Murali's Record

[archie mac]

Err, first you have to learn to bowl with the wrist as Murali does, and not fingers.

Not 'having a go' was just wondering if anyone on here can do it?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Do you mention Warne's doping in every thread?

Unless he has a reefer al denté when he's on the field the significance is not so obvious.

 

[silentstriker]

Not 'having a go' was just wondering if anyone on here can do it?

No, I don't think its possible. Harbhajan certainly chucks his - or at least his action is much different with one.

 

[archie mac]

Do you mention Warne's doping in every thread?

no, he does not take drugs before bowing every ball

 

[JASON]

I can see this thread heading towards a Warne v Murali thing again...disappointed about some of the posters here...who have been long enough on these forums...Aren't we damn well over these crap...Get over it ...grow up...[or older than what you are now in the case of some (perhaps very very old )]

Move on...Go break your head on something else if you are frustrated...

 

[JASON]

I wouldnt hold his record in Australia against him. There is too much going on elsewhere in his career to outweigh any argument that he peformed poorly and dodged playing in Australia.

My issues with him have nothing to do with any abberations in his performances.

The only time he dodged was when the Ex-Prime Minister of Australia called him a chuck...and there was a likelihood he would've been under severe duress and unsavoury attention had he toured then as the populist PM then had cast aspersions... So I would really be wary of saying he dodged touring Australia in 2004 TBH...it was the circumstances then that lead to his decision...he is not a guy who avoids touring otherwise...

 

[Burgey]

One of the best ever IMO, his team and the pitches gave him no assistance in Australia and therefore he will always have this abnormal statistic in Australia despite bowling beautifully given the conditions.

Any player with such a good average in todays game definitely deserves a great amount of kudos and Murali certainly deserves a mention in any all-time list.

AWTA. I believe history will judge Murali more kindly than those players who have raised continual questions over his action, even after he's been cleared.
On the pitches no assisting him though, the same can be said of fast bowlers int eh subontinent, and the record of Lillee.

WEll, he has had what 3 tests since that boxing day tour????


Hard to judge on that, esp. since two of those have JUST happened... He seems to have missed out on playing in Australia in his prime...... Also, this recent tour is a perfect example of why a spinner needs a quality fast bowler at the top... Bowling to the openers with the score at 60 or 70/0 is never easy for the spinner... Also, from whatever I have read and heard on this series, a few catches were dropped and a couple of close calls turned down off his bowling..... So all these have to be taken into account.


The one thing that is obvious is that the Aussies play Murali better than most other teams, maybe apart from India.... QUOTE]
On your first point, DK was hardly in his prime when he toured SL & Pakistan, and his sample size is the same on the subcontinent as Murali's in Australia.
I think your second point I've quoted is a very, very good one.

He failed in four Test, in 100 plus career meh.

As did Lillee ont he subcontinent.

Now,I don't understand people coming up again & again with "not considering Lillee an alltime great" rubbish.Regarding his record in subcontinent,all some people including me say is that he's an alltime great but that there are some better bowlers than him because they've succeeded on subcontinent or for some other reasons such as stats,consistency etc.Lillee is an alltime great ,there's no doubt about it.

Fair point you raise, and it's valid. Re. spinners in Australia though, I'd think (without checking) that Kumble's record here would be a fair bit better than Murali's. I suppose the conclusion to draw is simply that some conditions just suit some bowlers (and batsmen) better than others.

Yes,too small a sample but what about the number of ocassions on which he refused to tour subcontinent with lame excuses?

What lame excuses were they? Australia toured India in 1969 iirc, then I think they didn't tour until the 80s when Lillee retired (I think). If they toured between 1977-79, Lille was playing WSC, and I don't think he joined that outfit to dodge a tour of India or Pakistan.
He toured Pakistan in the early 80s when he performed poorly, and had one test in SL.
I'm just trying to think of an example when he dodged going there.

As for Murali not coming here, were I him I wouldn't want to tour a country whose Prime Minister comes out and says that about me either. Fortunately, that regime is no more (refer to my avatar please).

Anyway, thanks to everyone for posting so far - for the most part it's been pretty constructive.

 

[honestbharani]

That is like saying "don't mention Bodyline when discussing the captaincy of Jardine"

They go hand in hand in both cases and always will

You know, Arch, I have the greatest respect for your knowledge of the game and therefore for your posts...


But I think this is just getting too tiresome here. I don't remember too many other negative comments about Murali's action here and the fact is, I have seen you do this on almost every Murali thread. We all know where you stand on his action but the point is the majority here, as around the world, have accepted his action and have moved on. I suggest you do the same. If you want to participate in the thread, then rate his performances, NOT his action... It has already been done to death and I don't see you changing your opinion or others' with your posts on that issue.....

 

[Sanz]

no, he does not take drugs before bowing every ball

Not every ball that Murali bowls is a Doosra.

If it is not too much to ask please take your hypocritical yap elsewhere and leave this thread.

 

[Sanz]

You know, Arch, I have the greatest respect for your knowledge of the game and therefore for your posts...


But I think this is just getting too tiresome here. I don't remember too many other negative comments about Murali's action here and the fact is, I have seen you do this on almost every Murali thread. We all know where you stand on his action but the point is the majority here, as around the world, have accepted his action and have moved on. I suggest you do the same. If you want to participate in the thread, then rate his performances, NOT his action... It has already been done to death and I don't see you changing your opinion or others' with your posts on that issue.....

Perhaps that is too much to expect from a knowledgeable member. He has done that in the past too, in almost all 20/20 threads he would jump in and badmouth about the format.

 

[Smudge]

I'm the last person to defend Richard, but if we're going to apply heavy standards on repetition on him, then archie mac's posts on this thread - particularly considering the obvious request in the thread starter's opening post - should be moderated similarly.

 

[SJS]

Its very interesting to see how finger spinners in general and off spinners in particular have fared in Australia. I did a study of this and have updated the figures to include the last test series of Sri Lanka.

• For this analysis, I have included all finger spinners (as the term is generally understood) who have taken at least 100 test wickets.
  
• I excluded those who played often primarily as a batsman thus excluding people like Shastri, Mankad and Sobers.
  
• I excluded people who played just a single test in Australia like Harbhajan.

This gave me 26 bowlers in all - 14 left arm and 12 right arm (including Murali). Here is the complete list.

[B]Left Arm	Right Arm[/B]
Bedi	        Allen, David
Blythe	        Bracewell
Doshi	        Emburey
Edmonds	        Gibbs
Giles	        Illingworth
Lock	        Laker
Peel	        Mallett
Qasim	        Murali
Rhodes	        Prasanna
Tufnell	        Saqlain
Underwood	Titmus
Valentine	Yardley
Verity
Vettori

Its interesting to see what happens to these bowlers when they tour Australia.

Effectiveness as Bowler : Wickets per test

I find this a very good criteria (not perfect as with any other) to determine the effectiveness of a bowler over his career. Thus Barnes with his 7 wickets per test makes him such a fantastically effective strike bowler. Murali is a very high 5 per wicket at this stage of his career. How does our reference group fare on this score.

[B]Type	Career W/T	Aust.W/T Diff W/T[/B]
LAS	 3.27	        3.20	-0.06
RAS	 3.27	        3.23	-0.03
Both	 3.27	        3.22	-0.05

Note:
1. The identical score in the career Wkt/test column is not an error but a statistical oddity.
2. The figures of Murali are removed from the above.

So, it can be seen that the bowlers as a whole do not fare much differently on this score in Australia in comparison to their overall careers. Within the groups there are variations of course with Bedi (1.0), Emburey (0.9) Iqbal Qasim (0.8) and Edmonds (0.5) taking much more wickets per test in Australia than all others.

Lock (-2.3), Blythe (-2.1) and Verity (-1.3) are the ones who suffer most in Australia on this score.

Murali has an amazing 6.12 wickets per test in his career as a whole and a mere 2.4 per test in Australia. Easily the worst in comparison. Even in absolute terms (without reference to creer stats, Murali comes 20th in this list of 26 bowlers in wickets per test in Australia.

Not a great start for the Matthara Marauder, I am afraid in this report.

- to be continued

 

[pup11]

Its very interesting to see how finger spinners in general and off spinners in particular have fared in Australia. I did a study of this and have updated the figures to include the last test series of Sri Lanka.

• For this analysis, I have included all finger spinners (as the term is generally understood) who have taken at least 100 test wickets.
  
• I excluded those who played often primarily as a batsman thus excluding people like Shastri, Mankad and Sobers.
  
• I excluded people who played just a single test in Australia like Harbhajan.

This gave me 26 bowlers in all - 14 left arm and 12 right arm (including Murali). Here is the complete list.

[B]Left Arm	Right Arm[/B]
Bedi	        Allen, David
Blythe	        Bracewell
Doshi	        Emburey
Edmonds	        Gibbs
Giles	        Illingworth
Lock	        Laker
Peel	        Mallett
Qasim	        Murali
Rhodes	        Prasanna
Tufnell	        Saqlain
Underwood	Titmus
Valentine	Yardley
Verity
Vettori

Its interesting to see what happens to these bowlers when they tour Australia.

Effectiveness as Bowler : Wickets per test

I find this a very good criteria (not perfect as with any other) to determine the effectiveness of a bowler over his career. Thus Barnes with his 7 wickets per test makes him such a fantastically effective strike bowler. Murali is a very high 5 per wicket at this stage of his career. How does our reference group fare on this score.

[B]Type	Career W/T	Aust.W/T Diff W/T[/B]
LAS	 3.27	        3.20	-0.06
RAS	 3.27	        3.23	-0.03
Both	 3.27	        3.22	-0.05

Note:
1. The identical score in the career Wkt/test column is not an error but a statistical oddity.
2. The figures of Murali are removed from the above.

So, it can be seen that the bowlers as a whole do not fare much differently on this score in Australia in comparison to their overall careers. Within the groups there are variations of course with Bedi (1.0), Emburey (0.9) Iqbal Qasim (0.8) and Edmonds (0.5) taking much more wickets per test in Australia than all others.

Lock (-2.3), Blythe (-2.1) and Verity (-1.3) are the ones who suffer most in Australia on this score.

Murali has an amazing 6.12 wickets per test in his career as a whole and a mere 2.4 per test in Australia. Easily the worst in comparison. Even in absolute terms (without reference to creer stats, Murali comes 20th in this list of 26 bowlers in wickets per test in Australia.

Not a great start for the Matthara Marauder, I am afraid in this report.

- to be continued

Amazing post sir, it almost felt as if i was reading through a page of a cricket encyclopedia!

 

[archie mac]

No Tayfield SJS?

 

[JBMAC]

I'm the last person to defend Richard, but if we're going to apply heavy standards on repetition on him, then archie mac's posts on this thread - particularly considering the obvious request in the thread starter's opening post - should be moderated similarly.

Personally I have a lot more respect for Archie Mac's opinions on the game of Cricket than Richards'.

 

[archie mac]

You know, Arch, I have the greatest respect for your knowledge of the game and therefore for your posts...


But I think this is just getting too tiresome here. I don't remember too many other negative comments about Murali's action here and the fact is, I have seen you do this on almost every Murali thread. We all know where you stand on his action but the point is the majority here, as around the world, have accepted his action and have moved on. I suggest you do the same. If you want to participate in the thread, then rate his performances, NOT his action... It has already been done to death and I don't see you changing your opinion or others' with your posts on that issue.....

What a beat up!

I simply stated that I thought his poor effort in Aust, should not be considered when deciding if he is a great bowler, and then very appropriately (I feel) mentioned I did not rate him a great bowler for a different reason. My opinion on a cricket forum , and I did not even mention the word chucker

Not every ball that Murali bowls is a Doosra.

If it is not too much to ask please take your hypocritical yap elsewhere and leave this thread.

What a beat up!
I simply asked a question about the doosra, and was then attacked over Shane Warne, I imagine because I am an Aussie

Perhaps that is too much to expect from a knowledgeable member. He has done that in the past too, in almost all 20/20 threads he would jump in and badmouth about the format.

What a beat up!
When I replied to those threads (about 6 posts over 3 threads), I was stating an opinion on a cricket forum. You asked me not to, and I think you will find I have not since

I'm the last person to defend Richard, but if we're going to apply heavy standards on repetition on him, then archie mac's posts on this thread - particularly considering the obvious request in the thread starter's opening post - should be moderated similarly.

What a beat up!
Read my first post and you will see I simply justified my opinion in a very subtle way, before being attacked. I forgot we all stick 100% to what a topic starter wants

 

[vic_orthdox]

Read my first post and you will see I simply justified my opinion in a very subtle way

Yes, it was "subtle" as such, you didn't use the term chucker. But you clearly implied it, when the thread starter specifically pointed out that he didn't want that topic being discussed in this thread.

This ends here.

 

[archie mac]

Yes, it was "subtle" as such, you didn't use the term chucker. But you clearly implied it, when the thread starter specifically pointed out that he didn't want that topic being discussed in this thread.

This ends here.

Well I don't agree, I thought it needed to justify my first line

 

[ohtani's jacket]

Eh, a little discretion is needed here.

Not every player who's performed well in Australia is a great player.

Playing in Australia is the type of challenge that keeps cricket interesting for players like Murali. He failed, I suppose, but I bet he can't wait to have a crack at England. He has a great attitude about these things. Sure he wanted to beat Australia and break Warne's record, but he got beat. He's been beaten plenty of times before. I doubt he's tormented about his place in history.

Too many people expect perfect stat lines -- bowlers who bowled perfectly, batsmen who batted perfectly. It's nonsense, really. If Murali had been sublime, the batsmen would've looked all at sea. People would've jumped to all sorts of conclusions about that. It's a game. Bowlers succeed, batsmen fail. Batsmen triumph, bowlers fail.

A bowler's greatness should be measured by the great things they do, not the balance of the good, the bad and the ugly.

 

[The Sean]

TBF, I'd say I'm very happy there'd be quite a few...

To name a few... Marshall, Donald, Hadlee, Ambrose, McGrath, Lindwall, Lillee, Bedser, Davidson, Statham, Imran Khan, Garner, Adcock, Fazal Mahmood, Trueman, Miller, Wasim Akram, Holding, Johnston, Peter Pollock, Bishop, Walsh, Shaun Pollock for the first half of his career, Waqar for the first quarter(ish) of his career. There are plenty others who I'd certainly at the very least consider.

Rich, you're taking the piss here aren't you mate? You genuinely believe that each and every one of the bowlers you list there should be considered better than both Warne and Murali?

Ian Bishop is the first (though not the only) name to leap out of that list at me - I'm not questioning the man's talent, nor the fact that his succession of injuries robbed him of a long and potentially great career. But for such a vocal proponent as yourself of the thinking that a player should be judged on what he achieved and produced rather than what he could have/should have/might have done had circumstances not been different, I find it more than a little strange that you could then claim him to be better than the two great spinners.