The CW50 - No.4

[GIMH]

To me this is another where judging against the field would give a different result to A vs B etc.

I didnt have him this high but I can see why some would. However, could you say for sure he was even the best player on his own team?

You're absolutely right of course Goughy. Although I'll never buy the pace>spin by default argument, there's obviously a huge amount of value in him not even being the best bowler in his team, given he bowled with McGrath. That's before we even look at the batsmen he played with.

On the other hand, teams generally only have on spinner. I believe him to be the greatest spinner of all-time, and I also believe a top-class wristspinner can win you matches on their own even if they have a paper thin batting line-up and joke seamers. Therefore I think that this position is justified, even if my putting him at one was a bit excessive

 

[Furball]

To me this is another where judging against the field would give a different result to A vs B etc.

I didnt have him this high but I can see why some would. However, could you say for sure he was even the best player on his own team?

Having said that, I loved Warne and he is one of the few cricketers I would pay some of my hard-earned cash to go watch.

I had McGrath in my top 5 as well, however the crucial difference between them is McGrath was almost mechanical in the way he went about things. Run up, bowl in the right spot, induce the edge, see you later. I realise I'm doing McGrath a massive disservice here, but McGrath's greatest strength was the ability to bowl that wicket taking delivery and do it again, and again, and again. However, there was nothing mysterious about McGrath's bowling, when he was on song there was an inevitability about the top order folding to him.

Warne was better to watch in my opinion because of the mystery sorrounding each and every delivery - will it turn, slide straight on, how much will it turn - and seeing how the batsman would respond. Would they try and hit him? If so, will they succeed, what does Warne do?

Warne against the best batsmen was always intriguing because it was like watching two heavy weights jabbing away until the weakness had been found and going for the knockout blow, whereas McGrath always felt like watching a mismatch where one boxer just swings and swings and swings until the opponent can't take any more.

 

[Goughy]

You're absolutely right of course Goughy. Although I'll never buy the pace>spin by default argument, there's obviously a huge amount of value in him not even being the best bowler in his team, given he bowled with McGrath. That's before we even look at the batsmen he played with.

On the other hand, teams generally only have on spinner. I believe him to be the greatest spinner of all-time, and I also believe a top-class wristspinner can win you matches on their own even if they have a paper thin batting line-up and joke seamers. Therefore I think that this position is justified, even if my putting him at one was a bit excessive

Im not criticising the position. I can see both POV. I can see why it is too high and why it is just right.

IMO, in order to be great amongst greats you not only have to have the records but have to transend your sport, be a winner on the field, have defining moments of genius, leave a lasting legacy and change the game. Fair to say that Warne did all that.

Though I had him outside the top 10 doesnt mean I think a different opinion is wrong.

 

[silentstriker]

I also believe a top-class wristspinner can win you matches on their own even if they have a paper thin batting line-up and joke seamers. Therefore I think that this position is justified, even if my putting him at one was a bit excessive

India's away record over 70 years of Test cricket would like to disagree with you.

When has that ever happened with any spinner - let alone Warne, except on big time crumbling pitches?

Pace bowlers have done that from time to time, spinners very rarely.

 

[silentstriker]

Also, very interesting that his drug use did not affect his rating. It doesn't matter with me of course, as I've mentioned earlier, but many people on here seem to get really uptight with steroids.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Also, very interesting that his drug use did not affect his rating.

It did, I put him three places higher because of it.

 

[silentstriker]

Haha, good man . Frankly, I agree with you. Many don't though, that's why I ask.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Also, very interesting that his drug use did not affect his rating. It doesn't matter with me of course, as I've mentioned earlier, but many people on here seem to get really uptight with steroids.

It's a stain on his reputation, no doubt, but many great sportsmen are flawed individuals. & personal charm does go a long way. Better a loveable larrakin like Warne than a po-faced hypocrite like Woods, IMHO.

&, whilst there's little doubt in my mind either, it was never actaully proven he did taken steroids.

 

[Furball]

Also, very interesting that his drug use did not affect his rating. It doesn't matter with me of course, as I've mentioned earlier, but many people on here seem to get really uptight with steroids.

