Sport Today

by **tendulkar.co** » Sun, 24 Dec 2006 01:52:45

Here's what happens when Warne is the frontline bowler. According to
Aussies (including Warne himself) he should have gotten 14 wickets
since there is no competition for wickets

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1997-98/AUS_IN_IND/AUS_IND_T2_18-2...

And here's what happens when Warne is not the frontline bowler.
According to Aussies, Warne faces immense competition from fellow
bowlers to take wickets and will take fewer wickets.

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1999-2000/IND_IN_AUS/SCORECARDS/IN...

Extreme cases? No. Happens most of the time in Test cricket (Just for
giggles sake, compare Srinath's figures in both tests. Srinath should
get fewer wickets at Calcutta because it is a spinners paradise and
India had three frontline spinners to eat away Srinath's share of
wickets)

Bottomline, you get to take easy wickets and score easy runs when your
team is doing well.

by **Sampat** » Sun, 24 Dec 2006 04:00:14

Quote:

> Here's what happens when Warne is the frontline bowler. According to
> Aussies (including Warne himself) he should have gotten 14 wickets
> since there is no competition for wickets

> http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1997-98/AUS_IN_IND/AUS_IND_T2_18-2...

> And here's what happens when Warne is not the frontline bowler.
> According to Aussies, Warne faces immense competition from fellow
> bowlers to take wickets and will take fewer wickets.

> http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1999-2000/IND_IN_AUS/SCORECARDS/IN...

> Extreme cases? No. Happens most of the time in Test cricket (Just for
> giggles sake, compare Srinath's figures in both tests. Srinath should
> get fewer wickets at Calcutta because it is a spinners paradise and
> India had three frontline spinners to eat away Srinath's share of
> wickets)

> Bottomline, you get to take easy wickets and score easy runs when your
> team is doing well.

Thanks tendulkar bro.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

by **Aich** » Sun, 24 Dec 2006 07:33:34

And every bowler thru history has had the same opportunity.Some are better
than others.Which gets back to the stats.

SHANE WARNE IS THE GREATEST WICKET TAKING BOWLER OF ALL TIME.NOT JUST LEG
SPIN. ALL BOWLERS. MURALI MAY PASS HIM. WHICH WILL MAKE HIM THE BEST.

Quote:

> Here's what happens when Warne is the frontline bowler. According to
> Aussies (including Warne himself) he should have gotten 14 wickets
> since there is no competition for wickets

> http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1997-98/AUS_IN_IND/AUS_IND_T2_18-2...

> And here's what happens when Warne is not the frontline bowler.
> According to Aussies, Warne faces immense competition from fellow
> bowlers to take wickets and will take fewer wickets.

> http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1999-2000/IND_IN_AUS/SCORECARDS/IN...

> Extreme cases? No. Happens most of the time in Test cricket (Just for
> giggles sake, compare Srinath's figures in both tests. Srinath should
> get fewer wickets at Calcutta because it is a spinners paradise and
> India had three frontline spinners to eat away Srinath's share of
> wickets)

> Bottomline, you get to take easy wickets and score easy runs when your
> team is doing well.

by **Ernest_the_Sh..** » Wed, 27 Dec 2006 20:15:29

Quote:

> Here's what happens when Warne is the frontline bowler. According to
> Aussies (including Warne himself) he should have gotten 14 wickets
> since there is no competition for wickets

> http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1997-98/AUS_IN_IND/AUS_IND_T2_18-2...

> And here's what happens when Warne is not the frontline bowler.
> According to Aussies, Warne faces immense competition from fellow
> bowlers to take wickets and will take fewer wickets.

> http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1999-2000/IND_IN_AUS/SCORECARDS/IN...

> Extreme cases? No. Happens most of the time in Test cricket (Just for
> giggles sake, compare Srinath's figures in both tests. Srinath should
> get fewer wickets at Calcutta because it is a spinners paradise and
> India had three frontline spinners to eat away Srinath's share of
> wickets)

> Bottomline, you get to take easy wickets and score easy runs when your
> team is doing well.

I'm not sure I follow your logic. The first game you quote is one in
which India scored 600+ runs in their first innings and went on to
achieve an innings victory. Quite naturally none of the Aussie bowlers
produced impressive figures. There is nothing especially insightful
about that fact. The other game you quote is one in which Australia
recorded a big win. The Aussie bowling figures are a lot better in this
game, as is to be expected. So I don't quite see your point. If you
were to calculate the averages of all established bowlers at the
present you would find that their averages would tend to be lower in
the games that their team won in comparsion to in the games that their
team did not win. This general rule would apply to all teams, not just
Australia. So you would appear to be merely stating the obvious here.

Sport Today

Warne with help vs Warne without help

Warne with help vs Warne without help

Warne with help vs Warne without help

Warne with help vs Warne without help

Warne with help vs Warne without help