• 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

GotSpin

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
Slifer said:
Ikki if a Neube to cricket looked at the stats of both men then it s quite obvious that Murali's are a bit more impressive than Warnes. WPm, SR, Average, 10 fors 5 fors etc. Only when u look at the stats more closely does one realise the differences.

Either way I dont rate spinners at all (sorry to say) which is probably y Ive kept mostly quiet on this thread.
Click to expand...
wow. how weird
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Lol, god CW is just weird sometimes. No disrespect, but not rating spinners is just ridiculous.
 
sifter132

sifter132

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
Jono said:
Lol, god CW is just weird sometimes. No disrespect, but not rating spinners is just ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Well I can understand it a bit. For starters, who's the next best spinner in history after Warne/Murali?? Quick, quick, cmon - no research. Top of the head. There's a few candidates I suppose, but how many 'great' spinners have there been? I'd say 5 or 6 tops in 120+ years of Test cricket.

Also, one of the best sides in history (Windies) didn't rely on spin at all - so it's obviously not vital to success.

Most spinners through history have just held up an end and kept the over rate ticking. Nothing more.
 
GotSpin

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
sifter132 said:
Well I can understand it a bit. For starters, who's the next best spinner in history after Warne/Murali?? Quick, quick, cmon - no research. Top of the head. There's a few candidates I suppose, but how many 'great' spinners have there been? I'd say 5 or 6 tops in 120+ years of Test cricket.

Also, one of the best sides in history (Windies) didn't rely on spin at all - so it's obviously not vital to success.

Most spinners through history have just held up an end and kept the over rate ticking. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Doesn't this mean that spin should be rated higher since it's clearly such a harder art to master
 
JBMAC

JBMAC

State Captain
sifter132 said:
Well I can understand it a bit. For starters, who's the next best spinner in history after Warne/Murali?? Quick, quick, cmon - no research. Top of the head. There's a few candidates I suppose, but how many 'great' spinners have there been? I'd say 5 or 6 tops in 120+ years of Test cricket.

Also, one of the best sides in history (Windies) didn't rely on spin at all - so it's obviously not vital to success.

Most spinners through history have just held up an end and kept the over rate ticking. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Benaud,Laker, Locke,Gibbs,Underwood,Tayfield, Grimmett, O'Reilly, Bedi,Prasanna....Do you want me to keep going...These guys were Great Spinners
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
He didn't say compare though, he said great/next best.

Sobers is arguably the next best batsman to Bradman, but he doesn't compare.

Same can be said of O'Reilly or Laker etc. to Warne/Murali.
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
sifter132 said:
Well I can understand it a bit. For starters, who's the next best spinner in history after Warne/Murali?? Quick, quick, cmon - no research. Top of the head. There's a few candidates I suppose, but how many 'great' spinners have there been? I'd say 5 or 6 tops in 120+ years of Test cricket.

Also, one of the best sides in history (Windies) didn't rely on spin at all - so it's obviously not vital to success.

Most spinners through history have just held up an end and kept the over rate ticking. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Interesting but contrasting points in the same post. WIndies success was partly due to slowing of the game by slow over rates of 11 - 13 per hour. If they've tried to do that in current setup we would see few captains getting banned. Quick men become less effective when they bowl at a higher rate due to less rest. Spinner is vital in current context of the game to keep the over rate going. Otherwise there would be some injuries to fast men or they become fatigued quickly and become ineffective.
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Migara said:
Interesting but contrasting points in the same post. WIndies success was partly due to slowing of the game by slow over rates of 11 - 13 per hour. If they've tried to do that in current setup we would see few captains getting banned. Quick men become less effective when they bowl at a higher rate due to less rest. Spinner is vital in current context of the game to keep the over rate going. Otherwise there would be some injuries to fast men or they become fatigued quickly and become ineffective.
Click to expand...
In modern times with all these FTB bullies & technically inept batsman around this era. Even if the Windies pace attack bowled 11-13 per hour, they would own most teams batsmen often enough to bowl them out cheapy & quickly. Thus overate problem would hardly be much of an issue.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
aussie said:
In modern times with all these FTB bullies & technically inept batsman around this era. Even if the Windies pace attack bowled 11-13 per hour, they would own most teams batsmen often enough to bowl them out cheapy & quickly. Thus overate problem would hardly be much of an issue.
Click to expand...
LOL, that is a ludicrous line of argument. The batsmen play this way because of the challenges that have been put before them, obviously they would play differently if they were regularly up against quick bowlers on bouncy wickets all over the world. Check Prince EWS's post about a batsman's technique being a product of his environment.
 
GotSpin

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
vcs said:
LOL, that is a ludicrous line of argument. The batsmen play this way because of the challenges that have been put before them, obviously they would play differently if they were regularly up against quick bowlers on bouncy wickets all over the world. Check Prince EWS's post about a batsman's technique being a product of his environment.
Click to expand...
Nah Pews line of argument is about comparing batsmen of different eras. I think it's fair to say that if a country emerged with 2-3 very good pace bowlers batting averages against said team would plummet.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Got_Spin said:
Nah Pews line of argument is about comparing batsmen of different eras. I think it's fair to say that if a country emerged with 2-3 very good pace bowlers batting averages against said team would plummet.
Click to expand...
Well, if any country had very good bowlers they'd take wickets relatively cheaply. It doesn't matter if they were pace bowlers or spinners. There is no evidence that this era has more "FTBs and technically inept batsmen" than any other generation. Most batting lineups would still do just fine on today's wickets even if you put a top class pace attack in front of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top