View Full Version : Our Patriotic Warney.
dr nick
14 Oct 2003, 10:38
A depressed Shane Warne considered leaving Australia in the wake of his drug ban, and qualifying to play for England instead, according to a report in today's London Sunday Times. Apparently Warne thought hard about settling in Hampshire after he was sent home from the World Cup and banned from cricket for a year. But the bad news for England's batsmen is that Warne eventually decided to stay put, and try to regain his Australian Test spot.
Ivo Tennant wrote: "The expectations on him [Warne], the adulation and pressure on his marriage were so great that he contemplated settling in Hampshire, the county he will return to captain next summer. Warne spent several weeks in a hideaway in Europe to escape from media and supporters alike after his ban for the use of diuretics. At the age of 33, he would have had to spend four years qualifying to play for England. Finally he decided this would have shortened his Test career too much, and he was too wedded to his native country."
Until recently Warne would have had to spend even longer before he could have played for England, but the ICC recently reduced the qualification period to four years (it took Graeme Hick seven years to qualify for England after he decided to leave his native Zimbabwe). But still Warne could not have swapped the baggy green for the tight blue until 2008. As it is, he will be eligible for Australian selection again in February next year, after serving his 12-month ban.
Warne, 34, is keen to add to his impressive tally of 491 wickets in 107 Tests.
© Wisden Cricinfo Ltd
Poor Warney :rolleyes:
Can't play for England because he's decided it will shorten his test career. Charming.
Seriously though, i'm very surprised the laws in regards to which country you play for are so lax. Sure if you are from a non-cricketing nation like Hick was, 4 years living in England is fair enough. But for those in test playing nations, it's a bit rich. fringe grade players could consider living in Bangladesh for 4 years and having a real crack at making the test side. I'm surprised this sort of thing doesnt happen more often ala what we see in state cricket.
bluechampion
14 Oct 2003, 10:41
Frankly, Warnie's a ****er.
MaccasNeighbour
14 Oct 2003, 11:46
Who is Ivo Tennant? How well does he know Shane Warne, or has he even met him?
The fact is that Shane Warne is in Australia and will play for Australia again in a few short months. He may have contemplated all sorts of things, as people do when they are depressed, but at the end of the day he has remained loyal.
Personally I don't care too much about what Shane Warne does off the field, and unless he's molesting children or torturing animals then I don't want to read about it. The fact is he is our greatest ever bowler and if you were a real cricket fan that's all you'd care about.
I would suspect this article has made an appearance because Shane, being the dumb attention seeking **** he is was a bit unhappy he's not getting any headlines lately. Especially in light of Hayden getting a world record score - thats the sort of headline Warnie thinks should be reserved for himself.
The story doesn't make any sense.
Why would Warne seriously comtemplate an option that involves him sitting out of cricket for four years instead of one?
There's no quotes from Warne in that article. Why not?
It seems like a beat up to me.
Lenny29
14 Oct 2003, 18:08
Unbelievable that people are believing as gospel something reported in a London paper.
Anything to chop down a tall poppy, eh?
swans_supporter
14 Oct 2003, 18:26
Absolute crap, he wont be playing in 4 yrs, either on some other drug or Ivo is a tosspot
Bomber Spirit
14 Oct 2003, 21:17
Originally posted by nicko18
Seriously though, i'm very surprised the laws in regards to which country you play for are so lax. Sure if you are from a non-cricketing nation like Hick was, 4 years living in England is fair enough. But for those in test playing nations, it's a bit rich. fringe grade players could consider living in Bangladesh for 4 years and having a real crack at making the test side. I'm surprised this sort of thing doesnt happen more often ala what we see in state cricket. I know Canada's not a Test side, but how did John Davison get a gig for them?
The criteria should be citizenship of the new country plus a qualifying period, and 4 years is fair enough. I wouldn't want to be languishing in Bangladeshi club cricket for 4 years. Injury, loss of form, civil war, political pressure against whites or imports, Bangladesh kicked out of Test cricket - there's too many things that can go wrong and then you'd be stuck in a third-world country on the other side of the world and still not be a Test cricketer.
the fly
14 Oct 2003, 21:48
Davison lived in Canada between the ages of 0 and 6 weeks, but then again, somebody born on an aeroplane can get citizenship of the country whose airspace the plane was in at the time.
Richmondfan#1
14 Oct 2003, 21:51
Originally posted by nicko18
But the bad news for England's batsmen is that Warne eventually decided to stay put, and try to regain his Australian Test spot.
Wouldn't the English batsmen be happy that he didn't go over there? Or is this a use of sarcasm that I've missed?
Bomber Spirit
14 Oct 2003, 21:54
If he had gone over there, he wouldn't be bowling to, and therefore dismissing, England's batsmen. The fact that he didn't go means he can still get them out.
I read this article & I must admit I was bit surprised but it wasn't in some crappy tabloid it was in the Sunday Times & I can only assume that if it was factually incorrect that Warnie could sue their arses off on the grounds of it damaging his reputation in Australia.
My feeling was that he must have wanted these comments to come out as a F*** you to those he felt were responsible for banning him.
Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
I know Canada's not a Test side, but how did John Davison get a gig for them?
The criteria should be citizenship of the new country plus a qualifying period, and 4 years is fair enough. I wouldn't want to be languishing in Bangladeshi club cricket for 4 years. Injury, loss of form, civil war, political pressure against whites or imports, Bangladesh kicked out of Test cricket - there's too many things that can go wrong and then you'd be stuck in a third-world country on the other side of the world and still not be a Test cricketer.
I think the 4 year rule only applies to players that have already represented a country. Davison never represented Australia, but was eligible for both Canada (being the country of his birth) and Australia. If Canada was a test nation, Davison would need another 4 years in Australia to play for Australia, but the ICC has relaxed the rules allowing players that are eligible for minnow countries to immediately play for test nations that they would otherwise be eligible to play for.
Not really applicable in Davison's case, as I can't see him being selected for Australia, but it was an issue with Gavin Hamilton who played for Scotland in the 99 WC (and played bloody well too if memory serves) and was subsequently selected for England a year or so later.
Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
I know Canada's not a Test side, but how did John Davison get a gig for them? He was born there.
I think the 4 year rule only applies to players that have already represented a country.
I don't think that is true. I remember reading an article on Darren Berry a few years ago, and he considered playing test cricket for zimbabwe in the mid 90's. He thought that it would take 2 years of living in Zimbabwe to qualify him. Had this had been the case it would have been a done deal, but he later found out that it was a 4 year wait and chose not to go. I might be wrong, but im sure i read this somewhere. The article was an interview with him in the Herald-Sun.
Originally posted by bluechampion
Frankly, Warnie's a ****er.
6 times a day my friend and u better effen believe it
1 - He is 2nd to Bradman in cricket
2 - He'd rather skull shizier from a cup than play for tha poms
3 - nicko18 - best joke in a while on Bigfooty.com
Originally posted by wang
I don't think that is true. I remember reading an article on Darren Berry a few years ago, and he considered playing test cricket for zimbabwe in the mid 90's. He thought that it would take 2 years of living in Zimbabwe to qualify him. Had this had been the case it would have been a done deal, but he later found out that it was a 4 year wait and chose not to go. I might be wrong, but im sure i read this somewhere. The article was an interview with him in the Herald-Sun.
Did he otherwise qualify? I would imagine you can't just pick a country at virtual random and say you want to play with them immediately, you would still need to qualify under the usual qualification rules, eg. you were born there. Otherwise you would need to go there for a while I suppose.
Or maybe Berry played for the national under 21 team 15 years ago or something like that which attached him to Australia.
Richmondfan#1
15 Oct 2003, 17:27
Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
If he had gone over there, he wouldn't be bowling to, and therefore dismissing, England's batsmen. The fact that he didn't go means he can still get them out.
Ahh I'm with it now ;).
guess_who
15 Oct 2003, 20:34
Seriously if warny has or wants to keep the very little dignity he has left, then he won't make a come back. Because you know what is going to happen, he'll get spanked around the park by South Africa and say he is out of form or some injury that has been nigling him during the pre season
Comon Shane, seriously don't kid your self mate. You have lost everybody's respect there is only one way to get it back leave the game on top and with some dignity.
dr nick
17 Oct 2003, 07:06
Originally posted by wang
I don't think that is true. I remember reading an article on Darren Berry a few years ago, and he considered playing test cricket for zimbabwe in the mid 90's. He thought that it would take 2 years of living in Zimbabwe to qualify him. Had this had been the case it would have been a done deal, but he later found out that it was a 4 year wait and chose not to go. I might be wrong, but im sure i read this somewhere. The article was an interview with him in the Herald-Sun.
Our Patriotic Darren Berry.... what is it with Victorians? :p
Originally posted by MaccasNeighbour
unless he's molesting children or torturing animals then I don't want to read about it. So if he was doing those things you would like to read about it? Or check out the videos maybe?
I hope he never plays again. We don't need him, Magilla does a good enough job for us.