‘The Warne’ factor

[Sunil1z]

I believe Shane Warne was one of the major reasons Aus dominated RSA in 90s and 2000s when SA were clear no.2 atleast till 03 . This dominance made AUS undisputed no.1 and ATG side.

My question is how would AUS between 95-07 fare if instead of Warne, Lyon was their main spinner?
Conversely how would current Aus side fare if Warne was their main spinner instead of Lyon ?

 

[Coronis]

I believe Shane Warne was one of the major reasons Aus dominated RSA in 90s and 2000s when SA were clear no.2 atleast till 03 . This dominance made AUS undisputed no.1 and ATG side.

My question is how would AUS between 95-07 fare if instead of Warne, Lyon was their main spinner?
Conversely how would current Aus side fare if Warne was their main spinner instead of Lyon ?

They’d struggle in this Indian series.

 

[Burgey]

The 90s side would be a fair bit worse overall and the current side a lot better

Simply say that because the 90s side had enough very good to great players to compensate for Warne missing, whereas his inclusion in the current side would elevate it massively

 

[Sunil1z]

They’d struggle in this Indian series.

How would they go in Ashes ? Clear winner?

Also I doubt Warne would struggle against this garbage Indian batting side .

I feel Warne would have been the Captain instead of Cummins.

 

[Burgey]

How would they go in Ashes ? Clear winner?

Also I doubt Warne would struggle against this garbage Indian batting side .

I feel Warne would have been the Captain instead of Cummins.

Not if he kept ***ting women he wouldn’t. I mean CA has at least demonstrated their consistency on that issue precluding blokes from the captaincy

 

[Molehill]

How would they go in Ashes ? Clear winner?

Also I doubt Warne would struggle against this garbage Indian batting side .

I feel Warne would have been the Captain instead of Cummins.

For all that Warne was clearly a much better bowler than Lyon, the main Aussie issue is their batting line up. He can't help that.

As for the Ashes, he'd be in awe of Bazball, it ticks all of his boxes. He'd have loved that Day 1 declaration.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I believe Shane Warne was one of the major reasons Aus dominated RSA in 90s and 2000s when SA were clear no.2 atleast till 03 . This dominance made AUS undisputed no.1 and ATG side.

My question is how would AUS between 95-07 fare if instead of Warne, Lyon was their main spinner?
Conversely how would current Aus side fare if Warne was their main spinner instead of Lyon ?

Or alternatively how would both teams have gone with MacGill as their main spinner?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

The 95-05 side would have also had a much longer tail after Gilchrist (except when Reiffel or Brett Lee were playing). An 8-11 of Gillespie, Lyon, Kasprowicz, McGrath is absolutely dreadful. Perhaps Andy Bichel would've played a lot more tests.

 

[Kenneth Viljoen]

No right or wrong answer , purely subjective post ..
But I think Lyon would have struggled to have the same impact in Warnes Era with the bat pad technique and no DRS , also I don't think he would have been the main spinner for long with Stuart Macgill in the side , I think Colin Miller would have also played a few more tests without Warne .

 

[Aritro]

New South Wales would have been glad to have someone to replace Stuart MacGill when he was playing for Australia

 

[R!TTER]

Unless you fill your sides with quality 3-4 A/R in the lower order you're toast, coincidentally I like to pick A/R till even the last man at 11 in hypothetical combinations - so I guess I win

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

Or alternatively how would both teams have gone with MacGill as their main spinner?

Or even Brad Hogg. Why do I mention Hogg, because he was probably the third best wrist spinner in Australia in the 1990s to the mid 2000s (behind Warne and MacGill). Hogg would be playing for Australia in Test cricket if he was playing nowdays. He didn't really play a lot of Test cricket in the Warne/MacGill era to really see if he could do well in Test cricket, only played a handful of Test matches. Plus he was a handy lower order batsman too, averaged 26 in Test cricket and averaged 35 in First-Class cricket.

