SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Just before Steve waugh's 2000-2001 Aussie side was landing for their "Last Frontier" series, I recieved a mail from my friend Jeremy Patton from Australia/ He told me how his children (they all play cricket boys and girls) felt Indian famed batting line up (Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman) would stand no chance before the attack of Fleming, Gillespie, Kasprowicz and above all McGrath and Shane Warne. He asked me what I thought.
I remember writing a long e-mail back for him to share with his children why I felt India might just surprise Australia and why Warne may not do to India what he had been doing to others around the world but most of all I wrote about why I felt McGrath though so accurate and consistent in his line and length that he could be handled by batsmen as long as they remembered where their off stump was, played back to him (unless he bowled a half volley) and left him alone as often as they could since he kept bowling a very similar line (and length) and relied on batsmen playing forward and erring in judgement when his lateral movement (never excessive) would ensnare them.
Of course what happened is history and it was, of course beyond my wildest dreams that India would come back as they did in Calcutta but Jeremy wrote to me a long letter about what his children said when they read my mail and what they were saying now that it had come true. It was very gratifying.
I recall this since on this thread, I once almost got into a debate on why McGrath is not such an all time great as the modern cricket fan makes him out to be. I think I realised in the nick of time that it was a futile debate since I was completely isolated.
I recalled this yesterday when I was reading gary Sobers last book Gary Sobers : My Autobiography (also his best) and was very interested to read what he had to say about McGrath. Sobers' book was published in 2002 so he probably penned these words about McGrath about six months to a year after that India Australia series. Interestingly, he does not rate Warne as the greatest spinner or even the greatest leg-spinner. Here have a read. Its interesting because my views on that are well known here.
Warne, Gupte and that "Ball of the Century"
I remember writing a long e-mail back for him to share with his children why I felt India might just surprise Australia and why Warne may not do to India what he had been doing to others around the world but most of all I wrote about why I felt McGrath though so accurate and consistent in his line and length that he could be handled by batsmen as long as they remembered where their off stump was, played back to him (unless he bowled a half volley) and left him alone as often as they could since he kept bowling a very similar line (and length) and relied on batsmen playing forward and erring in judgement when his lateral movement (never excessive) would ensnare them.
Of course what happened is history and it was, of course beyond my wildest dreams that India would come back as they did in Calcutta but Jeremy wrote to me a long letter about what his children said when they read my mail and what they were saying now that it had come true. It was very gratifying.
I recall this since on this thread, I once almost got into a debate on why McGrath is not such an all time great as the modern cricket fan makes him out to be. I think I realised in the nick of time that it was a futile debate since I was completely isolated.
I recalled this yesterday when I was reading gary Sobers last book Gary Sobers : My Autobiography (also his best) and was very interested to read what he had to say about McGrath. Sobers' book was published in 2002 so he probably penned these words about McGrath about six months to a year after that India Australia series. Interestingly, he does not rate Warne as the greatest spinner or even the greatest leg-spinner. Here have a read. Its interesting because my views on that are well known here.
Warne, Gupte and that "Ball of the Century"
The current crop of Australian bowlers, Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne and Jason Gillespie, are rated the most potent in the world and as a unit they are very effective but individually I think I played against better.
Watching someone and playing against them are two different things, but to me Gupte was a better bowler than Shane Warne. One reason is that Gupte had far wider variety, and his disguised googly was far better than Warne. Warne is a big spinner of the ball and not many turn it that far although another Australian, Stuart MacGill seems to be able to. But turning the ball are not always the biggest criterion; length and line are just as important.
However I do believe that Warne has improved. When he played in Australia against the West Indies after the injury break, he looked a much better bowler because he had a much bigger mix. The fellows did not pick his googly as well as they used to. He does not spin it away from them as much as he did. I was impressed with what I saw; he certainly looked a lot better than when he was turning it too big. He took a lot of hammer from Brian Lara but he also had him in a lot of trouble.
Lara and India's Sachin Tendulkar seem to have the measure of him. It's the Englishmen who appear to have the most trouble with him. They are beaten before they face him because they are so concerned by his reputation. Thats an ongoing problem. If the English can't play a bowler, he instantly becomes the greatest, no matter how he does against other countries. Ever since Warne bowled Mike Gatting around his legs, the press and the players would have you believe that Warne is the best. Another Aussie, David Sincock bowled me with a chinaman just like that once but people don't go on about it forever. One ball doesn't make you a king and this dismissal was as much Gating's fault as it was Warne's ability. If a player bowls to you a ball outside the leg stump on a turning wicket, you should cover your stumps - thats basic. You can not be out leg before wicket. If Gatting had gone across instead of trying to play the shot or stand up, it would have been no problem. The same principle applies to me when I was bowled by Sincock. It was my fault. I was taken by surprise because he had never bowled like that before.
