*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[luckyeddie]

That was uncalled for. I suppose you are in a very foul mood as a result of the 7th-ranked test team taking apart your beloved English nancies, but there's no reason to take out that frustration in such a malicious manner.

You're right - I apologise, although it's nothing to do with seeing Pakistan whip our sorry botties.

You have, yourself, come over as an extremely confrontational individual in your first week here in at least a dozen posts, although that's perhaps down to the fact that you find it impossible to come to terms with supporting a team who you thought were world-beaters by divine right and yet they were beaten by a team who may well find themselves bested by (chuckle) Pakistan. Perhaps Australia's true form was the ODI defeat by Bangladesh.

Works both ways.

Now maybe you were acting like the new dog on the block, 'marking your territory', so to speak, or maybe it was just a desire to be noticed. You obviously have much to contribute with respect to your knowledge of cricket - let that come to the fore.

 

[ClownSymonds]

You're right - I apologise, although it's nothing to do with seeing Pakistan whip our sorry botties.

You have, yourself, come over as an extremely confrontational individual in your first week here in at least a dozen posts, although that's perhaps down to the fact that you find it impossible to come to terms with supporting a team who you thought were world-beaters by divine right and yet they were beaten by a team who may well find themselves bested by (chuckle) Pakistan. Perhaps Australia's true form was the ODI defeat by Bangladesh.

Works both ways.

Now maybe you were acting like the new dog on the block, 'marking your territory', so to speak, or maybe it was just a desire to be noticed. You obviously have much to contribute with respect to your knowledge of cricket - let that come to the fore.

Oh, please. I am perfectly over the Ashes debacle, and am through with letting everyone know what I thought of it.

I am a confrontational individual when it comes to issues regarding cricket that I have an opinion on, and figure that there's no reason not to liven things up here by speaking (er.. typing) what's on my mind. I never make any real personal attacks on other individuals here though, so there really shouldn't be any problem.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Err no.
It would work both ways if both were usually introduced around the same time into the attack.
McGrath opens the attack, Warne comes in around the 20th over.
Factually, Warne comes in to bowl with more opposition wickets down than Murali.
The biggest advantage of having a strong bowling attack is that each bowler benifits in the average stakes(since batsmen are under more pressure and face far more superb balls) but loses out in wickets/match rate(since there is a finite # - 20- wickets available).
The WI quartet is a prime example of this.
The biggest advantage of having a weak bowling attack (whilst you are a great bowler) is that you bowl the large majority of superb deliveries and thus you take a lot more wickets/match but owing to the lack of overall pressure, batsmen can afford to 'see you off' and thus impact your average.
Richard Hadlee is a prime example of this.
The fact that Murali has a better average than Warne and more wickets/match despite operating in a significantly lower quality attack shows that he is an overall superior and more consistent bowler.

McGrath and Warne often bowl in tandem, therefore it does work both ways.

The fact that Murali bowls on pitches which spin a mile is to me more influential than Warne bowling at Number 4 or 5 rtaher than Murali bowling at the openers (and Openers aren't always the better batsmen). And Warne also bowls at the openers after ineffectual opening bowling more than you'd think.

 

[Shahid_Afridi_6]

Oh, please. I am perfectly over the Ashes debacle, and am through with letting everyone know what I thought of it.

I am a confrontational individual when it comes to issues regarding cricket that I have an opinion on, and figure that there's no reason not to liven things up here by speaking (er.. typing) what's on my mind. I never make any real personal attacks on other individuals here though, so there really shouldn't be any problem.

You're one of the most knowledgable posters here as far as I've seen.

You're not afraid to speak the truth and your Ashes posts are spot on.

Keep it up.

 

[C_C]

McGrath and Warne often bowl in tandem, therefore it does work both ways.

The fact that Murali bowls on pitches which spin a mile is to me more influential than Warne bowling at Number 4 or 5 rtaher than Murali bowling at the openers (and Openers aren't always the better batsmen). And Warne also bowls at the openers after ineffectual opening bowling more than you'd think.

Sorry doesnt fly for me.
Tracks are secondary to the quality of attack here. I am sure you'd rather face upul chandana in Sri Lanka than Warne in OZ or Javagal Srinath in WACA than Malcolm Marshall on a flatbed.
The only thing going for warne is that his away average is marginally superior.
Everything else almost is going for Murali and therefore, murali is a better bowler as of now.

 

[Jono]

McGrath and Warne often bowl in tandem, therefore it does work both ways.

The fact that Murali bowls on pitches which spin a mile is to me more influential than Warne bowling at Number 4 or 5 rtaher than Murali bowling at the openers (and Openers aren't always the better batsmen). And Warne also bowls at the openers after ineffectual opening bowling more than you'd think.

