With Sachin Tendulkar tantilisingly close to a 100 international centuries which will never be matched, there’s a growing band of cricket scribes, and cricket-lovers, trumpeting him as the greatest batsman of all time.
On the score of run-getting there’s absolutely no argument. “The Little Master’s” 15,409 Test runs is a binocular distance ahead of compatriot Rahul Dravid’s 13,206, Australian Ricky Ponting’s 12,912, and South African Jacques Kallis’ 12,260, and there’s more in store for all four.
But on the score of consistency it’s “The Don”, and daylight.
What must be kept in mind is Sir Donald Bradman batted 80 times with 10 not outs, Tendulkar 307 times, for 32 not outs.
If Sir Donald’s career average of 99.94 to Tendulkar’s 56.02 isn’t proof enough of who was the greater batsman, try the conversion rate of Test tons to dismissals.
Sir Donald posted a Test century every 2.41 innings, Tendulkar every 5.39. That’s comprehensively conclusive, Tendulkar has needed more than twice the number of visits to the crease to achieve the same result.
Triple centuries: Sir Donald (2) – 334 and 304; Tendulkar – none.
Double centuries: Sir Donald (10) – 299*, 270, 254, 244, 234, 232, 226, 223, 212, and 201; Tendulkar (6) – 248*, 241*, 217, 214, 202, and 201*.
Single centuries: Sir Donald 17 – Tendulkar 45, due entirely to the extra 205 innings he has batted.
But there’s a rarely used criteria that slams the door shut on who is the greatest batsman of all time.
* Fastest in history:
The first to reach 1,000 Test runs – Sir Donald 13 digs, Tendulkar 28. Sir Jack Hobbs and Everton Weekes were the fastest with 12.
The 2,000 mark – Sir Donald 22*, Tendulkar 44.
The 3,000 – Sir Donald 33*, Tendulkar 67.
The 4,000 – Sir Donald 48*, Tendulkar 86.
The 5,000 – Sir Donald 56*, Tendulkar 103.
And the 6,000 – Sir Donald 68*, Tendulkar 120.
Let’s leave the final word to Sachin Tendulkar.
“Anyone would want to play like Sir Donald, he was completely at a different level”.
ppc
Guest
Tendulkar has the highest centuries against Australia arguably the best side ever in test cricket. Tendulkar has also more runs in away games than home games. Bradman is overrated because he is an Aussie.
ppc
Guest
Bradman's technique was not technically perfect. He played a lot of cross batted shots which shows that there were not many quality bowlers in that time and standard of fielding was very poor. Mcgrath or Warne would get Bradman out with lot of preparation before match. Older folks think Hammond was a better player on bad pitches compared to Bradman.
ppc
Guest
Greats can't be compared. Aussies just don't get it. One statistics does not make someone great. Viv Richards, Lara, Tendulkar, Hobbs, Hammond all are great batsmen of their era. But Aussies like to trumpet that one stat to beat everyone into submission. Pathetic.
Akash
Guest
First of all, if the centuries against low ranked team are deleted, then even the number of matches played against those teams have to be reduced. So, the century ratio is the same as David said
TomC
Guest
Cheers for that toms. Interesting reading.
Polar Bear
Guest
The only year The Greatest Of Them All was able to "achieve" Tendulkar's career average was the Bodyline year. lol
Tony, Brian, Dave
Guest
Dear David, It would be fitting if Sachin Tendulkar's final tour of Don Bradman's homeland could be cause, not for division, but a celebration of their supreme talent, immense contribution and the infinite pleasure their combined skills have given to those who love cricket. Following many years of study, We feel Tendulkar's presence in Australia provides an ideal opportunity for their individual forms of development and modes of play to be fully examined and compared. After all, it was Bradman who stated:- "My entire cricketing experience has been a practical one" while under Ray Martin's questioning revealing the adoption a 'Different Technique'. The purpose is to acknowledge the many boyhood hours Bradman spent co-ordinating the human senses when playing his Shepherd Street, 'Golf ball and stump Test Match games' while recognizing how such demanding 'High skill' was transferred into the "Continuous Rotary Batting Process" by which, we understand, from the age of eleven he immediately commenced and sustained such prolific runmaking throughout a long career played on uncovered pitches. Our continued aim is for the essence and principles of Bradman's unique form of development to be accepted so the proven tenets of his 'Rotary' style of batting can be offered for the benefit and choice of others alongside that which is presently taught. Such an outcome is seen as 'Don Bradman's lasting gift and true legacy to the game of cricket'.
