Why are we so obsessed with comparisons? Is it really that important to find out who the greatest batsman or bowler of all time is? What makes this even stranger is the fact that most people who have a basic understanding of the game will tell you that comparisons are generally inconclusive and very often almost impossible to do.
Indian fans are probably keener when it comes to this topic than most others. Almost any cricketing debate (whether it has anything to do with Indian cricket or otherwise) generally will have a bunch of Indian fans writing about how great their favorite player is. Whilst I have no problems with that, a lot of people seem to feel the necessity to downgrade other great players to make their favorite player appear even better.
The other topic that has often attracted several passionate comments is the 'our era' vs 'every other era' debate. Plenty of old timers find it very difficult to look past the achievements of players who played in their generation. Equally there are many youngsters today who have no appreciation of all the great performances chalked up by players in an earlier era.
Every era throws up a handful of great players. These players due to their achievements on the field can easily be separated from the other run of the mill players. However, comparisons between them are just not possible. This situation becomes even more complicated when players from different eras are compared.
A pet theory of old timers is that great batsman in the early days had to be greater as they often faced bigger obstacles. There was no protective gear, wickets were often very poor and umpiring standards around the world were ordinary to say the least. Whilst braving these circumstances and still scoring big runs game after game is undoubtedly a splendid achievement, does this really make them better than the modern day masters?
To gain a better understanding of this issue, the best thing to do would be to look at things from a different angle. If the batsman then were indeed better, then is it not fair to say that great modern day bowlers are much better than their counterparts who played in a different era? If the batsman had everything stacked against him then, bowlers today are in the same boat. Bats have become better, wickets have nothing in it for bowlers, grounds are becoming increasingly smaller and rules have been tweaked to such an extent that cricket is fast becoming a game between bat and bat with the bowlers being reduced to the role of fringe performer.
The fact remains that the moment we try and compare players from different eras, it becomes a game of assumption. Great players around the world have given immense enjoyment to millions of cricket lovers across generations. From Bradman to Tendulkar, Trueman to Wasim, all great players have left their unique imprints on this great game. Rather than losing sleep over comparisons that can never yield a concrete result, why not just appreciate the huge contributions each and every one of these players have made in making a great game even better?
