Spinners

[LankanPrince]

Definitely Murali is the best spinner in the world at the moment since Shane Warne's form declined after the mid 90s. Seriously these two are the only decent spinners in the world at the moment. Saqlain seems to have fallen out of favour with Pakistani selectors and Anil Kumble is now nothing more than a glorified medium pacer (but still quite a good one). However Murali never really regained his form after his ankle injury in the April 2002 Sharjah series. He has become more predictable and many batsman have adapted and conquered him, especially Brian Lara. I really do hope he fulfills his dream of 600 test wicketz because whatever the criticisms he was one of the main guys who made Sri Lanka famous in the cricketing world. He has also followed Shane Warne in introducing innovation to a dying art in modern cricket and nothing beats his beady eyes and great smile. I hope he returns to form and once again puts terror into the eyes of young and inexperienced batsman.

 

[Richard]

Oh for god sake , Im never going to list all the spinners , thats why I left the 'other' option.
And just off the top of my head , wasnt Barnes a medium pacer anyway , one who swung it a bit & could cut the ball but not a guenuine spinner

Barnes' stock-ball was the fast leg-break. He could bowl loads of other deliveries but his stock-ball would have been recognised as a leg-break bowler's action.

 

[Richard]

Murali's turned the ball just as far as Warne, a ball he bowled to Butcher a few years ago was around a foot outside leg and hit off. The difference is I've seen Murali turn the ball much more consistantly than Warne, and further on average, on even the flattest of pitches.

Murali's Butcher ball in 2002 was almost an equivalent of Warne's Gatting ball. Not quite the same because it didn't drift, but both turned about 45 degrees. Warne produced almost a reverse carbon-copy to Afzaal in 2001, who rather rashly tried to drive him out of the rough. Both balls went straight with the arm and turned, from a full length, from about the side of the pitch to the stumps.
IMO Murali and Warne turn the ball just about exactly the same as each other, and slightly less than MacGill both. Murali's turn is sometimes exaggerated by the angle he usually bowls from from over-the-wicket (Warne's is exactly the same when he bowls round into the rough - eg the Afzaal ball).
The thing that sets Murali and Warne apart from substandard bowlers like MacGill is their accuracy. You can turn the ball all you like, but if you're dragging it down all the time you're not going to be too much of a threat.

 

[Richard]

Well I don't think there's much doubt that Warne has turned the ball more than anyone in the history of the game - a wrist spinner will always achieve more sideways spin than an offie.......and by 'orthodox' I assume you mean with a legitimate action?

Murali's action illegal? 'Fraid people who know more about it than you have professed it legal.
And as for the "a wristspinner will always achieve more sidespin than an offie" - a bit of apple-orange attempt there. Murali is a wristspinner. "Offie" or "leggie" are flexible terms, "wristspinner" and "fingerspinner" are much more fixed ones. And while beyond a question wristspinners will almost always turn the ball more than fingerspinners, given that Murali isn't a fingerspinner that argument holds nothing!

 

[JohnnyA]

Murali for me. Love to watch them both. But Murali carries an ordinary team on his slender shoulders. Warne doesn't have to. Warne augments a team that can win with or without him.

 

[Richard]

my reasons are the reverse of why I rate yesterday's batsmen ahead of todays counterparts - pitches and protective gear.

Todays pitches are more consistant & batsmen friendly than yesteryear's uncovered ones, and batsmen now have more physical protection to give them confidence to play shots.

Yesteryear's bowlers got more assistance from the wickets, they would have deteriorated quicker & the batsmen would not have had as much confidence re bounce etc. This is not to say that I do not rate yesteryear's bowlers, as IMO many of them would still come up trumps today as they were 'real' class acts (unlike some of today's pretenders), just that perhaps their stats would not be so impressive......

The argument about multi-era comparisons is one that should always be considered. Pre-1900 to 1970-onwards is simply a different time where, without a doubt, bowlers had far, far more assistance.
For me, you've almost got to leave seperate the four eras:
Pre-1900 (pitches basically just slightly trimmed outfield, and fields themselves unrecognisable from today)
1900-1930 (soils technology developed. Pitches and outfields a bit better)
1930-1970 (more development in soils technology, and pitch preparation)
1970 (pitches covered)
Some basic assumptions can be made (eg for WG Grace's average and Ranji's runs were worth about double) but nothing can ever be definitive, as generalisations can't.

 

[marc71178]

Looking at the dicussions about Murali vs Warne, I for one would love to see a session of those 2 in tandem!

 

[Richard]

A match for any batsman.
Any batsman ever.

 

[Prince EWS]

I cant believe no-one has mentioned Richard Dawson. Its just unbelievable. He is obviously the best ever spinner and nobody can argue.

