*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[PY]

Can't believe I missed this gem of a thread.

I can't wait until the King of Spin or the Python takes 500 Test wickets, that's when things will truly hot up.

 

[Francis]

First off I want to thank Sanz for posting a good post. It wasn't emotional, it was well presented etc.

The reason I mention away strike-rate is if you take out Bangladesh and Zimbabwe it looks much worse for Murali. Warne got killed by Bangladesh and yet his strike-rate is in the 40s. Against tougher opposition when he's away, it varies from player to play.

Can you please give me their total away strike-rate? If they're the same it's only because Murali has 28 against Bangladesh.

By the way you didn't mention New Zealand. And you should have mentioned their strike-rates against Australia and Sri Lanka. Obviously Warne never played Oz and Murali SL but still...

And you know what... Eddie is right, this thread has gone on for too lone.

I hope we're leaving it on good terms. At the end of the day all I think I want to say was in this post...

Then what I do is balance these factors together by what I've seen with my eyes, which will always be more reliable than stats. I've seen Murali bowl in Sri Lanka and how well he does there... I've seen him struggle away. I've seen Warne get wickets off good bowling and nothing else. So I present my opinion and select the scenarios that explain what I see at the truth. That's debating.

It's just about possibilities.

That's all. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion on either side, I'd just like all possibilities acknowledged. But I wont worry about that.

Like I said, hopefully we're leaving this on good terms... I did appologise before.

And yeah Eddie your right, this thread is deader than dead.

 

[luckyeddie]

Oh, just ignore my cantankerousness. Perhaps the last couple of posts have proved that you (well, Sanz and Francis at least) are ready. Just consider my previous one a shot across the bows.

 

[honestbharani]

First off I want to thank Sanz for posting a good post. It wasn't emotional, it was well presented etc.

The reason I mention away strike-rate is if you take out Bangladesh and Zimbabwe it looks much worse for Murali. Warne got killed by Bangladesh and yet his strike-rate is in the 40s. Against tougher opposition when he's away, it varies from player to play.

Can you please give me their total away strike-rate? If they're the same it's only because Murali has 28 against Bangladesh.

By the way you didn't mention New Zealand. And you should have mentioned their strike-rates against Australia and Sri Lanka. Obviously Warne never played Oz and Murali SL but still...

And you know what... Eddie is right, this thread has gone on for too lone.

I hope we're leaving it on good terms. At the end of the day all I think I want to say was in this post...



That's all. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion on either side, I'd just like all possibilities acknowledged. But I wont worry about that.

Like I said, hopefully we're leaving this on good terms... I did appologise before.

And yeah Eddie your right, this thread is deader than dead.

I ask you again, why is Warne's inability take wickets against the same Bangladesh that Murali ran through, something that should be taken out?

 

[GotSpin]

I ask you again, why is Warne's inability take wickets against the same Bangladesh that Murali ran through, something that should be taken out?

*sigh* I believe this has been answered many times

 

[honestbharani]

*sigh* I believe this has been answered many times

Not when the other guy hasn't had the same kind of success against the weaker opposition. Like I said in the past, even I feel that Warney today is better than Murali and that over the careers, inspite of Murali's phenomenal consistency, Warney is so extremely close to him (IMO) that I can very easily take him over Murali and then argue that case. But this is definitely not one of the points. You can talk about his longevity, his resilience (his ability to come back and take wickets after being mauled) and just the awra about him (which I think helps him get some wickets too). People overdo the Bangla/Zim thing when discussing Warne/Murali for me.

 

[JASON]

How about we call a Truce on this thread in honour of Fardin (alias Cricket Player) ?

I really feel this sort of discussions and arguments are meaningless when you consider the Big Picture .

I call every one on this thread to stop this never ending argument in honour of our departed friend , to show how much we appreciated his contribution on this forum.

 

[Smudge]

How about we call a Truce on this thread in honour of Fardin (alias Cricket Player) ?

I really feel this sort of discussions and arguments are meaningless when you consider the Big Picture .

I call every one on this thread to stop this never ending argument in honour of our departed friend , to show how much we appreciated his contribution on this forum.

There are other threads for that. It's sad that Fardin has died, but it doesn't mean the whole forum grinds to a halt.

 

[Pratters]

Murali - Modern Bradman?

He has an amazing career but if we remove the initial part where he was not that potent, it is pretty amazing.

unfiltered           113 6230.2 14931 700  9/51  16/220  21.33  2.39  53.4 60 20
filtered (1998 onwards) 79 4607.2 10725 565  9/51  16/220  18.98  2.32  48.9 51 20
filtered (2000 onwards) 65 3750    8791 473  9/51  13/115  18.58  2.34  47.5 43 18
filtered (2002 onwards) 43 2345.2  5629 318  9/51  13/115  17.70  2.40  44.2 29 11
filtered (2005 onwards) 22 1043    2766 168  8/46  12/82   16.46  2.65  37.2 16  7
filtered (2006 onwards) 14  701.3  1803 116  8/70  12/82   15.54  2.57  36.2 12  6

When we consider we are playing in a generation when batsmen are dominating compared to the 90s to an extent, it becomes more amazing.

We talk about McGrath but does any one really compare to Murali? A wicket machine, just like Bradman was a run machine. What do you think?

 

[nightprowler10]

I'd actually agree with this. He's been unstoppable for so long its absolutely amazing. 43 5-fors in his last 65 tests. Just amazing.

 

[Prince EWS]

I wouldn't call him a modern day Bradman by any stretch of the imagination. Bradman was quite easily the best batsman of his time and of all time without any real competition. He averaged twice as much as batsmen we still consider greats of their respective eras. And while Murali is obviously a fanstastic bowler, it's debatable over even whether he is the best of his time - let alone such a undeniably superior player as Bradman was.

 

[andyc]

I wouldn't call him a modern day Bradman by any stretch of the imagination. Bradman was quite easily the best batsman of his time and of all time without any real competition. He averaged twice as much as batsmen we still consider greats of their respective eras. And while Murali is obviously a fanstastic bowler, it's debatable over even whether he is the best of his time - let alone such a undeniably superior player as Bradman was.

Agreed. He's a gun, but to be anywhere near a 'modern Bradman,' he'd have to be averaging 10-15 at most with the ball IMO.

 

[Perm]

No.

 

[nightprowler10]

No.

What a compelling argument!

 

[Richard]

He's a gun, but to be anywhere near a 'modern Bradman,' he'd have to be averaging 10-15 at most with the ball IMO.

Best said in t' thread so far IMO.

Murali is pretty much undoubtedly > all other bowlers around for the last 3 or 4 years, though, and if he can finally achieve that coveted success in Australia his record will become still more impressive.

 

[Perm]

What a compelling argument!

The idea is that far-fetched that it doesn't deserve more than one word, with all due respect to Pratyush.

 

[PhoenixFire]

It's hardly that far-fetched when you think about it. Considering it's the age of super flat pitches, small boundaries, great bats and loads of great batsmen, it's a wonder that he averages 15 odd.

 

[Perm]

It's hardly that far-fetched when you think about it. Considering it's the age of super flat pitches, small boundaries, great bats and loads of great batsmen, it's a wonder that he averages 15 odd.

He averages about 22 or so against Test standard teams. Impressive, but definately not the statistical giant that Bradman was.

 

[Pratters]

Before 1998, he was pretty average though what does he average against test standard teams 1998 onwards?

 

[PhoenixFire]

He averages about 22 or so against Test standard teams. Impressive, but definately not the statistical giant that Bradman was.

So? Bradman made runs against sub-standard NZ and SA sides.