Would Warne have been a good captain?

[Anil]

IMO, Warney has an excellent cricketing brain but he doesnt have the personality or the right image to be a captain.
It would be akin to appointing Denis Rodman as the captain of a cricke team, really.

that is really not a good comparison....didn't you see "men in black"? it reveals what we earthlings suspected all along, that rodman is not from this world...

 

[Shane Warne]

ponting looks like bush??? never heard that before...

It's true though actually.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Quite. He should have been captain instead of Waugh, if it weren't for his off-field problems.

 

[chooka_nick]

Quite. He should have been captain instead of Waugh, if it weren't for his off-field problems.

Agreed

 

[social]

Given that Aus' tactics in this series have not been great AND that Warne has considerable input into those same tactics, he has not really covered himself in glory un this area of late.

However, he is an inspirational character and a leader men, which is the greater part of the battle.

There is little doubt that he would be a good and possibly great captain.

Personally, I couldnt give a toss about his private life. If he's good enough to be in the team, he should be considered for the job.

 

[King_Ponting]

Pontings captaincy is greater than warnes, however that doesnt mean warne wouldnt have been a great captain

 

[honestbharani]

I think Warney should have been the successor to Steve Waugh. But I think Gilchrist was outstanding during the India series as well. He seems to be the forgotten man in this captaincy debate. Remember, he achieved what Taylor and Waugh couldn't achieve, a series win in India.

 

[vic_orthdox]

A few times this series you can hear Warne being the guy trying to gee everyone up, even when England weren't on top. Sign of a very flat side, IMO. Interestingly, that used to be Ponting's role, he'd be the one talking and encouraging all the time - maybe that's ceased now that he's captain?

I think Warne most certianly would have made a good captain, but probably would have been more along the same tact as Waugh in terms of very attack focused, as opposed to Ponting's taste for restricting.

 

[archie mac]

There is little doubt that he would be a good and possibly great captain.

Personally, I couldnt give a toss about his private life. If he's good enough to be in the team, he should be considered for the job.

I agree, why are Cricketers role models and rock singers not?

 

[Shounak]

I agree, why are Cricketers role models and rock singers not?

Because cricket is meant to be a gentlemens game...

I don't think rock singing was ever considered a gentleman's pursuit?.. Well not as far as I'm aware anyway.

 

[Shounak]

Warne wouldn't be taken seriously enough by the cricketing community to be a captain. Ponting has a bit of credibility when he queries an umpires decision.

Warney on the other hand, appeals at everything under the sun, would any of his queries as a captain mean a thing. The boy who cried wolf, anyone?

His off field behaviour also sets a bad example. Ponting's at least kept his nose pristine clean, Warne on the hand has lived in controversy his entire career. Warne would make a good VC, but if I was a selector, I would never, ever select Warne as my captain.

 

[archie mac]

Because cricket is meant to be a gentlemens game...

I don't think rock singing was ever considered a gentleman's pursuit?.. Well not as far as I'm aware anyway.

Good point, what about footballers I don't think that is a gentleman's game, but they are still regarded as role models.

 

[andyc]

I think Gilly should be captain.. is there any reason why he isn't? And I personally don't think what happens off the field matters at all. As long as he gets the results for the team on the field, which he does with his bowling (and batting), then who cares?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Warne wouldn't be taken seriously enough by the cricketing community to be a captain. Ponting has a bit of credibility when he queries an umpires decision.

Warney on the other hand, appeals at everything under the sun, would any of his queries as a captain mean a thing. The boy who cried wolf, anyone?

His off field behaviour also sets a bad example. Ponting's at least kept his nose pristine clean, Warne on the hand has lived in controversy his entire career. Warne would make a good VC, but if I was a selector, I would never, ever select Warne as my captain.

I don't think Punter has kept his nose clean, is his youth he had his widely publicised dalliances with the bottle & the gee-gees. The difference seems to be that Punter has matured sufficiently to put those "issues" behind him. Warne, 5 years his senior, still seems unable to keep the mouse in its house.

 

[social]

Big difference nowadays it the amount of press scrutiny.

Anyone who thinks that players of yesteryear were choirboys is kidding themselves. Journos simply had more to gain at that time from being participants in play-time rather than reporters.

On the other hand, along with increased exposure have come massively increased pay-packets.

Question is whether we are paying them to play cricket alone or whether there is a wider responsibility.

Fortunately (or not depending on your perspective), I put them in the former bracket.

As such, Ive always thought that if the ICC, ACB and general public could forgive Warne for his off-field indiscretions to the extent that they allow him to play, then he should be allowed to play to the best of his ability. From Aus' perspective, that should have resulted in him being appointed captain of his country.

 

[archie mac]

Big difference nowadays it the amount of press scrutiny.

Anyone who thinks that players of yesteryear were choirboys is kidding themselves. Journos simply had more to gain at that time from being participants in play-time rather than reporters.

On the other hand, along with increased exposure have come massively increased pay-packets.

Question is whether we are paying them to play cricket alone or whether there is a wider responsibility.

Fortunately (or not depending on your perspective), I put them in the former bracket.

As such, Ive always thought that if the ICC, ACB and general public could forgive Warne for his off-field indiscretions to the extent that they allow him to play, then he should be allowed to play to the best of his ability. From Aus' perspective, that should have resulted in him being appointed captain of his country.

Well written, I watched Warne captain Aust. in some ODI, I thought he did a great job. I think when he retires his two biggest regrets will be 1. never captaining his Country and 2 not scoring a Test hundred. (after tonight I hope it is only one regret)

 

[luckyeddie]

Pontings captaincy is greater than warnes, however that doesnt mean warne wouldnt have been a great captain

Without wishing to labour a point, this summer we have witnessed blunder after blunder - not just little field placing ones or moderate keeping Shane under wraps for half a day ones but huge faux-pas that have cost matches.

Hope that continues for a couple more games.

 

[King_Ponting]

Without wishing to labour a point, this summer we have witnessed blunder after blunder - not just little field placing ones or moderate keeping Shane under wraps for half a day ones but huge faux-pas that have cost matches.

Hope that continues for a couple more games.

I have a feeling that warne had a lot to do with that decision as he was hell bent on pietersen as his 600th wicket......

 

[Swervy]

I have a feeling that warne had a lot to do with that decision as he was hell bent on pietersen as his 600th wicket......

do you really think Warne/Ponting would do that.

I have to say Pontings captaincy has been in general pretty average so far

 

[luckyeddie]

I have a feeling that warne had a lot to do with that decision as he was hell bent on pietersen as his 600th wicket......

Now I've heard everything.