Best cricketer for this decade ?

[Ikki]

before you laugh too much, note that what you say is correct only against india ikki. his record in australia against other teams is very very good. he is crap against india in austraila too.

now, if u r blaming injuries for his failure in india what is your excuse for his pathetic record against india in australia? he seems to do well against everyone else in australia. why was he horrible against india in australia?

Incoincidentally, it is actually worse against Sri Lanka; the only other side apart from India that play spin exceptionally well.

But check the stats again, IIRC Warne is worse against most sides at home than he is away - which explains why he averages better away than at home. Might have to do with the fact that Australia's only generally had 1 spin receptive pitch.

You need to know something about the player in question, I find it pathetic that you generalise to the nth degree without knowing specifics.

 

[bagapath]

Incoincidentally, it is actually worse against Sri Lanka; the only other side apart from India that play spin exceptionally well.

But check the stats again, IIRC Warne is worse against most sides at home than he is away - which explains why he averages better away than at home. Might have to do with the fact that Australia's only generally had 1 spin receptive pitch.

You need to know something about the player in question, I find it pathetic that you generalise to the nth degree without knowing specifics.

you still have not explained why his record against india in australia is far worse than his overall record in australia. straight forward answer, please

 

[bagapath]

I aceept it to the point in that IND playerd him better than anybody even at his best. But when you say things like he was "got mauled beyond recognition" this where i feel you & other you feel the same have forget what where the situations in Warne's career in the tours he had to IND.

excuses.....

what about india down under? why did warne get mauled by indian batsmen in australia?

 

[aussie]

excuses.....

No - Facts.

what about india down under? why did warne get mauled by indian batsmen in australia?

He was in the worst form of his test career in 99/00. He just wasn't smashed like in IND 01 because McGrath & co in home conditions had the IND batting well covered, so generally Warne didn't have much serious bowling to do.

Plus just in case you are using it as part of your argument - you can't include 91/92 since Warne was raw then.

 

[bagapath]

okay aussie. you say, "in 12 years of test cricket involving two home series and three away tours, warne never played india in peak health or with good support. he would have succeeded against them otherwise. indians have played him easily only because of these reasons and not because they were great players of legspin.". not even shane warne would buy this argument dude.

 

[aussie]

okay aussie. you say, "in 12 years of test cricket involving two home series and three away tours, warne never played india in peak health or with good support.

Up until the 2004 tour yes he didn't have that perfect combination.

he would have succeeded against them otherwise. indians have played him easily only because of these reasons and not because they were great players of legspin.". not even shane warne would buy this argument dude.

As i said before, it is clear IND have played Warne better than any team whether he was in full health with support or out of form. But clearly based on how he bowled in 2004 if he didn't have has injury woes that affected in between ENG 99 to IND 01 - and always played in with the support he had in 2004, he would have a better record againts them.

Warne despite how great he is can't by himself destroy IND they are too good againts spin. If Warne for example had ambitions to tour the Ashes this year & had toured IND in 2008 - he would have been smasehd again.

 

[bagapath]

okay. i will wait for ikki to tell me why warne's record in australia against india is much much worse than his overall record in australia.

and warne, for me, is a shoo-in for a post world war 2 XI. might choose oreilly for an all time team though. but always prefer warne by a whisker over murali otherwise. that is simply because i am a sucker for style.

 

[Ikki]

you still have not explained why his record against india in australia is far worse than his overall record in australia. straight forward answer, please

I already did. He had multiple injuries during 97/98 to 01 of which he was poor against many teams home and away. What makes his situation worse in Australia is that it is even less helpful than Indian pitches against Indian batsmen.

Let's not take this to mean that Warne would have destroyed India otherwise, but please, for the sake of equity acknowledge he would not have been that bad.

 

[bagapath]

Let's not take this to mean that Warne would have destroyed India otherwise, but please, for the sake of equity acknowledge he would not have been that bad.

as a true cricket fan and a huge shane warne supporter, i am still not able to accept this. i truly believe warne could not have succeeded against any indian team since 1986 till now. no leg spinner could have bowled well against shastri, kapil, azhar, vengsarkar, siddhu, sachin, laxman and sehwag. please note that i have not included dravid and ganguly.
i think warne would have suffered equally badly anywhere against any three or four of them however fit and match ready he was. u dont have to agree with me - but this is honestly what i feel.

