*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[Ikki]

My big problem with the whole Murali Warne away analysis is when comparing records, the comparison has to be standardised fairly. As far as I'm concerned how can you simply remove Zimbabwe and Bangladesh figures? As I said they should be weighted, but not removed completely.

In the same way it has to be taken into account that Warne never bowled against his own line up in Australia, and Murali never bowled at his own line up in Sri Lanka. So there is no common opposition there. Again I would never agree for these stats to be removed, but there has to be some adjustment in Murali's favour for bowling against a stronger batting team.

Then we have to take into account the flat pitch era, and seeing as we ALREADY have discounted for minnows, we cannot discount for them again. Murali was disadvantaged by playing in the flat pitch era more than Warne was.

Lastly we have to find out the percentage of tail-end wickets taken, as they would be lower quality wickets, much like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

These are some of the things which I feel need to and can be accounted for (and I would be willing to hear other valid measures).

In conclusion, it's obvious that simply removing Bangladesh and Zimbabwe does not make for a fair comparison of their away records.

I didn't remove them for the away records...I showed you them with regards to Murali's home records. They're night and day whether you include them or not. And even if you do, Warne is still ahead.

When we standardised them we didn't remove them. Even though this is inherently not in the favour of Warne who did not get to play them as much and build a better record against them. Also, not including Warne's performances in Sri Lanka and Murali's in Australia is disingenuous - removing one's best figures and one's worst. Warne did the best out of any spinner visiting Sri Lanka in the last two decades - and as was pointed out before; including Murali himself. Murali on the other hand was terrible in Australia- worse than spinners who aren't as good as him. Even if we assume Murali would have done as well as Warne against his home team - which is a big leap of faith in itself - Warne certainly wouldn't done as bad as Murali in Australia. The reason for the standardising however was more so that we could get a fair amount of matches played against each team. For that, I simply just include the same amount of matches against each's rival team.

Aside from the away stats, Warne still has clearly the worser bowling conditions, by far.

This is the breakdown of Murali bowling the same exact amount as Warne %-wise to each team away from home; wherein the amount he bowled to Aus is the same as Warne bowled to SL.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Murali's 75 average in Australia is severely skewing that analysis, especially when you realise that Murali with the doosra only played 3 tests in Australia (2 of which he failed in), but 2 test is still a very small sample.

What happens if it's done the otherway round. Percentage of away matches Murali played against each opposition is standardised to Warne? I appreciate your effort in bringing these stats out.

 

[Jarquis]

And if you remove Aus/SL?

 

[Ikki]

Who cares if Murali played with the doosra or not? No offence, but I find that a cop-out. Heck Warne could barely bowl anything other than the standard leg break after his shoulder and finger surgeries.

The other way round:

 

[Ikki]

And if you remove Aus/SL?

Depends which way round you do it.

If you do it to Warne's proportions:

Murali: avg. 23.73 sr. 55.4
Warne: avg. 24.95 sr. 56.0

if you do it with Murali's proportions:

Murali: avg. 25.86 sr. 59.0
Warne: avg. 26.25 sr. 56.2

Again; this is when you remove Warne's best figures (SL) and Murali's worst (Aus).

 

[Athlai]

Still when comparing them Warne didn't play Australia and Murali didn't play SL so it's a fair enough call to remove them.

 

[Ikki]

Still when comparing them Warne didn't play Australia and Murali didn't play SL so it's a fair enough call to remove them.

Skews the stats noticeably though. Imagine comparing Ponting and Tendulkar and removing India for Ponting and Australia for Tendulkar? As long as one can appreciate the logic of the exercise it is fine. However, one has to credit Warne (or Tendulkar) for doing well in incredibly difficult conditions where the other in the comparison failed.

 

[Athlai]

Skews the stats noticeably though. Imagine comparing Ponting and Tendulkar and removing India for Ponting and Australia for Tendulkar? As long as one can appreciate the logic of the exercise it is fine. However, one has to credit Warne (or Tendulkar) for doing well in incredibly difficult conditions where the other in the comparison failed.

Comparing how they played against mutual oppositions is a worthy enterprise. How Warne would have went against Australia and Murali against Sri Lanka is pure speculation IMO, domestic results reflect it slightly but still pretty harsh.

 

[Ikki]

I disagree with it being pure speculation. It's as much speculation as any analysis.

Warne did the best of any visiting spinner in 2 decades. To the degree that even Murali statistically cannot compare to (and whilst Murali played a wider range of opponents, Warne did it against the toughest team to face in SL). Conversely, Murali was dreadful in Aus. Even the likes of Kaneria and Vettori were far better. Even if we were to assume Murali would have done as well as Warne facing SL (which is an argument in itself) I really doubt Warne would have done as poorly as Murali against Aus - when several lesser spinners did better than Murali.

Whilst it isn't a proven fact, and it does have an element of speculation...it's a pretty reasonable and solid conclusion. Anyway, it's to Warne's credit that even with his best figures removed and his rival's worst, he is still as good or better.

 

[Athlai]

Murali's last tour of Australia was actually pretty good IMO, looking beyond statistical analysis he beat the bat so many times and looked to be genuinely troubling the Aussies. That tour was a hard one with Sri Lanka, every half chance went the other way, Malinga and Murali should have gotten a lot more wickets than they did.

I also doubt Warne would have done as poorly as Murali in Oz but I do think Murali may have done even better against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka than Warne.

 

[Ikki]

I also doubt Warne would have done as poorly as Murali in Oz but I do think Murali may have done even better against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka than Warne.

He would have averaged 21.45 and struck at 42.5 - which is what Warne did? I doubt it. The only 3 teams he faced where he did as good or better are Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and WIndies. There isn't much in his record to suggest so - it actually suggests clearly otherwise.