Gupte was always on the spot, bowled a googly and a good leg-break and had some of the best batsmen in the world confused. The Weekes, Worrells and Walcotts made runs against him but he also had them in trouble. Wickets in the West Indies were very good in those days and spinners found them very difficult but Gupte came to the Carribean and took 27 wickets in 1952 series. He didn't play a lot of test cricket but he took a lot of good wickets.He was so acurate, varied the flight and pushed it through, and he could bowl two different googlies. You had to watch him carefully to play him because of his variety.
Warne by contrast is a lot flatter. He bowls the flipper well and as I've said, his googly has improved. As far as I am concerned, great leg break bowlers don't bowl round the wicket, which he did a lot in his early days. The great leg-spinners always bowled over because they could push the ball across the batsman and make it come back. Its much easier to bowl the googly coming over the wicket than to bowl round because in the latter case your arm is too far out to be truly effective. Warne for many years bowled round the wicket into the rough.
I'm not saying that Warne is not the greatest bowler today although there are not many good leg spinners to chose from. He has a nice aggressive attitude and will tie up good batsmen, but I would like to see him bowl a lot more variety and to improve that googly still further.
Warne arrived at the end of another cricket cycle, at the end of an era of all out pace, at least for the successful teams. There is no doubt that he has helped resurrect the art of spin bowling around the world.
Watching someone and playing against them are two different things, but to me Gupte was a better bowler than Shane Warne. One reason is that Gupte had far wider variety, and his disguised googly was far better than Warne. Warne is a big spinner of the ball and not many turn it that far although another Australian, Stuart MacGill seems to be able to. But turning the ball are not always the biggest criterion; length and line are just as important.
However I do believe that Warne has improved. When he played in Australia against the West Indies after the injury break, he looked a much better bowler because he had a much bigger mix. The fellows did not pick his googly as well as they used to. He does not spin it away from them as much as he did. I was impressed with what I saw; he certainly looked a lot better than when he was turning it too big. He took a lot of hammer from Brian Lara but he also had him in a lot of trouble.
Lara and India's Sachin Tendulkar seem to have the measure of him. It's the Englishmen who appear to have the most trouble with him. They are beaten before they face him because they are so concerned by his reputation. Thats an ongoing problem. If the English can't play a bowler, he instantly becomes the greatest, no matter how he does against other countries. Ever since Warne bowled Mike Gatting around his legs, the press and the players would have you believe that Warne is the best. Another Aussie, David Sincock bowled me with a chinaman just like that once but people don't go on about it forever. One ball doesn't make you a king and this dismissal was as much Gating's fault as it was Warne's ability. If a player bowls to you a ball outside the leg stump on a turning wicket, you should cover your stumps - thats basic. You can not be out leg before wicket. If Gatting had gone across instead of trying to play the shot or stand up, it would have been no problem. The same principle applies to me when I was bowled by Sincock. It was my fault. I was taken by surprise because he had never bowled like that before.
Gupte was always on the spot, bowled a googly and a good leg-break and had some of the best batsmen in the world confused. The Weekes, Worrells and Walcotts made runs against him but he also had them in trouble. Wickets in the West Indies were very good in those days and spinners found them very difficult but Gupte came to the Carribean and took 27 wickets in 1952 series. He didn't play a lot of test cricket but he took a lot of good wickets.He was so acurate, varied the flight and pushed it through, and he could bowl two different googlies. You had to watch him carefully to play him because of his variety.
Warne by contrast is a lot flatter. He bowls the flipper well and as I've said, his googly has improved. As far as I am concerned, great leg break bowlers don't bowl round the wicket, which he did a lot in his early days. The great leg-spinners always bowled over because they could push the ball across the batsman and make it come back. Its much easier to bowl the googly coming over the wicket than to bowl round because in the latter case your arm is too far out to be truly effective. Warne for many years bowled round the wicket into the rough.
I'm not saying that Warne is not the greatest bowler today although there are not many good leg spinners to chose from. He has a nice aggressive attitude and will tie up good batsmen, but I would like to see him bowl a lot more variety and to improve that googly still further.
Warne arrived at the end of another cricket cycle, at the end of an era of all out pace, at least for the successful teams. There is no doubt that he has helped resurrect the art of spin bowling around the world.
Sir Garfield Sobers in Garry Sobers : My Autobigraphy (2002) to be continued. . .
Last edited:
