-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Murali Retires from International Cricket
- Thread starter Scaly piscine
- Start date
Faisal1985
International Vice-Captain
I don't think anyone will be able to reach the heights that these greats have reached...The same number we had before these guys.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Everyone was saying the same thing in the 90's when only one bloke had gone past 10000 Test runs.....or when Hadlee took his 431st wicket, etc. There will be other greats.
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
You cant replace someone with 800 Test wickets..SL cricket will struggle to fill his boots..
BTW how many wickets does Harbhajan have? Murali said only Harbhajan can emulate him..but i was off the impression that Harbhajan is way behind with 300 wickets or something
BTW how many wickets does Harbhajan have? Murali said only Harbhajan can emulate him..but i was off the impression that Harbhajan is way behind with 300 wickets or something
Athlai
Not Terrible
30 years old with 355 wickets after 12 years of playing. If he plays for another 8 years at a stellar level he will still come short of Warne's tally. More of a statement to he'll be the only 500+ wicket taking spinner for a long time it seems.
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
^ Yep
Just two points
1) India play relatively less test matches
2) Fitness issues as he grows older..
Just two points
1) India play relatively less test matches
2) Fitness issues as he grows older..
Jezroy
State Captain
Vettori needs 175 more. But at his rate of 3.25 wickets per test he needs another 54 tests to get there...
He's 31 and a half... He would probably need to play another 6 years? Maybe. I know a lot of people don't rate him as a great "spinner" but NZ would have been in the **** without him. And it would be pretty funny for a bowler of his standing (steady, but not the greatest) to get (probably) over 400 or (maybe just maybe) 500 test wickets.
Athlai
Not Terrible
Yeah I can see Vettori coming close but I see him becoming more of an all-rounder which will probably see him shorten his career a bit and take a few less wickets. 500 is possible but a little unlikely IMO.
Jezroy
State Captain
I was being a bit tongue in cheek, but with a sprinkling of serious.
Migara
International Coach
It's more like Murali throwing the egg on Bishan Bedi's face who said Sehwag is the best off spinner India had.
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
Shots fired..was a matter of time I guess
'Murali doesn't deserve the record' - Emerson | Australia Cricket News | Cricinfo.com
'Murali doesn't deserve the record' - Emerson | Australia Cricket News | Cricinfo.com
stumpski
International Captain
I'm not a huge Murali fan by any means, and can see why the controversy has arisen, but don't pay too much attention to his comments tbh. Shows why you shouldn't appoint umpires for internationals who haven't played f-c or List A cricket. Comes across as quite a bitter individual tbh.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
There was an impressively even handed eulogy from David Hopps in Tuesday's Guardian.
Think this paragraph is as close to the kernel of the matter as I've seen:
Cricket has always been a highly technical game predominantly watched by incurable romantics. That is why many former players, steeped in orthodoxy, and priding themselves as realists, condemn Murali's action as illegal whilst a majority of spectators sighed: "Leave him alone, he's a delight to watch."
Think this paragraph is as close to the kernel of the matter as I've seen:
Cricket has always been a highly technical game predominantly watched by incurable romantics. That is why many former players, steeped in orthodoxy, and priding themselves as realists, condemn Murali's action as illegal whilst a majority of spectators sighed: "Leave him alone, he's a delight to watch."
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
See this has been going on for so long...and not just about Murali..its also about Shoaib, Harbhajan, Shabbir and maybe even Brett Lee (?)
So much has been said about this topic, from both sides, yet no one ever talks about the most important issue..
There is no doubt that Murali does bend his arm more than others..
Does it give him an extra advantage over other bowlers? Yes
There should be no disagreement on that..
Now..the argument presented by Murali and Shoaib is that their arms have this hyperextension..a special condition.. They do not have control over it.
So now the question remains, is international cricket going to accomodate these bowlers with a special condition or not? That should be the debate..not whether their actions are illegal or legal because legality of the matter is simply something that is determined by people.
So much has been said about this topic, from both sides, yet no one ever talks about the most important issue..
There is no doubt that Murali does bend his arm more than others..
Does it give him an extra advantage over other bowlers? Yes
There should be no disagreement on that..
Now..the argument presented by Murali and Shoaib is that their arms have this hyperextension..a special condition.. They do not have control over it.
So now the question remains, is international cricket going to accomodate these bowlers with a special condition or not? That should be the debate..not whether their actions are illegal or legal because legality of the matter is simply something that is determined by people.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nope. Murali doesn't hyper-extend. He can't even fully extend his arm, let alone hyper-extend it.
The debate's already been had to death, though. The ICC has determined that hyper-extension is fine because it, like having longer arms or being taller, is involuntary.
Murali's problem is entirely different. And the debate isn't about whether his action is legal any more because it is. The limits of the amount of extension vs flexion are where the debate is and will probably always be controversial.
Last edited:
nightprowler10
Global Moderator
I've taken one wicket in two years for my team...
Shri
Mr. Glass
You are still young...ish. You could manage it.