 

[Spark]

No right or wrong answer , purely subjective post ..
But I think Lyon would have struggled to have the same impact in Warnes Era with the bat pad technique and no DRS , also I don't think he would have been the main spinner for long with Stuart Macgill in the side , I think Colin Miller would have also played a few more tests without Warne .

No DRS would neuter most modern finger spinners tbh. The most effective way of taking wickets on turners is simply to dart the ball as quickly as possible with maximum sidespin straight at middle stump. That only works because DRS has made umpires so much more willing to give LBWs.

EDIT: On that basis late career Warne would dominate to levels hitherto unknown tbh. He got a **** ton of wickets with leg breaks which didn't turn in the last few years of his career, he would become nigh on unplayable with DRS. He'd just bowl nothing but flat fast legbreaks and laugh as the batsmen got totally bamboozled by the same ball bowled six times doing six different things an over.

 

[Molehill]

No DRS would neuter most modern finger spinners tbh. The most effective way of taking wickets on turners is simply to dart the ball as quickly as possible with maximum sidespin straight at middle stump. That only works because DRS has made umpires so much more willing to give LBWs.

EDIT: On that basis late career Warne would dominate to levels hitherto unknown tbh. He got a **** ton of wickets with leg breaks which didn't turn in the last few years of his career, he would become nigh on unplayable with DRS. He'd just bowl nothing but flat fast legbreaks and laugh as the batsmen got totally bamboozled by the same ball bowled six times doing six different things an over.

I don't buy the Warne would pick up loads more wickets on DRS argument. He won many appeals which would've been given not out on DRS simply because of who he was. I think it would've evened itself out.

 

[Spark]

I don't buy the Warne would pick up loads more wickets on DRS argument. He won many appeals which would've been given not out on DRS simply because of who he was. I think it would've evened itself out.

There's no reason at all to conclude that the universal and massive uplift in the number of LBWs given against spin since the introduction of DRS would not include Warne. It went from something like 17% of all wickets taken by spinners to over 21%.

"But he got some lucky LBWs sometimes" is particularly weak as a point of evidence against.

 

[Molehill]

There's no reason at all to conclude that the universal and massive uplift in the number of LBWs given against spin since the introduction of DRS would not include Warne. It went from something like 17% of all wickets taken by spinners to over 21%.

"But he got some lucky LBWs sometimes" is particularly weak as a point of evidence against.

Warne was already above average at 19.6% of his wickets being lbw. That suggests we're not looking at a particularly big increase if indeed any.

Also, where were all these extra wickets going to come from? The lbw's that would've been given he was probably getting another way an over or two later anyway.

 

[Spark]

Warne was already above average at 19.6% of his wickets being lbw. That suggests we're not looking at a particularly big increase if indeed any.

Also, where were all these extra wickets going to come from? The lbw's that would've been given he was probably getting another way an over or two later anyway.

He took a wicket every ten overs on average. It's not like he just took wickets for fun; he had to work for them.

 

[R!TTER]

"But he got some lucky LBWs sometimes" is particularly weak as a point of evidence against.

He definitely got a lot of wickets on reputation, same goes for McGrath & Oz in general in part because of how dominant they were. This was particularly acute post 2001/02 when 2 neutral umpires came to the fore. Tell me what do you think about the first ball of the series -

Out, not out or umpire's call?

 

[Starfighter]

He definitely got a lot of wickets on reputation, same goes for McGrath & Oz in general in part because of how dominant they were. This was particularly acute post 2001/02 when 2 neutral umpires came to the fore. Tell me what do you think about the first ball of the series -Out, not out or umpire's call?

This is a bigger stretch than your average bungee jump. Also, I don't see Warne or McGrath bowling at your timestamp.

 

[R!TTER]

Did you miss the Oz part? As for Warne or McGrath, check Sehwag's lbw in second innings when he middled it basically! Pretty clear how lot of so called neutral umpires were intimated by them especially Mcgrath's incessant appeals!