Bradman's 100 off 22 balls

[philreich]

The other day (Saturday I think), somebody mentioned on the Boxing Day Test thread about the time Don Bradman smashed 100 runs off just 22 deliveries. Well it just so happens that I'm currently reading a biography on The Don's life. It's simply entitled "The Don" by Roland Perry. While I was flying home from Melbourne on Sunday, I just happened to read about this very innings. What I wasn't aware of is the fact that he was already on 54 when he decided to go ballistic, nor was I aware that he had a special motivation for making a particular bowler pay a heavy price. I thought I'd share the account of this remarkable incident with all you cricket nuts on bigfooty:

On 3 November 1931, Don was invited to play in an exhibition match at Blackheath for a combined Blue Mountains team against the Lithgow Pottery Cricket Club. Blackheath Council was opening a new ground and testing a new malthoid wicket, a rubberised tar surface which didn't need matting.

Bradman came in when the score was 1 for 16, and moved to 54 in about 25 minutes against the second-rate bowling. The fielding captain 'rested' one of his opening 'quicks' and brought on Bill Black, an off-spinner.

"What does this fellow bowl?", Bradman asked the keeper, Leo Waters, as Black placed his field.

"Don't you remember this bloke?", Waters replied. "He bowled you in that Lithgow match (on the Kippax tour) a few weeks ago. He's been boasting about it ever since."

Bradman didn't react. He glanced around at Black's ambitious attacking field and faced up. The first ball was walloped for 6 over mid-on, and the tall Monterey pines on one side of the ground. The second ball went straighter for 6 more. A boy retrieved the ball which ended up well down a nearby street, as Black asked his captain if he could have two more men in the deep. His third ball was straight-driven for 4. The fourth was driven through mid-wicket for 2. More consultation between bowler and captain saw changes, but Bradman hammered 4, 4, 6 and 1 to take 33 off the over in 4 minutes, which was twice as long as normal because of the ball fetching.

He had retained the strike, and had the taste for blood. The next bowler was hit by Bradman for 40 - 6, 4, 4, 6, 6, 4, 6, 4 - in another 4 minutes, to the great joy of the crowd watching the ball sailing high out of the ground. His batting partner, Wendell Bill, took a single off the first ball of Black's next over to bring Bradman on strike. Black had 6 men in the deep. Bradman sent his second and third balls sailing high over mid-wicket and the pines. He had hit 86 off 19 balls, and needed 14 for a century in 3 overs. Bradman got a single off the fourth ball. Wendell Bill took a single off the fifth, giving Bradman the strike. Black had 3 balls to complete his over. Bradman lofted two 4's and one more smash for 6 over the pines to reach 100 in 22 balls. He had moved from 54 to 154 in just 12 minutes, the fastest 100 runs ever recorded in a game of cricket. Black's two overs cost him 62 runs, and now he had a far bigger boast than capturing Bradman's wicket, which had been achieved by hundreds of bowlers over his career. For the record, Bradman went on to 256, before being caught just short of those now-famous Monterey pines.

So there you have it folks. I guess the moral of the story is, if you managed to bowl Don Bradman, only boast about it to your mates if you weren't going to bowl to him again 3 weeks later .

 

[LukasTheGreat]

I'll remember that next time i bowl to Bradman.

 

[MowShow]

Nice share..

86 off 19 - 1, 4, 4, 6?
Is that not 101 off 23?

 

[CheekyMonkey]

bradman was a gun, def top 12 all time

 

[Power Raid]

The other day (Saturday I think), somebody mentioned on the Boxing Day Test thread about the time Don Bradman smashed 100 runs off just 22 deliveries. Well it just so happens that I'm currently reading a biography on The Don's life. It's simply entitled "The Don" by Roland Perry. While I was flying home from Melbourne on Sunday, I just happened to read about this very innings. What I wasn't aware of is the fact that he was already on 54 when he decided to go ballistic, nor was I aware that he had a special motivation for making a particular bowler pay a heavy price. I thought I'd share the account of this remarkable incident with all you cricket nuts on bigfooty:

On 3 November 1931, Don was invited to play in an exhibition match at Blackheath for a combined Blue Mountains team against the Lithgow Pottery Cricket Club. Blackheath Council was opening a new ground and testing a new malthoid wicket, a rubberised tar surface which didn't need matting.

Bradman came in when the score was 1 for 16, and moved to 54 in about 25 minutes against the second-rate bowling. The fielding captain 'rested' one of his opening 'quicks' and brought on Bill Black, an off-spinner.

"What does this fellow bowl?", Bradman asked the keeper, Leo Waters, as Black placed his field.

"Don't you remember this bloke?", Waters replied. "He bowled you in that Lithgow match (on the Kippax tour) a few weeks ago. He's been boasting about it ever since."

