Best cricketer for this decade ?

[Richard]

Well I thought I’ll check and see how much truth is in that statement. As it turns out Warne seems to go out of form when he plays India...
Here are results: I won’t even bother with 91-92… as Warne was just starting his career and it wouldn’t have been easy for debutant to bowl against some of the best players of spin.
AS for 1997/98 series.. Warne’s two series before playing India were South Africa and NZ

Trans-Tasman Trophy (New Zealand in Australia), November 1997/98
3 6 170.4 36 476 19 5/88 7/160 25.05 2.78 53.8

South Africa in Australia Test Series, December 1997/98
3 6 187.1 51 417 20 6/34 11/109 20.85 2.22 56.1 2


Yep those sure look like figures of man not bowling well…. Warne's subsequent series were not so good which is expected as he was coming back from a shoulder injury.. so only played one match against England and didn’t fair too well against WI either.
Just before Series 2000-01.. Warne’s figures against NZ


Trans-Tasman Trophy (Australia in New Zealand), March 1999/00
3 6 129.2 33 414 15 4/68 7/160 27.60 3.20 51.7 0

And Here are his figures after the Indian series…
The Ashes (Australia in England), July2001
5 10 195.2 41 580 31 7/165 11/229 18.70 2.96 37.8 3


Again you can see he was bowling pretty well during this time as well. He did have a crap series against NZ after the Ashes but that was more due to NZ playing exceptionally well rather than Warne bowling crap. McMillan and Carins were really good in that series.

No it was due to the fact that Warne only once bowled remotely well between the 1997/98 home summer and the 2001 Ashes. By the time the 2001 Ashes rolled around there was serious speculation that Warne planned to retire after it, he'd been bowling so badly for so long. The series' immediately prior to the 1997/98 series and immediately after the 2000/01 one are irrelevant. The point is that in everything in between them except the 1999/2000 series in Sri Lanka Warne bowled awfully. A fair bit of that was down to his shoulder and finger injuries, but not all of it - he simply was not capable of keeping-up the standards he enjoyed 1992/93-1997/98 and 2001-2005/06 for an entire career. Precious few are, and the fact that he was not capable of doing so is why I consider the suggestion that he was the greatest bowler in history ludicrous.

Warne between the 1997/98 and 2000/01 India tours averaged over 38 - and that flattered him considerably, there were several matches where he took big hauls including a fair few tailenders, and it also contained said SL series. If you deduct the SL series IIRR it's about 41-42. What happened straight before and straight after is as I say irrelevant - all that matters is what happened in the period which those two series' bookended.

As for 2004/05... India played Warne pretty well despite Sachin being injured for half of series and out of touch due to his well known injury and there could be case for Indian team being out of touch.... not playing test cricket for more than 6 months. Warne did ok in that series.
Overall Warne has been pretty terrible against India. Even when he’s been bowling well, his bad series have been against India. I believe its becauseof where he pitches his bowls. Warne worked on a leg stump line and Indian batsman are brilliant off their pads and plus they are good players of spin bowling so that’s why Warne hasn’t had much success against India. Not because he’s been out of form when playing India.

I've heard people make this suggestion before but I'm sorry, quality wristspin on a turning deck is capable of getting the ball to turn so much that however good a player of whatever direction of turn, you're still not going to have that much of a chance. Warne has had just a single series against India where he has been in with a fair chance, at the top of his own game. Yes, he and his side enjoyed a fair amount of advantage in that 2004/05 series, but we will never know what may have happened with a fully tip-top Warne against a fully tip-top Indian batting unit on consistently turning decks, because such a thing just never happened.

It is not the case that Warne bowled exactly against India as he bowled against everyone else and what tied everyone else in knots was played easily by the Indians. Complete and total fabrication, that, IMO.

 

[Top_Cat]

It is not the case that Warne bowled exactly against India as he bowled against everyone else and what tied everyone else in knots was played easily by the Indians. Complete and total fabrication, that, IMO.

It's because he bowled the same way as everywhere else that he struggled in India. Warnie himself has said so, is on the record as saying he had to change his method to bowl well in India (quicker through the air, etc.)

Anyway, the Indians, especially in 1998, didn't play him 'easily', they played him 'well'. No-one had gone after Warne the way Sidhu did nor could many players have slapped big turning leg-breaks from around the wicket over the wide mid-on fence the way Sachin did. Warnie's method wasn't ideally suited to India but they still had to play him very well.

 

[Richard]

I don't doubt that for a second. However I also don't doubt that had Warne faced-up to a team other than India in the same timeframe of the 1997/98 series he'd have done nothing-much. I don't doubt he wouldn't have been punished quite so severely as Sidhu and Tendulkar managed, but there's no way AFAIC he'd have returned anything other than poor figures.

As for what Warne said are you sure he wasn't suggesting he struggled because he tried to bowl the same way? He may have attempted the same methods but in my book he was incapable of delivering on them in the couple of series' in question, same way he was incapable of delivering on every other occasion against every other team in the 3-year period except SL 1999/2000.

 

[Top_Cat]

As for what Warne said are you sure he wasn't suggesting he struggled because he tried to bowl the same way? He may have attempted the same methods but in my book he was incapable of delivering on them in the couple of series' in question, same way he was incapable of delivering on every other occasion against every other team in the 3-year period except SL 1999/2000.

Well, I saw most of the '98 series and didn't see much deviation from his MO. Difference was that instead of being lamely prodded from the crease to slip, the same deliveries were either milked or smashed through the mid-wicket/mid-on arc. The pitches were also slow enough that when he threw up the big-turning leg-break, the batters had plenty of time to sit back and slap them through point/cover at the top of the bounce. The slow pitches also negated his flipper and took the bite out of his side-spinning deliveries. Since Warne never really did have a lot of variation anyway, there wasn't a lot he could do.

Basically, the Indians went over the top a lot more often than other players had been prepared to do against Warne. Cronje tried it successfully for a while but I can't remember anyone else doing it. In India, Warne came up against an entire team (including the openers!) prepared to do it. Sidhu's batting was something else, more memorable than Sachin in that series in some ways (and he was sublime). Sidhu set the tone and he's on record as saying it was their specific plan to come hard at Warnie.