Going into the fifth day of the Third Test match, some mischievous people (read, the media) were suggesting that a repeat of Adelaide 2006 could occur: with the game seemingly headed for a draw, the side batting third completely collapses, leaving a short and sharp run chase for victory.
And, it is the habit of people to think that after something happens it could happen again. But lightning is highly unlikely to strike twice.
There were two reasons why England lost that day, the first of which was their atrocious batting.
England began the 5th day on 1/59 with a lead of 97, which meant they only had to score 100 in two sessions to be okay. But they batted appallingly. They scored 9/70 from 54 overs on the fifth day and, frankly, if you bat like that, you deserve to lose.
The other reason was Shane Warne.
He bowled unchanged for all of England’s fifth day batting. This was two sessions and he would have gone longer had it been needed. His figures for the fifth day were 4/23 from 26 overs with 11 maidens.
This was just another performance which showed that Warne didn’t have to retire for him to be appreciated.
Ricky Ponting had no Warne in Delhi.
Michael Clarke and Simon Katich bowled before Craig White did. White didn’t get a bowl until halfway through the final day. Ponting only used four bowlers in that innings in Adelaide, compared to the seven who bowled in Delhi.
As can plainly be seen now, Warne was a freak.
He could bowl accurately and tightly from the first ball. He hardly bowled bad balls and batsmen were so intimidated of him, that when he did, they mostly went unpunished.
He was both an attacking and defensive weapon at the same time. He had the stamina of an ox and seemed to strengthen as opposed to weaken as his spell went on.
He was the Sir Donald Bradman of the ball.
People seem happy to label him the greatest ever spinner, I’m prepared to up the ante and call him the game’s greatest ever bowler.
Warne resuscitated a dying art and gave it a renaissance that was never thought possible. Previously thought of as bowlers who hemorrhaged runs, Warne disproved that. He was allowed the benefit of such attacking fields because he was so tight.
Even so, he could survive a few lusty blows and still have the confidence of himself and his captain to fight back.
Can Michael Clarke or Craig White? If they started to get a bit expensive, would Ponting persist with them?
Allan Border was frustrated by Australia’s inability to bowl out the West Indies at the Gabba in 1992 after reducing them to 4/9. Warne was included in the next Test and, for the next fourteen years, never looked back.
On a hot, dry, dusty and frustrating day in Delhi, it looks like things have gone back to how they were, and unless Australia uncovers another leg spinning freak, that they are going to stay like this for a while.
dasilva
Roar Guru
you're right David about on a flat track with nothing on it on the 5th day then warney the man to bowl the opposition out. However about splitting between Warne and McGrath. If Warney had a good record in India and against the Indians I would have agreed with you that they were equal. However Warney was tonk by the indians and therefore I have to say that Mcgrath outdoes Warne as he has no bogey team or country. I think that McGrath retired at the exact right time when ever since that injury during the Ashes Mcgrath was never the same bowler he was. When Warne retires he was still a great bowler and IMO he could still do the job for Australia while McGrath right now probably can't. At retirement Warne was a better bowler then McGrath and I think that's colours some of the opinion who is better but at a whole career level McGrath outdoes Warney.
David Wiseman
Roar Guru
da Silva - I guess it's hard to split them because they spent most of their career playing together. He has more wickets than any other quick in the history of the game. But on a dying pitch when nothing much is doing - Warne is the guy you want. LK - Sorry about that - I indeed meant Craig White. Greg - Until people's expectations change, you need to keep referring back to Warney. Australia is going to play in far more draws than they did. They are not going to bowl out sides on the final day like they used to and because the first innings is going to last longer than it used to, they will have less time on the final day. Shane Warne was a spinner - all these other guys simply bowl slow - big difference. It shows a certain arrogance by the selectors that they are prepared to play in India against India without a specialist spinner.
dasilva
Roar Guru
To me Glenn Mcgrath is australian greatest bowler. Even though he is rated as one of Australia's all time great I still think he is underated. Does well against every country and every condition in every country. Taking mostly top order wickets. Shane warne was the superstar and his performance was certainly more spectacular. However Mcgrath doesn't worry about being the star he just takes wicket while conceding less runs.
Greg Russell
Roar Guru
Craig White's other claim to fame is that he is Darren Lehmann's brother-in-law. David: much as I agree that Warne was one of the greatest cricketers of all time, and much as I loved watching him bowl, could we please all just accept that he is retired, and that even if he wasn't there is the issue that he is 39. Kumble is a full year younger, and I think Kumble makes clear what happens with age to great wrist spinners. We just have to accept that Warne's career is over, and that we were privileged to have him. Dwelling on a past that cannot be recovered takes Australia nowhere. One can always tell when the Wallabies are doing badly, because the level of nostalgia towards Mark Ella rises. The other thing I really should not have to mention is Warne's bowling average in India (43.11) and all-up against the Indians (47.18). These do not really give cause to think he would have made much difference in this series. In fact, if one thinks of the Australian test victories in India over the last decade, one would have to suggest that McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz are the bowlers Australia really is missing.
Michael C
Guest
daSilva - ironically, Craig White had played for Victoria too, and, like a few others, ended up in England playing county cricket and meeting qualification criteria and so was able to play for the Poms. He ended up developing his action to be quite a quick bowler towards the end. I seem to recall. I thought he might have been more a medium and some time offie with the Vics/and district cricket.
dasilva
Roar Guru
Craig white is an English "all rounder" Handy bits and piece player and a decent bowler. I think he means cameron white
LK
Guest
Who is Craig White?
dasilva
Roar Guru
Personally I think McGrath was the better bowler and his record in India and subcontinent are extraordinary for a pace bowler (Average 21 in India and 23 in Asia). When Australia defeated India in 2004 it is based on the pace attack not spin bowling (although Warne played the support economical bowler role supurbly during that tour). This tour the pace attack lacks leadership and IMO Mcgrath is more greatly miss in the short term tour to India than Warne. However Warney would be greatly missed in the long term simply because we don't have anyone half decent to replace him. Nevertheless Warne had been hammered by Indians for a long time. His presence may not have made a difference and we are giving him too much credit if we blame this defeat due to the absence of Warne. If we lose to South Africa and England however ....
old goalie
Guest
"I’m prepared to up the ante and call him the game’s greatest ever bowler." Hear hear