Best cricketer for this decade ?

[bagapath]

It should because Warne at his best never played againts in in AUS. He missed that chance in 2003/04 given he was banned.

wouldn't have mattered. sehwag, dravid and laxman were in top form. sachin came back to form in the end and ganguly started it all off. warne would have suffered more humiliation in their hands. who knows? sachin might have come back to form earlier! had mcgrath played, australia would have won the series 2-0 or even 3-0.

murali remains the spinner of the decade.

but i would always choose warne in my team ahead of him. because i prefer his style. just like i would choose richards over miandad in 80s or sachin over ponting in the 00s even if the numbers point in the other direction. before ikki accuses me of any indian bias, let me tell you i would choose gilly, lillee, richards, warne, lara and marshall before any indian player, including sachin, out of all those i have seen.

 

[aussie]

while i disagree with what you claim as warne's impact on the game, i have to share what i saw that day.

the day was to start with irffan and sehwag at the crease with dravid, laxman and ganguly to follow. australia had warne and mcgrath in the attack. gilly, of course, was keeping wickets. most of the chennai cricket fans i know were not going to pass up this opportunity of witnessing so many great/very good players on the ground at the same time. the stands were full an hour before play. i had pulled some strings and was seated right in the middle of the members stand.

irrfan hit warne for a six and then became his world record victim. chennai crowds, traditionally as cricket crazy as barbados, lords, sydney or the oval, stood up to applaud the great man's moment of glory. in walked dravid. and sehwag opened up. what followed was a wonderful display of dazzling stroke play, strategic bowling and intelligent field placements - all in bright sunshine and totally supported and enjoyed by the full house. mark waugh was sitting with the aussie supporters not too far off from me. and i knew he enjoyed every minute of the day as much as anyone. it was heaven on earth.

but one memory i would always carry with me from that day, the point of this whole post, and that is of shane keith warne bowling his heart out. the champ knew he had not done well against india and that he had to do something special to not have that regret once his career finished. he varied his length, changed the angle, controlled the flight, played around with his pace, shifted the fielders around, kept varying his line. all with the precision of a supreme architect but never, not even once, without a touch of magic. his style, energy and aura filled the entire stadium throughout his long spell. had the pitch been less flatter and had the batsmen been less comfortable with his type of bowling, he would have had even more success on that day. this must be as good as his match winning spells elsewhere in the world. it didnt get that kind of result for his team but still, it was good to see him look pleased with a five wicket haul against his greatest nemesis and walk away cheered by his teammates. i dont expect to see a greater exhibition of test match bowling in my life.

Wonderful description, couldn't have described it better myself.

But as shown in the highlighted part you do agree that the pitch was flat. Further proof of the flat nature of the was of this was the Martyn/Gillespie partnership. Kumble & Harbhajan struggled to get the same big turn that spun AUS out on the first day..

 

[aussie]

ponting and warne are not the same. ponting has been extremely successful against india in australia. he has failed in india. warne has failed against india everywhere. the difference being ponting has not come to terms with indian pitches and so he has failed repeatedly. whereas indians cant be bothered by leg spin. so warne could not succeed against them. these are totally different issues.

All of this has been continously disapproved in this thread & the other thread, you just repeating the same thing over & over now. So as i said the ideological beliefs you have developed over the years about Warne & Punter's record in IND, unfortunately is clouding your judgement.

 

[aussie]

wouldn't have mattered. sehwag, dravid and laxman were in top form. sachin came back to form in the end and ganguly started it all off. warne would have suffered more humiliation in their hands. who knows? sachin might have come back to form earlier! had mcgrath played, australia would have won the series 2-0 or even 3-0.

AUS entire bowling first strenght attack was missing that series. If McGrath/Warne plus a fit Gillespie had played, the series wouldn't have been that close.

But it still would have been though for Warne & the rest because as your rightfully said the IND bats where in top form & those pitches where really flat throughout.

murali remains the spinner of the decade.

but i would always choose warne in my team ahead of him. because i prefer his style. just like i would choose richards over miandad in 80s or sachin over ponting in the 00s even if the numbers point in the other direction. before ikki accuses me of any indian bias, let me tell you i would choose gilly, lillee, richards, warne, lara and marshall before any indian player, including sachin, out of all those i have seen.