Warne also played against Pakistan in SL and owned them.

I have to go back and edit some of those stats as I made a slight mistake.

 

[Athlai]

He would have averaged 21.45 and struck at 42.5 - which is what Warne did? I doubt it. The only 3 teams he faced where he did as good or better are Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and WIndies. There isn't much in his record to suggest so.

Warne also played against Pakistan in SL and owned them.

I have to go back and edit some of those stats as I made a slight mistake.

What do you mean by the bolded? Murali has better figures against a fair few teams. It's more going by Murali's utter dominance of every team in his home conditions. Would have to say an all-time great like Murali would likely bamboozle the majority of Sri Lankan batsman in his time.

In Sri Lankan FC cricket Murali appears to average 13. Whoops missed one of the domestic teams he played for, he actually seems to average 14.5 in Sri Lankan first class cricket with 234 wickets.

 

[Ikki]

What do you mean by the bolded? Murali has better figures against a fair few teams. It's more going by Murali's utter dominance of every team in his home conditions. Would have to say an all-time great like Murali would likely bamboozle the majority of Sri Lankan batsman in his time.

In Sri Lankan FC cricket Murali appears to average 13. Whoops missed one of the domestic teams he played for, he actually seems to average 14.5 in Sri Lankan first class cricket with 234 wickets.

No, he doesn't. Look at the home breakdown of the teams he has played country by country. The only 3 he dominated to the extent (or more) Warne did are the aforementioned 3. For example, Warne does better in SL against SL than Murali does against NZ in SL. SL in SL >> NZ in SL.

The Sri Lankans were/are amongst the best players of spin in the world during Murali's career. Probably on par with Aus when Warne faced them.

 

[Athlai]

No, he doesn't. Look at the home breakdown of the teams he has played country by country. The only 3 he dominated to the extent (or more) Warne did are the aforementioned 3. For example, Warne does better in SL against SL than Murali does against NZ in SL. SL in SL >> NZ in SL.

The Sri Lankans were/are amongst the best players of spin in the world during Murali's career. Probably on par with Aus when Warne faced them.

Ah I see what you mean now, my point was more that Murali had a better record than Warne against several other teams but the margin is so narrow you can't split them. Doing it that way though suggests that Warne only dominated Pakistan to the extent (or more) of Murali.

Murali's domestic record against Sri Lankans seems to suggest that he does alright TBH. And while Sri Lankan's are the best (or at least one of the best) players of spin in the world because spin is so predominant in their country, because conditions suit it so well. The Sri Lankan Test team probably benefited immensely from having a guy like Murali in the nets.

I think your implication that Murali wouldn't do well in his favourite conditions against the Sri Lankan batting lineup (which tends to have a handful of greats in it mixed with genuinely poor players) is short sighted.

 

[Athlai]

I know Warne had a lot of success in Sri Lanka but so has Vettori, and Vettori is clearly a far far far worse spinner than both players.

 

[Ikki]

I think your implication that Murali wouldn't do well in his favourite conditions against the Sri Lankan batting lineup (which tends to have a handful of greats in it mixed with genuinely poor players) is short sighted.

The implication was he wouldn't do as well as Warne. You bring up Vettori but what about better spinners in Kumble and Harbhajan? They were obliterated. Visiting spinners have often had success there, but not to the extent Warne did. Not near it. Frankly, I don't know enough about the FC standard of SL cricket but I imagine it probably wasn't very high. And really, even the so-called muppets of spin England didn't do that badly against Murali - with relation to how Warne did against SL in SL. I think the Sri Lankan Test team would have given Murali trouble. Just as the Aus team would have given Warne trouble - although I doubt he would have been as bad as Murali.

 

[Athlai]

I still think the implication that he couldn't do as well as Warne against Sri Lanka in his home conditions is false. He might not have but you can't dismiss the possibility he would, his record against every team in Sri Lanka is excellent. Murali would scythe through the Sri Lankan tail like butter and would very likely pick up any of the prank batsman that have made it into the team over the years. Jayawardene, Dilshan, Ranatunga, Jayasuriya, de Silva, Sangakkara, Atapattu are hardly the only wickets you need to take for success.

 

[Ikki]

Visiting spin bowlers since 01 Jan 92:

In Aus: avg. 48.79 sr. 90.3

In Ind: avg. 44.23 sr. 84.1

In SL: avg. 42.956 sr. 84.9

Sri Lanka about as hard to play for visiting spinners as India. Although Australia is the hardest place according to this. Which I disagree with as I think generally India were better and Sri Lanka our equal. The pitches in India/SL are more conducive to spin whereas Australia isn't so I'd guess the difference is down to that.

 

[Ikki]

I still think the implication that he couldn't do as well as Warne against Sri Lanka in his home conditions is false. He might not have but you can't dismiss the possibility he would, his record against every team in Sri Lanka is excellent. Murali would scythe through the Sri Lankan tail like butter and would very likely pick up any of the prank batsman that have made it into the team over the years. Jayawardene, Dilshan, Ranatunga, Jayasuriya, de Silva, Sangakkara, Atapattu are hardly the only wickets you need to take for success.

Couldn't sounds harsh, but it's based on his performance in SL against worse players of spin. What you're saying he'd do to SL he could do easier to teams like NZ, Eng, SA...everyone bar the 3 I mentioned...but he didn't. Warne's record in SL is pretty ridiculous. It's very unlikely Murali would have done as well as him.

 

[akilana]

We can all speculate how well Murali would have went against SL or Warne against Australia.. but they're all speculation.

Let's talk about facts...# of countries Murali outbowled Warne > # of countries Warne outbowled Murali.