 

[royGilchrist]

If you guys are talking about turning the ball of the spinners I have seen Qadir could turn more than either Murali or Warne because he could turn it miles both ways. His legspinner spun a little less than warne perhaps but whereas Warne has basically no googly, Qadir had two googlies and one of them which was not very disguised could spin miles. Not sure if you have seen footage of WC87, but in the semifinals Pak keeper Saleem Yousuf got hit on the nose by a vicious googly, which both the keeper and the batsman misjudged and Saleem Yousuf broke his nose.

 

[iamdavid]

The thing that sets Murali and Warne apart from substandard bowlers like MacGill is their accuracy. You can turn the ball all you like, but if you're dragging it down all the time you're not going to be too much of a threat.

MacGill's inaccuracy certainly does him no good , however even with this flaw he could still be a pretty damn good bowler if he managed to get a little bit of drift on the ball.

The reason he gets none at all is that his front arm basically collaspes rather than pulling down (ala Warne).
He also has some problems with tha follow through , he sets off to the right almost immediately after letting the ball go , this action allows him to get alot more sidespin on the ball & thus more turn than someone like Warne , who actually stays on that front foot alot longer & lets his front arm do a lot of the work , thus he gets way more topspin on the ball & actually makes it dip & drift in , alothough not extracting quite as much turn as MacGill.

As for the Warne v Murali thing , I dont think there can be much debate that Murali turns it alot more these days , back when he was younger Warne turned it as much as anyone ever has & he will still bowl the odd ball into the rough which turns a mile (eg Afzaal in 2001 , Kirsten in 2002) but he dosent consistently get the turn he used to.
I would still rate him as the better bowler though , due to his guile , drift & variety.

As for the calls that Warne's form has dropped since 1995 , well I think this may be a little harsh.
He has been rubbish at times (India 98 , India 01 , Sri Lanka 99 , WI 99 & several others) , however they were mainly around the time of his shoulder injury , he has also produced some superb performances , (Ashes 2001 , WC 99 , PAK 2002 , SAF 2002 , SAF 1998) , he is still IMO just as good a bowler as he was 8 years ago.

Dosent turn it as much , but smarter & more accurate/consistent.

 

[Richard]

He has been rubbish at times (Sri Lanka 99)

The same series where he averaged 14.something?
That was one of the rare occasions he didn't go to pot in spin-friendly conditions (like he did twice in India and once in West Indies)

 

[deeps]

brad hogg!!! no1 can pick him still, has heaps of varietY!! hehe,ok,jokes aside...i reckon abdul qadir was one of the best ever..he had heaps of variety, and a brilliant action which was very stylish... great bowler...

Warne would have to be the best for me... He plays most of his games in australia,where the pitches are more fast bowler pitches than spinner pitches...Murali bowls in sri-lanka,where the pitches conduct more spin...so obviously he'll have a better record

I;m a strong believer that the game is won in the mind...and warne has an EXCELLENT cricket brain (i know he doesn't have much common sense) but cricketing-wise, he's top...He see's a weakness,and he will probe at it for hours and hours

I don't beleive mruali has that thought process...

Purely based on bowling skill,variety etc... Warne again is grea.t...he can control the AMOUNT of spin he gives the ball, he can pitch the abll exactly where he wants it, and used 2 b able to bowl almost every ball to perfection...

Every1 that says murali is a better bowler than warne....i think they're talking about warne post-operation...ATM murali is better,warne doesn't have his vast array of delieveries nemore

Prior to his operation,he was king...better than murali is at the moment,better than ne1 ever

 

[lord_of_darkness]

Look for Reuben Verghese in that list after 10 years or so when i would be representing new zealand

 

[anzac]

so am I to believe that Warne & Murali are the 2 bowlers who best meet my criteria re dominating series Home & Away & not just in wicket taking????

It seems to me that there are some other bowlers worthy of note in this debate such as Qadir & O'Reilly.....

 

[iamdavid]

Who voted for MacGill?:P

 

[marc71178]

Well, you can hardly complain as you were stupid enough to put him in the poll in the first place!

 

[Richard]

I presume he only did it to see act jokingly, and to see if anyone seriously thought MacGill was a Test-standard bowler, let alone in the top 100 spinners of all-time.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

MacGill is a Test standard spinner which half the cricket sides in the world would like to have at their disposal, but I agree that he's certainly not anywhere near an all-time great. I assure you that this is the only place that his name will be mentioned in this context with Laker, let alone be listed above it. :P

 

[iamdavid]

The only reason I even included him was that on certain other forums I have actually run into idiots who beleive it or not , actually rate MacGill as one of the top few spinners of all time (Richard remember that Shane Sitek dude ) & I was just checking if there were any such examples of arrogance on here.