 

[bagapath]

I said compare them where they had somewhat the same conditions (vs India, in India) and you'll see their records are pretty much the same,

too bad we cant bring in the ODI stats. if we could, then sharjah would be the litmus test. warne was listless against india in sharjah whereas murali has rolled them out more than once on his own proving once again india dont care much about warne but have to respect murali.

 

[Ikki]

as a true cricket fan and a huge shane warne supporter, i am still not able to accept this. i truly believe warne could not have succeeded against any indian team since 1986 till now. no leg spinner could have bowled well against shastri, kapil, azhar, vengsarkar, siddhu, sachin, laxman and sehwag. please note that i have not included dravid and ganguly.
i think warne would have suffered equally badly anywhere against any three or four of them however fit and match ready he was. u dont have to agree with me - but this is honestly what i feel.

From 98-01 it was pretty clear that Warne went off the rails. He could not land his balls properly and constantly let out pressure he would build up. Warne himself has already talked about it, I've brought it up too, that he practically had to learn to bowl again because what he was bowling did not trigger the same muscle memory he had. His finger was forever crooked and he could no longer bowl his array of deliveries. How you think that the Warne in that period resembles the Warne before and after that period is a good question; because any real fan of Warne or cricket in general could spot that something was simply not right.

You're right, I don't agree with you and Murali's exploits in Sri Lanka are good indication for me. That I think Warne is better doesn't change the fact that they were worthy rivals and that they usually shared the same kind of successes everywhere else. You think no leg spinner could have bowled to the aforesaid batsmen...you're more an Indian fan than a Warne fan, I am sure. There's nothing wrong with that, but I dislike your first sentence as a precursor to the rest of your argument.

Anyway, all bases have been covered on this topic before. You don't agree; that's fine.

 

[bagapath]

.you're more an Indian fan than a Warne fan, I am sure. There's nothing wrong with that, but I dislike your first sentence as a precursor to the rest of your argument.

why do you dislike that sentece?
and why do you call me more of an indian fan than a warne fan? can i call you more of an australian fan than a cricket fan?

the bunch of players i have listed were superb against qadir, mushy, warne, mcgill and kaneria every time they played them. none of those leg spinners made any impact on the said players anywhere, ever. if three of those batsmen played together no sensible opposition captain would select a leg spinner in his team.

if i had claimed these indian batsmen could've handled pace bowling of any kind or off spinners with equal ease, then you can blame me for allowing my indian bias to cloud my opinion. i never said it. murali and saqlain have run through several indian batting line ups featuring many of those players. they have succumbed to the umar guls and simon doulls of this world not to mention greats like allan donald, shaun pollock and courtney walsh.

all that i am saying is however fit and well supported warne could have been he would not have succeeded against india anywhere because the stats of indian batters against leg spinners say so throughout the entire period of warne's career, and a little before and after that as well. warne's stats against india are a reflection of this indisputable reality

 

[Ikki]

Because I can't fathom someone calling themself a "huge" fan yet ignoring the glaring change he had in his game during his injury period. The fact that you then go on and try to denigrate his record leads me to believe you're not genuine in your claim. And yes, it still is a stretch to say "no leg spinner could ever" take on those players. What were they, gods?

 

[bagapath]

Because I can't fathom someone calling themself a "huge" fan yet ignoring the glaring change he had in his game during his injury period. The fact that you then go on and try to denigrate his record leads me to believe you're not genuine in your claim. And yes, it still is a stretch to say "no leg spinner could ever" take on those players. What were they, gods?

why do u laugh, ikki? i guess you dont have a logical counter argument to beat mine. i find it sad you have to resort to sarcasm when cornered.

to answer your question sincerely.... no, they were not gods. they were mere mortals who played leg spin exceptionally well. they were crap against pace and struggled against quality off spin. but they could slaughter leg spinners in their sleep. please try to disprove me with facts, not snide remarks.

and you are questioning my honesty, ikki? i am no blind fanboy to ignore obvious facts when analyzing a player's career. your defense of warne's record against india with all sorts of excuses is as pathetic as someone trying to defend sachin's record against SA at home. i am a huge warne fan and he was crap against india because the indian teams of his time could slaughter leg spinners at will.

