I first watched this as a cricket-obsessed kid, and loved it. Watching it again as an adult, it disappoints on many levels.<br /><br />Firstly, I understand the need for dramatic licence, but this doesn't excuse some of the laughable inaccuracies portrayed here. A batsman described as left-handed but depicted otherwise, fielders described as leg fielders moving to the offside when the opposite is the case, etc. They must know that cricket fans would be attracted to a series such as this, so they should have done their homework.<br /><br />Secondly, it is technically poor. The writers seem more interested in telling a fable, with its cast of clichés and "representative" characters. The radio commentator (played by real life sports commentator Norman May) detracts from the story with his repetitive exposition, and I was sick to death of "the barracker" by the fourth episode. Honestly, wasn't there a Depression? He followed them from one city to the next, I can only think he must have been a millionaire disguised as an uncultured and stupid yob. By contrast, Bradman's own parents get barely a look in, with only the odd scene here and there.<br /><br />Thirdly, they felt they could make up for the above with melodrama. I'm a sports fan and have known over the years quite a number of sportsmen and women who represented Australia. Nobody takes it this seriously. This was patriotic muck at its worst - five and a half hours of it. By the time going out to bat was compared to Gallipoli, I'd had enough.<br /><br />This is certainly not one of our finest TV moments.