Home > Cricket > Bradman is cricket's greatest batsman of all time - past, present and future
Bradman is cricket's greatest batsman of all time - past, present and future
It's not just Sir Donald's statistics that tell such a remarkable story. This is a man who took sporting prowess to a level we will never see again.
by Craig Hackney on 26 May 2008
Email this Article (4) Comments
Free £25 bet when you register at
Rightly or wrongly, batsmen are the glamour boys of cricket.
Although the input of bowlers is just as important as the guys higher up the order, the big names of the sport, with a few exceptions, are the ones who are proficient at wielding the willow.
Amongst this group are some of the legends of the game. Names like Sachin Tendulkar, Ricky Ponting and Brian Lara from the recent crop. Going back further we have Viv Richards, Graeme Pollock, Greg Chappell, Sunil Gavaskar, George Headley and Victor Trumper.
As good as this lot are, and there are a number of other names who deserve to be on this list, the very best that any one of them could hope to achieve is to be considered the second best batsman ever.
The reason that these stellar players are reduced to also-rans is, of course, the man known simply as The Don – Sir Donald Bradman. He is the yardstick against whom all others are measured – invariably unfavourably – and whose record will never be equalled.
For the statistically minded, no-one else comes close. Bradman’s average of 99.94 will never be bettered by anyone with any kind of serious Test career. His 6996 test runs in 52 Tests included 29 centuries with a record 12 double centuries and two triple centuries.
He also scored over 5000 runs in Ashes Tests, scored centuries in six consecutive Tests, three double centuries in a Test series, scored 300 in a single day and scored a century in a single session on six occasions. Amazing.
Much is made of Bradman’s final innings. Requiring only four runs to finish his career with an average of 100, he was famously bowled for a duck by Eric Hollies. As nice as the round figure would have been, the duck proved that Bradman was human – almost.
Such was Bradman’s dominance of the sport – some suggest that it is unrivalled by anyone, in any sport – that the infamous “leg theory” was spawned to try to curb his influence. Bodyline was one of the darkest periods in cricket history, but it speaks volumes of the dominance of Bradman, that the English resorted to one of the most unsporting acts ever seen on the cricket field as a way of curbing his influence.
Despite all of the success, it wasn’t entirely a fairytale career. Although Bradman was the foundation stone on which the Australian team was built, he didn’t fit well into the team. He kept himself apart, often travelling separately in first-class - mainly because he could.
Remember, in those days travelling to England took weeks, so the separation was not necessarily out of aloofness; it helped reduce the impact of the journey. Nevertheless, it made him about as popular as poo-flavoured ice cream amongst his team-mates.
The famous incident in which Bradman received a gift of £1,000 pounds from Arthur Whitelaw, as a token of his appreciation of Bradman’s innings of 334 at Leeds, gives an insight into the mindset of the man. Not only did Bradman not share his good fortune with his team-mates as is the norm today, he didn’t even buy them a beer as thanks for their part in his success
But that was Bradman the man, not the batsman. In the middle he was unequalled. It has been suggested by fans of contemporary players like Tendulkar, that Bradman’s position at the top of the tree is undeserved because he played in a time when techniques, both batting and bowling, were undeveloped. What cr*p
Bradman pioneered technique. His cover drive was a thing of unequalled beauty, his horizontal bat shots were sublime. Anyone who suggests he didn’t have technique knows nothing about cricket.
It is true that he didn’t face the amount of analysis and scrutiny that goes into the modern game. It is equally true that bowlers like Larwood were the equal of any modern bowler. And Bradman also didn’t have the benefit of the modern technology that makes the life of today’s batsmen so much easier.
Bradman’s bat was an ordinary lump of wood, not a highly sculpted and compressed weapon that is available today. His pads were only slightly better than going out bare legged. His gloves were cotton with bits of rubber glued on to protect his hands. He had no helmet to protect his head and, worst of all, he had the equivalent of an old jam tin to protect his wedding tackle.
Bradman also had to contend with uncovered pitches, a fact that cannot be overlooked. Today’s pitches are manicured and protected and won’t be played on if affected by the weather in any way.
Sure, the game is different today, but there is no doubt that Bradman would still dominate. His commitment, determination and concentration were what set him apart and those qualities still have currency today.
Who knows, with all of the help available to modern players, he could have been even better. Now that’s a scary thought.
Comments (4)
by Mark T on May 27, 2008
I do not think it is fair to compare the cricketers of today to that of yesteryear. Bradman was a brilliant player, and that cannot be denied. However, the modern age has other pressures. Bradman played 50 odd tests, where todays great players play over a hundred. they also play a lot more frequently than those of the past. Then thrown into this is 50 0ver and 20/20 matches. So as great as Bradman was, I do not think it fair to compare him to the players of today or even speculate that he would have been as great, had he played in the modern era.
by harry the hornet on May 27, 2008
great piece craig..bradman will always be the greatest ever
by Harihar VSG on May 28, 2008
I agree with Mark T. Definitely Bradman was a great, but its hard to say he was a better batsman than a Sobers or a Richards or a Lara. One should should not forget that Jack Hobbs was considered a better batsman than the Don by some of the seasoned observers and mere stats always never give the whole picture. The incomparable cricketer of modern era, Brian Lara has held the world record twice 375 & a 400*, but his 213 & 153* were better than the two world record scores. Its not like how much you score, but how you score. I seriously do not think Bradman any better than the 3 immortal West Indian giants Sir Garfield Sobers, Sir Vivian Richards and Brian Lara. Bradman was great, an all-time great for sure, but to call him the best of all-time is perhaps not fair. May be we could call him as statistically the best, but I would always prefer a Sobers, or a Richards or a Lara to Bradman. The fear a Sobers, or Viv or Brian would install in the minds of opponents is unparalleled and Bradman would not have destroyed bowling attacks like these true greats from the Caribbean.
by aniket on June 10, 2008
i think sachin tendulkar has passed bradman as the greatest in cricket with more than one factors first of all its unfair to compare but if one look at the matches sachin has played,his consistensy over a period of time, quality of bowlers faced(warne,macgrath,akram,walsh,ambrose,murli to name just a few)and handling the pressure of billions he is just best
Add your comment here
PERSONAL ABUSE WILL NOT BE TOLERATED
First Name
Last Name
Email
Heading
Display your favourite sport or football team badge with your comment.
Sport
League
Team
Comment *
Please enter the text you see in the picture into the textbox below. *
Ipswich Volz into town as Watford seek to close the gap
Houston lift-off: Will Ron Artest and Yao Ming combine to fire up the Rockets?
Roddick serves up a US Open treat to wrap up the first round
Arsenal Aston Villa Barcelona Chelsea Everton Football Liverpool Manchester City Manchester United Newcastle United Portsmouth Real Madrid Sunderland Tottenham Hotspur West Ham United