Shane Warne's top 50 cricketers

[PhoenixFire]

That's maybe why. I saw Tendulkar face Warne in the 2001 India v Aus series, and he did pretty well on some repsonsive pitches. I've never actually seen Warne bowl to Lara, but I'm sure that Lara would have hit him around a bit.

 

[Richard]

Both of them did, TBH - they were both absolutely brilliant players of spin.

I've never bothered trying to separate them myself.

 

[silentstriker]

Ambrose
Tendulkar
Lara
McGrath
Healy
Ponting
Taylor
Akram
Murali
Laxman

In no particular order.

 

[silentstriker]

But as far as warne is considred i think Tendulkar played him better than lara.

That's maybe why. I saw Tendulkar face Warne in the 2001 India v Aus series, and he did pretty well on some repsonsive pitches. I've never actually seen Warne bowl to Lara, but I'm sure that Lara would have hit him around a bit.

Both of them did, TBH - they were both absolutely brilliant players of spin.

I've never bothered trying to separate them myself.

Tendulkar plays Warne better than Lara, but he doesn't play spin better than Lara. Best player of spin that I saw was Andy Flower. But Lara is a very close second. Tendulkar plays pace better than Lara due to his superior footwork against the quicks, but Lara plays spin better as his hand eye coordination really shines against the slower bowlers. You'd think it would be the other way around considering where they are from, but it's not true.

 

[Richard]

Don't think Lara really plays spin as-a-whole better than Tendulkar TBH - tends to hit spinners around more often, but that's just the way he does it, Tendulkar is generally more measured (though perfectly capable of hitting 'em around when the situation demands).

I've never considered Tendulkar to be a worse player of spin than anyone, even Andy Flower.

 

[silentstriker]

IMO, no one matches Andy Flower. In that one tour of India, on turning pitches, he looked like he was facing a U-13 attack.

 

[Matt79]

Also a handy left-arm pie-thrower.

I think two out of Laxman, Murali, Ambrose and Border will miss out. If Murali is in, he'll be around 9 or 10.

Taylor, Healy, McGrath are absolute certainties. Ponting is almost as certain. Sachin and Lara wil be there. Given his plaudits to Wasim in his comments on Waqar, it would be surprising if Akram wasn't in. I think he'll include Border, but am less certain than the others mentioned.

The wild-card is Michael Clarke. We know Warnie thinks the world of him, and I'd would have thought he'd have been included in the 40s or 30s somewhere, which would be surprising but understandable given the list. But unless I'm very much mistaken, he hasn't been listed yet, and I can't see him leaving him out.

 

[The Sean]

Ambrose
Tendulkar
Lara
McGrath
Healy
Ponting
Taylor
Akram
Murali
Laxman

In no particular order.

So it's Border to miss out for you?

 

[The Sean]

Indeed, Clarkey puts a whole new spin on things - meaning TWO of those mentioned have to miss out.

 

[Richard]

Also a handy left-arm pie-thrower.

?

 

[Poker Boy]

Mark Waugh above Steve - seems Warne prefers style over subatance? Hughes beter than Donald - no comment. As for the Top 10 I'd be amazed if he didn't put murali in the Top 10 - I don't think he'll be in the top 4 which might be Lara, Tendulkar, McGrath Ponting (not neccesisarily in that order). It will be interesting if Warne is swayed by VVS's performances in 2000/01 and 2003/04 because if you take those series out of the equation there is no logic that says he should be above Dravid. It will be interesting if AB and/or Taylor get in because he didn't play much under the former and I don't think the later deserves a place purely on his batting although judging what Shane said about the team Waugh inherited from Taylor I reckon he'll be higher than Border if they are both in. I'll be amazed if Clarke is there as he said KP would be higher up if he had played longer and Clarke's record is not as good. Considering the other candidates you can't put someone in the Top 10 on potential. Allowing for the fact that this list has been nearly as hard to work out as his bowling I'll say: He'll put McGrath at No1, Tendulkar will be above Lara, Taylor will be above Border if the latter gets in at all....and I don't think even Warne wouldn't put Murali in the Top 10 although it would give him a lot of headlines if he did. Tune in tomorrow, same bat time, same bat channel....

 

[silentstriker]

Is it published on a saturday or do we have to wait until monday?

 

[Chubby Rain]

Lol, not a chance. Lara and Flower are the two best players of spin in the least 25 years or so, in my opinion. Tendulkar obviously still a great player of spin, but he doesn't come near Lara for mine.

There's a difference between playing spin well and just dominating him in an almost sadistic manner.. Sachin dominated Warne like no other player. Takes guts to dance down the crease and tonk the first ball of Warne's spell for a straight six repeatedly. Now, that's intent.

Obviously Lara came close to that in one tour of Sri Lanka, and so if Murali was making this list, he'd have Lara above Sachin. However, I'd rate Sachin's assault on Warne higher than Lara's assault on Murali purely for the fact that I have always found Warne better at coming back from early setbacks compared to Murali. Murali tends to drop away a bit if he's not done well against quality batting early on in his spell. (Mind you, he's still managed a superor record to Warne's despite that, so hats off to him).

 

[vic_orthdox]

I think Lara is a better player of spin generally, but Sachin has had the wood over Warne a bit more often.

 

[Richard]

However, I'd rate Sachin's assault on Warne higher than Lara's assault on Murali purely for the fact that I have always found Warne better at coming back from early setbacks compared to Murali. Murali tends to drop away a bit if he's not done well against quality batting early on in his spell. (Mind you, he's still managed a superor record to Warne's despite that, so hats off to him).

Perhaps because he's not often taken to early on - perhaps because often if you try to do so, you lose your wicket.

Yes?

 

[PhoenixFire]

How often did Flower face Murali out of interest, and what was the general outcome?

 

[Chubby Rain]

Perhaps because he's not often taken to early on - perhaps because often if you try to do so, you lose your wicket.

Yes?

Don't get whom you're referring to.

 

[Beleg]

eh

of all the players i have ever seen, inzy has dominated murali more than anybody (apart from lara in sri lanka on that particular tour).

in any case, this list is his personal list which is fair enough and does create lots of discussion which i guess was the point to begin with.

though his comments about donald make me laugh. one of the first non-pakistan involved games i remember watching was a south-africa/australia test with donald bowling in it - and none of the batters were able to middle his balls at all.


and not including inzy...i guess he's still seething about the 94 karachi test.

 

[social]

I'll throw another name into the mix - Jason Gillespie

Warne loves the guy and consistently rates him with McGrath when he was at his best PLUS it also downplays McGrath influence on the no. of wickets Warne took.

It's absolutely inconceivable that Warne can rate Lee in the 20s and not put Gillespie in the top 50

 

[Chubby Rain]

I'll throw another name into the mix - Jason Gillespie

Warne loves the guy and consistently rates him with McGrath when he was at his best PLUS it also downplays McGrath influence on the no. of wickets Warne took.

It's absolutely inconceivable that Warne can rate Lee in the 20s and not put Gillespie in the top 50

Wouldn't it overplay it? It would be easier for Warne to get his wickets cheaper if it were two guys helping him out instead of just one.