Warne v Muralitharan

[frankc]

Another cricket question. Whose the better bowler?

Again, I thought I'd have a look at the stats to give an idea. However I thought I'd strip out games against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe to compare on the basis of games against the front line nations. On this basis;

Warne: 672 wkts at 25.31 (strike rate 57.5)
Murali: 520 wkts at 23.73 (strike rate 57.7).

Murali has taken 137 wkts against the two lesser nations, while Warne's taken 17.

Overall strike rates are virtually identical, with Murali has a better average. Indicates that Murali is harder to score off but Warne takes wickets at the same rate.

On the bowling front, I feel Murali is the better bowler, however as a cricketer Warne probably shades him. As a batsman warne averages 16 with 11 fifties, while Murali averages 12 with 1 fifty. Also warnes taken 123 catches to Murali's 59.

In any case, Murali will take a squillion wickets by the time he is done. In wouldn't expect Warne to continue for too much longer - still a very good bowler but get the feeling he is on the decline.

Both would be included in my Best XI of the past 25 years. As per previous thread:

Greenidge, Hayden, Ponting, Tendulkar, Lara, Gilchrist, Imran Khan, Wasim Akran, Marshall, Warne, Muralithan (Gooch - 12th man).

 

[kolchak]

I wouldn't say Warne is on the decline, he hasn't bowled the way he has lately since the early nineties...retirement you would think is closer for Warne...

They are both spin bowlers but they are very different types of bowlers. As you said Warne more aggresive while Murali is more defensive.

Warne at the top of his game when he was creaming opposition was the Bradman of bowling, Murali has never been that good. No cricketer has ever dominated Cricket like that since the Don.

I'm not sure if Murali has had MANY injuries along the way but Warne has had plenty of set backs (some of his own creation)

Warne is far greater than Murali, BUT Murali is a great bowler in his own right and would hold his own on that team you put together.

 

[frankc]

I wouldn't say Warne is on the decline, he hasn't bowled the way he has lately since the early nineties...retirement you would think is closer for Warne...

They are both spin bowlers but they are very different types of bowlers. As you said Warne more aggresive while Murali is more defensive.

Warne at the top of his game when he was creaming opposition was the Bradman of bowling, Murali has never been that good. No cricketer has ever dominated Cricket like that since the Don.

I'm not sure if Murali has had MANY injuries along the way but Warne has had plenty of set backs (some of his own creation)

Warne is far greater than Murali, BUT Murali is a great bowler in his own right and would hold his own on that team you put together.

Good points Kolchak. I think the other thing also is that Warne is the reason why spin bowling has come back into vogue, pre-warne, spon bowling was largely ignored.

 

[Roddy]

I'd pick Warnie 796,865,389 times before I'd pick Murali. And i think Murali's one of the greats!!!

 

[frankc]

I'd pick Warnie 796,865,389 times before I'd pick Murali. And i think Murali's one of the greats!!!

I take it you think Warne is better!

 

[Cynic]

Murali is nowhere no near as clever as Warne is when it comes to bowling, just as skilled yes, but not as cunning.

Murali tends to be a one trick pony in test matches, he'll start with a big off break and then after a few stock balls he'll throw in the doosra. Rinse and repeat for a few hundred wickets

Warne can not naturally spin the ball as much as Murali so relies more on flight & control allowing him to execute plans to batsman which is what makes him such a dangerous bowler.

 

[frankc]

Murali is nowhere no near as clever as Warne is when it comes to bowling, just as skilled yes, but not as cunning.

Murali tends to be a one trick pony in test matches, he'll start with a big off break and then after a few stock balls he'll throw in the doosra. Rinse and repeat for a few hundred wickets

Warne can not naturally spin the ball as much as Murali so relies more on flight & control allowing him to execute plans to batsman which is what makes him such a dangerous bowler.

If repitition works there is nothing wrong with that.

If I had only one option out of the two, I'd also choose Warne as a better balanced side would result. He is a decent batsman and has a very good technique and a very good fielder in the slips. No a half-bad bowler to boot!

 

[Hugshawks]

If repitition works there is nothing wrong with that.

If I had only one option out of the two, I'd also choose Warne as a better balanced side would result. He is a decent batsman and has a very good technique and a very good fielder in the slips. No a half-bad bowler to boot!

That's what really expands the gap between the two. Unfortuantely, Warne does find himself all to often in off-field scandals every second day, and can't say this has been good for us or any team.

