Is Warne better than Muralitharan?

[vmcburney]

My first post on this forum, thought I would start with this old chestnut.

I think Murali is currently the best bowler in the world. I think Warne had a purple patch early in his career when he was the best spin bowler ever seen. He could take wickets on just about any pitch.

His performances on unfavourable pitches against South Africa come to mind, he averaged low 20s on those pitches. His ability to take big hauls on neutral pitches such as the MCG or even the WACA. These are venues at which Murali has struggled, he has just 12 wickets from 5 Zimbabwe tests and 3 wickets from 2 Australian tests.

When you compare the Warne of the last few years then Murali looks the better bowler. For example Warne in the West Indies has just 17 wickets from 7 tests. Murali has 24 from 4 tests.

On the whole Murali will end up with the better average and higher wicket tally thanks to a seriously skewed home ground advantage. Murali has 20 tests at Kandy and Galle where his average is 14 and 17. Warne has no home ground venue that offers as much advantage as this. If Warne had been able to maintain his form he would have finished ahead of Murali, but thanks to Murali's consistency he will finish on top.

 

[Cactus]

Warne has missed far more cricket than Murali, remember. Finger and shoulder operations, one-year ban.
Murali has sometimes had to play when he'd do best to have not.

fair point, but still not enough to make the margin small enough that it doesn't count.

 

[Cactus]

(his overseas record is @27-28) and that wickets have been prepared to help assist him. He is a brilliant bowler but has a big hometown advantage.

that doesn't tell me anything. Warne has played more test matches than Murali.......and are you trying to tell me that the Aussie curators do nothing to help their own trump card bowler??......and that warne has never had hometown advantage??? (and ofcourse your gonna take more wickets on the pitches you're most comfortable with)......with all of that in consideration (take in note of my first point) and taking heed that Warne is extremely talented, Murali should be no where near to giving Warne a fight for the 500 wicket mark!

 

[Top_Cat]

that doesn't tell me anything. Warne has played more test matches than Murali.......and are you trying to tell me that the Aussie curators do nothing to help their own trump card bowler??

They don't. Asking a rhetorical question is totally useless when you've got people on here who KNOW whether this is the case and I can tell you, it's never happened here. The most spin-friendly pitch we've got is Sydney and for most of the Tests Warnie's played on it, it's been really slow.

Not tomention that at home, Warnie has to play on the WACA, Adelaide and the MCG every summer. He has to adjust his bowling accordingly. Murali can rock up to any ground in SL, know it's been prepared dusty and bowl exactly the same way to take wickets. That's a huge advantage.

For me, I'd pick Warne any day of the week and twice on Sundays. I've seen quite a bit of both bowling and although Murali has a greater number of tricks and is a fantastic bowler in his own right, I'd say he's the superior performer.

And just to address the issue of turning decks, off-spinners have always been more likely to take wickets. Why? Because of the differing lines leggies compared to offie have to bowl. There are simply more possible modes of dismissal available to off-spinners. If a leg-spinner bowls a ball which turns a mile, batsmen just miss it. If an off-spinner bowls a ball which turns a mile, considering the off-stump line, the batsman will miss it.................and be bowled or LBW. It's just logic that off-spinners will have more modes of dismissal available to them on any pitch but particularly on turning pitches.

Also, leg-spinners will always concede more runs because of the line they have to bowl. Bowling a leg-stump line means that you have a much smaller margin for error. Slightly full and batsmen will play you down the ground. Slightly short, they free the arms for the horizontal shots. Off-spinners can wheel away short or full for most of the day and they'll be less likely to be punished. Why? Batsmen much prefer facing stuff on leg-stump than off-stump. So Warnie's average will automatically be higher than Murali.

So you can't really use averages as a bare-faced measure of ability. The most poignant measure we'd probably want to look at is strike rate and on that count, I think there's about a 1-ball-per-wicket difference between them. This shows that as far as the basic goal of any bowler goes (i.e. to take wickets), they're virtually on par.

However, taking into consideration other factors such as performance in pressure situations, raw ability and relentless pressure, I'd personally pick Warnie.

And to those who say it would be easier to take wickets in a bowling attack which had more great bowlers than not, try it. The captain is always looking to bring on their other trumps and you don't have the luxury of knowing you're going to bowl over a 3rd of the innings' overs (like Murali did yesterday) and will EVENTUALLY get wickets. You're under pressure to take quick wickets or you're off and someone else gets a go. When the WI were at their peak in the early 80's, check out the series stats of Garner, Holding and Roberts. Not that impressive because they had to share the wickets around with each other and Marshall.

Notice that Murali took the bulk of his wickets in both innings towards the end of his spell. If SL had another great bowler to turn to, he most certainly wouldn't have been allowed to bowl 40-odd overs for 1 wicket like he did yesterday. He would have been taken out of the attack and replaced with someone to try something different. This is a the big advantage of being the only truly great bowler in your team. You bowl lots of overs so you're more likely to take wickets. It's basic probability. Couple the expectation that he'd bowl most overs in the innings with the custom-prepared pitches to suit your style and the advantage because REALLY clear.

