Averaging 50 with the ball gets you in the World XI?

[Deja moo]

I think your attempt to bluff by going back to the stats we have already analysed is quite pathetic Mate !!

We have discussed the above stats in the previous pages so I am not going to repeat like a parrott and your vain attempt to bluff this is quite laughable really !!

Okay Jason. I know I'm wasting my time here. You can take a horse to water, but you cant make him drink.

 

[JASON]

And yet the lesser bowler comes out on top when it comes to facing the best in the business. Interesting dont you think so? Dont you think its a last desperate refuge when you bring up the overall stats when the point being put forward was that Kumble is the better bowler against Australia ? Wouldnt it have saved us a lot of time if you had just right at the start accepted the fact that Kumble bowls better against the World Champs than Murali does instead of letting nationalistic pride come in the way ?

You are repeating like a parrott Mate - 51 wickets in 7 v 43 wickets in 6 is extremel marginal !! The selectors for this World XI picked Murali because he is the second highest wicket taker in Tests and the highest wicket taker in International Cricket (Tests and ODIs) !! Not picking him would have been even more pathetic !!

They were also guided by the fact that he has performed well against all opposition, unlike Anil who has suffered against other opposition.

I certainly think Kumble should have been picked over Vettori, but certainly not over Murali.

Having said that, I doubt Murali will play in this Super series given his recent lack of desire to play in Australia !! So you may find Anil might still be playing with Vettori !!

Wouldnt it have saved us a lot of time if you had just right at the start accepted the fact that Kumble bowls better against the World Champs than Murali does instead of letting nationalistic pride come in the way ?

No because you have still failed to grasp the point, Kumble has not done better than Murali against the Aussies !!

 

[Deja moo]

You are repeating like a parrott Mate - 51 wickets in 7 v 43 wickets in 6 is extremel marginal !!

It certainly is. Because thats being selective in that you're only taking Muralis best performances against Aus into account. Kumbles overall figures against Aus are better than Muralis. Which, unarguabely, means that Kumble is the better performer against Australia ( which I repeat, was the original point ).

No because you have still failed to grasp the point, Kumble has not done better than Murali against the Aussies !!

It defies all common sense to say that a bowler who takes more wickets per match, and at a better average against a particular opposition hasnt done better than one with inferior figures. Would you say that Kumble is a better overall bowler than Murali ? No. Because Murali has a better record vs all teams than Kumble. Similarly, Kumble is a better bowler against Australia than Murali because he beats Murali in virtually every department possible in that frame of reference. Is it that hard to grasp ?

 

[BlackCap_Fan]

Sweet jesus, STOP

 

[JASON]

It certainly is. Because thats being selective in that you're only taking Muralis best performances against Aus into account. Kumbles overall figures against Aus are better than Muralis. Which, unarguabely, means that Kumble is the better performer against Australia ( which I repeat, was the original point ).


It defies all common sense to say that a bowler who takes more wickets per match, and at a better average against a particular opposition hasnt done better than one with inferior figures. Would you say that Kumble is a better overall bowler than Murali ? No. Because Murali has a better record vs all teams than Kumble. Similarly, Kumble is a better bowler against Australia than Murali because he beats Murali in virtually every department possible in that frame of reference. Is it that hard to grasp ?

OK, again you have failed to grasp the previous points made. Murali made his debut and played first 2 tests v Australia then next 2 tests, 3 years after debut at non spinning tracks of WACA/MCG. Kumble played his first Test V Australia 7 years post debut at home !! This has been mentioned several times and you have struggled to understand this !