Bradman didn't react. He glanced around at Black's ambitious attacking field and faced up. The first ball was walloped for 6 over mid-on, and the tall Monterey pines on one side of the ground. The second ball went straighter for 6 more. A boy retrieved the ball which ended up well down a nearby street, as Black asked his captain if he could have two more men in the deep. His third ball was straight-driven for 4. The fourth was driven through mid-wicket for 2. More consultation between bowler and captain saw changes, but Bradman hammered 4, 4, 6 and 1 to take 33 off the over in 4 minutes, which was twice as long as normal because of the ball fetching.

He had retained the strike, and had the taste for blood. The next bowler was hit by Bradman for 40 - 6, 4, 4, 6, 6, 4, 6, 4 - in another 4 minutes, to the great joy of the crowd watching the ball sailing high out of the ground. His batting partner, Wendell Bill, took a single off the first ball of Black's next over to bring Bradman on strike. Black had 6 men in the deep. Bradman sent his second and third balls sailing high over mid-wicket and the pines. He had hit 86 off 19 balls, and needed 14 for a century in 3 overs. Bradman got a single off the fourth ball. Wendell Bill took a single off the fifth, giving Bradman the strike. Black had 3 balls to complete his over. Bradman lofted two 4's and one more smash for 6 over the pines to reach 100 in 22 balls. He had moved from 54 to 154 in just 12 minutes, the fastest 100 runs ever recorded in a game of cricket. Black's two overs cost him 62 runs, and now he had a far bigger boast than capturing Bradman's wicket, which had been achieved by hundreds of bowlers over his career. For the record, Bradman went on to 256, before being caught just short of those now-famous Monterey pines.

So there you have it folks. I guess the moral of the story is, if you managed to bowl Don Bradman, only boast about it to your mates if you weren't going to bowl to him again 3 weeks later .

what a great story

imagine being at the ground, that day

 

[philreich]

I'll remember that next time i bowl to Bradman.

Mate: I reckon you'll have more luck than Mr. Black did

 

[philreich]

Nice share..

86 off 19 - 1, 4, 4, 6?
Is that not 101 off 23?

Nice pick up: I reckon the author didn't count properly. It was actually 86 off 18, not 19.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Nice share..

86 off 19 - 1, 4, 4, 6?
Is that not 101 off 23?

The first single was from the bat of Wendell Bill to put Bradman back on strike.

 

[worbod]

Whilst Black could justifiably feel pleased with having bowled Bradman in their previous encounter, The Don had made 52 at the time, and Kippax's XI passed Lithgow's total of 62 with the loss of only one wicket and kept batting. Black's figures in that particular game were 4-0-47-1 (8 ball overs).

In this other game, to Black's credit, although having been slaughtered by Bradman, he had top scored for Lithgow Pottery with 65. Bradman's 256 contained 29 fours and 14 sixes and he also took 4-49 (he did not claim Black's wicket).

 

[worbod]

In 2011 a book regarding this famous match was published titled "Bradman at Blackheath". It was written by Ronald Cardwell and Irene McKilligan. I purchased a copy through Roger Page the cricket book seller in Yallambie, as it was not available in mainstream bookstores. Roger has his own website if anyone is interested. The book is only 30 pages.

 

[Craze]

Great stuff.

In my grade of cricket it's generally the 'larger' gentlemen that hit 6s. It would have been an amazing sight to see Bradman, at 5'8'' belting shit out of the opposition big fast bowlers.

 

[footyfan1978]

Great stuff.

In my grade of cricket it's generally the 'larger' gentlemen that hit 6s. It would have been an amazing sight to see Bradman, at 5'8'' belting shit out of the opposition big fast bowlers.

Clearly an absolute freak. None of us have any idea how good he really was. Bradman was not only talented but very smart guy. Read some of his own stuff from letters and he was a real independent thinker. Would love to have seen him live more than any other sportsman that has lived.

 

[philreich]

Clearly an absolute freak. None of us have any idea how good he really was. Bradman was not only talented but very smart guy. Read some of his own stuff from letters and he was a real independent thinker. Would love to have seen him live more than any other sportsman that has lived.

Yep: I once heard a suggestion that Viv Richards was better than Bradman. Viv was an excellent player, but I have no doubt about who the better player was, and I'm sure Richards himself would be embarrassed to be mentioned in the same breath as the great man. There'll never be another Bradman - just as there'll never be another Warne.

 

[GROTTO]

Yep: I once heard a suggestion that Viv Richards was better than Bradman. Viv was an excellent player, but I have no doubt about who the better player was, and I'm sure Richards himself would be embarrassed to be mentioned in the same breath as the great man. There'll never be another Bradman - just as there'll never be another Warne.

Viv definitely faced far superior bowlers and played against teams that were well established and developed.

 

[mediumsizered]

Viv definitely faced far superior bowlers and played against teams that were well established and developed.

Richards never faced the best bowling attack of his era & only faced Lillee & Thomson at their peak in one series (1975/76 during which Richards averaged 38). He also played against some quite weak Indian teams & never played test cricket against South Africa.

