| 
Posts and words
Loading ...Is this a list of the 50 greatest that he’s played with or against, or the 50 greatest overall? It wasn’t very clear.
Warne’s 50 greatest cricketers
By Will 3 years ago, at the end of August Add your comment below
Shane Warne has run out of ideas for his Times column and, like a Channel 4 producer bereft of inspiration, is producing a list. But it ought to be far more entertaining than those interminable countdowns (“100 greatest romantic moments” etc), so take a look. In today’s (50-41) are Mike Atherton (43) and Alec Stewart (44)
Tags: alec-stewart, Mike-Atherton, shane-warne |
10 Responses to “Warne’s 50 greatest cricketers”
August 28th, 2007 at 11.54 am
August 28th, 2007 at 1.24 pm
Seems to be a bit of both, Marcus; those he has seen, played against or just admired.
August 29th, 2007 at 2.26 am
Did you read the comments after the article. Reflects on the post the other day about over-sensitive supporters from the sub-continent. Warnie’s already being grilled for putting Waqar in the top 50, but not where they thought he belongs. Still, typically Victorian of him to include two Vics at 50 and 49.
August 29th, 2007 at 1.05 pm
Yes, Chris, interesting to read the comments, isn’t it. Apparently it doesn’t occur to them that Warne is entitled to his personal view of what makes a great cricketer, and that what he values in a cricketer, isn’t necessarily what a fan values. It’s almost like it’s a personal affront to many of them that he doesn’t agree with them!
August 30th, 2007 at 4.29 am
Just went back to see if the list had been updated, and must say that the comments have started to get quite nasty. MASE from Samoa launching an unprovoked attack on one Dennis Lillee, calling him a “gay pornstar”. Prior to this, DK hadn’t been mentioned on the list, or in any other comments. Thats not very nice.
August 30th, 2007 at 7.12 am
No Chris, that’s absolutely disgraceful and completely contemptible. It’s absolutely amazing how personally some take it when their favourites aren’t included higher. Personally, I think that Mark Waugh’s better than Ricky Ponting, but I have no doubt that Ponting will be rated higher than him. When that happens you won’t hear any personal abuse from me.
August 30th, 2007 at 9.48 am
It’s really all a matter of personal preference. Some people like batsmen of the Hayden variety who like to bludgeon the opposition into submission, while others like the Martyn variety who place the ball through field placements. Some like tearaway quicks, some like wiley spinners. Different strokes for different folks.
August 31st, 2007 at 1.52 am
Warne’s list has just been released in Australian papers, and there were lots of comments, mainly not taking Warne very seriously, because he didn’t rank Steve Waugh very high. But the posts didn’t get nasty, just dismissive. But then Warne’s never been had the fan club here that he seems to have in Britain.
And it doesn’t seem to have occurred to anyone that he may want to give plaudits to players, mainly his own countrymen, he feels don’t get enough recognition, especially cricketers from Waugh’s generation who were eclipsed by all the attention Waugh got.
August 31st, 2007 at 12.43 pm
It had to happen eventually…
“So far 29 out of 40 players are white.
So Warne what are you saying or rather what are you seeing only white colour??”
IDIOT!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2.54 am
Yep, who’s the racist? Not Warne methinks.
Comments
« £100,000 for six weeks work: welcome to ICL | Main | The geek in all of us »