Here are the list of wickets taken by each bowler v Australia in their last 6 and 7 tests respectively - (Highlighted are the tailender wickets)

Murali -
8-14 1st Test v Aus at Kandy, 1999 [1459]
1 RT Ponting c & b 96
1 IA Healy st +RS Kaluwitharana 11
1 JN Gillespie lbw 41
1 CR Miller c MS Atapattu 0
3 GS Blewett c MS Atapattu 14
3 MJ Slater lbw 27
3 IA Healy bowled 3
15-19 2nd Test v Aus at Galle, 1999 [1460]
2 MJ Slater st +RS Kaluwitharana 96
2 GS Blewett bowled 62
2 JL Langer c A Ranatunga 7
2 ME Waugh c A Ranatunga 10
2 IA Healy c DPMD Jayawardene 4
20-22 3rd Test v Aus at Colombo (SSC), 1999 [1461]
1 JL Langer c A Ranatunga 32
1 ME Waugh c RP Arnold 13
1 DW Fleming c MS Atapattu 32
23-33 1st Test v Aus at Galle, 2003/04 [1685]
1 ML Hayden c UDU Chandana 41
1 DS Lehmann bowled 63
1 A Symonds c DPMD Jayawardene 0
1 AC Gilchrist c HDPK Dharmasena 4
1 MS Kasprowicz bowled 1
1 SCG MacGill lbw 0
3 ML Hayden c DPMD Jayawardene 130
3 DR Martyn c sub 110
3 DS Lehmann c & b 129
3 A Symonds st +KC Sangakkara 24
3 SK Warne st +KC Sangakkara 0
34-42 2nd Test v Aus at Kandy, 2003/04 [1688]
1 ML Hayden lbw 54
1 DR Martyn lbw 1
1 JN Gillespie c DPMD Jayawardene 8
1 MS Kasprowicz bowled 0
3 AC Gilchrist lbw 144
3 DR Martyn st +KC Sangakkara 161
3 A Symonds lbw 23
3 SK Warne c DNT Zoysa 6
3 JN Gillespie c MS Atapattu 11
43-50 3rd Test v Aus at Colombo (SSC), 2003/04 [1691]
1 DS Lehmann c ST Jayasuriya 153
1 SM Katich c & b 14
1 AC Gilchrist c ST Jayasuriya 22
1 SK Warne lbw 32
1 JN Gillespie c HP Tillakaratne 0
3 JN Gillespie c DPMD Jayawardene 1
3 DS Lehmann c +KC Sangakkara 1
3 SM Katich lbw 86

Only 13 out of 43 wickets were non front-line batsmen.(or tailenders) ie 30 of 43 were Frontline Batsmen.


Kumble -

38-43 2nd Test v Aus at Adelaide, 2003/04 [1673]
1 JL Langer c V Sehwag 58
1 RT Ponting c R Dravid 242
1 AJ Bichel c A Chopra 19
1 BA Williams bowled 0
1 SCG MacGill lbw 0
3 AC Gilchrist bowled 43
44-49 3rd Test v Aus at Melbourne, 2003/04 [1678]
2 ML Hayden lbw 136
2 RT Ponting st +PA Patel 257
2 AC Gilchrist c A Nehra 14
2 SR Waugh lbw 19
2 SM Katich c A Chopra 29
2 B Lee c VVS Laxman 8
50-61 4th Test v Aus at Sydney, 2003/04 [1680]
2 JL Langer c +PA Patel 117
2 ML Hayden c SC Ganguly 67
2 RT Ponting lbw 25
2 DR Martyn c & b 7
2 SM Katich c V Sehwag 125
2 B Lee c A Chopra 0
2 JN Gillespie st +PA Patel 47
2 NW Bracken c AB Agarkar 2
4 ML Hayden c R Dravid 30
4 DR Martyn c sub 40
4 SR Waugh c SR Tendulkar 80
4 AC Gilchrist st +PA Patel 4
62-66 1st Test v Aus at Bangalore, 2004/05 [1713]
1 SM Katich bowled 81
1 DR Martyn c A Chopra 3
1 DS Lehmann c R Dravid 17
3 SM Katich c R Dravid 39
3 AC Gilchrist c A Chopra 26
67-79 2nd Test v Aus at Chennai, 2004/05 [1714]
1 DR Martyn c Yuvraj Singh 26
1 DS Lehmann c +PA Patel 0
1 MJ Clarke lbw 5
1 AC Gilchrist c Yuvraj Singh 3
1 SK Warne c & b 4
1 JN Gillespie c M Kaif 5
1 MS Kasprowicz c VVS Laxman 4
3 JL Langer c R Dravid 19
3 ML Hayden c VVS Laxman 39
3 AC Gilchrist bowled 49
3 DS Lehmann c +PA Patel 31
3 SK Warne c VVS Laxman 0
3 MS Kasprowicz lbw 5
80-82 3rd Test v Aus at Nagpur, 2004/05 [1718]
1 SM Katich c A Chopra 4
1 DR Martyn c AB Agarkar 114
3 MJ Clarke c M Kaif 73
83-88 4th Test v Aus at Mumbai, 2004/05 [1720]
2 RT Ponting lbw 11
2 SM Katich c M Kaif 7
2 MJ Clarke st +KKD Karthik 17
2 JN Gillespie c M Kaif 2
2 NM Hauritz c Harbhajan Singh 0
4 NM Hauritz lbw 15