Take nothing away from Richards, he is one of the greats of the game, but it is doubtful that he played against "far superior bowlers" than Bradman (Larwood, Voce & Allen were no slouches, yet even during the Bodyline series Bradman averaged 58).

 

[philreich]

Richards never faced the best bowling attack of his era & only faced Lillee & Thomson at their peak in one series (1975/76 during which Richards averaged 38). He also played against some quite weak Indian teams & never played test cricket against South Africa.

Take nothing away from Richards, he is one of the greats of the game, but it is doubtful that he played against "far superior bowlers" than Bradman (Larwood, Voce & Allen were no slouches, yet even during the Bodyline series Bradman averaged 58).

And what's more, I have little doubt that Bradman would have dominated the modern era if he had played today. It would have been interesting to see how he would have gone against the West Indies pace battery of the mid '80's - safe to say he would have coped better than most.

 

[mediumsizered]

And what's more, I have little doubt that Bradman would have dominated the modern era if he had played today. It would have been interesting to see how he would have gone against the West Indies pace battery of the mid '80's - safe to say he would have coped better than most.

No doubt he would have taken full advantage of the shorter boundaries that have become a part of the modern game.

 

[GROTTO]

Richards never faced the best bowling attack of his era & only faced Lillee & Thomson at their peak in one series (1975/76 during which Richards averaged 38). He also played against some quite weak Indian teams & never played test cricket against South Africa.

Take nothing away from Richards, he is one of the greats of the game, but it is doubtful that he played against "far superior bowlers" than Bradman (Larwood, Voce & Allen were no slouches, yet even during the Bodyline series Bradman averaged 58).

Voce and Allen would be lucky to be in the top 50 bowlers of all time.

I am not saying that Bradman is not better than Richards, just that the quality of bowlers that Richards faced was far superior to Bradman's. It is a subtle point. A lot of bowlers that Richards faced would be easily the top 50 possibly even the top 20.

 

[eth-dog]

Not a bad talent that kid.

 

[aflcliche]

Is this innings on youtube?

 

[mediumsizered]

Voce and Allen would be lucky to be in the top 50 bowlers of all time.

I am not saying that Bradman is not better than Richards, just that the quality of bowlers that Richards faced was far superior to Bradman's. It is a subtle point. A lot of bowlers that Richards faced would be easily the top 50 possibly even the top 20.

Outside of Lillee & Thomson, who are these other bowlers you refer to? I'll give you Imran Khan & qualify this by saying that Richards only averaged 28 against Pakistan when Imran was at the peak of his game in 1977.

From people I've spoken to in the past who saw 'Gubby' Allen bowl, he was rated very highly (Bradman also rated him very highly).

As a side note, it would be interesting to compile a list of the Top 50 bowlers of all time. I would suspect the vast majority who made the list would not have played in either Bradman's or Richard's era, e.g. Warne, McGrath, Trueman, Hall, Spofforth, Barnes, Murali. Factor in the great Windies bowlers of Richard's era & you can see that there wouldn't be much difference in the quality of bowlers faced by both Bradman & Richards. There is one significant factor that hasn't been mentioned. The wickets that Bradman played on were nowhere near as good as those that Richards played on.

 

[Belnakor]

And what's more, I have little doubt that Bradman would have dominated the modern era if he had played today. It would have been interesting to see how he would have gone against the West Indies pace battery of the mid '80's - safe to say he would have coped better than most.

The biggest key to bradmans success was when he got in, he cashed in. his mental ability to keep batting was simply insane. The modern era he would just have had a bigger bat and not needed to run as much.

 

[MowShow]

The first single was from the bat of Wendell Bill to put Bradman back on strike.

He had hit 86 off 19 balls, and needed 14 for a century in 3 overs. Bradman got a single off the fourth ball. Wendell Bill took a single off the fifth, giving Bradman the strike. Black had 3 balls to complete his over. Bradman lofted two 4's and one more smash for 6 over the pines to reach 100 in 22 balls.

Doesn't this read Bradman on 86 off 19.
Bradman takes a single (87 off 20).
Single to put Bradman back on strike.
Bradman hits 4, 4, 6 off the next 3 deliveries (101 off 23)?

Not important at the end of the day I suppose. Wish I was around to see this guy in action...

 

[GROTTO]

Outside of Lillee & Thomson, who are these other bowlers you refer to?

Richards Test career spanned from 74 to 91.

Here is a list of all the time wicket takers in test cricket about the top 20, he has faced 8 of them on that list. Interestingly Tendulkar has faced about 16 of them on that list.



I think your missing the point I am making, I am not saying Richards is better than Bradman. I am saying though Richards faced far superior bowlers than Bradman.

 

[GROTTO]

There is one significant factor that hasn't been mentioned. The wickets that Bradman played on were nowhere near as good as those that Richards played on.

But that also goes the other way, if the pitches were as bad as you mentioned, almost all the other bowlers should have demolished the rest of the batsmen that played in that era.

In fact that highlights just how bad the bowlers were. Shit pitches and yet they couldnt destroy the opposition and take wickets.