FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
No denying that. Warne should have done better against that team, but he was shockingly out of form and unfit, and that accounts for part of his struggles in my opinion. Warne was reasonably poor through all of the 16 test victories Australia had in fact.Jono said:See I understand that, and I'm not discarding those facts. Those are true, but I think at the same time you have you to look at other factors too.
Firstly, as I've pointed out, India in 1999/2000 were rubbish. Gandhi, Kanitikar, MSK Prasad and R Vijay Bharadwaj and Ramesh (He wasn't too bad) were hardly players to fear. Even if Warne was in a horrid period of his career, he should have averaged less against a team with these players. Added on to that Laxman was hardly as good as he became from 2001 onwards (partly because he had to open) and Dravid hasn't been that good against Warne anyway. That leaves Tendulkar and Ganguly.
Just to expand a bit, between his 98 injury and the 2001 India tour, these were his series averages:
10 @ 54.00 vs India
2 @ 55.00 vs England
2 @ 134.00 vs West Indies
8 @ 14.28 vs Sri Lanka
6 @ 22.83 vs Zimbabwe
12 @ 30.83 vs Pakistan
8 @ 41.88 vs India
15 @ 27.60 vs New Zealand
10 @ 50.50 vs India
He came back strongly against England in the 2001 Ashes, and since then has only had one bad series, where he took 6 @ 71 against New Zealand. In this period, he averaged above 25 seven times out of nine, and one of the lower ones was against Zimbabwe. Since he really "came back" against Pakistan in 2002, he's only averaged above 25 in a series twice. One was when he took 10 @ 28 in 2 tests against Sri Lanka at home, and the other was in the next series where he took 14 @ 30.07 in 3 against India. Neither are shocking performances.
So, it's not simply an issue of Warne struggling against India. Warne's played 5 series against India, and 3 of them were in that period where he was plagued by injuries, out of form, even got dropped from the side and many people considered he'd never be back to his best. Aside from that period, he's got one shocking debut series against India, and one pass-mark tour.
Not denying that either. I don't think the 2004 tour needs much of an excuse actually. Warne played the best players of spin in the world at full strength, missed the best pitch for spin bowling in the series, was coming off relatively little cricket post-drugs ban and averaged 30. Nothing at all wrong with that. However, had he toured India right now instead of a year ago, I'd have higher expectations. That was my point, not that the tour was irrelevant.Jono said:Secondly, in 2004 you mentioned Warne returning after not playing much cricket. Yet he absolutely dominated Sri Lanka at least 3-4 months earlier in his first test series after the drug ban. If he can destroy SL, he must have been in some form surely? They're no India but they're not exactly bunnies against spin.
Anyway, there's no doubt India are by far the best players of spin in the world, particularly leg spin. There's also no doubt that Warne has a bit of a mental problem against India. For example, the one thing you can rely on Warne for all the time is accuracy. He's quite simply the most accurate wristspinner you're ever going to see, and puts almost everything on a dime, and that is the key to most of his success. Watch him in India in 2001, and he's bowling half-trackers and full tosses like it's going out of style. He looks demoralised, unfit, and simply a shadow of the bowler he usually is. Part of it was his form and confidence at the time, but he also has a problem playing against India. Maybe his decent 2004 tour will have overcome that, but it's fairly unlikely he'll play India again unfortunately, as I think he's likely to call it a day after the next Ashes series.