I dont think you are biased. I think you are one of the better posters around, just that your position on Warne & Ponting's record in IND (although u r not alone on CW and around the cricket globe) is dead wrong.

 

[aussie]

Indian series was in March, the operation was in April. He was complaining about it on tour and that is when they opened him up and saw he needed surgery. So I am pretty sure his shoulder was buggered in March too.

I honestly dont remember him complaining about it on tour TBH - but i know he didn't go into the series injured. After all i was only 9 haa. If he was suffering from injury (if you could find a link that would be great) during the series, that certainly adds a new dimension to the argument.

But fully fit or not, i'm sure you will agree him not having McGrath & co in 98, he thus had the impossible task to both contain & take wickets by himself againts those batsmen.

 

[bagapath]

But as shown in the highlighted part you do agree that the pitch was flat. Further proof of the flat nature of the was of this was the Martyn/Gillespie partnership. Kumble & Harbhajan struggled to get the same big turn that spun AUS out on the first day..

of course the pitch was flat. it was not a belter though. it had some life for sure. south africa or england or even pakistan would have folded to shane warne the way he bowled on that day. even the indian players, who were masters of leg spin, played him with much more respect than they normally would have. this was a genius in his elements. but it was like sampras on clay. reality had a little edge over magic in the end.

 

[stephen]

Out of interest I had a look at the '98 tests - the ones "before" he was injured.

1st Test: India v Australia at Chennai, Mar 6-10, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

This test had exactly one wicket taken by an Australian fast bowler. The two spinners performed almost identically. If Warne had not have been bowled into the ground in the second innings (when the pitch was an absolute belter) he would have had respectable stats in the game. Note that he dismissed Dravid twice and Tendulkar once (the only time he was dismissed). There was no cashing in on the tail for Warne in this game.

2nd Test: India v Australia at Kolkata, Mar 18-21, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

This match was an utter pounding, with Aus only taking 5 wickets in the match. Warne could hardly be blamed for the batting lineup batting like millionaires (how he bowled 7 no balls in the one match I have no idea).

3rd Test: India v Australia at Bangalore, Mar 25-28, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Warne took 5 wickets in this match, four of which were top order wickets. Kasper took 6 wickets for the match.

Over the series Warne took more wickets than any other Australian bowler, including a performance in the final match that helped Australia win.

Of his ten wickets in the series eight of the wickets were top/middle order batsmen. He was instrumental in Australia's only win. All this from a bowler who's shoulder was on the fritz and was facing the best players of spin in the world on their own turf with no support.

This is one of two series ever that he played against India where he could have even been considered near his best.

 

[aussie]

Out of interest I had a look at the '98 tests - the ones "before" he was injured.

1st Test: India v Australia at Chennai, Mar 6-10, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

This test had exactly one wicket taken by an Australian fast bowler. The two spinners performed almost identically. If Warne had not have been bowled into the ground in the second innings (when the pitch was an absolute belter) he would have had respectable stats in the game. Note that he dismissed Dravid twice and Tendulkar once (the only time he was dismissed). There was no cashing in on the tail for Warne in this game.

2nd Test: India v Australia at Kolkata, Mar 18-21, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

This match was an utter pounding, with Aus only taking 5 wickets in the match. Warne could hardly be blamed for the batting lineup batting like millionaires (how he bowled 7 no balls in the one match I have no idea).

3rd Test: India v Australia at Bangalore, Mar 25-28, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Warne took 5 wickets in this match, four of which were top order wickets. Kasper took 6 wickets for the match.

Over the series Warne took more wickets than any other Australian bowler, including a performance in the final match that helped Australia win.

Of his ten wickets in the series eight of the wickets were top/middle order batsmen. He was instrumental in Australia's only win. All this from a bowler who's shoulder was on the fritz and was facing the best players of spin in the world on their own turf with no support.

This is one of two series ever that he played against India where he could have even been considered near his best.

The KEY point.