Unless I've missed something, I don't think it was ever proven he took steroids, was it?

Was the substance not something that was banned because it could hide the fact that Warne had taken steroids, if he did take them?

 

[GIMH]

India's away record over 70 years of Test cricket would like to disagree with you.

When has that ever happened with any spinner - let alone Warne, except on big time crumbling pitches?

Pace bowlers have done that from time to time, spinners very rarely.

Fair to say Muralitharan has won Sri lanka a fair few matches, obviously he had good batsmen and seamers alongside him but nowhere near the calibre of Warne's team-mates.

Anyway - the fact that pace bowlers have done it from time to time and spinners 'very rarely' only strengthens my belief that the man I personally believe to be the greatest ever spinner should be placed so highly - quality fast bowlers and batsmen are ten a penny, spinners less so

 

[Goughy]

Yeah, he took a diuretic which could mask steroid use but also has any number of (useless) applications.

I am very much against performance enhancing drugs. I am not relating this to Warne in any way, but in general I am no where near as opposed to their use in injury recovery (as a short term medicinal process) as I am to boosting performance on the field on game day.

 

[silentstriker]

The substance wasn't banned because it made you lose weight.

It was banned because it was a masking agent, and it's kind of the reason why you couldn't prove he took steroids, and why it's banned in the first place. And if people remember, he was injured at the time, an injury that he recovered from very (suspiciously?) fast, recovery from injury is one of the big reasons people take steroids.

In any case, I don't want to harp on this because I don't give a crap if he did take steroids, I don't consider it cheating nor do I find it a big deal. But obviously others do. To think, if only Asif were smart enough to take a diet pill with his Nandrolone .

 

[silentstriker]

Yeah, he took a diuretic which could mask steroid use but also has any number of (useless) applications.

I am very much against performance enhancing drugs. I am not relating this to Warne in any way, but in general I am no where near as opposed to their use in injury recovery (as a short term medicinal process) as I am to boosting performance on the field on game day.

If he did take them, that was most likely the reason, as I said above. For a slow bowler, it would have limited use to improve on field play, compared to a fast bowler. Except maybe improving your ability to withstand a larger workload I'd think.

 

[Pothas]

When I saw the thread I knew you'd have posted something like that. FWIW I think you're right too.

There are some players who are exceptional and they go about their business in a workmanlike way, and there's nothing wrong with that. Fair to say Warne wasn't one of them. I was fortunate enough to see him bowl live many, many times and when people said the crowd sat forward in their seats, they weren't lying. I saw his 300th live, his first test (he was poor of course), his last test, saw him toy with Cullinan in a couple of ODIs, saw the last ball of the day to Basit Ali when he bowled him and the monster leg break to Chanderpaul. All of them were in Sydney, but I'd have walked to Perth to watch him bowl. Serious entertainer.

Bet you never saw him bowl medium pace though

Was a strange sight.

 

[_Ed_]

he is the one and only player to have been nominated by everyone who contributed a list to this exercise.

Really? That's surprising.

 

[Pothas]

A couple of people only included players that they had seen though, knew there was only one, was between him and Sachin I thought.

 

[thierry henry]

A uniquely talented cricketer with a huge personality who wasn't effective or successful enough at what he did to deserve a spot in the top 20 itbt.

 

[bagapath]

so stylish on the cricket field. but such a cheap tart off it; hanging out with barmaids and street side hookers and public hospital nurses. love this guy to bits. still he should have been below hobbs. but a top 5 cricketer 99% of the time I draw my lists, and a 100% certainty in top 10.

 

[Goughy]

so stylish on the cricket field. but such a cheap tart off it; hanging out with barmaids and street side hookers and public hospital nurses. love this guy to bits. still he should have been below hobbs. but a top 5 cricketer 99% of the time I draw my lists, and a 100% certainty in top 10.

haha, what is wrong with 'public hospital nurses'?

 

[Ikki]

Although this is T20, the way he captained Rajasthan Royals and led them to the first IPL title was just pure Warne. Most thought they were the weakest side and gave them no chance after the first match yet somehow the group of unlikelies got it together and found confidence under Warne's tutelage.