Who is the no.1 spinner of the Post Packer Era?

[subshakerz]

I believe statistically they are close, though Muralitharan seems to have a distinct advantage. One big, big problem with Warne is that he never, in his entire career, produced a match-winning performance against the Indians, even when he was in form. That is a pretty damning stat, given that he played 14 tests against them.

Another very compelling reason I vote for Muralitharan is that I have noticed that almost all great players of spin, from Sidhu to Pietersen to Mark Waugh to Sehwag to Salim Malik, found Murali more of a handful to play. I value their judgment more than that of some English batsmen from the 90s who couldn't tell the difference between off-spin or leg-spin yet felt overawed when Warne bowled to them.

Mark Waugh himself said on Murali, "The best accolade I can offer is to say I found him even more difficult to face than the great Shane Warne."

 

[Ikki]

I believe statistically they are close, though Muralitharan seems to have a distinct advantage. One big, big problem with Warne is that he never, in his entire career, produced a match-winning performance against the Indians, even when he was in form. That is a pretty damning stat, given that he played 14 tests against them.

Another very compelling reason I vote for Muralitharan is that I have noticed that almost all great players of spin, from Sidhu to Pietersen to Mark Waugh to Sehwag to Salim Malik, found Murali more of a handful to play. I value their judgment more than that of some English batsmen from the 90s who couldn't tell the difference between off-spin or leg-spin yet felt overawed when Warne bowled to them.

Mark Waugh himself said on Murali, "The best accolade I can offer is to say I found him even more difficult to face than the great Shane Warne."

The two best players of spin in this generation (Lara/Sachin) were split as to who was the greatest. In general, Warne is considered the greatest bowler, let alone spinner, of all time by a great host of players.

 

[zaremba]

Voted for Panesar for the much the same reason that Australians will all vote for Warne and Sri Lankans vote for Murali. (Except that Panesar is sh!t by comparison with them, obviously).

If forced to choose an overseas player I'd go for Murali. The tie-breaking factors being (a) I don't like Warne, and (b) Murali hasn't got a record of taking banned substances.

 

[fredfertang]

Nationalism aside as others have said it's a straight choice between Warne and Murali who I believe it's virtually impossible to separate. As human beings I much prefer Murali to Warne but on the basis this particular XI might have to bowl in Australia I've gone for the one with the straighter arm

 

[BoyBrumby]

Anyway, Shane Warne is my favourite player ever so I'm picking him. There's a good argument for picking him over Murali, if you want the extra batting and slip catching, but I'm just picking him largely over personal preference. It's close enough that i don't care who was the slightly better bowler.

Bravo. Nail on the head.

Both are obviously great spinners and I'd be quite prepared to accept the arguments that Murali has the better record as a bowler, but as cricketers there's only one winner. Warne was a more than capable no.8 (whose average doesn't reflect his batting ability remotely) and a very decent slip catcher. Murali is, at best, an engaging no.11.

If I were selected a Post-Packer XI there's no doubt in my mind who I'd go for.

 

[silentstriker]

Love the ethnic-based split, though good on the people who went to the other side.

Also, the people who don't vote for Warne because he might be a drug cheat are crazy. The luddites who don't vote for Murali due to his action are equally so.

I don't give a crap about spinners, so I'll go with Harbhajan. And I'll sit back and watch the arguments. Again.

In my all time XI, I would not have any spinner, but if I were forced to pick one, I'd make Sobers play as a specialist spinner. Or, if I couldn't weasel out of that requirement, I'd go with Tufnell just to spite everyone.

Don't get the adoration for the step-and-fetch-it blokes. Give me a proper bowler any day.

 

[kingkallis]

Murali......it was tough to avoid Warney but afterall, Murali is the neighbour

 

[ozone]

Started reading through the thread but got bored when it turned into Warne v Murali, but has anyone suggested a side that could include both? After all, they are probably two of the best bowlers ever, let alone in the time-scale mentioned.

 

[silentstriker]

Well, I guess as long as you never tour India or Australia, you'd be OK.

 

[Uppercut]

Also, the people who don't vote for Warne because he might be a drug cheat are crazy. The luddites who don't vote for Murali due to his action are equally so.

Yeah, I second that.