Although looking back at that 1st test in Chennai. Wow for all those who saw that test Warne was superb in that 1st innings & his battle with Tendy in the second innings is the stuff of legends. I still believe to this day Warne had Tendulkar LBW before he reached 30 in the 2nd dig..

 

[stephen]

Actually I thought the key point was that he didn't cash in on late order wickets, picking up the best Indian batsmen.

 

[bagapath]

I still believe to this day Warne had Tendulkar LBW before he reached 30 in the 2nd dig..

i dont remember it. but it is quite possible. an umpiring decision could change the course of legend building history. the fact that sachin was so phenomenally successful against warne makes him bigger rather than make warne smaller. i always believed warne vs sachin, though the results were one sided, was true box office. shane sportingly acknowledging tendulkar's superiority over him, has made him an even bigger legend in my mind. wish i could see it for one last time in the coming IPL

 

[aussie]

Actually I thought the key point was that he didn't cash in on late order wickets, picking up the best Indian batsmen.

Statistically thats true. But after the 1st innings in Chennai he was utterly dominated by the IND top 6 - only Dravid was troubled. I think Bagapath may agree here ha..

 

[aussie]

i dont remember it. but it is quite possible. an umpiring decision could change the course of legend building history. the fact that sachin was so phenomenally successful against warne makes him bigger rather than make warne smaller. i always believed warne vs sachin, though the results were one sided, was true box office. shane sportingly acknowledging tendulkar's superiority over him, has made him an even bigger legend in my mind. wish i could see it for one last time in the coming IPL

I personally have always held that belief since i was a kid watching that test that he was out. I cant possibly lend you my old fungus tape - but if you can buy the DVD "Cricket's Greatest Entertainers" by Mike Atherton. It has highlights of Warne vs Tendy in 2nd dig in Chennai & that same potential dismissmal i was talking about is there...

 

[bagapath]

Statistically thats true. But after the 1st innings in Chennai he was utterly dominated by the IND top 6 - only Dravid was troubled. I think Bagapath may agree here ha..

sure i do. only i think the domination continued till november 2004.

 

[Migara]

So what is this comparison suppose to prove?. As i've said & i'm sure many have said in over the years in CW, Warne was out of form, injured & lacked bowling support between his tours to IND between 98-01.

What it proves is when there was better suited pitches for the support bowlers Murali did remarkably well against opponets where he struggled against. Vaas had done very well against Aussies and so has Herath in SL. Murali's home stats are so better than away stats against Aussies. One may say that pitches are different. We'll give the benefit of the doubt and then move on to Indian case. SL suport bowlers have done much better on SL pitches which have bit more life for the fast men than Indian pitches. The difference is nearly 10 runs. The fact is when tough opponents are there Murali also relied on support bowling to help him. When it helped him, he even rolled over the best in the business. But Warne after getting magnificent support was not able to roll them over.

If Warne had the bowling support he had in 2004 especially in 98 (since he was fit then) - he would have done better clearly. In 2001 if he wasn't injured things also would have gone better. The only relevant statiscal average when judging Warne at his best (with bowling support in IND) in 2004 where he was decent.

If SL had the current bowling attack in 1990s, Murali would have devastated India. SL now has bowlers with what Indians least like. That is pace. Malinga, thushara and Prasad all are 85+mph and fond of aiming at the helmet of the batsmen. Warne could not capitalize on the prey after they were softened up.

There is no way Murali would have done better than Warne in 98 (when Warne was fit) with that awful AUS pace attack - given that in the year before in 94 & 97 - Mural also was equally poor with no support. (Although based on cricinfo reports it seems like those 97 pitches where dead roads)

Murali with Doosra would have done definitely better, as seen by the latter tours. No one picked Muralis doosra in early 2000s except Ganguly perhaps. I don't see how Sidhu, Azhar and Kapil could do also. All these players picked Warne's flipper very well.

Both Warne & Murali hadd their best performances in IND 04 & 05 respectively because they had support. Warne with the great pacio trio & Murali with Vaas.

