This.
Despite the fact MacGill overall had a better head-to-head record than Warne in test matches they both played in together - in 16 tests played together during 1998-2006, Warne took 74 wickets @ 29.57, MacGill took 82 wickets @ 22.11, MacGill producing better figures in 11 of those 16 tests - Warne was of more value to the ACB at the time (re:marketing and ability to draw in sponsors). However, after Warne had that first shoulder operation, he bowled absolutely crap and the Windies ate him up for breakfast. And Warne believes that the deciding test of that WI series was going to be the opportunity for him to step up to the plate, when he had only taken 2 wickets @ 134 in the first 3 tests?:lol: Funky Miller comes in and takes 3 wickets, including scoring a VITAL 43 batting at no.10 in the 1st innings of that deciding test. Besides being dropped, the fact Australia won that test without Warne is what deep down eats him up about the whole situation to this day: that they could win without him.
Warne had a massive sook after that tour, threatened to retire after the 1999 World Cup if Australia didn't make it, and then slotted straight back into the tour of Sri Lanka at MacGill's expense.
In the context of this Warne-Waugh incident, Warne obviously failed English in high school, as his definition of 'selfishness' is someone who had the balls to stand up and drop him from the side. It's funny that he doesn't hold the same animosity towards Allan Border when he was dropped after his first two tests against India.
Waugh will go down as the only captain that stood up to Warne. Could you imagine Ponting or furthermore, Clarke dropping Warne? Would NEVER happen.
Waugh's response to the incident in his book proves that there is no substitute for class. Class is something that is there for all to see; something that Warne has always lacked off the field (even going back before his international debut. Paul Barry wrote of some very unsavoury incidents Warne was involved in during his AIS Academy years and why the AIS staff weren't sad to see him go). Waugh handled both the Warne (1999 Windies tour) and Slater (2001 Ashes) droppings professionally, yet both of them had the audacity to bag him out on tv.
The bloke who chose to put his dick over his wife and kids is calling Steve Waugh selfish.
Anyone read Craddocks piece this afternoon? It is behind a paywall.
I remember Warnes comeback in the new years test 1999. He bowled alright in that test but it was MacGill who stole the show taking 12 for the match and kept his place in the team for a little while after that. They liked the leg spin combination.
I remember Warne got dropped after his first two tests in 1992 but even he admits he wasnt bowling well and were always gonna pick a 4 pace bowling attack for the Perth. Imagine him though, being the new guy, trying to question Captain Grumpys decision. He would've copped a flogging.
Ahh yes Slats is another one who held or still holds a grudge after he was dropped, but leading up to that 5th Ashes test his behaviour was pretty poor and Waugh was not impressed especially how he reacted in the Indian test.
Not just on the field but off it as well.
And like the Warne incident his dropping paid off. Langer replaced him and got a 100, which began a great partnership with Hayden.
ThisI loved Warne too. Champion cricketer the greatest leg spin bowler, but cant keep his bloody mouth shut.
Let me get this straight
Warne is being rumoured to be paid around 2 million plus to be in this crap show, BUT before he commences the show he closes down his charity?
Lew Swires its quite obvious to everyone if he wins or gets any amount of money he is going to donate it to this now defunct charity, it shouldnt change a thing about its shonky operation tho and that he was in charge
In response to recent, unwarranted speculation about The Shane Warne Foundation and its distribution of funds, we confirm we have distributed $3.67M to date with an additional and final substantial cheque to be distributed on March 18, 2016. At that time, we hope to have distributed over $4M dollars. All accounts have been fully audited by KPMG, and our final accounts will also be audited for the March 18th cheque presentation.
Someone on Facebook reckoned only 16c out of every dollar donated went to the charity, the rest went to executives parties, poker tournaments and other rubbish.
Not sure how true it is but if even a slither is true it makes Warnes pathetic attack more laughable.
Waugh just finished an over 900km ride for his charity, the less Waith says and the more plastic man opens his mouth the stupider Warne looks.
HOW can ex-cricketer Shane Warne jet off into the African jungle leaving such a mess behind him here in Australia?
In case you haven?t heard, Warne has been named as one of the big names appearing in the reality show I?m a Celebrity ? Get Me Out of Here!
He?s rumoured to be earning a princely $2 million for his involvement. On the show Warne arrives by private jet, and struts confidently down a red carpet dressed in a smart navy jacket.
Clearly, he?s the star contestant ? some of the others had to arrive by canoe.
