Comments on: The Two Warnies

By: mastdies

mastdies — Wed, 02 May 2007 14:44:19 +0000

Hello!

By: wrongun

wrongun — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 02:54:04 +0000

McGrath going after Sydney too. I am so gonna be concreted in front of the telly watching the last two tests.

By: Five

Five — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:48:44 +0000

Great post. All my workmates said they didn’t care, Shane Warne was such a tosser he was best out of the game.

I corrected them. He’s a bowler, I said.

By: Shaun

Shaun — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:05:51 +0000

Yeah, fair point Liam. Now don’t do that again.

And it wasn’t till the train home I remembered the Indian bookies as well so good point Georg.

By: Georg

Georg — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:59:21 +0000

Liam you’ve got a point. But what is it with Warney that makes some of us forget things like this? Like his dalliance with the Indian bookmakers? I had forgotten that until this evening. I don’t consider myself to be someone who forgets such misdemeanors, nor someone who is bowled over by blokes for that matter, but somehow Warney seems to encourage forgiveness. Beats me why.

By: wrongun

wrongun — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:54:20 +0000

I didn’t know whether to bring that Catallaxy post over here or not, Shaun. Sorry if you wanted me to, but I thought it had too much non-sporting commentary in it.

By: Liam

Liam — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:46:08 +0000

Shaun, you can hardly call using a banned diuretic/masking agent an ‘off-the-field’ misdemeanour, any more than you can say that of Ben Johnson’s or Tyler Hamilton’s use of sports drugs.

By: Georg

Georg — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:45:23 +0000

Great post Shaun.

I have to admit I am still coming to terms with the fact that the next Test series will be Warne-free.

David, you make a very good point. Warney’s batting has been a highlight of the past couple of years. It was so fitting that he holed out on 99 only to find out later through video replay that the ball that got his wicket was indeed a no-ball. It just fits the script.

And: trackback.

By: Shaun

Shaun — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:39:02 +0000

Good point David. I haven’t seen the press conference so I’m not sure what exactly was said but it well known that Warney coveted a test century. He has come oh so close twice I think.

One thing I haven’t mentioned is that Warney has the sense to retire at the right time and go out as a winner.

By: David Jackmanson

David Jackmanson — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:27:31 +0000

Yes he has been a bad boy off field, and that proves (if it needed proving) that there is one rule for the famous and successful, and one for others.

He would have been sacked as an embarrasment years ago if he could not break the laws of physics.

However, I want to mention one-other on-field thing in his favour.

His batting.

Yep, ever since last year at the Ashes (when his rearguard batting action in one of the Tests got Australia to within 3 runs of victory), there has been a very strong vibe that lower-order batsmen have to be able to bat a bit, or at least not recklessly throw away wickets.

At least that’s when I started noticing, presumably that vibe has been working its way into the public notice for a few years.