• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Shane Warne - the myth

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Warne is not a myth. He is an ATG spin bowler in test, and slight holes here and there in the stats should not disqualify from him being ATG. Heck, guys like Lillie had gaping holes in their records and still considered ATG.

However Warne in ODIs is a myth. Much inferior than Murali and Saqlain. Even Jumble and Qadir also could be added
Definite ATG in tests. Arguable ATG in ODIs too. In other words it's harder to make a case that he was the best ever spinner in ODIs than in tests.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Definite ATG in tests. Arguable ATG in ODIs too. In other words it's harder to make a case that he was the best ever spinner in ODIs than in tests.
Other than the WC means all types no-one has him as the best spinner in ODIs. While any gap between Murali and Warne is pretty marginal at Test level, the gap between the two at ODI level is fairly significant.
 

GoodAreasShane

Cricketer Of The Year
the beta manlet stuff was tongue in cheek haha. i dont use those terms seriously
Honestly my post was somewhat tougne in cheek also

No interest in getting into a serious debate on this subject, just bored, drinking, watching county cricket, and talking ****e here
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
i dont thinks its unreasonable to weight a heavy amount of ODI ratings on WCs. With tests every single one feels special. Even a dead rubber has meaning. Remember how crazy England would celebrate winning their token meaningless test at the end of an ashes series (especially Butcher's heroics in '01).


JAMODIS never feel like a big deal. In the 80s and 90s crowds got into the tri series stuff but man ODIS just come and go without people paying any attention to them these days. The players themselves seem to barely give a stuff
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
JAMODIS never feel like a big deal. In the 80s and 90s crowds got into the tri series stuff but man ODIS just come and go without people paying any attention to them these days. The players themselves seem to barely give a stuff
I'd say even up until the mid to late 2000s the tri series in Australia felt like the teams involved were taking it 100% seriously with most of the first choice players taking part. The 03 and 08 tri series involving India I remember being contested like important games by both teams.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'd say even up until the mid to late 2000s the tri series in Australia felt like the teams involved were taking it 100% seriously with most of the first choice players taking part. The 03 and 08 tri series involving India I remember being contested like important games by both teams.
yeah maybe i'm being a bit too harsh on them. All ODIs involving India seem to get huge crowd involvment(especially in India lol)

but yeah between most other nations it feels like players are just going through the motions in JAMODI seires
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Vaas was 5'9" and just about 65kg. I'd be amazed if he could create meaningful rough. Nuwan Zoysa is definite yes.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I've read that bio-mechanical studies have determined that in a quick bowler's delivery stride 7-8 times their bodyweight comes down through their leg so, even if the stride after delivery halves or even quarters that downward force, Chaminda could likely make some useful rough for any offie to exploit, 10 stone dripping wet or not.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think Migara just wanted to bait an argument but instead everyone is simply scratching our heads.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I think he was responding to AMZ's point but really, its splitting hairs. Any decent bowler at the test level would be good at both bowling good balls and setting up batsmen. Its silly to think either Warne or Murali got 700 and 800 wickets without being able to do one of these basic things. Of course, the extent to which they relied on each trick and at what point of their careers is up for debate but I think AMZ's was a very fascinating read and something I would agree with. Of course, with a caveat stating that Warne indee did bowl some very good to unplayable deliveries even in the noughties and Murali did set up batsmen cleverly and ruse them to get them out. Just that the percentage of the former was more for Warney and the latter more for Murali, at least in the noughties.

Anyways, to me it only makes Murali even better coz we all know how batsmen filled their boots in the noughties.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd say even up until the mid to late 2000s the tri series in Australia felt like the teams involved were taking it 100% seriously with most of the first choice players taking part. The 03 and 08 tri series involving India I remember being contested like important games by both teams.
Yeah basically everything between the 92 and 2011 World Cups while having gaps in importance were comparable in value. Last 10 years? Nowhere near the same degree, and it does feel like a lot of ODI cricket outside of World Cups and Champions Trophies are kind of irrelevant.

(I think anything before about 1990 in ODI cricket is very difficult to compare to after the 92 World Cup, though in fairness there's a difference between 70's ODI cricket and 80's ODI cricket)
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
ODI cricket has constantly evolved and not necessarily for the better. It's lost a lot of the texture and tempo changes that it used to have. It's become a lot more monotone over the course of an innings.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ODI cricket has constantly evolved and not necessarily for the better. It's lost a lot of the texture and tempo changes that it used to have. It's become a lot more monotone over the course of an innings.
The world cup thankfully showed how great odi cricket can be when the conditions keep bowlers in the game.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If you didn't constantly rotate bowlers then ODI's would be a lot more watchable. The tactical innovations themselves have been fine, but it also means that the gap between the great bowlers and the average ones is a whole lot more noticeable and that hurts if you're resting good bowlers.

As OS said, the most recent World Cup shows the potential when taken seriously.
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
The world cup thankfully showed how great odi cricket can be when the conditions keep bowlers in the game.
Conditions don't make half as much difference as how often a first choice attack actually takes the field in ODIs

Australia in England 2018 attack: Stanlake, Tye, K Richardson, J Richardson, Neser, Lyon, Agar.
Combined bowling average: 49.7, economy 6.49

Australia in the world cup in England 2019 attack: Starc, Cummins, Behrendorff, K Richardson, NCN, Lyon, Zampa.
Combined average: 33.59, economy 5.66
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
the weighting given to a WC game v a JAMODI is definitely something people pick at their bloody leisure though.
It's almost like getting a good understanding of what a player was up against in an ODI series actually requires looking.

ODI bowling stats are pretty hacky at the best of times, and making big sweeping generalisations about which matches count to try and clean the data makes it worse
 

Top