The single reason for Murali's success was the doosra and the topspinner. He bamboozled Indians with those deliverues in that tour

Not really. If the AUS pace attack bowled like how they bowled in 04, just like how Warne basically didn't have much work to do until he was needed. Murali would have been a passenger.

That is what you like to think, but which is not the true case.

 

[Ikki]

I honestly dont remember him complaining about it on tour TBH - but i know he didn't go into the series injured. After all i was only 9 haa. If he was suffering from injury (if you could find a link that would be great) during the series, that certainly adds a new dimension to the argument.

But fully fit or not, i'm sure you will agree him not having McGrath & co in 98, he thus had the impossible task to both contain & take wickets by himself againts those batsmen.

He was complaining about it, but everybody was surprised at the extent of the damage done to his shoulder. In fact, the injury was of such a nature that the doctors were wondering how he had bowled at all. I do agree with the latter part. If you don't have a good pace attack going away into India you're basically screwed.

 

[aussie]

What it proves is when there was better suited pitches for the support bowlers Murali did remarkably well against opponets where he struggled against. Vaas had done very well against Aussies and so has Herath in SL. Murali's home stats are so better than away stats against Aussies. One may say that pitches are different. We'll give the benefit of the doubt and then move on to Indian case. SL suport bowlers have done much better on SL pitches which have bit more life for the fast men than Indian pitches. The difference is nearly 10 runs. The fact is when tough opponents are there Murali also relied on support bowling to help him. When it helped him, he even rolled over the best in the business. But Warne after getting magnificent support was not able to roll them over..

A fit & in-form did not play IND @ Home or away until 2004. He missed the chance to potentially roll IND over in the only test of that 2004 - on the most bowler friendly wicket in Mumbai. So everything esle you said is irrelevant.

If SL had the current bowling attack in 1990s, Murali would have devastated India. SL now has bowlers with what Indians least like. That is pace. Malinga, thushara and Prasad all are 85+mph and fond of aiming at the helmet of the batsmen. Warne could not capitalize on the prey after they were softened up..

Check back on what happened in 2004.

Secondly i agree that SRI now do have a pace attack capable of winning in IND. But i doubt whether in a series in IND - if Malinga & co could do the same damage that McGrath/Dizzy/Kasper did to IND top order - so Murali would have more to than Warne.

Murali with Doosra would have done definitely better, as seen by the latter tours. No one picked Muralis doosra in early 2000s except Ganguly perhaps. I don't see how Sidhu, Azhar and Kapil could do also. All these players picked Warne's flipper very well.

Exactly in "latter tours". In 97 he didn't have it - thus he smashed like Warne with a similar poor support attack. So need to go into hypoteticals about his doosra since he didn't have it in the 90s while he toured IND.

The single reason for Murali's success was the doosra and the topspinner. He bamboozled Indians with those deliverues in that tour.

Indeed. That doosra that bowled Dhoni in Chennai (one of the ball of century that not many in the media have not hyped) clearly proves that. But overall on tour IND outside of that one innings in Chennai, IND played him fairly competently - he never bamboozeld them.

I have always agreed Murali has troubled IND more than Warne regardless. I am just correction the age old misguided reason for Warne's failures in IND & vs IND overall.

That is what you like to think, but which is not the true case.

I think have done a good job above to prove why this is the case..

 

[Migara]

A fit & in-form did not play IND @ Home or away until 2004. He missed the chance to potentially roll IND over in the only test of that 2004 - on the most bowler friendly wicket in Mumbai. So everything esle you said is irrelevant.

This misconception has been smashed here by bagapath. Warne indded did well tours preceding and following in most occasions.

Check back on what happened in 2004.

Secondly i agree that SRI now do have a pace attack capable of winning in IND. But i doubt whether in a series in IND - if Malinga & co could do the same damage that McGrath/Dizzy/Kasper did to IND top order - so Murali would have more to than Warne.

2004 Warne never single handedly destroyed Indian top order. be it in tests or ODIs. The second oart, you are correct. SL seam attack is no where close to what Aussies had. It is miles ahead what we had few years back.

Exactly in "latter tours". In 97 he didn't have it - thus he smashed like Warne with a similar poor support attack. So need to go into hypoteticals about his doosra since he didn't have it in the 90s while he toured IND.

He developed in in 2000 or around. There's a sharp difference in stats (home and away) after he had developed the doosra.

Indeed. That doosra that bowled Dhoni in Chennai (one of the ball of century that not many in the media have not hyped) clearly proves that. But overall on tour IND outside of that one innings in Chennai, IND played him fairly competently - he never bamboozeld them.

I don't know whether you watched the matches (I would say you have not). No Indian was confident in using their feet to Murali. All of them were playing from the crease. It was so un-Indian like. When they cannot attack him, they played defensively, and done that reasonably well. Warne never mad eIndians to change their mind set on how to play him.

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't know whether you watched the matches (I would say you have not). No Indian was confident in using their feet to Murali. All of them were playing from the crease. It was so un-Indian like. When they cannot attack him, they played defensively, and done that reasonably well. Warne never mad eIndians to change their mind set on how to play him.

Not to diminish Murali's work but I wonder it's it's an off-spin/leg-spin thing? The occasional offie has had a good tour of India but they've wrecked every leg-spinner to tour there bar Benaud, who took wickets when they were a pretty ordinary side. So, I wonder if they just play leg-spin better? Not sure of why that would be, though.

 

[aussie]

This misconception has been smashed here by bagapath. Warne indded did well tours preceding and following in most occasions.

Haa nothing of the sort, myself & Ikki have clearly proved him wrong. Those are the hardcore facts of Warne's career while he played IND between 98-01.

2004 Warne never single handedly destroyed Indian top order. be it in tests or ODIs.

Yes, but i am not debating whether he destroyed IND like how Murali did in Delhi 05. You incorrectly claimed that...Warne could not capitalize on the prey after they were softened up... Which is VERY naive way to look at how Warne bowled in the 3 test he played in 2004, given that it was the pace trio in every innings of that series did all the work. When Warne was needed to step up when the fast bowlers where getting wickets - he did so in Chennai & took 6 wickets on VERY flat deck - & although he didn't spin through IND like what Murali did in Delhi - IND definately played him with great respect. Bagapath himself stated that on page on the previous page.

Plus no ODIs where played in 04 so thats irrelevant.

The second oart, you are correct. SL seam attack is no where close to what Aussies had. It is miles ahead what we had few years back.

Yes but u claimed that if SL had the current pace attack on previous tours Murali would have DEVASTATED IND at home, which is definately exaggerating it. Since i dont see Malinga & co having the same consistent effect to blow out INDs top order like what McGrath/Dizzy/Kapser did in 04.Murali definately would have still had to carry the attack more often than not.

He developed in in 2000 or around. There's a sharp difference in stats (home and away) after he had developed the doosra.

Yes. But the argument here is whether if Murali went to IND in 98 like Warne & had to bowl with no support whether he would have done better - the answer is clearly NO. Since in 97 he also was smashed with similar lack of bowling support & he did not have the Doosra then - which indeed gave IND problems 8 years later in 2005.

I don't know whether you watched the matches (I would say you have not). No Indian was confident in using their feet to Murali. All of them were playing from the crease. It was so un-Indian like. When they cannot attack him, they played defensively, and done that reasonably well. Warne never mad eIndians to change their mind set on how to play him.

I see all cricket over here thanks to skysports. Only things i dont see if NZ & SL home series (when ENG aren't touring).

That is not true. In 2004 IND certainly did play Warne with much respect - again you can refer to Bagapath's post on his description of the days play he saw while at the ground @ the Chennai test.

Having seen both Warne & Murali bowl in IND in 04 & 05 respectively with bowling support & all their tricks. The IND batsmen played them equally competently & their decent series averages reflects this.

The only advantage i have always given the Murali is that he has tested IND slightly more at his best. But overall in IND they both have been average.

 

[bagapath]

Haa nothing of the sort, myself & Ikki have clearly proved him wrong. Those are the hardcore facts of Warne's career while he played IND between 98-01.

.

FTR, I dont agree with this claim. And I have said all I had to say already. So count me out boys...