s - was facing up to some of the net bowlers at a training session without pads and smashing them around completely. Thommo decided to test him out (of course, by his claims only bowling around 60%) and the Don predictably smashed him around to the point where Thommo asked "why the f**k" he wasn't still playing for Australia.

Seriously though, he just was that much better than everyone that has ever played the game.

I like you're thinking there MV.
Stats dont paint the real picture. He was greatest, plain and simple, a genius perhaps, on par with the likes of Woods, Ali and Pele.
you give him what we have now, he would averaged a lot more than 99.94.

[distributer of pain]

he didnt play against india, or in indian conditions, he only ever played against england, now days batsman have to adapt to much more variety of attacks and very different conditions, look at ricky ponting, what does he average in india, even against india in Australia, it would be much lower than his overall average.

[ants14]

Originally Posted by distributer of pain

he didnt play against india, or in indian conditions, he only ever played against england, now days batsman have to adapt to much more variety of attacks and very different conditions, look at ricky ponting, what does he average in india, even against india in Australia, it would be much lower than his overall average.

how many more people need to tell you before you get it through your head? the man was that good. he made run after run, and had some poor health throughout and yet he always cam eout and performed. I'm all for everyone having there own opinion, but there are some things you just don;t do, and one of those things is not to doubt the Don. as far as Grimmett saying the Don wasnt as good as trumper, grimmett was the star before the Don came along, and was overshadowed when he came onto the scene. what more would you expect?

[distributer of pain]

if you read the whole thread you would know that im just highlighting the different circumstances back then, can you please get that through your head ??, probably not. you act like your an expert on the subject but you dont answer any of the questions. if you had bothered to read the whole thread you would realize that im not doubting him as the greatest, im just saying IMO i dont think he would average 99 today, and im far from being the only person who thinks that.

[hattrick]

I must be honest I would have never thought that this topic would become so popular.
I can add that from an equipment point of view remember that they did not have decent gloves, no helmets and very average pads. He would have batted for days and I believe lara's 400 and 501* would not be highest scores in the game..

Lets face it the game has moved to a commercial venture and I often wonder if the Don would have had Tendulkar like issues with privacy and the like..most probably yes.. He most probably would have had to have 24 hour security and a assistant to do the day to day stuff..

[macca]

Originally Posted by MV!

I think you'd be surprised by how little the War and the Great Depression

I think we were talking about first world war, and its impact on Bradmans generation is what he was getting at. Bradman was already a full genius before the wall street crash so that doesnt come into it really.

I think our old mate distibuter isn't questioning his greatness just asking a question people have been asking since he retired. It was often asked during the West Indies domination. People asked would he have kept that average against unrelenting pace like that. Most oldtimers at the time said he would have easily got on top of the 70,s / 80,s Windies.

My old man, who would be in his 90,s if he was still alive, saw him side on at the SCG a couple of times and he said he was in another league that everyone at the time knew no-one before or since could ever approach. Everyone talks of the lightening footwork and batspeed but it was his placement that Dad said made him impossible to bowl to. I used to argue with him that modern fielding was superior and would have restricted him, but dad said that wouldn't have made any difference.

[macca]

Originally Posted by ants14

as far as Grimmett saying the Don wasnt as good as trumper, grimmett was the star before the Don came along, and was overshadowed when he came onto the scene. what more would you expect?

There is a lot more to the Grimmett /Bradman clash then any jealousy on Grimmetts part ,as you are suggesting. Mainly Bradman just couldn't take Clarries' wicked sense of humour.

[ants14]

Originally Posted by distributer of pain

if you read the whole thread you would know that im just highlighting the different circumstances back then, can you please get that through your head ??, probably not. you act like your an expert on the subject but you dont answer any of the questions. if you had bothered to read the whole thread you would realize that im not doubting him as the greatest, im just saying IMO i dont think he would average 99 today, and im far from being the only person who thinks that.

i actually did read the whole thread from start to finish. I dont act like an expert all i said was that he is the best there has ever been and performed time after time even when he was fair ill. then i went on to talk about grimmet where I read in the don's biography that there seemed to be a bit of jealousy on grimmets part when he came on to the scene. all you have done in this thread is continually gone ahead and try to deny that he is the best ever. he played against the best players of that era, and made a mockery of them. you cant compare it today because there are so many variables that have been thrown around by everyone in this thread and IMO they probably cancel each other out and bring me back to saying it would surprise me if his average would remain the same.

EDIT: do you mind explaining why you think his first class average is better than his test one?