Warne?s involvement in the show will be great for ratings, but it?s a questionable choice for the spin king, who?s just announced to sudden closure of The Shane Warne Foundation.
The charity, which raises and distributes funds to children?s causes, continues to face scrutiny from Consumer Affairs Victoria over its accounting practices.
Other Stories
If Warne wins the show his charity will get $100,000, but it?s a long way short of the millions of dollars he will allegedly earn personally for a few weeks? work.
It?s not a good look for Warne to pocket such a big pay cheque at a time when his foundation is still under such a cloud.
Shane Warne Foundation meeting with board members.
Also, there still seems to be a fair amount of denial coming from the foundation and Warne about why the auditors are so interested.
A message on the foundation?s website refers to ?recent, unwarranted speculation? about its management of millions of dollars in funds. Warne also scoffed at what he called a ?malicious campaign? in the media.
However, there is nothing unwarranted or malicious about the financial probe into the charity.
The closure of the foundation follows a review of operations by the board in November last year amid concerns about high costs and low revenues. Consumer Affairs became involved when the foundation failed to provide sufficient documents.
There?s another issue. Warne has repeatedly denied the foundation has done anything wrong and had ?nothing to hide?.
But how can he be so sure given that the audit hasn?t yet been completed?
Warne has also made it all very personal, insisting he?s hurt by the allegations. He needs to realise this is not about him and his feelings. It?s not a personal attack, but a legitimate and justified process.
James Packer. Picture: Getty Images
At audit time it doesn?t matter what famous people are involved, or how many millionaires or TV stars are on the board. All charities must meet the same high standards of accountability and transparency that donors expect.
Most people would be shocked to know as little as one in three dollars raised by some charities has to go out as donations. The rest can be spent on fundraising and overheads.
The Shane Warne Foundation insists that on average 52 per cent of the money it has raised has been distributed. Its website states that it has distributed $3.6 million since 2004 and says that by March this year it will have distributed more than $4 million out of total funds donated of $7.8 million.
It sure looks as if the foundation has massive overheads given that it is an umbrella organisation that channels money to other charities rather than spending it directly.
Indeed, in some years the percentage of money distributed is much, much less than 52 per cent.
Between 2011 and 2013, the average figure was only 16c going to needy families and children?s charities from every dollar raised.
Warne decked out in his jungle attire.
Warne completing a challenge on the show. Picture: Network Ten
Figures obtained by the Herald Sun show that in 2012, $115,472 was distributed from revenue of $405,212 and expenses amounted to $385,000. Compare this with the Australian Council for International Development that says its members spend about 10 per cent on fundraising, and another 10 per cent on administration costs. That?s 80 per cent going directly to the beneficiaries, not 50 per cent or 16 per cent.
No one is questioning Warne?s commitment to the cause or suggesting he?s been involved in any wrongdoing, or questioning the credibility of other high-profile people associated with the charity such as Glenn Robbins, Eddie McGuire and James Packer.
However, somewhere along the line something has clearly gone awry, despite the good intentions.
The foundation?s main source of revenue ? events-based funding relying on profits from gala dinners, poker tournaments and race days ? are very risky.
The charity ends up getting what?s left over once all the costs of the event have been met, which are often not as high as projected.
Laws governing charities need to be tightened so donors have a much better picture of how much money gets through.
In interviews promoting I?m A Celebrity, the cricketer says his time in the jungle will show people the ?real? Shane Warne. Let?s hope he?s out soon to face some real questions and give real answers about the foundation, which he is clearly so passionate about.
Donors deserve nothing less.
My message to Shane Warne? Just shut up and eat the grubs - and leave Steve Waugh alone
No, I won't do it, and you can't make me.
I won't rip into Shane Warne for his ludicrous remarks on Steve Waugh,. It would be unfair! It would be too easy! It would be like throwing a stick of dynamite into a goldfish bowl, and calling the result "fishing!"
It would ...
Be fun, and only fair, as Waugh is too dignified to reply himself?
Oh alright. You've convinced me, as dignity has never been my strong suit anyway.
So, take it away, Shane. Tell the folks what you said again, while I get the big bungers and some matches?
"He's the most selfish cricketer I've played with ..."
Bloody hell! Really? You must have played with, like, a thousand cricketers over the years, and Steve Waugh really stands out that much?
Amazing, no, that he is a byword for "selfish" in your world, and yet no other cricketer or commentator of note has ever bandied that word around about Waugh, and instead he is regarded as the most revered leader of cricketing men of his generation?