 

[Fastback]

Apples and oranges - Warne is a textbook wrist spinner whereas Murali is and will be the only bowler ever to have crafted a technique where on release his palm faces upwards, sometimes more so to the right. This allows him to flick/rotate the ball vigorously either way, hence harder to pick. The obvious issue with Murali is that it is impossible to bowl this delivery without bending the elbow.

 

[DannyJ]

Apples and oranges - Warne is a textbook wrist spinner whereas Murali is and will be the only bowler ever to have crafted a technique where on release his palm faces upwards, sometimes more so to the right. This allows him to flick/rotate the ball vigorously either way, hence harder to pick. The obvious issue with Murali is that it is impossible to bowl this delivery without bending the elbow.

Don't imply Mr. Muralitharan is cheat now

 

[frankc]

Don't imply Mr. Muralitharan is cheat now

He'll never get rid of that tag. What was interesting is that the ICC changed the rules because all bowlers straighten their arm.

If you have a look at Brett Lee bowling in slow motion, you can see that his elbow hyper-extends, then straightens slightly due to the effort he expends. This is different to Murali whose arm straightens from the normal position.

Murali has a suspect action and always will.

 

[Fastback]

Don't imply Mr. Muralitharan is cheat now

he only cheats against us

 

[Fastback]

He'll never get rid of that tag. What was interesting is that the ICC changed the rules because all bowlers straighten their arm.

If you have a look at Brett Lee bowling in slow motion, you can see that his elbow hyper-extends, then straightens slightly due to the effort he expends. This is different to Murali whose arm straightens from the normal position.

Murali has a suspect action and always will.

Exactly Frank, fast bowlers have the whiplash effect, cant be helped unless you insert a 3ft steel rod into the arm.

The only reason the ICC have allowed Murali/sacked Hair is so that cricket remains a world game. Disgraceful, but I guess you can't have teams abandoning games because of their perceived racial descrimination. Hopeless.

 

[Hawkk]

Warne - as the figures show Muralitharan has had the advantage of playing more tests against the lower ranked cricketing/ex cricketing nations - Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Significantly Warne has had to compete for wickets with quality quick and wrist spinners alike - McGrath and on occasions MacGill, as well as less favorable conditions on home tracks – compare the tracks in Australia to the pitches in the sub continent and there is no comparison.

However, I guess you could stake a claim that Murli hasn't had the luxury of being a member of one of the most dominant sides in test cricket history - with bat, ball and in the field, which helps to build pressure on opposition players and deliver Warne and co. easier wickets.

 

[Hawkk]

Exactly Frank, fast bowlers have the whiplash effect, cant be helped unless you insert a 3ft steel rod into the arm.

The only reason the ICC have allowed Murali/sacked Hair is so that cricket remains a world game. Disgraceful, but I guess you can't have teams abandoning games because of their perceived racial descrimination. Hopeless.

Agree....Any bowler bowling at speeds over 130 km has to have a slight bend in the arm...no one could bowl at those speeds without a slight bend - which was proven by the ICC...Spinners however do not.

Cricket is controlled by Asia and its money - why do you think the sub continent was chosen (wrongfully) before Australia to host the 2011 World Cup?

 

[frankc]

Agree....Any bowler bowling at speeds over 130 km has to have a slight bend in the arm...no one could bowl at those speeds without a slight bend - which was proven by the ICC...Spinners however do not.

Cricket is controlled by Asia and its money - why do you think the sub continent was chosen (wrongfully) before Australia to host the 2011 World Cup?

Good point Hawkk - I have to admit these days my interest in Cricket has declined. I more interested in its history than current events. The Governing body appears to be incapable of running the game.

In which other code of sport do the teams playing the sport have the right to vote on who are appointed as umpires/referees? I fairly certain the AFL appoints the umpires without reference to the clubs (naturally processes are in place for clubs to complain about the performance of an umpire).

If Hair correctly applied the rules then the way he has been treated is disgraceful. Whether or not Pakistan actually tampered with the ball is irrlevent - Hair had reason to suspect it, consulted with his colleague on the issue, deemed that the ball had been tampared with and docked five runs. Inzaman should have been received a severe punishment - instead of the limp wristed, one day ban (which he probably didn't mind).

No matter what anybody says, Murali bends his arm from the natural position, he throws the ball - end of story. His career will alwys been tainted.