manutd4eva
Fan Favourite
.........You Aussies worried?
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
Originally posted by Rob
I would be the one worried if I were you. You just lost a test series to ... England
Originally posted by chatterbox
That would not quite make up for the loss to England but atleast it is a start.
Originally posted by X-Ter
hes done it! a new record. even though i support england now i want him to get 400 because weve lost anyway
Originally posted by manutd4eva
There is no batsman on the face of this earth as good as Brian Lara./B]
TrueOriginally posted by manutd4eva Originally posted by manutd4eva [/i]Not even Sachin as good as he is.
No, Bradman?Originally posted by manutd4eva In my book the greatest batsman ever.[/B]
Good on himOriginally posted by manutd4eva Breaking the world record is no easy feat and he has managed to do it twice.[/B]
No, Bradman is the EmperorOriginally posted by manutd4eva He was the Prince before but now he is the Emperor. [/B]
Originally posted by manutd4eva
Originally posted by Rob
No, Bradman
Originally posted by manutd4eva
I can never dispute Bradman's greatness, no one can. An average of 99.94 is just mind boggling.
But the reason I say Lara is better is because of the top quality bowlers Lara has had to face up to and along with the continuos pressure of having to be the leading batsman in a declining team over the last 12 years.
If he is not better then he is certainly right alongside him. He is now certainly better than Tendlukar, Sir Viv and Sir Gary.
But then again comparing batsmen from different eras is not usually a good idea.....or maybe I'm just biased.
The greatest batsman of the last 50 years no doubt though.
Originally posted by man united forever
Perhaps advances in technology have improved bowling techniques and fielding, but that rise in standard can be balanced by the fact that pitches weren't covered when Bradman was playing. Exposing pitches to the elements produced far more unpredictable surfaces which made life dangerous for batsmen. Another factor to take into account is the protection a batsman was given. Today's batsmen have gloves, helmets, elbow guards, forearm guards, thigh pads, pads, inner thigh pads, boxes and chest guards. In Bradman's day they had a box, thin gloves that offered no real protection, and heavy pads. Imagine facing Harold Larwood on an unpredictable pitch in that. Take away the protection batsmen get today, expose the pitches to rougher conditions and improve the standards of fast bowlers and perhaps a better picture will emerge. Even then, it is impossible to compare eras because in order to compare two batsmen from different eras, you must see how they did against the best bowlers and fielders of the time. That would then require an examination of the respective talents of the bowlers and fielders, which would require you to go back and assess the batsmen of the time(a bowler's figures are heavily dependent on the batsmen he bowls to). It's an infinite loop.