Of Kumble's 51 wickets 15 were tailenders.
Or only 36 were Frontline Batsmen.

Murali - 30 Frontline batsmen's wickets off 6 tests .
Kumble 36 off 7 tests.

That's hardly a difference !! But I realise we can keep discussing this over and over , but you will no doubt continue to say what you have repeated over and over without addressing the merits of the points mentioned by me !! So I will take Black Cap Fan's advice on this !!

 

[marc71178]

Can someone tell me why you're comparing the 2 when they should be the 2 teaming up in the Supertest?

 

[honestbharani]

yep. I am pretty sure a few Aussie batters are dancing with joy that one of them isn't playing.

 

[Deja moo]

OK, again you have failed to grasp the previous points made. Murali made his debut and played first 2 tests v Australia then next 2 tests, 3 years after debut at non spinning tracks of WACA/MCG. Kumble played his first Test V Australia 7 years post debut at home !! This has been mentioned several times and you have struggled to understand this !

All you've done is consider that Murali played his first 2 tests on debut, but refused to consider that Kumble played his first 3 in Australia in conditions much worse than Murali had to encounter in Australia.



As for the "non spinning" MCG, heres their records on the ground:

Kumble: 2 104.2 369 8 6/176 6/219 46.12 3.53 78.2 1 0
Murali : 1 38 124 1 1/124 1/124 124.00 3.26 228.0 0 0

Murali: Only 13 out of 43 wickets were non front-line batsmen.(or tailenders) ie 30 of 43 were Frontline Batsmen

Of Kumble's 51 wickets 15 were tailenders.
Or only 36 were Frontline Batsmen.

Subtle use of language that immediately reveals bias. Can you explain why you employ the word "only" when referring to tail ender wickets for Murali, but while referring to top order wickets for Kumble ?

That's hardly a difference !! But I realise we can keep discussing this over and over , but you will no doubt continue to say what you have repeated over and over without addressing the merits of the points mentioned by me !! So I will take Black Cap Fan's advice on this !!

I cant help it if you are selective and choose to employ stats from only those periods which suit your argument . There certainly is little difference between their performances of late ( and even that is arguable, because Kumble has played close to 50% of those tests in Australia while Murali has played 100% of his recent ones in Sri Lanka !! ).

But look at their overall records, without offering excuses for Murali, because Kumble had many factors going against him on his first series in Australia too, and Kumble still comes out on top !!

 

[JASON]

As for the "non spinning" MCG, heres their records on the ground:

Kumble: 2 104.2 369 8 6/176 6/219 46.12 3.53 78.2 1 0
Murali : 1 38 124 1 1/124 1/124 124.00 3.26 228.0 0 0

Again you have shown clearly that you have not read prvious posts or happily chosen topretend ignorance !!

The MCG pitch, for anyone who knows the ground can tell you, was relaid prior to 99 .

Prior to it being relaid it was a seaming track with scores under 250 being the norm for completed innings (infact under 200 mostly !!)
After it was relaid it is now a pitch that is reasonable to bat on, and has on occassions been a turner !!

