.jpg)
"Sehwag got to 6000 in 123 innings, Bradman did it in 68 innings,Tendulkar got there in 120 innings" is what a famous cricketing website had to say after Virendar Sehwag scored his 6000th run in the test cricket.This statement can lead to an interesting discussion about comparing the cricketers from different times. One often tends to compare sportsperson across time line, but often when this happens , one keeps the older ones as Demigod and goes overboard saying they are incomparable(in this case , Don Bradman) which most of the times may not be true (or at least, i believe so).Lets consider Don Bradman, he was surely of the best cricketers the game has ever seen but positioning him as an idol who is beyond all sorts of comparisons, is something one must refrain from doing. The game evolves with time,and so the players and hence such an assumption becomes meaningless .
Take for instance , the above case where 6000 runs of Sehwag, Sachin and Bradman are compared.To reach his 6000 runs, Sehwag played against 9 different International teams in 10 different countries, all of them offering different conditions in terms of pitch, climate, crowds etc whereas Bradman in whole of his international career had played (in only 2 countries ) against 4 teams , including the-then-Indian-team whose bowlers were elated at the mere thought having got to bowl against Bradman (very similar to the Namibian players who after a world cup match in 2003 rushed to shaoib akhtar to get his autograph ).What i would like to point out is that most teams in their home conditions are pretty tough to play against, something Bradman never got to do.
One may boast of better sports accessories(bats, helmets, guards and other stuffs) and technology in the present scenario, but let us put it this way; as the game has evolved, the bowlers have devised new techniques, fielding teams have come up with better strategies than before,better technology has led to lesser (or should i say rare) "doubtful benefits" which needless to say , used to go in favor of the batsman.
Australian dominance in world cricket is something that has always added to greatness to the Aussie batsmen(read on to find why this is being talked about here). An important factor , often overlooked towards same is role of Australian media who are a vital ingredient in making the Aussie recipe the best in world.They leave no stone unturned to portray the Aussie players as the best of the lot and they don't mind goin overboard with it.One (in)famous example is from the recent Indian tour to Australia where the Australian broadcasters would often replay a wrong decision going against Australia but never did replay one going in favor of them, something very difficult to find in other parts of world.Don being an Aussie has surely been of help to him in this respect.
I too believe that Bradman was a Great Great batsman but i often think that if we keep a frame of reference , which makes us believe no batsman can ever be as good as (or better than) him(Bradman) , its time to look back at our frame of reference and ask "is it correct?"
This is my first attempt towards writing a blog. Please drop in your valuable comments.
Take for instance , the above case where 6000 runs of Sehwag, Sachin and Bradman are compared.To reach his 6000 runs, Sehwag played against 9 different International teams in 10 different countries, all of them offering different conditions in terms of pitch, climate, crowds etc whereas Bradman in whole of his international career had played (in only 2 countries ) against 4 teams , including the-then-Indian-team whose bowlers were elated at the mere thought having got to bowl against Bradman (very similar to the Namibian players who after a world cup match in 2003 rushed to shaoib akhtar to get his autograph ).What i would like to point out is that most teams in their home conditions are pretty tough to play against, something Bradman never got to do.
One may boast of better sports accessories(bats, helmets, guards and other stuffs) and technology in the present scenario, but let us put it this way; as the game has evolved, the bowlers have devised new techniques, fielding teams have come up with better strategies than before,better technology has led to lesser (or should i say rare) "doubtful benefits" which needless to say , used to go in favor of the batsman.
Australian dominance in world cricket is something that has always added to greatness to the Aussie batsmen(read on to find why this is being talked about here). An important factor , often overlooked towards same is role of Australian media who are a vital ingredient in making the Aussie recipe the best in world.They leave no stone unturned to portray the Aussie players as the best of the lot and they don't mind goin overboard with it.One (in)famous example is from the recent Indian tour to Australia where the Australian broadcasters would often replay a wrong decision going against Australia but never did replay one going in favor of them, something very difficult to find in other parts of world.Don being an Aussie has surely been of help to him in this respect.
I too believe that Bradman was a Great Great batsman but i often think that if we keep a frame of reference , which makes us believe no batsman can ever be as good as (or better than) him(Bradman) , its time to look back at our frame of reference and ask "is it correct?"
This is my first attempt towards writing a blog. Please drop in your valuable comments.