 

[marc71178]

For me, I'd pick Warne any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Erm Corey, the "Sunday League" is on any day of the week over here nowadays!

 

[Shane Warne]

Murali has a greater number of tricks

No, he doesnt. Murali basically has a huge spinning offie & the new "other one" which will go the other way or straight. His wickets have been picked up pretty much solely down to the massive turn of his stock delivery, combined of course with accuracy. He worked on perfecting this new ball due to the fact he was beginning to become more predictable, an example being when England toured a few years ago. This was because of A LACK of variation, granted his figures were still quite good due to his class. Warne on the other hand has a number of different deliveries, as would most legspinners. Speculation has been that he`s got dozens but he himself dimissed that & stated he had a handful & variations of these. Warne has considerably more "tricks" and is pretty much the epitome of it, he has single handedly invented a couple. Although the lethal flipper has become less apparent, the slider took its place

 

[Swervy]

No, he doesnt. Murali basically has a huge spinning offie & the new "other one" which will go the other way or straight. His wickets have been picked up pretty much solely down to the massive turn of his stock delivery, combined of course with accuracy. He worked on perfecting this new ball due to the fact he was beginning to become more predictable, an example being when England toured a few years ago. This was because of A LACK of variation, granted his figures were still quite good due to his class. Warne on the other hand has a number of different deliveries, as would most legspinners. Speculation has been that he`s got dozens but he himself dimissed that & stated he had a handful & variations of these. Warne has considerably more "tricks" and is pretty much the epitome of it, he has single handedly invented a couple. Although the lethal flipper has become less apparent, the slider took its place

i might be wrong, but i am sure i read that Warne has something like 15 different deliveries mastered

 

[biased indian]

s.warne ::::

the best leg spin bowler ever to bowl aganist 8 test playing countries (haven't played aganist bangladesh and don't mention any indian name to him :saint: )

found guilty of drugs

have taken money to tell the world that the weather is fine and pitch is oaky

murali ::::

the best Off spinner aganist all test playing countries

Suspected of Chucking

 

[Swervy]

s.warne ::::

the best leg spin bowler ever to bowl aganist 8 test playing countries (haven't played aganist bangladesh and don't mention any indian name to him :saint: )

found guilty of drugs

have taken money to tell the world that the weather is fine and pitch is oaky

murali ::::

the best Off spinner aganist all test playing countries

Suspected of Chucking

right then!!!!!!ok

 

[Richard]

murali ::::
...
Suspected of Chucking

And proven not-guilty to anyone who is prepared to accept that some people know better than them because they've had access to what they haven't.

 

[Tom Halsey]

They don't. Asking a rhetorical question is totally useless when you've got people on here who KNOW whether this is the case and I can tell you, it's never happened here. The most spin-friendly pitch we've got is Sydney and for most of the Tests Warnie's played on it, it's been really slow.

Not tomention that at home, Warnie has to play on the WACA, Adelaide and the MCG every summer. He has to adjust his bowling accordingly. Murali can rock up to any ground in SL, know it's been prepared dusty and bowl exactly the same way to take wickets. That's a huge advantage.

For me, I'd pick Warne any day of the week and twice on Sundays. I've seen quite a bit of both bowling and although Murali has a greater number of tricks and is a fantastic bowler in his own right, I'd say he's the superior performer.

And just to address the issue of turning decks, off-spinners have always been more likely to take wickets. Why? Because of the differing lines leggies compared to offie have to bowl. There are simply more possible modes of dismissal available to off-spinners. If a leg-spinner bowls a ball which turns a mile, batsmen just miss it. If an off-spinner bowls a ball which turns a mile, considering the off-stump line, the batsman will miss it.................and be bowled or LBW. It's just logic that off-spinners will have more modes of dismissal available to them on any pitch but particularly on turning pitches.

Also, leg-spinners will always concede more runs because of the line they have to bowl. Bowling a leg-stump line means that you have a much smaller margin for error. Slightly full and batsmen will play you down the ground. Slightly short, they free the arms for the horizontal shots. Off-spinners can wheel away short or full for most of the day and they'll be less likely to be punished. Why? Batsmen much prefer facing stuff on leg-stump than off-stump. So Warnie's average will automatically be higher than Murali.

So you can't really use averages as a bare-faced measure of ability. The most poignant measure we'd probably want to look at is strike rate and on that count, I think there's about a 1-ball-per-wicket difference between them. This shows that as far as the basic goal of any bowler goes (i.e. to take wickets), they're virtually on par.

However, taking into consideration other factors such as performance in pressure situations, raw ability and relentless pressure, I'd personally pick Warnie.

And to those who say it would be easier to take wickets in a bowling attack which had more great bowlers than not, try it. The captain is always looking to bring on their other trumps and you don't have the luxury of knowing you're going to bowl over a 3rd of the innings' overs (like Murali did yesterday) and will EVENTUALLY get wickets. You're under pressure to take quick wickets or you're off and someone else gets a go. When the WI were at their peak in the early 80's, check out the series stats of Garner, Holding and Roberts. Not that impressive because they had to share the wickets around with each other and Marshall.

Notice that Murali took the bulk of his wickets in both innings towards the end of his spell. If SL had another great bowler to turn to, he most certainly wouldn't have been allowed to bowl 40-odd overs for 1 wicket like he did yesterday. He would have been taken out of the attack and replaced with someone to try something different. This is a the big advantage of being the only truly great bowler in your team. You bowl lots of overs so you're more likely to take wickets. It's basic probability. Couple the expectation that he'd bowl most overs in the innings with the custom-prepared pitches to suit your style and the advantage because REALLY clear.

Agree completely with this post.

Very well said.

 

[Legglancer]

Murali the Don Bradman of bowlers,
says Waugh

SYDNEY, March 11 (AFP) - Steve Waugh has called
extraordinary Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan
the Don Bradman of bowlers.

Waugh, who retired as Australian Test skipper after the
home Test series against India last January, said there
would never be another Bradman with the bat.

But, he wrote in The Daily Telegraph Thursday, that
Muralitharan came close, at least statistically, in
bowling terms.
Muralitharan exposed Australia's batting limitations
against spin with a six-wicket haul in the opening Test
in Galle on Monday, the 40th time he has taken five or
more wickets in a Test innings.

Bradman is cricket's greatest batsman with an
unprecedented batting average of 99.94 in 52 Tests in
the 1930-40s.

Waugh said that while figures can be misleading in the
short term, longevity tends to put them into
perspective, and the "rubber-wristed illusionist" has no
peer as a bowler.

"Such is his aura, whenever anyone mentions Sri
Lankan cricket his name immediately springs to mind,"
Waugh said.

"For teams about to take on this proud cricketing
nation, about half the team meeting will revolve around
how to combat his (Murali) unique style of bowling.

"This, of course, is much easier said than done
because like all great players he has the ability to
improvise, evolve and mutate to stay one step ahead
of everyone else.

"The dismissal of Darren Lehmann in the first innings (in
Galle) was a perfect example of his genius in not only
inventing a delivery but in executing it at exactly the
right time." Waugh said that while Muralitharan may
appear to be laid back by nature a fierce competitive
streak lurks beneath the surface.

"Much in the same vein as (Australian leg-spinner)
Shane Warne, Murali tends to dismantle the opposition
through imposing body language, immediate detection
of any apparent weaknesses, relentless pressure,
unfailing accuracy and an enormous repertoire of
deliveries," he said.

"He bowls with subtle variations and is capable of
turning a match in his team's favour in the blink of an
eye.

"With such a unique action, Murali is very hard to pick
up when you first face him because of his bent arm
and plasticine wrist which propels the ball at various
speeds without being easily detected." Waugh said
that like all sportsmen Murali must have an Achilles heel
- although the great ones tend to mask their
inadequacies well.

 

[Swervy]

and this proves?

 

[aussiefan]

I must say that warne is in consistent where as murali does it often.

but if you look at the recently concluded test then warne has an edge over murali

 

[a massive zebra]

I must say that warne is in consistent where as murali does it often.

but if you look at the recently concluded test then warne has an edge over murali

errrr..........Murali took 11 wickets in that test!

 

[Tom Halsey]

errrr..........Murali took 11 wickets in that test!

And conceded runs.

5 for 160, or whatever it is, on one of the spinniest wickets anywhere?

 

[Richard]

and this proves?

I thought you were one of the purveyors of this insane "superior playing ability automatically means superior analytical ability" attitude?
If I was wrong I'm very pleased.

 

[Swervy]

I thought you were one of the purveyors of this insane "superior playing ability automatically means superior analytical ability" attitude?
If I was wrong I'm very pleased.

i am far from it..i think statistics etc need to be taken in the right context...many very good players have had career averages which do do real justice to there talent for whatever reason.

To say Murali was better or what ever in this test coz he got 11 wickets compared to Warnes 10 is silly...Murali was gifted at least 3 of those in the run chase at the end.

 

[Rik]

And conceded runs.

5 for 160, or whatever it is, on one of the spinniest wickets anywhere?

Against probably the top batting attack in World Cricket...whilst Warne was against Sri Lanka, who don't have such a strong batting lineup.

It could go on for ages.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Against probably the top batting attack in World Cricket...whilst Warne was against Sri Lanka, who don't have such a strong batting lineup.

Jayasuriya, Atapattu, Jayawardene, Tillikeratne, Sangakkara, not strong???:rolleyes: