• 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.

Imran Khan vs Shane Warne (as bowlers)

Who was the better Test bowler

  • Imran

  • Warne


Results are only viewable after voting.

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Give me a top tier fast bowler over a Warne/Murali any day.
The very best five or so quicks are better than the best spinners.

But I think I'd rather have Warne/Murali as a bowler over the next group of quicks that I consider roughly even because they can bowl a greater percentage of the team's overs. Imran is right between the first group and the second group of quicks for me so I find this one really hard to decide on.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
The very best five or so quicks are better than the best spinners.

But I think I'd rather have Warne/Murali as a bowler over the next group of quicks that I consider roughly even because they can bowl a greater percentage of the team's overs. Imran is right between the first group and the second group of quicks for me so I find this one really hard to decide on.
Nah, the next group of quicks have gaps in their record but not well established weaknesses and limitations like Murali/Warne.

Murali/Warne's reduced effectiveness on the 1st day of tests itself is a reason to put them behind the top tier pacers who as long as the wicket has something in it are a threat every day, every spell of a test match. Great pacers are capable of taking the wicket out of the equation in a way Murali/Warne cannot.

Good luck opening the bowling with Warne/Murali against Hutton/Sutcliffe.
 
Last edited:

kyear2

International Coach
The very best five or so quicks are better than the best spinners.

But I think I'd rather have Warne/Murali as a bowler over the next group of quicks that I consider roughly even because they can bowl a greater percentage of the team's overs. Imran is right between the first group and the second group of quicks for me so I find this one really hard to decide on.
That's exactly what I was initially thinking as well. For the guys in the second or in-between tier, it is closer, but then I recalled Warne and Murali's record vs India, Murali vs Australia and what Lara did to both. I'll go with Imran on this one.
 

Coronis

International Coach
Nah, the next group of quicks have gaps in their record but not well established weaknesses and limitations like Murali/Warne.

Murali/Warne's reduced effectiveness on the 1st day of tests itself is a reason to put them behind the top tier pacers who as long as the wicket has something in it are a threat every day, every spell of a test match. Great pacers are capable of taking the wicket out of the equation in a way Murali/Warne cannot.

Good luck opening the bowling with Warne/Murali against Hutton/Sutcliffe.
Yeah cos they never faced spinners opening the bowling right?
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
Ok how is Murali objectively better than Sir Richard Hadlee?
Let's back up and talk on how Murali is better than ATG seamers generally. Basically, it's because he's MORE. Him and Warne were the only freak spinners of the previous generation ( Ashwin is one of this generation, especially at home ) who struck at the top seamer's rate, or thereabouts. They weren't a change to the backfoot, as most spinners are. Murali takes it a step further than even Warne, as he averages with the very best seamers of all time. I mean this part is obvious, but when you combine that, with the ability to bowl marathon spells, and you give up so little in terms aggregate average then it's a no-brainer.

For Hadlee in particular, his big claim separating him from other ATG pacers is that he would spearhead and take big wicket hauls with a huge workload for NZ. Um... yeah, he can't reach Murali's level in those attributes (obviously he shouldn't be expected to either). And if you consider Murali's longevity and aggregates, it separates him further.

McGrath is exceptional, because he is possibly the most conditions independent bowler I've seen. Home or away, flat or seamy, he'd just get dudes out cheaply. And he did it with exceptional consistency and longevity. So that's why he's the one exception, and McGoat.
 

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Let's back up and talk on how Murali is better than ATG seamers generally. Basically, it's because he's MORE. Him and Warne were the only freak spinners of the previous generation ( Ashwin is one of this generation, especially at home ) who struck at the top seamer's rate, or thereabouts. They weren't a change to the backfoot, as most spinners are. Murali takes it a step further than even Warne, as he averages with the very best seamers of all time. I mean this part is obvious, but when you combine that, with the ability to bowl marathon spells, and you give up so little in terms aggregate average then it's a no-brainer.

For Hadlee in particular, his big claim separating him from other ATG pacers is that he would spearhead and take big wicket hauls with a huge workload for NZ. Um... yeah, he can't reach Murali's level in those attributes (obviously he shouldn't be expected to either). And if you consider Murali's longevity and aggregates, it separates him further.

McGrath is exceptional, because he is possibly the most conditions independent bowler I've seen. Home or away, flat or seamy, he'd just get dudes out cheaply. And he did it with exceptional consistency and longevity. So that's why he's the one exception, and McGoat.
Murali's records in Australia and India and several bashings by major bats shows his limitations compared to more well rounded pacers.

I think Hadlee edges out McGrath as more condition independent as the latter had moderate records in SL and Pakistan. But McGrath has longevity.
 

Slifer

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

I think Hadlee edges out McGrath as more condition independent as the latter had moderate records in SL and Pakistan. But McGrath has longevity.
And Marshall. He was far from being dependent.
 

Top