Clearly I'm done arguing my points in this thread, and we've come to sort of a nice 'agree to disagree with different criteria' end. But there is a point I'd like to make.
McGrath's injury was in no way comparable to Shane Warne's. After his finger opperation Shane Warne's ring-finger wasn't the same. Dean Jones has explained this very well in the past - better than I can - but basically the tip of his ring finger points more upwards than it used to. To make my ring finger point upwards like that, I'd have to take my elft hand and force it to move upwards.
The terrible result of that was that Warne lost his accuracy on his flipper. This was especially evident during the third and final Test of the 2001 series to India when I remember he bowled two flippers to Tendulkar and they bounced before halfway of the actual pitch. Tendulkar had all the time in the world to hit his consecutive two flippers, and hit two fours. That's why I've said in the past that I don't think Warne ever bowled his best against India - because he clearly didn't. He lacked probing accuracy.
By all means Warne's record against India should count againt him, because most athletes who've been injured and don't return to their best get criticised, and Warne should be no different. But I've always felt that Warne, at his best, could have played well in India, not great. Unfortunately 2004 was the only time he was heading into an Indian series with great form and he did well. People can dispute that if they like, but I've never seen Warne hit the pitch before halfway on any other occasion. You'd have to be blind not to see he was out of form. Again, he should be criticised for his stuff in India because why couldn't have have re-thought his bowling strategies at the time etc? He re-invented himself after 2003 and bowled great then with his limitation, but why couldn't he bowl like that in India? If his flipper was gone in that series, why try to bowl it so much? So Warne should be criticised for that, but I've seen him at his best and really I think 2004 is the best indication of how he would have done in India with good form and good health.
Warne had to teach himself to bowl again after his finger injury. After his first delivery in the nets following his finger surgery (which apparently was right on the mark) Warne said it didn't feel good - that it didn't feel it came out the way it used to. If you understood the composition of Warne's finger, then you'd be able to see that it's unlikely anybody could bowl a consistent good flipper after that. The only time I've seen Warne bowl consistent good flippers following his injury was against the West Indies in 2005 - the first Test in Brisbane (where he absolutely toyed with Lara - despite Bracken getting his wicket).
If McGrath had some sort of elbow injury or shoulder injury that forced him re-shape his bowling action, or re-think his action, or generally re-think the way he had to go about bowling, then he'd have an injury comparable to Warne's. Really Dennis Lillee is a better example of someone who went through what Warne had to. Lillee had to re-think his bowling after his back injury and came back with variations like cutters (both ways), masterful chances of pace etc. I believe he somewhat changed his bowling action, although personally I never saw it from old footage I've watched.
Really I wish I could get Deans Jones to explain Warne's finger injury to you because he did a great job of it once.
