Love sport? Try betting on your favourite team and win!

 


Twitter

 

Recent Posts

Cricket news



Fantasy Cricket

Lehmann better than Steve Waugh?

By Will 2 years ago, at the start of October Add your comment below

Shane Warne’s got a new book out. It upsets some people. Yeah, whatever.

One for our Australian readers: what do you think about Warne’s insistence that Darren Lehmann is a better player than Steve Waugh? He’s releasing one of those infuriatingly addictive “lists” books – his top 100 Test cricketers – which is a total sell-out, but then he’s allowed to do these types of bullshit books. Because he’s a legend.

Waugh’s lowly 26th place was received with a few raised eyebrows in Australia when The Times first serialised the book. So what do you think? Who’s better? Darren or Steve? Mark or Steve? Taylor or Steve? Frankly, I think Warney’s probably got a screw loose, but then that’s why we love him: for his shameless lack of bolts upstairs, and belief in himself that what he says is gospel.

buy his book if you like. All proceeds go to a good charity.

“In the beginning was Warne, and Warne was with God, and Warne was God.” (St Luke, 2008)

Tags: , , , |

4 Responses to “Lehmann better than Steve Waugh?”

  • Kris wrote:
    October 6th, 2008 at 4.14 am

    I guess that depends on what criteria you are rating players, I for one think that Mark Waugh, while great to watch when he was in form, was far too inconsistent and lacked the mental fortitude to ever be counted amongst the greats. Similarly, Lehmann's inability to ever properly dedicate himself to getting fully fit (and away from the grog) stopped him from having the career he could have had.

    So, in an all round sense, I would rate Steve Waugh ahead of both. Similarly a player like Langer or even David Boon, who didn't have the same natural gifts, but through hard work and effort wrung every ounce out of their careers, gets kudos from me ahead of those who were geniuses on their day, but seemingly weren't up for the challenge when it got tough.

    Warne's list reads a little like someone endeavouring to square up with people after the event. Great bowler that he was, I must admit that I wouldn't expect any more from him as a man.

  • Marcus wrote:
    October 7th, 2008 at 2.49 am

    I think that for all the talk about Mark Waugh's inconsistency, he did play 100 consecutive Tests (something shared with only Gavsakar and Border) and he struck 50s as regularly as Steve Waugh did, so I think that he could quality as a great. He's certainly a shoe-in if you're talking about ODIs!

    But on the whole I'd have to agree that Steve Waugh probably should be ahead.

  • JII wrote:
    October 7th, 2008 at 2.54 am

    Kris,
    Wanted to add a comment and then saw yours. Fully agree with you.

  • Sathnam_Mann wrote:
    October 7th, 2008 at 4.33 am

    Every time any1 offers an opinion on shane warne,they never fail to reprimand him on his 'human errors'.Stuff like , he's a great bowler but not the best man.Upto a limit, its allright.But its getting bugging.All these greats have some frustrations or the other that they one day pour out in print or use the electronic media.He's a great,period.No,I don't care if he's begging nurses to have sex with him.He was also a genius in intimidating non- indian batsman.Are hayden,sehwag, up there??Steven Waugh overall was the best test batsman that aus had befor hayden came along.He should be right up there.

    • Comments

     


    Receive email updates on new comments


    « | Main | »