PDA

View Full Version : Glorious Warne reaches the sky!


kalpurush
December 26, 2006, 02:00 AM
Today at Melbourne, Australia, in the 4th Test against England Warne reached another milestone of world's first 700 wickets in history. Also he took his 37th five-for! Truely it's the greatest achievement in world cricket so far. Congratulations and three cheers for you...Warne.

N.B. : For Warne...rest of his life... he wouldn't forget a day without any wkts for 129 though!!! There's rest our pleasure...:-D

AsifTheManRahman
December 26, 2006, 09:08 AM
just goes to show how much more he's got in him, and gives you an indication of what he's capable of given a few more years of cricket.

banned at 33 for a year, comes back and raises his tally from 490+ to 700 in two years. what a man.

Bancan
December 26, 2006, 10:56 AM
awesome. just great. if he played 2 more years, he could hav reached 1000.

israr
December 26, 2006, 02:09 PM
awesome. just great. if he played 2 more years, he could hav reached 1000.

Watch out for Muralitharan. Warne's world-record is just temporary.

Bancan
December 26, 2006, 03:33 PM
i know some ones gonna break it.

Alien
December 26, 2006, 07:40 PM
Hope that someone does it before the Day of Judgement.

Rabz
December 28, 2006, 08:39 AM
Too bad he is retiring...wish he had played for couple of more years..
the rate he is going atm, he could have been the one breaking the 1000 wicket mark..

The Cricketing world would miss him immensely for sure...

Kabir
December 28, 2006, 09:26 AM
Watch out for Muralitharan. Warne's world-record is just temporary.

He's almost 35 YO, with 674 Test wickets, and 426 ODI wickets. Given his current record, he can do it. And unlike Warne, I'll miss Murli.

kalpurush
December 28, 2006, 10:32 AM
And unlike Warne, I'll miss Murli.

SL will be missing Murali too (!) when they would start wobbling and tattering to win against BD!!;)

Kabir
December 28, 2006, 10:43 AM
SL will be missing Murali too (!) when they would start wobbling and tattering to win against BD!!;)

Then I won't miss him. Thanks for pointing it out tho :D
In that sense, there's a point in missing Warne...who are our batsmen gonna treat like a club cricketer now? ;)

kalpurush
December 28, 2006, 08:59 PM
Then I won't miss him. Thanks for pointing it out tho :D
In that sense, there's a point in missing Warne...who are our batsmen gonna treat like a club cricketer now? ;)

Hummmm...!:doh:
BD batters are in trouble then!!
No easy way to make world record now!!!

Carte Blanche
December 30, 2006, 09:01 PM
What? Not one bean or SMS joke?

Anyway, props to the king spinner. Now let's wait for Murali to shatter it and take a lead none of us will live to see break.

Tigers_eye
January 3, 2007, 11:39 AM
What warne has achieved is amazing but there is no way he could get 1000 test wickets in next two years. 2006 was one of his best years and he got 49 test wickets in 12 tests. What makes one think that he would double the output in the next 2 seasons? At most he can cross 800 if he continues to play two more years. Without McGrath there to dislodge the top order that would be a much harder task for sure. He is 37 now. No way he can match his this years performance in the future.

At the end of day, he is still one of the great bowlers to play the game.

But the greatest of them all are just few wickets behind and will take his place in due time.

Kabir
January 3, 2007, 12:30 PM
But the greatest of them all are just few wickets behind and will take his place in due time.

The right thing to say at the right time :up:

Simdog83
January 4, 2007, 11:41 AM
Greatest of them all? What rubbish. I like Murali he is a great guy and I do feel sorry for him because of what he has gone through but at the end of the day he throws the damn ball and plays against weaker opposition more often than Warne and on shamefully doctored Asian wickets to suit spinners. We all saw how the two compare in the last series they played each other in (which took place in Sri Lanka). Warne took key top order wickets and probably didn't go for 100 an innings all series. Murali was not much problem for the Aussie top order and only really got the tail out to flatter his figures to usually somewhere around 3 or 4 for 150.

israr
January 4, 2007, 12:15 PM
Greatest of them all? What rubbish. I like Murali he is a great guy and I do feel sorry for him because of what he has gone through but at the end of the day he throws the damn ball and plays against weaker opposition more often than Warne and on shamefully doctored Asian wickets to suit spinners. We all saw how the two compare in the last series they played each other in (which took place in Sri Lanka). Warne took key top order wickets and probably didn't go for 100 an innings all series. Murali was not much problem for the Aussie top order and only really got the tail out to flatter his figures to usually somewhere around 3 or 4 for 150.