Now I have mentioned this fact previously but you have failed to grasp this along with other things mentioned.



Your other points are not worth wasting my time over because, I have discussed it at depth before !!

But No bowler has taken 8 or 9 wickets in debut Test V Australia !! And the fact that Kumble played his tests against Aussies long after debut has obviously helped his figures a bit !! (compared to Murali playing on Debut and early in his career ,OK )You have struggled to understand this as well !

 

[thierry henry]

Can someone tell me why you're comparing the 2 when they should be the 2 teaming up in the Supertest?

Smartest thing you've ever said Marc. The most important point here is that Vettori shouldn't be anywhere near the world side, when Kumble is available.

 

[Deja moo]

Again you have shown clearly that you have not read prvious posts or happily chosen topretend ignorance !!

The MCG pitch, for anyone who knows the ground can tell you, was relaid prior to 99 .

Prior to it being relaid it was a seaming track with scores under 250 being the norm for completed innings (infact under 200 mostly !!)
After it was relaid it is now a pitch that is reasonable to bat on, and has on occassions been a turner !!

Now I have mentioned this fact previously but you have failed to grasp this along with other things mentioned.

Utter tripe.

Is that why Warne averages more ( 39.36 ) after the relaying than before ( 19.8 ) in tests in Melbourne ? You'll find the same trend in One Dayers there too. And you'll find that the MCG was known for wearing off a lot in the early 90s, which was one of the reasons it was relaid.

But No bowler has taken 8 or 9 wickets in debut Test V Australia !! And the fact that Kumble played his tests against Aussies long after debut has obviously helped his figures a bit !! (compared to Murali playing on Debut and early in his career ,OK )You have struggled to understand this as well !

And you have once again chosen to ignore the fact that Kumble played a far better team in 99, on their home turf, than Murali did in the early 90s, in his own backyard !!. Are you struggling to get this or plainly ignoring it because it weakens your claims ?


And since you're so uppity about Muralis performances on debut being discounted, I'll do that for you, which still leaves Kumble ahead with an average of 27.17 compared to Muralis 29.26, with a better strike rate to boot.

 

[_Ed_]

10-1-33-4

 

[shaka]

awesome stuff, proved some critics wrong that he would not be effective. Nice to see him bowl in tandem with Murali.

 

[SJS]

awesome stuff, proved some critics wrong that he would not be effective. Nice to see him bowl in tandem with Murali.

SH**. I wish I was watching

 

[age_master]

yeah good performance from both spinners - particularly vettori though

 

[kears_falcon_9]

lol he shut this thread down didnt he 4 for 33 is a great return..

 

[honestbharani]

I don't think many people had a problem with him being picked in the ODI side. (Atleast, not me) It is the test side where I still think Kumble should have been picked ahead of him. I will stand by that even if he takes all 20 wickets.

 

[marc71178]

Exactly, hb, hence the comment about an average of 50!

 

[Isolator]

I don't think many people had a problem with him being picked in the ODI side. (Atleast, not me) It is the test side where I still think Kumble should have been picked ahead of him. I will stand by that even if he takes all 20 wickets.

I'm not saying that he should be there ahead of Kumble, but theoretically, if he does take 20 wickets, wouldn't the selection be justified?
I mean, let's say this was a normal national team, and you have bowlers X and Y competing for a spot. X is generally considered the better choice, but Y is picked, and he does extremely well. Is the selection right or wrong?

 

[honestbharani]

I'm not saying that he should be there ahead of Kumble, but theoretically, if he does take 20 wickets, wouldn't the selection be justified?
I mean, let's say this was a normal national team, and you have bowlers X and Y competing for a spot. X is generally considered the better choice, but Y is picked, and he does extremely well. Is the selection right or wrong?

I don't believe in commenting on selections on hind sight. It is a risk to take Vettori over Kumble and I am against taking risky selections. You pick the best guys to do the job and IMO, at the time the side was picked, Kumble would have done the job better than Vettori. End of story.