silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
In any case, a dead set cricketing legend. He'll be missed...hopefully we'll see him in IPL for a while.
-
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.
*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion
- Thread starter Mr Mxyzptlk
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Yeah, heard that on the radio yesterday. Daresay a few Hants fans will be a little disappointed, but I don't think too many could argue with the IPL.Now that Shane Warne has announced his retirement from all First Class Cricket he probably deserves a tribute thread but as it will inevitably become a discussion about how good he was compared to Murali it might as well continue here.
Warne retires
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
legend
The Masterplan
U19 Debutant
Yes, a Ledgend.. as GeriantIsMyHero pointed out.. Lol
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Hmm, how does that make sense? If he doesn't want to use vowels out of principle, it'd be 'lgnd'. If he wanted to use the first four letters and limit himself to one e, it'd be legn. I'm not sure how you can displace the 'd' from last place to middle of the word, and miss one vowel and an n.
sideshowtim
Banned
Watto > Warney with other things on his mind
Hopefully Watto takes his place and extends his contract.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Should say "ledge" really as that how it's said, fairly common slang abbreviation over here ITBTHmm, how does that make sense? If he doesn't want to use vowels out of principle, it'd be 'lgnd'. If he wanted to use the first four letters and limit himself to one e, it'd be legn. I'm not sure how you can displace the 'd' from last place to middle of the word, and miss one vowel and an n.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Indeed Watson's stays so far have been profitable.
Migara
International Coach
Thought of bumping this.
Some people have been saying that Murali takes more wickets because he bowls more. When you bowl more, oyu can have more opportunities. But you'll be tired and your performance will drop after some time. So thought of testing this out statistically.
I plotted number of wickets against number of deliveries per each inning. On average Warne takes about 2.6 wickets per innings and Murali 3.5 per innings. Warne bowls 149 deliveries per innings whereas Murali bowls 192.
Resulting scatter digrams were as following
The trend lines were drawn using linear egression and polynominal regression analysis. As shown by the R square value, polynominal thrend line describes the scatter better.
This shows that Murali will achieve his highest potential (i.e 4 wickets per innings) if he bowled around 300 deliveries. Warne also has the maximum potential at 4 wickets per innigs. but it would take about 350 deliveries for that.
IF Warne was to bowl 192 deliveries on average per innigs, still he would have picked around 3.0 wickets per innigs. If Murali was to bowl 149 deliveries, he would have picked about 3.1 wickets per innigs.
Conclusion: Long bowls would have helped Warne to achieve better figures. The trend is less apparent with Murali. But for about up to 350 deliveries per innigs, Murali will pick more wickets than Warne.
Some people have been saying that Murali takes more wickets because he bowls more. When you bowl more, oyu can have more opportunities. But you'll be tired and your performance will drop after some time. So thought of testing this out statistically.
I plotted number of wickets against number of deliveries per each inning. On average Warne takes about 2.6 wickets per innings and Murali 3.5 per innings. Warne bowls 149 deliveries per innings whereas Murali bowls 192.
Resulting scatter digrams were as following
The trend lines were drawn using linear egression and polynominal regression analysis. As shown by the R square value, polynominal thrend line describes the scatter better.
This shows that Murali will achieve his highest potential (i.e 4 wickets per innings) if he bowled around 300 deliveries. Warne also has the maximum potential at 4 wickets per innigs. but it would take about 350 deliveries for that.
IF Warne was to bowl 192 deliveries on average per innigs, still he would have picked around 3.0 wickets per innigs. If Murali was to bowl 149 deliveries, he would have picked about 3.1 wickets per innigs.
Conclusion: Long bowls would have helped Warne to achieve better figures. The trend is less apparent with Murali. But for about up to 350 deliveries per innigs, Murali will pick more wickets than Warne.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
I'm not too sure about the stats above - meaning my knowledge is just ordinary. Maybe Top_Cat can provide some info.