Who really cares? Just a few more tests for Murali, and he'll be leading the all-time highest wicket tally and shall be labelled as the greatest bowler due to his records. In addition, its not about playing against weaker oppositions, its about getting wickets, and in this case, Murali has been more successful. Furthermore, if my memory serves me right, Warne had one of the most worst figures in his cricketing career on the first day of the first test against the bottom ranked test playing nation Bangladesh at Fatullah in 2006, where he had to go begging for a single wicket, and was smashed for 112 runs in his 20 overs, and to make it even more humiliating, he was bowling on those 'shamefully doctored Asian wickets', so why the greatest spinner on earth was at his wit's ends bowling on that track, where on the same similar wickets against Bangladesh, Murali was more effective.

Doesn't my above explanation sound a bit irrational? Yes, and thats because I've copied this idea from you. In your explanation, you convinced Warne is better, and in my explanation, I prooved Murali is greater. Comparisons can be done in many different ways where the writer can convince others that his opinion is right. But at the end, it all comes down to statistics if you want to really compare. So mate, allude to it and accept the fact that Warne will be overtaken, and that Murali is the greatest of all spin bowlers.

Tigers_eye
January 4, 2007, 12:41 PM
SimDog83,
welcome to BanglaCricket. I will talk to you in three years time if and only if you are around and we are not dead. By then Murali would be Warne + 200+ and no arguement of yours would hold any water then. As for your minnow wickets, you can subtract from the total :) and see who is the king of test cricket.

Adios.

Simdog83
January 4, 2007, 07:31 PM
"Doesn't my above explanation sound a bit irrational? Yes, and thats because I've copied this idea from you. In your explanation, you convinced Warne is better, and in my explanation, I prooved Murali is greater. Comparisons can be done in many different ways where the writer can convince others that his opinion is right. But at the end, it all comes down to statistics if you want to really compare. So mate, allude to it and accept the fact that Warne will be overtaken, and that Murali is the greatest of all spin bowlers."

We are not mates and you've proven nothing except how unfortunately biased you are and that despite trying to sound all intellectual and smart all the time you don't know how to spell (just the one o in proved).

I'm sorry but I would have thought a series where Warne and Murali went head to head would be more useful in comparing the two and how 'great' they are rather than bringing up some one off match no one gave a crap about where Warne got none for 112. You're explanation and mine are no where near equally 'irrational'. Warne's stats and records ARE extremely impressive but even they don't tell the whole story about what he has done for the game, the art of spin bowling and his country.

You all may as well keep going on about stats and records because in the end that is all Murali will have as Warne's name continues to be mentioned with Bradman as the greatest players and greatest influence on the game of all time.

Tigers_eye
January 5, 2007, 05:08 PM
...
I'm sorry but I would have thought a series where Warne and Murali went head to head would be more useful in comparing the two and how 'great' they are rather than bringing up some one off match no one gave a crap about where Warne got none for 112. You're explanation and mine are no where near equally 'irrational'...

Flawed and illogical arguement. One can only find out how good bowlers are when the bowlers bowl at the same batsmen. Not bowling head to head to different people. Everyone knows how good Australian batting lineup is compared to the rest of the world. Mashrafe's 49 wickets this year in ODIs are statistically better than lee, bracken, ntini, pollock. But a sane person would not rate Mash ahead of the four mentioned. Cause mash bowled at a weaker opponent. Similarly on a head to head warne bowls at a weaker opponent than Murali. That is why head to head match would not give you the correct picture.

Simdog83
January 5, 2007, 10:34 PM
So because Warne has never had to bowl to his own team and Murali is going to take more wickets than him we should just hail Murali as the 'greatest'? Yeah right what a pathetic argument. I can't believe people here are so sadly biased toward Asian cricketers and are so hateful and disrespectful toward Australian cricketers who have proven themselves over and over to be the best.

Alien
January 7, 2007, 02:40 AM
Flawed and illogical arguement. One can only find out how good bowlers are when the bowlers bowl at the same batsmen. Not bowling head to head to different people. Everyone knows how good Australian batting lineup is compared to the rest of the world. Mashrafe's 49 wickets this year in ODIs are statistically better than lee, bracken, ntini, pollock. But a sane person would not rate Mash ahead of the four mentioned. Cause mash bowled at a weaker opponent. Similarly on a head to head warne bowls at a weaker opponent than Murali. That is why head to head match would not give you the correct picture.

A batsman has his own set of peak and shallow times. And measuring 2 bowlers bowling against the same batsmen is a fair comparison. But you are right about Masri's 49 wicket fact. Stats can be very misleading if you don't look at the bigger picture.

Its not fair to compare Masri with Lee or Ntini, but it is fair to compare Murali with Warne because both the players face more harder professional ODI and Test teams like India, WI, Pakistan, England etc.

Now, who is better is a matter of one's own opinion. Both are top of their game and both got hell lot of controversy during their life time.

Alien
January 7, 2007, 02:41 AM
But I reckon Warne would have made a better captain than Ponting.

mac
January 7, 2007, 02:55 AM
Don't wanna compare warni and murali. Saluting warni for his service to the cricket world. For his bowling, his tragedies, his character and everything. I'll miss him. I'm afraid murli retire korle spin bowling er ki hobe?