The birth of ODIs in 1971 and of Twenty20 cricket in 2003 changed what it meant to be a great cricketer.

Instead of digging in and toiling for six hours, suddenly batsmen were expected to score a run-a-ball 50, only going out to the bravest of skyward shots. Bowlers no longer had the task of 20 wickets to focus on, the number one objective was restricting runs, wickets merely a tool for doing so.

Have the shorter forms of the game fundamentally changed what skills are needed to be a successful cricketer? Would the old greats have fallen foul of the Twenty20 phenomenon?

'If any batsman of the pre-ODI period had the skills to make big runs in short spaces of time, it was The Don'


Don Bradman is, without doubt, one of the greatest Test batsmen who has ever played cricket. There is really no need to justify this statement with anything other than his peerless career average – 99.94 from 52 matches. The question of whether or not he would have excelled at ODIs.

The same can be wondered of ‘The Don’s’ long time adversary, England bowler Harold Larwood.

What better test of a bowler’s mettle than to pit them against one of the greatest batsman in the game? During the infamous Bodyline Series, Larwood slashed Bradman’s previous average against England (139.14) to what must be considered mediocre by his standards, almost half that of his career average - 56.

He also took ‘The Don’s’ wicket four times in the eight innings they were pitted against one another. Touching on record speeds with the ball, Larwood can also take his place as one of the greats of the long form of the game.                      
Bradman had the runs and the shots, but with only six sixes in his career it is a far from forgone conclusion that he would take to the Twenty20 game as he did Test cricket. His part-time bowling would have been useful and likely oft called-upon, he was economical in the Tests he bowled in (2.70) but would his batting, almost flawless in Tests, have needed to pick up speed in order to succeed in limited overs cricket?

As record holder for the most runs in a single day’s play and of the most centuries scored in a single session (1 pre lunch, 2 lunch-tea, 3 tea-stumps) it seems that if any batsman of the pre-ODI period had the skills to make big runs in short spaces of time, it was The Don.
Larwood’s terrifying pace with the ball would have offered him assistance in any form of cricket but this would have had to be coupled with a greater control in Twenty20 cricket in order to avoid conceding unnecessary runs.

Larwood’s low average (below 20 in first-class cricket and below 30 in Tests) would suggest that he possessed the control required and his high strike rate could have made him a very imposing limited overs bowler. Also, his batting average (19.39) would have made him a useful lower-order batsman.

In conclusion, the real question is whether or not the skills required to excel in Test cricket can be transferred into the Twenty20 game.
Some have succeeded and others have failed, being shunned as ‘Test specialists’. But the sheer class of Bradman and Larwood would suggest that they could have brought something special to the short form of the game.