Captain Grumpy
Guest
I certainly think you have put it to bed David. For every Pro-Sachin article, I'll raise you about 3000 alternate articles in support of The Don. I even saw Chennei born Nassar Hussein was flogging this dead horse. Doesn't do much for his credibility.
toms
Guest
link to a poll from the guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/poll/2010/feb/25/sachin-tendulkar-greatest-batsman a link to the "debate" about tendulkar v bradman http://www.thenational.ae/sport/cricket/is-tendulkar-the-greatest-batsman-of-all-time current cricketers http://cricketnext.in.com/news/tendulkar-greatest-batsman-of-all-time/51598-13.html another http://www.deccanherald.com/content/54789/praise-pours-players-media-greatest.html the telegraph uk http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/cricket-world-cup/8414462/India-v-Pakistan-Sachin-Tendulkar-is-the-best-batsman-ever-to-play-cricket.html
toms
Guest
once you take the lesser nations out its even clearer Sir Don - 29 centuries in total from 80 innings Tendulkar - 51 in total from 307 innings If we dismiss tendulkar's centuries against lower ranked test nations Sri Lanka 7, Bangladesh 5 and Zimbabwe 3, Tendulkar actually has 33 from 307 innings Sir Don then has the ratio of a century from every 2.75 innings against top tier test teams. Tendulkar then has a ratio of a century every 9.3 innings against top tier test teams.
Tony Shillinglaw, Brian Hale
Guest
Dear David, Don Bradman's golf ball and stump game cannot be played by conventional batting means as Australian cricketers displayed in the recent 'Vodafone Challenge'. However, experimentation confirms control of an erratic fast moving ball is possible through the adoption of 'Shoulder Rotation' which with practice can automatically co-ordinate and induce both 'Mind and Body' to respond to the moving ball in subconscious, unconscious fashion. By our understanding, Bradman simply adapted these highly developed 'Human' skills to the requirements of 'Hitting through the ball' and batsmanship in the form of his instinctive and repetitive "Continuous Rotary Batting Process" The immediate and sustained manner of runscoring throughout his long career played on uncovered pitches reveals a mode of play which was already in place and good working order. In batting terms "Bradman was Bradman by the age of ELEVEN".
WoobliesFan
Guest
Tendulkar is a staticians wet-dream and that's it......Wisden don't rate him because he scored too many centuries when it didn't count........not one innings in their greatest 100. Ouch! Lara is the closest to Bradman....no doubt in my mind. He was dangerous, a proven winner and a loose cannon...and that's the way it should be. :)
Redb
Roar Guru
What has Warne got to do with Bradman? He was a modern player and thus had the benefit of more cricket to reach milestones.
Captain Grumpy
Guest
Relative terms are the only thing we can judge players by because they simply aren't playing in another era. Absolute terms is redundant. Bradman could average more if he played today because for every argument against Bradman (the amateur era, no video analysis of batsmen, no full time training for bowlers, not as many countries playing) the same points and more can be used in his favour (no video analysis of bowlers, no full time training for batsmen (Bradman held multiple jobs off the cricketing field during his playing days), not as many countries playing - such as Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) + no bowling machines at training, poor quality & limited protective gear (not sure how tough the Baggy Green is compared to a helmet), batting paradises in the Sub Continent & West Indies, the list goes on). I'm not saying he would average the same or more, just that this line of thought only works in his favour.
Brian
Guest
IIt is an entirely different era and all these comparisions are really arguing about is the use of the word "best". In relative terms Bradman is clearly the best, in absolute terms probably not. Bradman never faced a professional bowler who had a full time career dedicated to bowling. Tendulker has probably never faced an amatuer (In test cricket). Given that in no olympic discipline is anyone the best ever from the 1930s it is safe to assume that in absolute terms Bradman is probably not be the best ever. His bat was a lot weaker and there was no video analysis to attack his flaws. None of this is to detract from the fact that in relative terms he is miles ahead
Olddantucker
Guest
Bradman was not a diety, he was a cricketer. It's not disrespectful to think someone else is better, it's just called having a differing opinion to your own, David. But why would this surprise me - you do have form in that sort of thing.
clipper
Guest
An interesting exercise would be to compare the average bowling average and batting average in Bradmans time to the average bowling and batting average in Tendulkars time. If the average bowling average in Bradmans time was in the mid thirties and the average batting average was around sixty, then a case could be made for Tendulkars superiority. If they have remained basically in the same ball park, then I can't see how you could argue any other way than to say Bradman was daylights ahead. After all, no one for any period had a higher average than Bradman, but examples like Kallis can be found that have had, and currently have a higher average than Tendulkar.
Chris
Guest
David I haven't seen anyone go on record as saying ANYONE was a better batsman than Bradman. Please provide some evidence for this statement.
TomC
Guest
Yeah, does anyone have any links? Must say I haven't seen anyone make that case.
Das Boat
Guest
Alot of the arguments are indeed from Indian Sachin worshipers. Some of my friends play a game on cricinfo....whenever there is an article praising a player, particularly a batsman, guess how many of the first 10 reader comments will make reference to Sachin.....it can get quite high