It appears Australia and England are hardly the best in the world at the moment, which poses the question how good were they both when Bradman dominated ?
Bradmanís batting average of 99.94 was , in all honesty , was made virtually against batting against English bowling. If the English bowling was as bad back then, as It is now , does that mean Bradmanís average is a little inflated ? I know Bradman faced body line bowling, but has that been overplayed ?
Bradman averaged 190 ( rounded ) against West Indies and South Africa, but in that era they were the weakest teams, which of course did no harm to his batting average, but that does not answer how strong was the English bowling attack.
Other than Anderson, when he bowls in England with the Duke ball, the Poms have a pretty ordinary bowling attack and one wonders whether any current day player could achieve a batting average against the Poms anything like Bradman ?
No doubt he was the best batsman of all time but is his batting average a ď little ď inflated ?