Best Test Bowler(s) since 2000

[Ikki]

Haha piss off, you'll take any opportunity you'll get to have a go at Murali. Don't act all innocent, just admit it and get on with it.

I'll take any opportunity to engage the argument and make my plea on facts. I don't take pot-shots at Murali's character or anything of the nature to which you imply. Furthermore, don't tell me to piss off, I find it offending.

 

[Flem274*]

This is ridiculous. Have I said 1 thing that wasn't a fact? It's really because of this "well you must be really really biased or racist unless you think Murali is the greatest" that makes these arguments spiral to crap.

No, I just think you're treating an all time great in the manner that Hamish and James marshall ought to be treated.

 

[Dasa]

I'll take any opportunity to engage the argument and make my plea on facts. I don't take pot-shots at Murali's character or anything of the nature to which you imply. Furthermore, don't tell me to piss off, I find it offending.

Good.

 

[Richard]

Who said massive? I said completely different; they paint different pictures. Averaging in the 18s and striking in the 40s to averaging 22 and striking at 52?

And I didn't say his figures are poor when you take those out. They are still great. They're just not 'ridiculous'. To which you replied...

A difference of 4? Wow! They're both hugely impressive, especially in an age of flat pitches (and supposedly great batsmen).

 

[Flem274*]

'90s probably.

Basically, anything which involved a "white" country and C_C was always fairly liable to degenerate into a flame-war, and anything that involved the subcontinent and "social" likewise. I highly doubt C_C went out at night thinking "how many white guys am I gonna bash-up today" nor social "how many brown guys am I gonna bash-up today", but there's no denying, IMO, that there was subconscious prejudice on the part of the two.

They sound like fun guys to argue with.

 

[Flem274*]

Good.

 

[Richard]

They sound like fun guys to argue with.

Well I enjoyed it.

 

[Richard]

Good.

Yeah, LOLzers at Dasa TBH. Soooooo familiar (and not referring to KaZo and Dasa here).

 

[Flem274*]

Well I enjoyed it.

I imagine you would, you three are all as stubborn as hell are you not? Boy I wish I was around to watch..

 

[Richard]

There's always the trecking back through the forum... it's all still there.

 

[Ikki]

Good.

I guess no deed should go unpunished? Reported.

 

[Flem274*]

There's always the trecking back through the forum... it's all still there.

Speaking of flame wars, I can see this thread going that way which would be a shame as there's lots of potential good debate here.

 

[Ikki]

A difference of 4? Wow! They're both hugely impressive, especially in an age of flat pitches (and supposedly great batsmen).

Um,

1) AVG. 18 SR 47
2) AVG. 22 SR 52

Yes, Wow, it is quite different. For such a large sample it is quite a difference, especially when discussing the same player, home and away.

And yes, they are all (all 3 McGrath, Warne and Murali) very impressive, it's not a coincidence that each can be regarded as the best bowler of all time.

 

[Ikki]

No, I just think you're treating an all time great in the manner that Hamish and James marshall ought to be treated.

Because I choose to look at his record realistically? What have I said that is disrespectful? In the other thread I took Sangakkarra's record apart too, do I hate him? Do I hate all Sri Lankans then? Or how about Dravid and his SR, even though Dravid is one of my favourite batsmen of all time? Or how about even when I voted for McGrath against Hadlee, I made arguments for both men?

 

[Richard]

Speaking of flame wars, I can see this thread going that way which would be a shame as there's lots of potential good debate here.

Yeah, likewise. Anything involving Murali usually has such potential.

 

[Ikki]

I imagine you would, you three are all as stubborn as hell are you not? Boy I wish I was around to watch..

Did you think it a coincidence Richard has so many posts.

 

[Richard]

Um,

1) AVG. 18 SR 47
2) AVG. 22 SR 52

Yes, Wow, it is quite different. For such a large sample it is quite a difference, especially when discussing the same player, home and away.

And yes, they are all (all 3 McGrath, Warne and Murali) very impressive, it's not a coincidence that each can be regarded as the best bowler of all time.

O...K... fine, you think it's a large difference, I don't. As I think bowlers can go from good to awful and vice-versa in no time and you don't. Let's leave it at that hey?

 

[Flem274*]

Because I choose to look at his record realistically? What have I said that is disrespectful? In the other thread I took Sangakkarra's record apart too, do I hate him? Do I hate all Sri Lankans then? Or how about Dravid and his SR, even though Dravid is one of my favourite batsmen of all time? Or how about even when I voted for McGrath against Hadlee, I made arguments for both men?

*sigh* I can't argue with your stats, because they aren't changed. However as a viewer of both spinners against my beloved Black Caps, I'm more worried about Murali than Warne. The "x factor" if you like, is greater IMO. I just think he is more destructive.

Doesn't this have its own thread yet where we can beat the hell out of this argument? Because its never ending

(I'm not trying to snub or ignore you BTW, i just feel this is an unwinnable argument for both points of view)

 

[Ikki]

O...K... fine, you think it's a large difference, I don't. As I think bowlers can go from good to awful and vice-versa in no time and you don't. Let's leave it at that hey?

It has nothing to do with going good to bad in a short time. Murali's figures here and his career figures suggest the same difference. Bowling at home helps him a great deal. In this period he had 40 of his 65 matches at home. If you want to look at it closely I guess you'd want to take that into account, and if you don't then don't.

I'm just putting it out there for those that don't know and who would like to discuss, even refute it. If you don't, then why start an argument about not wanting to argue? Just don't.

 

[Richard]

It has nothing to do with going good to bad in a short time.

I know it doesn't, I was merely mentioning this to show another case of something which can only ever be opinion and not proven conclusively.

Murali's figures here and his career figures suggest the same difference. Bowling at home helps him a great deal. In this period he had 40 of his 65 matches at home. If you want to look at it closely I guess you'd want to take that into account, and if you don't then don't.

I don't think bowling at home does help him that much. Because he spins it so much he can turn in on anything.