Migara
International Coach
No it isn't. warne was awful against India let it be home or away, test or ODI. There is no hiding from it.We've done this dance: SL and India are the best places to bowl spin in the world and they're also two of the best spin-playing teams in the world during that time. Warne already showed what he could do on Murali's pitches and Murali showed how ineffective he was on Warne's.
The comparable part of their record is how they did in India, and Warne did better.
And conviniently forgetting that Shane Warne never bowled to Virender Sehwag at his best, the best player of spin in current era, at least in his prime.Fantastic, now show us the innings where he was shellacked to the point that his figures go south of Warne's.
Against same Indian sides Murali has a better average. Warne didn't play the best Indian side of the era.Warne has a better record in India than Murali. Warne also has the best series against India for both of them.
When they played together against same sides, Murali has better stats, And he always had the edge against India than Warne in any surface he bowled.Warne has better ratios than Murali in India. That's not disputable. Murali took 40 wickets in 11 matches; Warne took 34 in 9 matches. If you want to refer to Innings, Warne bowled less even if he played more innings.
Shows Warne was hidden from the attack while Murali took the brunt of it. Murali had no McGrath or gillespie to hide behind. If Warne was in SL side against India would average above 75.Murali had 2 5fers, Warne had 1.
Having injuries is an excuse! Your superstar is a fat unfit ****. That's why he gets injured. Fitter players are better players, and it's simple as that.And Warne had several career threatening injuries during that period. What was Murali's excuse?
Last edited: