Monday, 26 September 2011
International Cricket Hall of Fame
Tucked on the Southern Highlands only about 90 minutes south of Sydney at Bowral is the International Cricket Hall of Fame. This is the new name of what was the Bradman Museum until a new wing was added.
The museum has now put most of the little bloke's stuff upstairs, leaving downstairs as a very clever combination of interactive view screens, static displays of memorabilia and large view screens. There is a large collection of cartoon drawings of famous cricketers and personalities and the theatrette was playing highlights from the IPL. There is a large curved wall with the members of the ICC Hall of Fame in huge silhouettes and the details of their achievements were on the opposite wall.
Denis Lillee's aluminium bat was there!
I watched Greg Chappell's impassioned explanation of the under arm ball and Lillee's first innings routing of England in the Centenary Test. I even watched an interview with the Nawab of Pataudi on the meaning of the Spirit of Cricket.
The changes since my last visit are embracing the non cricket lover. Previously, a reasonably good understanding of the game was need to get maximum value from your entry fee but now, someone who has lived for the entire life at the North Pole would walk through and understand what the game is about. On top of that, reception staff are friendly and helpful and certainly made my visit all that much more enjoyable with their engagement with me.
I am no fan of Bradman. I've read to much Fingleton and O'Reilly and listen to Chappelli speak on Bradman's manner as a captain and as an administrator. Were all human and perhaps that's what I've realised about this man that is revered here and give divine status in India. In hearing of his human failings, I find him less than I would want my cricketers, let along my captains to be. He was a great batsman and a ruthless captain but he appears to have cared for himself above all else. I find it ironic that as he carefully made himself famous and then wealthy from Australian cricket, so now the game make an even bigger killing from his legend.
I didn't need to go upstairs. I've known the achievements since my days of an innocent school boy. They are glorious and almost unsurpassed and whilst the numbers will never be mastered, they can never be enough to confer tags of the highest level of greatness. Sure that is a value judgment based on more that numbers on a page. In fact, Bradman said as much. Therefore, I'll stand by "almost unsurpassed".
In my opinion, Tendulkar is better and so was McCabe.
I can recommend a visit to the ICHF, even if you have been before. In revisiting, us cricketragics reinvent ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bradman is always an interesting talking point. He played in two countries against 4 opposition - 3 of which were very much developing as test nations. However, he dominated in an era of uncovered pitches and without helmets.
ReplyDeleteI share your sentiments about his approach to administration and to an extent his selfishness, Lango, but Bradman played a major role in separating Aus cricket from its parent and forging its own path. There were numerous accomplices that due to having played with Bradman rarely receive their dues but I don't think any batsman is or has been 'better'. Only bodyline slowed him down and of course this was one series.
To be so far ahead of all others, in my opinion, ranks him first. Barry Richards, George Headley, Graeme Pollock were undoubtedly in complete command of their game and seemingly played it at a different level than most. I'd take Sobers over any of them because of his all-round ability and view him as the greatest cricketer of all time. Lara, Tendulkar, Kallis and few others are/were incredible batsmen but they have had lean patches that Bradman simply never did.
I'd always rather see batsmen with flair than accumulators and so would watch KP, Lara, De Villiers etc over a guy like Bradman though.
Quite a few issues there Leftie but for your consideration:
ReplyDelete* Bradman had the rather obvious lean period of Bodyline
* place, Tendulkar or Lara back in Bradman's time and with Bradman's context (limited opposition, limited exposure to varying pitch conditions etc etc) and would they have fared better, worse or the same
* place Bradman forward with a helmet and protective padding and would he have fared better, worse or the same
Bradman was shy of the short ball and really quick bowlers. Had there been as many about as we have had in the last thirty years, even with protective gear, I believe the concentration would have given him many more lean periods.
Therefore, I'll still have Tendulkar over Bradman. Tendulkar has also done his thing far longer than Bradman. Stats freaks will tell you that the longer stats are gathered the more their tendency to drop towards the overall norm. As an example, Adam Gilchrist had a batting average in the mid eighties after 52 Tests.
My main point was addressed to Bradman the man. Here, I'd place him at the bottom of the pile, along with Richard Hadlee, Salim Malik and Javed Miandad - players who played for themselves first. Bradman ended the career of many.
I'd argue that with better protection and the more even bounce that the commonly produced roads provide that Bradman would have fared quite well against more modern quicks.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of averages coming down over time; Bradman played 52 tests but over 20 years. If he'd played 52 more tests in that time I don't think there's anything to suggest that his average would have been significantly different. Maybe he would have got worked out more; maybe he would have just plundered even more runs.
In terms of selfishness; no argument here. One reason my favourite players are the ilk of Border, Steve Waugh, Langer, Taylor etc are that they always put the team's chance of victory first. Bradman treated the ACB money like his own.
The notion of more recent successful players playing in a previous era is problematic. Too much speculation and uncertainty for mine. To me it comes down to what attacks a batsman faces. Bradman faced Larwood, Tate, Verity, Laker and Bedser from England, Constantine from WI, Mankad, Hazare and Amarnath from India. Lara and Tendulkar have probably faced more varied and difficult attacks more often in their careers. Would they have dominated the attacks Bradman faced? Perhaps. But they would have had to have done so without helmets, on more difficult wickets some of the time and while working at a job to pay bills (well, perhaps not Tendulkar!).
If Gilchrist had batted higher I doubt his average would have been in the 80s after 52 tests. Bradman batted 3. Who knows what Headley or Pollock's average would have been after 50 tests?
Keep up the writings. Both points of view are exciting to read.
ReplyDelete