Imran Khan vs Shane Warne (as bowlers)

[Coronis]

Funny how its acceptable to mention Murali and Australia whilst Marshall never cops anything about NZ.




(fwiw I don’t count either that much against them myself, just making an observation)

 

[Bolo.]

Funny how its acceptable to mention Murali and Australia whilst Marshall never cops anything about NZ.




(fwiw I don’t count either that much against them myself, just making an observation)

Ya, I don't think trying to equivocate a 32 bowling average with a 75 one (which was 100 or whatever in real tests) is the route to take.

Marshall also gets a bit of a pass due to it being a single series. Nobody thinks he would have not improved (especially in a seam friendly country) given more games.

That said, Murali gets more flack than he deserves in Aus. Debatable umpiring and quirks of timing meant he only played there in the rubbish stage of his career or against probably the strongest home batting unit ever on soft wickets that we're really not condusive to his style. I do hold his performances there against him, but not by as much as the averages would suggest- it's one country and a very limited number of games.

 

[kyear2]

Surprised Warne winning this one. Warne vs India and how Lara took to him places him below the elite fast bowlers for me.

 

[subshakerz]

Funny how its acceptable to mention Murali and Australia whilst Marshall never cops anything about NZ.




(fwiw I don’t count either that much against them myself, just making an observation)

Because that is irrelevant as far as a serious test of his skills.

 

[Prince EWS]

Surprised Warne winning this one. Warne vs India and how Lara took to him places him below the elite fast bowlers for me.

I voted for Imran but if I ranked everyone they'd be one above the other and basically the closest comparison I could imagine.

If I wanted someone to bowl a single over for me it'd be Imran no question. But Warne could bowl more of them and have a bigger effect on the median Test attack so I give him points for that. It's a coin flip for me I think. McGrath/Marshall/Hadlee are better than Warne, Imran/Ambrose/Davidson/Murali are roughly equal, everyone else is worse.

I think I'd vote for Warne over Davo ... and Imran and Ambrose over Warne, then followed by Murali, but I could be swung by mood on that grouping.

 

[subshakerz]

I voted for Imran but if I ranked everyone they'd be one above the other and basically the closest comparison I could imagine.

If I wanted someone to bowl a single over for me it'd be Imran no question. But Warne could bowl more of them and have a bigger effect on the median Test attack so I give him points for that. It's a coin flip for me I think. McGrath/Marshall/Hadlee are better than Warne, Imran/Ambrose/Davidson/Murali are roughly equal, everyone else is worse.

I think I'd vote for Warne over Davo ... and Imran and Ambrose over Warne, then followed by Murali, but I could be swung by mood on that grouping.

Warne on Day 1 of a test was below worldclass quality of all toptier pacers. Murali too I imagine. That is a serious limitation and why I would never put a spinner in my lineup first.

 

[Bolo.]

I voted for Imran but if I ranked everyone they'd be one above the other and basically the closest comparison I could imagine.

If I wanted someone to bowl a single over for me it'd be Imran no question. But Warne could bowl more of them and have a bigger effect on the median Test attack so I give him points for that. It's a coin flip for me I think. McGrath/Marshall/Hadlee are better than Warne, Imran/Ambrose/Davidson/Murali are roughly equal, everyone else is worse.

I think I'd vote for Warne over Davo ... and Imran and Ambrose over Warne, then followed by Murali, but I could be swung by mood on that grouping.

This is the nature of spin vs pace. It is a trade-off, and we shouldn't really be assessing either by the inherent limitations of their discipline.

I voted Warne here. So few spinners even remotely in his quality range. Many quicks somewhat comprable to Imran... closer even if we account for the fact that there have been a lot more ATG quicks.

 

[subshakerz]

This is the nature of spin vs pace. It is a trade-off, and we shouldn't really be assessing either by the inherent limitations of their discipline.

Depending on the comparison, we can.

 

[Slifer]

Funny how its acceptable to mention Murali and Australia whilst Marshall never cops anything about NZ.




(fwiw I don’t count either that much against them myself, just making an observation)

You better be trolling because A. 32 <<75 and B. Murali also struggled in India. And C. Given more tests in NZ no doubt Malcolm would likely improve his record there like he did everywhere else.

 

[CricAddict]

Ya, I don't think trying to equivocate a 32 bowling average with a 75 one (which was 100 or whatever in real tests) is the route to take.

Marshall also gets a bit of a pass due to it being a single series. Nobody thinks he would have not improved (especially in a seam friendly country) given more games.

That said, Murali gets more flack than he deserves in Aus. Debatable umpiring and quirks of timing meant he only played there in the rubbish stage of his career or against probably the strongest home batting unit ever on soft wickets that we're really not condusive to his style. I do hold his performances there against him, but not by as much as the averages would suggest- it's one country and a very limited number of games.

The way subz puts down Murali's performance in Australia is completely undeserved by Murali. One should only see highlights of the matches that Murali bowled with those umpires in Australia to see how they played with his state of mind and wrecked him. A spinner needs confidence to thrive and they totally destroyed that confidence. Subz will just put it down as a lame excuse knowing him but it is what it is.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Murali's records in Australia and India and several bashings by major bats shows his limitations compared to more well rounded pacers.

There is not a single batting lineup Marshall had to bowl to that was anywhere near as good as India/Aus of the 2000s. The only great lineup of his era was his own team's. It is nonsensical to compare records like this.

 

[subshakerz]

The way subz puts down Murali's performance in Australia is completely undeserved by Murali. One should only see highlights of the matches that Murali bowled with those umpires in Australia to see how they played with his state of mind and wrecked him. A spinner needs confidence to thrive and they totally destroyed that confidence. Subz will just put it down as a lame excuse knowing him but it is what it is.

I always said that Murali hasn't succeeded in Australia, but I refrain from calling him a failure since its a small sample.

I don't judge him for not making an impact in 95 but I do for 2007.

 

[subshakerz]

There is not a single batting lineup Marshall had to bowl to that was anywhere near as good as India/Aus of the 2000s. The only great lineup of his era was his own team's. It is nonsensical to compare records like this.

A lot of special pleading for Murali/Warne. 'Oh those batsmen were just too good'. Pathetic. Just accept that spinners have more limitations.

Marshall destroyed a formidable Indian lineup in India in 83. Imran was awesome against the WI. Top pacers don't need excuses like that.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Marshall destroyed a formidable Indian lineup in India in 83.

What the ****

 

[subshakerz]

What the ****

India in 83 had Gavaskar, Vengsarkar and Amarnath, a formidable lineup like I said.

The point is whether top bowlers can be successful against the best lineups they face home and away. Marshall and Imran were, Murali and Warne were not. In fact, the latter were worse than unsuccessful, they were abject failures in India.

Rather than demerit Murali/Warne, you are basically arguing that failure against a great lineup should be completely overlooked because Marshall didn't play his own lineup.

 

[shortpitched713]

India in 83 had Gavaskar, Vengsarkar and Amarnath, a formidable lineup like I said.

Had Viswanath retired by that point? Would have been even formidabler if he was in it too.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

All I know is

F O U R T Y S E V E N
O
U
R
T
Y
S
E
V
E
N

 

[sledger]

Every era has outstanding quick bowlers. Can't think of another cricketer at all like Warne.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Every era has outstanding quick bowlers. Can't think of another cricketer at all like Warne.

His own era has another cricketer like him tho.

 

[sledger]

His own era has another cricketer like him tho.

Yeah MacGill was great but he was no Warne.