Also weird that none of those "tell-all" books by your teammates that live off controversy for their sales have ever come up with anything along the "he's selfish" lines? (And for once I know something of it, having read many of them, and having penned a book on Waugh myself.)
But go on, what is your evidence for the charge? I'm guessing he never did any of the hard yards in building victories, always put himself on to bowl when the bunnies were up offering easy wickets at the end, that kind of thing?
Tell us all ...
"The one Test I got dropped, in the West Indies in 1999, we had to win the last Test match. At that stage, captain, vice-captain, coach used to pick the team. We went to selection. I hadn't bowled well [and] we had lost Brian Lara batted unreal but I felt like I was being the scapegoat, that because I didn't bowl well it was my fault.
"We got to the selection table and said 'What's everyone's thoughts?'. Steve Waugh said (to me) 'You're not playing'. I went 'What? Hang on. What do you think the team should be? Blah blah blah', and Steve Waugh said 'Nup, I'm the captain of this side ... you're not playing."
He what? He . . . WHAT?
He didn't pick you, Shane, and that makes him selfish?
But you get, Shane, surely, that the essence of selfishness is putting yourself ahead of everyone else? How is Waugh declining to pick you selfish of him? At that point, Stuey McGill was twelve wickets to the good in that series, while you had just two. You were in a rare burst of bad form, and were stinking up the joint, and Australia had lost two Tests.
So they picked Colin Miller instead of you, who bowled like a bloody bewdy, took crucial wickets, and so Australia won the Test and levelled the series.
Most commentators took it as inspired Waugh captaincy, putting the team first, no matter the celebrity of certain players, like, say, you. But you say you were made the "scapegoat?"
You mean like, say, many to this day reckon Joe the Cameraman was made the scapegoat for your sledge, and you made your own mum the scapegoat for you failing that drug test? That kind of scapegoat? (BOOM!)
(I know, I know, but I couldn't resist. What's a man to do with a stick of dynamite, and an open gold-fish bowl?)
But perhaps you just didn't like the manner he did it in, face to face like?
Maybe a text message would have been better? (BOOM!)
"I thought the situation, of having to win a Test match, would've brought the best out in me too."
But, remember I told you, they did win the Test match. (BOOM!)
Did maybe, Waugh's selfishness show up as a fatal flaw in his captaincy, the one you coveted, but never got. But hang on, his winning percentage as captain is the best of any Australian Test captain, ever! (BOOM!)
Or maybe, he was one of those blokes who went so far outside the rules in pursuit of his own advancement, he was suspended from the game for a year, selfishly bringing his whole team into disrepute. But hang on, that wasn't Steve Waugh who did that . . . it was another. (BOOM!)
"I don't like Steve Waugh for a lot of other reasons [too] "
Ah. Perhaps you mean his selfishness in other fields, away from the cricket pitch, then Shane? Maybe be was always just putting himself ahead of, say, his ... family?
Dunno, Shane, but prima facie not a lot of evidence for that. Some cricketers, as you must have heard, selfishly turn their backs on their familial responsibilities the instant they are out of sight of them, making trouble for many apart from themselves, but Waugh has prospered with the one partner for well over three decades, and lived under the same roof as her and their kids since the day dot, so that can't be it.
So maybe you mean other stuff, then?
You must mean like he's one of those other selfish bastards who is huge on show for doing his bit and more for charity, often bearing his name, but when you get right down to it, the whole thing is an embarrassment and has to be shut down, because so little of the money being contributed actually gets to the underprivileged it is intended for and ...
And what?
You don't mean that and don't want to talk about it, and I'll hear from your lawyers? Ok, but let the record show that with precious little fanfare, and NO controversy, the Steve Waugh Foundation has quietly gone about its business, and so far supported 1,454 poor souls with rare diseases, and ...
And enough already.
I am sorry, Shane, we've voted you off the island. You are the weakest link, and your charge smells amazingly like dead fish. You are so lost in your own celebrity. Get us out of here.
And in the meantime, get over it. You were dropped. No big deal. I want to leave you with the words of one of the Twitterati who yesterday quoted Billy Birmingham channeling the late, great Tony Greig, "to me a grudge is nothing more than a place to pork your coar ..."
Park yours, please, Shane. Just shut up and eat the grubs, on "I'm A Celebrity ..." don't be one.
so not only do you watch the AFL Footy Show but you also read Fitzknobjockey :crazy:
The real Shane Warne lol, there is no one more fake and plastic in Australian sport.