Warne would consider Test return

[Richard]

I've never heard so much as one person claim before that MacGill bowled well in the First and Second Tests of that series. Even MacGill's most rabid fans - of which there are several on this board, and one or two who've been banned too.

 

[aussie]

I know what i saw, you could say when Chanderpaul going crazy in the 1st test in Guyana that all the bowlers where at his mercy.

But as i said i was appauled at how badly he bowled in Antigua probably bowled two good balls in that test which coincidentally got him two wickets, haha.

 

[Richard]

I know what i saw, you could say when Chanderpaul going crazy in the 1st test in Guyana that all the bowlers where at his mercy.

Ironically, after dismissing a couple of tailenders, his figures in the Chanderpaul-century innings were perfectly good. It was the second-innings where he got carted.

 

[honestbharani]

MacGill seems to be a bit overrated in the boards considering the fact that he never bowled any good spell at us. Even in Australia. Somehow I never felt that he was capable of even being a standby for Warne let alone his equal.

Warney himself was no great shakes against either, though..


So I guess you may be underselling MacGill a tad there if that is what you judge him on..

 

[Precambrian]

I agree, but Warney did something of note in the 2004 series right? Not spectacular by his Ashes standards, but ok still. MacGill has struggled to put any kind of pressure on any Indian side.

 

[Richard]

Or most others. MacGill has only ever had the odd good Test against any Test-standard team (has ransacked Bangladesh though).

 

[luffy]

I said yes only for the reason that we have no one.

It's one thing i dislike very highly though, when someone retires than comes back. But I believe it is almost a different case when someone is needed, as Warne is at the moment. Cam White has been playing good but as we have seen in the past, he is a very on-off sort of bowler, plus we can't just rely on the part-timers the whole time, ie, Clarke, Symonds, even White. We need a specialist spinner who strikes fear into batsmens heart like what Warnequite often did.

If he is up to it, and is the best choice, than why not give him a go.

 

[GIMH]

According to KP, Warne texted him quite recently and said he might play in the series next summer...LOL

 

[four_or_six]

According to KP, Warne texted him quite recently and said he might play in the series next summer...LOL

KP is such a ****-stirrer.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Warne - craves the spotlight.

 

[honestbharani]

I agree, but Warney did something of note in the 2004 series right? Not spectacular by his Ashes standards, but ok still. MacGill has struggled to put any kind of pressure on any Indian side.

MacGill only had the one series against us, though... didn't he?

 

[Precambrian]

MacGill only had the one series against us, though... didn't he?

Yeah, 2003-04 If I am right. He was carted around by Lax, Dravid and then Tendulkar. Oh yeah, Ganguly as well.

 

[Richard]

He was carted by other teams on plenty of occasions as well though.

 

[morgieb]

Yeah, 2003-04 If I am right. He was carted around by Lax, Dravid and then Tendulkar. Oh yeah, Ganguly as well.

The pitches were absoulte roads, and only one spinner has had success against India, and he didn't even play FC cricket in 2003-04.

 

[Precambrian]

The pitches were absoulte roads, and only one spinner has had success against India, and he didn't even play FC cricket in 2003-04.

Guessing you are referring to Warne. When did he enjoy success against India?

MacGill averaged a Sami-esque 50.78 against India in 2003-04, took 14 wickets in 4 matches.

In the same series, Kumble took 24 wickets from 3 matches @ 29.5

So, I don't think there was too much in the pitch for Macgill's poor performance.

 

[honestbharani]

Guessing you are referring to Warne. When did he enjoy success against India?

MacGill averaged a Sami-esque 50.78 against India in 2003-04, took 14 wickets in 4 matches.

In the same series, Kumble took 24 wickets from 3 matches @ 29.5

So, I don't think there was too much in the pitch for Macgill's poor performance.

Think he referred to Mendis there..

 

[Julian87]

I still reckon Australia will struggle this summer and he'll be back for another last hoorah in time for Teh Ashes.

 

[Francis]

I agree, but Warney did something of note in the 2004 series right? Not spectacular by his Ashes standards, but ok still.

Sorry I haven't really been keeping up to date with this thread. This comment got my attention though.

Yes Warne played very well India in 2004 which was part (perhaps not a big part) of the reason why Australia finally triumphed in India.

That said, Warne averaged a solid 30 in that series and got a fiver in one game. I hate stats and seldom use them, but considering Kumble's been the must successful spinner in India for the past 20/30 years (in fact arguably ever!) and he averages around 28/29, I thought Warne did a good, if unspectacular job.

In fact I rated Warne the best bowler in the world in 2004. In terms of quality of bowling I rate his efforts against Sri Lanka as good as his efforts in the 2005 Ashes. He was remarkable there.

But that's besides my point. There's a lot of myths about why Warne never did well in India, and many of them are false. Warne was coming off an injury in 1998 and was struggling for form when he came against Tendulkar (at the height of his powers) who'd been practicing leg spin for months in the nets. It was a similar sotry in 2001 and in fact I recall thinking Warne would retire after the series because his form was horrendous.

For me, I can tell good bowling when I see it and Warne, quite simply, bowled terrible in 1998 and 2001. If we'd seen Warne at his best in India, then he'd have a different record. Indians are great players of spin, but for me Warne hit India at the wrong time. In 2004 he was back to his best and he did a very solid job.

I'd also like to make a point about Murali...

There's a myth going around that Murali can't bowl on Australian pitches or that he can't do it against the very best - that being Australia. But for me his 4-400 (I think that's right) from three tests was more impressive than anything the other Sri Lanken bowlers, who took more wickets, did.

What to me was a telling factor was the caution the Aussies played Murali with. It's not like they were scoring over three an over off him. They were very cautious - Mike Hussey especially. In my opinion the other Sri Lanken bowlers got more wickets because the Aussies seemed more comfortable playing their shots and playing more freely.

It was also clear to me that only the very highest quality batting was enough to see Murali off. To me Murali can do it against Australia because any less than what Hussey and Clarke did and Murali would have taken more wickets.

To me, the respect the Aussies showed Murali says more about who the best bowler is than who took more wickets because I swear the Aussies were far less cautious against other players.

 

[silentstriker]

Sorry I haven't really been keeping up to date with this thread. This comment got my attention though.

Yes Warne played very well India in 2004 which was part (perhaps not a big part) of the reason why Australia finally triumphed in India.

That said, Warne averaged a solid 30 in that series and got a fiver in one game. I hate stats and seldom use them, but considering Kumble's been the must successful spinner in India for the past 20/30 years (in fact arguably ever!) and he averages around 28/29, I thought Warne did a good, if unspectacular job.

Kumble averages 24.73 in India.

The reason Warne didn't do as well against India is because his method of bowling plays right into Indian hands. He didn't do much of note in Australia either, against India.

Plus in the 2001 Ashes, he averaged 18.70...hardly out of form.

 

[silentstriker]

In any case, despite all that, he was most likely the best spinner of all time, so it's all moot.