As human beings I much prefer Murali to Warne

That's a more interesting question. There's no doubt Murali is by far the nicer bloke, any number of sources support that- the memoirs of anyone who ever played with him, the work he's done with charity, particularly in the wake of the tsunami disaster. He's also very funny and charming to be around.

I think I actually prefer Warne though, because he's a more interesting character. He's every bit as charming as Murali, and some of the things he said will be quoted for hundreds of years. But he was deeply flawed, "a red-blooded male", in his own words, and had a tendency to do something really stupid at any point, despite being a cricketing genius. In terms of who I'd rather be friends with, it's got to be Murali, but I find Warne much more inspiring, and prefer the way he played the game. For me, the only time in history cricket has ever been cool is when Warne was bowling.

 

[silentstriker]

Yeah, I second that.



That's a more interesting question. There's no doubt Murali is by far the nicer bloke, any number of sources support that- the memoirs of anyone who ever played with him, the work he's done with charity, particularly in the wake of the tsunami disaster. He's also very funny and charming to be around.

I think I actually prefer Warne though, because he's a more interesting character. He's every bit as charming as Murali, and some of the things he said will be quoted for hundreds of years. But he was deeply flawed, "a red-blooded male", in his own words, and had a tendency to do something really stupid at any point, despite being a cricketing genius. In terms of who I'd rather be friends with, it's got to be Murali, but I find Warne much more inspiring, and prefer the way he played the game. For me, the only time in history cricket has ever been cool is when Warne was bowling.

Warne sounds like a bit of an asshole, and by that, I mean a huge asshole. Reading other people's biographies (like Gilly's for example) just gives more proof. I don't find his attitude inspiring at all - it's probably the antithesis of what I respect in a cricketer - let alone a person. With all that said, overall he is a better cricketer to Murali, and he makes this guy proud:

so I'd rather be Warne even if I'd rather be friends with Murali.

 

[Uppercut]

Aren't you anti-sledging?

 

[silentstriker]

Aren't you anti-sledging?

No, I am pro-ice hockey fights.

 

[silentstriker]

Oh, and for those who don't get the picture, watch office space.

 

[Ikki]

Unfortunately, I've never met Warne but I've actually heard he was a great guy in person. Always has time for fans, etc. I remember HB talking about how nice Warne was, maybe he'll reply and replay that story.

 

[silentstriker]

Unfortunately, I've never met Warne but I've actually heard he was a great guy in person. Always has time for fans, etc. I remember HB talking about how nice Warne was, maybe he'll reply and replay that story.

I was primarily talking about on-field things. Off the field, I don't really care what he does. In fact, I respect much of his tabloid-attracting activities.

 

[Uppercut]

Unfortunately, I've never met Warne but I've actually heard he was a great guy in person. Always has time for fans, etc. I remember HB talking about how nice Warne was, maybe he'll reply and replay that story.

I've heard mixed anecdotes. Some people say he was really friendly, a good laugh to chat with and seemed a generally really good guy. The people who disagree tend to be the unfortunate women subjected to his chat-up technique

 

[Evermind]

Warne was a ****y, annoying asshole while Murali's action to me has always been a little dubious. They're both on equal terms.

I guess Warne over Murali because of the batting advantage.

I find it hard to imagine why people would choose anyone else though. Wouldn't dream of it.

 

[JBH001]

Oh dear, here we go again.

In retrospect, it would have been more interesting to have Murali out (being tested again at the U of WA) and Warne out (shagging, after having already suffered RSI in his right thumb). Then we could have really had a discussion about who would be the no. 2 spinner in the post Packer XI. Much more interesting.

I used to think Warne was slightly better, up until 2004/2005 but then switched to Murali, these days I am not sure either way.

Have to think about it some more.

Edit/ On the other hand, since I am picking my own XI, I might go with someone fun and flamboyant, but fragile, like Qadir. A few days left anyway.

 

[ozone]

Well, I guess as long as you never tour India or Australia, you'd be OK.

Personally think that these two are effective in pretty much any circumstances, so wouldn't mind playing them together in either of these countries.

If its got to be one though, I'd take Warne. I think that if he bowled on more friendly pitches at home (as mentioned before I think, Murali played on pitches prepared almost solely for him) his record would be far closer to Murali, and given the far superior batting and slip catching, Warne just edges him out.