*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[h_hurricane]

The answer to the question of the most overrated cricketer? Yeah

This comment is just a validation of your face.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

This comment is just a validation of your face.

So you there are people who rate my face?

 

[Coronis]

1. Murali is better against India overall, nobody is arguing otherwise, but based on home and not away performances.

2. Lara basically suggests that Murali didn't have a plan B once a batsman stuck in and negotiated his varieties.

3. Based on fifers/tenfers? It is clear that is because Hadlee, like Murali, had the advantage of being the sole prime ATG threat.

Not based solely off that, but its definitely a big factor. Similarly with players such as Steyn and Lillee, hell even Botham.

 

[subshakerz]

1. If Warne got exact same conditions as Murali, his record would still be substantially inferior to Murali's against India. Just look at their ODI records for supporting evidence.

2. Plan B and mental toughness has a lot to do with bunch of other things including match situation, captaincy and support cast. I take that as less insightful than his admission that he couldn't pick Murali. Sehwag said exact same thing about Murali. I value that a lot. Although I don't take away from Warne's theatre and mental game, he was pretty good at it.

3. No, not on that alone. But on ability to do it day in and day out even in absence of much support or scorecard pressure.

1. Sure Murali was a unbeaten master in his own conditions. How would Murali have done against India in Australia though? Yeah we don't know.

2. Maybe you missed Lara's point. As he stayed longer, along with any quality player of spin, he would pick Murali more comfortably. Whereas Warne didn't build his game around a bad of tricks.

3. Ok so long as someone doesn't say look at the staggering numbers of fifers that lonegun has. He is the best pacer/spinner ever.

 

[subshakerz]

Not based solely off that, but its definitely a big factor. Similarly with players such as Steyn and Lillee, hell even Botham.

There is a huge caveat though with players like Hadlee and Murali compared to the others who had more competition for wickets. This is obvious.

 

[h_hurricane]

So you there are people who rate my face?

Mediocre career, mediocre face, mediocre commentator.

 

[Coronis]

There is a huge caveat though with players like Hadlee and Murali compared to the others who had more competition for wickets. This is obvious.

And yet it is something many people recognise and judge bowlers on.

 

[Migara]

Doesn't sound like a valid excuse for someone put forward as the greatest spinner ever.

Had he succeeded against them, even moderately, I think that would have given him a much more valid claim to be better than Warne.

That is a far bettere xcuse than playing with a broken toe nail.

 

[Migara]

Warne simply a more tactically intelligent bowler than Murali and more aggressive.

Murali was too reliant on his natural variety and the need to keep things tight with his fields that he often lacked a plan B. This is why his own captain Jaya called him a defensive bowler.

Warne had control but didn't mind being hit once in a while if it meant getting a wicket by inducing risk. He rarely went into a shell.

Once again no. To outfox best players of spin you need much more strategy. Murali was the better spinner against better players of spin. Warne was found scratching his head when attacked, while for Muarli it was part and parcel of his game, somebody coming after him. Murali was so successful in ODIs, because he was way more strategical against attacking batsmen than Warne.

 

[Migara]

They were both roughly as bad in India. Yes Murali succeeded at home so overall you can claim he did better against India but it wasn't an unqualified success.

Murali missing performances in Australia is a bigger issue though. That was the ultimate test for bowlers of the era.

No. Murali was actually intimidating in some spells even in India. Warne never ever had respect of Indian batsmen like Murali. And if you further go in to stats you will see Murali has primarily dismissed the Indian top order compared to Warne.

 

[Migara]

1. Sure Murali was a unbeaten master in his own conditions. How would Murali have done against India in Australia though? Yeah we don't know.

We have limited ODI evidence though.

Murali in Australia against India average 46.2 at ER 5.55. Warne (despite being home) average 57.0 at ER of 6.33. However the number of matches is small. It is worth to note Murali played more matches in Australlia against india than Warne.

 

[Migara]

There is a huge caveat though with players like Hadlee and Murali compared to the others who had more competition for wickets. This is obvious.

If they had competition sure they would have lesser wickets. But lot better averages and SRs because they will have more access to the tailenders.

 

[subshakerz]

No. Murali was actually intimidating in some spells even in India. Warne never ever had respect of Indian batsmen like Murali. And if you further go in to stats you will see Murali has primarily dismissed the Indian top order compared to Warne.

Murali was destroyed by Sidhu in 97 and destroyed by Sehwag in 2009. He had an early 90s tour and then the 2005 tour where aside from that magical Nagpur spell he was mostly neutralized.

Sure let's give him an edge over Warne in India too but by objective standards their overall records are both failures.

 

[Migara]

Murali was destroyed by Sidhu in 97 and destroyed by Sehwag in 2009. He had an early 90s tour and then the 2005 tour where aside from that magical Nagpur spell he was mostly neutralized.

Sure let's give him an edge over Warne in India too but by objective standards their overall records are both failures.

Warne was duely destroyed by Sidhu in 98, but never faced Shewag on form, or would have much worse figures.

 

[subshakerz]

Warne was duely destroyed by Sidhu in 98, but never faced Shewag on form, or would have much worse figures.

Warne faced Sehwag in the 2004-5 series and was relatively ok.

Anyways, we are comparing two horrible records in India.

The big issue as always will be Murali not succeeding in Australia, where pretty much every major spinner has had their moments of success.

 

[Migara]

Warne faced Sehwag in the 2004-5 series and was relatively ok.

Anyways, we are comparing two horrible records in India.

The big issue as always will be Murali not succeeding in Australia, where pretty much every major spinner has had their moments of success.

We could say the same about Warne failing in West indies, where almost all other spinners had their moments.

And it does not explain horrible failing of Warne against India in Australia as well.

 

[subshakerz]

We could say the same about Warne failing in West indies, where almost all other spinners had their moments.

And it does not explain horrible failing of Warne against India in Australia as well.

Can we at least agree Murali and Warne are close and each have gaps in their resume that we can weigh differently?

 

[ankitj]

Can we at least agree Murali and Warne are close and each have gaps in their resume that we can weigh differently?

That was never in doubt. It's you who has the need to get everyone to agree with you (and have amazing patience for this pursuit).

 

[Migara]

Can we at least agree Murali and Warne are close and each have gaps in their resume that we can weigh differently?

No one doubted that they were of similar class. Just some people wanted to show that Warne was a class apart.

However in ODIs it is a different kettle of fish. Murali is class apart from Warne and only Saqlain comes close to him in performances.

 

[Coronis]

Can we at least agree Murali and Warne are close and each have gaps in their resume that we can weigh differently?

Yep. And both are dwarfed by Bill.