However, Murali will take more wickets in the same amount of balls due to his SR. His SR is inflated because of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe amongst other things described in this thread. The above seems to be a more complicated way of looking at SR. When people say if Warne bowled more he'd take more wickets, they're talking about his SR. Murali, counting all the positives of his position, has an SR about 3 points superior. So it's natural he'd take more even within the same amount of balls bowled.
I would also venture to ask, would the fact that Warne will more often than not share his wickets moreso than Murali have anything to do with the above?
However, Murali will take more wickets in the same amount of balls due to his SR. His SR is inflated because of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe amongst other things described in this thread. The above seems to be a more complicated way of looking at SR. When people say if Warne bowled more he'd take more wickets, they're talking about his SR. Murali, counting all the positives of his position, has an SR about 3 points superior. So it's natural he'd take more even within the same amount of balls bowled.
I would also venture to ask, would the fact that Warne will more often than not share his wickets moreso than Murali have anything to do with the above?
LOL
Last edited:
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Interesting. Not trying to dispute your finding, but just curious how you calculated the above.Thought of bumping this.
Some people have been saying that Murali takes more wickets because he bowls more. When you bowl more, oyu can have more opportunities. But you'll be tired and your performance will drop after some time. So thought of testing this out statistically.
I plotted number of wickets against number of deliveries per each inning. On average Warne takes about 2.6 wickets per innings and Murali 3.5 per innings. Warne bowls 149 deliveries per innings whereas Murali bowls 192.
Resulting scatter digrams were as following
The trend lines were drawn using linear egression and polynominal regression analysis. As shown by the R square value, polynominal thrend line describes the scatter better.
This shows that Murali will achieve his highest potential (i.e 4 wickets per innings) if he bowled around 300 deliveries. Warne also has the maximum potential at 4 wickets per innigs. but it would take about 350 deliveries for that.
IF Warne was to bowl 192 deliveries on average per innigs, still he would have picked around 3.0 wickets per innigs. If Murali was to bowl 149 deliveries, he would have picked about 3.1 wickets per innigs.
Conclusion: Long bowls would have helped Warne to achieve better figures. The trend is less apparent with Murali. But for about up to 350 deliveries per innigs, Murali will pick more wickets than Warne.
How do you measure the 'Tiring' Quotient here ? Is it even possible to measure that ? Also how do you measure 'tiring' factor in situations like ' Bowler bowled total 35 overs in an innings over two days as ooposed to Bowler B bowling 25 overs in one day.'
Secondly, I would be more interested in knowing how both bowlers compare in real life by wickets in no. of overs bowled. I.e. How many wickets Murali/Warne take in their first 5/10/20 etc over.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Well I've never argued one topic for anything like as long as this thread, and I've always said there's no point whatsoever in trying to argue this one for 5 minutes. Warne and Murali are for all intents and purposes equal to my mind and I thought that in 2001 when I first asked myself the question.
Still, yeah, obviously there's the same sort of stuff here as there was when Marc used to accuse me of being obsessed with boosting my postcount.
BTW, please try remembering not to capitalise the p in :P\ Looks so much better when you actually have the smiley in there which is so essential.
Still, yeah, obviously there's the same sort of stuff here as there was when Marc used to accuse me of being obsessed with boosting my postcount.
BTW, please try remembering not to capitalise the p in :P\
Looks so much better when you actually have the smiley in there which is so essential.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Haha, I (and many other people I'm sure) was thinking the same thing.
yep that was a bit rich coming from rich...
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
The minute I screwed up the smilie I figured you'd correct me.BTW, please try remembering not to capitalise the p in :P\
You're quite the predictable character sometimes Richard
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I disagree. You might not have argued anything in one sitting or one thread for as long as people have argued this one for, but your continued arguments that come up regularly, particularly whenever someone who hasn't read your opinion on them before comes across one of them, would surely qualify.
If you added up all your posts on the value of FCA, for example, I'm sure you'd have more posts than the 405 C_C contributed to this thread.