Bradmanesque or is it?

The Don of Greatness
Hunting for great quotes on the cricketing genius Don Bradman whom we fondly called the Don must be as easy as finding a verbal jab by an aussie on a touring English cricketer. After all when a man has an average of 99.94 and the next person a measly 60 surely the former can only be an incarnation of the divine cricketing god. A glimpse of quotes spoken in reverence of his strokness reveals the aura and awe commanded by him,

When Larwood bowled ineffectively at Bradman, P.F. Warner turned around to Lord Hawke and said, 'This is like throwing stones at Gibraltar.'"

“On and on he seemed to go batting into cricket eternity…. He was the genius absolute…” – J.H Fingleton Australian batsman

Never has any man defied the law of averages to this degree. There have been the supermen of other sports but somehow all their records no matter how great always seemed within grasp given time. People always knew that it would be a matter of time before those records were felled. Yes sir, all records felt that way, all but that of the Don. But how did he do it?
Going back in time to Bradman’s childhood we see a most beautiful amalgam of talent and champion desire in the unique way he practiced his cricket. A method that can only be conjured up by a bored genius tired of the predictable nature of daily challenges. Bradman as a boy practiced cricket by trying to hit a golf ball thrown against the base of a water tank, with the ball fizzing away at an unpredictable angle. The feat is difficult at the best of times, but he managed to do it more often than not at a tender age of 10. Such was the speed of eye and co-ordination of eye with arm.

A brief analysis of Bradman’s game highlights the man’s unique batting sense to his time. He was probably the only player who best resembled the modern day great cricketer like a Tendulkar or a Ponting, always eager to go for the extra run. He could carve up a bowler's line through nimble footwork and always kept the scoreboard ticking at a brisk pace. His batting resembled a modern day cricketer bred on one day cricket. Truly a man beyond his time and as evinced by his records, too much to handle for his peers.

Such was the greatness of the man... or was it? That he was capable of his mythical average during his time is true beyond a shred of doubt but would that be true now? Could the Don have conquered such peaks or even managed to rub shoulders with the greats of our time given the pressures, rigors and attrition of modern day cricket? Let’s find out.

His Mythical Average Tested
Bradman’s mythical average of 99.94 is oft talked about and it’s grandeur is further accentuated by the contrasting averages of people who follow. Here’s a look at some of the top aggregators in test cricket,
DG Bradman (Aus) 6,996 runs at 99.94 (52 Tests)
RG Pollock (SA) 2,256 at 60.97 (23 Tests)
GA Headley (WI) 2,190 at 60.83 (22 Tests)
H Sutcliffe (Eng) 4,555 at 60.73 (54 Tests)
R.Ponting (Aus) 9368 at 59.29 (110 tests)
E Paynter (Eng) 1,540 at 59.23 (20 Tests)

The contrast is clear, but one can see a pattern in this equation. All players barring Ricky Ponting are from eras long gone by and have played less than 55 test matches and some less than 25! Compare that to the modern day greats who play at the least twice that many during their careers.
The law of statistics states that the lesser the number of observations the more chances of a skewed result. Players today play a 100 tests while the Don played just 50. Statistics was with him, as he didn’t play many tests he was shielded to an extent from the law of averages. The more breaks you take the better your play will be as you get to regain your ability to perform at peak condition. Which is why sportsman are advocated to take timeouts during the game. Take for example a tennis player taking time before serving or a batsman taking some time before facing balls. Given genius and enough recuperation time, perhaps great players could take averages to much greater heights, even 100 and maybe the Don wasn’t an exception.

The Uncovered Pitches Argument
Before the 70s cricket was played on uncovered pitches, that were exposed to the elements and was anything but batsman friendly. That Bradman played in such a time and came out on tops is used to beat down any imposter who dare raise an eyebrow at the stature of the game’s greatest son. But one must remember that the Don rarely played on a devastated uncovered pitch and more importantly he didn’t have to do it against the modern day professionals. Modern professionals would have clinically cut open batting lineups on uncovered pitches and batsmen from the don’s time didn’t have to contend with such bowlers and that’s the key.

Bowling is a difficult art, more so than batting as one must battle fatigue while staying accurate. Apart from great fitness levels it requires the bowler to practice the art for very many hours to truly master it. During the ‘30s and ‘40s all cricketers were amateurs who practiced the art but did not live it and consequently they weren’t anywhere close to the consistency or greatness of modern day bowlers. Despite rules and pitches loaded in the bowler’s favor, they simply weren’t as great or effective barring a handful of them. The Don or any other great batting talent would have surely been much more successful facing bowlers who could only do so much as compared to the likes of a Mcgrath, Lillee, Warne or Kumble – bowlers who rated off the charts in skill and fitness. Ironically, the proponents of the uncovered pitches argument are batting on a sticky wicket!


Playing Under Pressure
Bradman was discomfited by Bodyline, the shameless method of attack which Douglas Jardine employed to depose him in Australia in 1932-33. It appears he was sidetracked and could muster up an average of just 56. Could it be that Bradman let all things unbecoming of the game affect him? If so the constant sledging of modern day cricket would have taken him to task, wouldn’t it?

The Don’s weakness against quality leg spin was often spoken about. Grimmett was not, in fact, the only wrist-spinner to make the great man seem, at times, almost mortal. Bill O'Reilly was another--Bradman called him the finest and therefore, presumably, the most testing bowler he played against--as were Ian Peebles and Walter Robins; and it was with a googly that Eric Hollies bowled him for a duck in his last Test innings, at The Oval in 1948, when he was within four runs of averaging 100 in Test cricket. Maybe wrist-spin was his undoing, given such a weakness and the modern techniques employed to attack such chinks in a batsman's armor, Bradman may have succumbed once too often and thereby setting off a chain of unfortunate batting troughs due to ebbing confidence levels. This would have resulted in the most cruel eventuality of pulling down his average.

Last Words on the Legend
Finally, add attrition, new age strategy, supremely athletic opposition into the mix and you are still left with constants- the pillars of a genius, concentration, divine talent and champion mentality. While the former would dip the batting average of the genius to mortal numbers the latter would keep his head up above his competition. Though it would be hard to say where he might have stood, an average in the high 60s might have suited him right and would still let him don the mantle of the greatest. But his rare genius and skill against varied opposition across a 100+ tests would make his life mean more than the callous signature of his numbers. His story would have almost been true, all but for the average and that ironically makes his legend 99.94% true!