Is Warne better than Muralitharan?

[DT8]

Hey

I know that Murali is considered the 'best bowler ever', but does anyone think Warne is better than him?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Welcome DT8

They're both damn good at what they do, and I would not try and split them - alongside guys like Laker, Grimmet, O'Reilly, Tayfield, Chandrasekhar, Prasanna, Venkat and Bedi - they're the top of the class.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Me.

Warne at his peak beats Murali at his peak.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Welcome DT8
IMO I think that Warnie is the better bowler.

 

[DT8]

hey thanks Ford_GTHO351

Who do you think will be first to 500?

 

[Salamuddin]

Both great bowlers. Personally I would opt for Murali, the Tamil Twirler.

He has a better record against India

 

[DT8]

Both great bowlers. Personally I would opt for Murali, the Tamil Twirler.

He has a better record against India

Yeah actually he has a better record against all test playing nations, except Pakistan. Against SAF both players have similar records.

 

[twctopcat]

Warne has been known to be hit around on the very rare occasion and although murali has previously been nullified to a degree (Thorpe 2001 etc), he has never been smashed about although both Warne's and Murali's economy are similar.
Despite Warne virtually single handedly ressurecting the art of leg spin (to his success that is), Murali has the lower average and is the most successful spinner ever in terms of wickets per test. He is the greatest spinner ever, though not by a large margin by any means and will end up with a record for test wickets that will stand for a long, long time.

 

[age_master]

Murali only has more wickets per test cause hes one of very few in sri lanka that can take wickets consistantly, warne has had mcgrath, gillespie and Lee to compete against - all of whom have very low SR's

 

[Neil Pickup]

Shouldn't affect his average, SR & ER...

 

[Salamuddin]

Murali only has more wickets per test cause hes one of very few in sri lanka that can take wickets consistantly, warne has had mcgrath, gillespie and Lee to compete against - all of whom have very low SR's

Well that is a good point -- Warne is part of a stronger bowling attack (with Mcgrath and Gillespie). Murali has only the underachieveing Vaas to contend with for wickets.

I still think MUrali is a phenomenal bowler.

 

[Langeveldt]

Shane Warne IMO...

Although he might have "reinvented" legspin, i think guys like Kumble and Mushtaq Ahmed should be mentioned too....

 

[aussie_beater]

Against India Warne has 29 wickets at 55.44 each, while Murali has 51 at 32.94 each.....so I would rate Murali to be better then Warne, because Warne has simply failed against one of the best set of players of spin bowling while Murali has held up better then him.

 

[Prince EWS]

They are both great bolwers and I think its just stupid to try and compare them.

 

[Thelwell]

Murali only has more wickets per test cause hes one of very few in sri lanka that can take wickets consistantly, warne has had mcgrath, gillespie and Lee to compete against

You could argue that because these 3 bowlers come before warne he usually only bowls against low/middle order batsman cos the top order have been dismissed by McGrath, Gillespie and Lee. Howver, being able to take wickets in this bowling attack is a great achievement. Murali only really has Vaas to compete within the bowling line up.

Having said that I do rate Warne more than Murali. However, the stats point to Murali as he has a similar amount of test wickets having played fewer matches than warne.

Murali will always be known for being a suspected 'chucker' but Warne will always be remembered for the way he bowled Mike Gatting in his first ashes match.

 

[twctopcat]

Although he might have "reinvented" legspin, i think guys like Kumble and Mushtaq Ahmed should be mentioned too.... [/B][/QUOTE]

I was only referring to the fact that he has been so much more successful than other leg spinners, and although bowlers like Kumble especially are leggies by definition, it is warne who has proved it so effective as a stock delivery.

As for Murali not having any backup being the reason for his number of wickets, he obviously has vaas as has been pointed out but his sr of 59 shows he has got these wickets on merit of bowling skill.

 

[DT8]

Murali will always be known for being a suspected 'chucker'

I dont think this is necessarily the case. In AUS we often go on about his action because we see him as a threat, but once he retires then there is no need for this.

 

[quytst0rm]

Well that is a good point -- Warne is part of a stronger bowling attack (with Mcgrath and Gillespie). Murali has only the underachieveing Vaas to contend with for wickets.

I still think MUrali is a phenomenal bowler.

If Warne is part of a stronger bowling attack then his average and strike rate would be a lot lower as all he would have to do is clean up the middle, low order and tail ender.

 

[Warne is god]

Is Warne better than Murilithian, Yes

 

[DT8]

If Warne is part of a stronger bowling attack then his average and strike rate would be a lot lower

Yeah this is true because he would be bowling to new batsmen more often whereas Murali is taking all the wickets so he has to bowl to batsmen who are well set.