 

[subshakerz]

In IND 98. As i said Warne did not have a strong fast bowling attack to assist, thus he got hammered. That lost was huge since as AUS proved in 2004, WI in 80s & SA 2000. PACE is what wins you tests in IND.

This is no excuse for a champion like Warne, I'm sorry. If anything, it admits that he was dependant on other bowlers to be a challenge to the batsman. Murali never had that luxury. He was in great form and on spinning wickets yet was owned comprehensively.

In 2004. Everything went well for Warne. He was in very good form & he had the strong pace attack to make his worst easier - thus AUS won.

You forget the fact that in this series he was faced with a batting lineup in poor form yet still was the most expensive spinner on both sides and at no point looked to remotely run through the Indian side. He was reduced to being a stock bowler. Hardly a good series much less a great one.

 

[subshakerz]

Warne despite how great he is can't by himself destroy IND they are too good againts spin. If Warne for example had ambitions to tour the Ashes this year & had toured IND in 2008 - he would have been smasehd again.

Then this is a big difference between him and Murali, because Murali was capable of destroying India on his day while Warne never came close.

 

[R_D]

as a true cricket fan and a huge shane warne supporter, i am still not able to accept this. i truly believe warne could not have succeeded against any indian team since 1986 till now. no leg spinner could have bowled well against shastri, kapil, azhar, vengsarkar, siddhu, sachin, laxman and sehwag. please note that i have not included dravid and ganguly.
i think warne would have suffered equally badly anywhere against any three or four of them however fit and match ready he was. u dont have to agree with me - but this is honestly what i feel.

Another reason for Warne not being so successful was the way he bowled... he always bowled just on or outside the leg stump.... As we know Indian players are not only good against spin but very good off anything bowled into their pads..

Warne hardly had a great tour of India 2004... better than his previous attempts that too when half the Indian batting lineup was just coming back from injuries or after long break.

 

[R_D]

in comparison, murali was quite successful against india. his 8 wicket haul on the first day of the test in sl was one of the most awesome spin bowling performances i have ever seen. warne never even came close to that kind of a performance against india.

3rd Test: Sri Lanka v India at Colombo (SSC), Aug 29-Sep 2, 2001 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Not the best batting lineup India's put out though... Murali had a even better match in his last tour of India.. where all of Sachin, VVS, Dravid et al were playing and he ran through the line up... might have been second test match of the series...

 

[aussie]

This is no excuse for a champion like Warne, I'm sorry. If anything, it admits that he was dependant on other bowlers to be a challenge to the batsman. Murali never had that luxury. He was in great form and on spinning wickets yet was owned comprehensively.

Has Murali ever won a series for SRI in IND?. No he hasn't. Whats his average in India in India again also? - 39.50.Pace is what has historically won in India since they became a force a home in the 70s, so all that arguments proves is that none of two great spinners have never dominated in IND without the help of decent pace attack.

You forget the fact that in this series he was faced with a batting lineup in poor form yet still was the most expensive spinner on both sides and at no point looked to remotely run through the Indian side. He was reduced to being a stock bowler. Hardly a good series much less a great one.

The only batsman that was in poor form going into that series was Tendy due to his tennis elbow injury. Everyone else was in good form - AUS pace trio just worked them out technically - which made Warne's job easier.

Then this is a big difference between him and Murali, because Murali was capable of destroying India on his day while Warne never came close.

Dont exaggerate. If Murali had to bowl with that bowling attack AUS had he 2008, he also would have struggled to dominant IND. Those pitches where just as flat as the ones Murali encountered on 97 tour of IND - where he did struggle on similar type wickets with an equally poor pace attack.

 

[aussie]

as a true cricket fan and a huge shane warne supporter, i am still not able to accept this. i truly believe warne could not have succeeded against any indian team since 1986 till now. no leg spinner could have bowled well against shastri, kapil, azhar, vengsarkar, siddhu, sachin, laxman and sehwag. please note that i have not included dravid and ganguly.
i think warne would have suffered equally badly anywhere against any three or four of them however fit and match ready he was. u dont have to agree with me - but this is honestly what i feel.

Once Warne had a strong pace attack to back him to work the tactics that made AUS win in 2004, he certainly would troubled all of them.