Warne has had opportunities to bowl on wicketst that spin a mile, and has on many occasions done crap all.

Warne is used to bowling on bouncy wickets just like Murali is used to bowling on dustbowls. Look at Warne's record at the Gabba for example.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Warne has had opportunities to bowl on wicketst that spin a mile, and has on many occasions done crap all.

Yes, but rarely gets the opportunity to play teams that aren't very good on these wickets while bowling there.

 

[Shahid_Afridi_6]

Murali is far better.

Warne isn't even the best legspinner in Australia.

 

[honestbharani]

As I'm sure you'll agree, Murali bowls with a bent elbow. It's as simple as that. It doesn't take a human movement expert to see it. Not until they changed the Laws to accomodate him was he really cleared.

Where in the laws does it say that one cannot bowl with a bent elbow?

 

[Sanz]

Yes, but rarely gets the opportunity to play teams that aren't very good on these wickets while bowling there.

Too bad..He should relocate to India then.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Warne has had opportunities to bowl on wicketst that spin a mile, and has on many occasions done crap all.

Warne is used to bowling on bouncy wickets just like Murali is used to bowling on dustbowls. Look at Warne's record at the Gabba for example.

Actually, Warne's records in Pakistan and Sri Lanka are second to none, and Faiip posted a host of potential reasons why his record in India is poor.

 

[Pratters]

And what would you put his record in one dayers being poor in India to?

There are other reasons Warne's record in India are poor and not just him not being 100% at that point of time.

 

[Tom Halsey]

And what would you put his record in one dayers being poor in India to?

The fact that they were played the same time as the Tests? Note I said possible, not definate.

 

[Jono]

And what would you put his record in one dayers being poor in India to?

There are other reasons Warne's record in India are poor and not just him not being 100% at that point of time.

3-5 seperate tours. 3-5 seperate excuses. Its all coincidence of course. I mean how can Warne demolish England time after time but struggle against India, it makes no sense.

What no one has been able to answer is this. Why did Warne not perform in his recent tour of India in 2004? Do not use match practice as an excuse, because in his first series after his return from his ban he demolished Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka. He outperformed Murali in that series, was simply amazing. Yet he walked into India months later (That's months more of cricket practice mind you) and faced up against a completely out of form and low on practice Indian batting line-up (other than Sehwag), who was also without Sachin Tendulkar for 2 out of the 3 tests he played, and still didn't do well. That's inexcusable. So you can make your excuses for all the previous tours, but they all fall flat on this tour.

And as I pointed out earlier, if you want to use 'poor form' as one excuse for Warne's poor tours, the same can be said in reverse for the batsman that face Warne. Dravid and Laxman were so horribly out of form in that series its amazing. Dravid was coming off a Cricketer of the Year award, yet he failed on many occasions getting bogged down against Australia. Surely Warne should have capitalised against this?

 

[Tom Halsey]

What no one has been able to answer is this. Why did Warne not perform in his recent tour of India in 2004? Do not use match practice as an excuse, because in his first series after his return from his ban he demolished Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka. He outperformed Murali in that series, was simply amazing. Yet he walked into India months later (That's months more of cricket practice mind you) and faced up against a completely out of form and low on practice Indian batting line-up (other than Sehwag), who was also without Sachin Tendulkar for 2 out of the 3 tests he played. That's inexcusable. So you can make your excuses for all the previous tours, but they all fall flat on this tour.

There are no excuses for the India tour of 2004. It wasn't, however, as bad as you make out, especially when you consider that he missed the most spin friendly pitch of the lot and had he not missed that he'd probably have ended up with an average in the mid 20s - and against the best players of spin in the World that ain't bad (and significantly better than Murali's average against India).

The other tours were, with the exception of one, all around a time when he was dogged with injuries. The other one was right at the beginning of his career when he simply wasn't very good (and there's no excuse for that).

 

[Tom Halsey]

And as I pointed out earlier, if you want to use 'poor form' as one excuse for Warne's poor tours, the same can be said in reverse for the batsman that face Warne. Dravid and Laxman were so horribly out of form in that series its amazing. Dravid was coming off a Cricketer of the Year award, yet he failed on many occasions getting bogged down against Australia. Surely Warne should have capitalised against this?

I don't think anyone uses poor form as an excuse - injuries, however, is a viable excuse.

 

[C_C]

I don't think anyone uses poor form as an excuse - injuries, however, is a viable excuse.

Except that Warne got injured after he was shellacked by Tendy,Sidhu and Azhar in the tests, not before.
And Warne has been shellacked far more often against IND than Murali.
When it comes to performance against the best players of spin, Murali is ahead significantly.
And keep in mind that Murali hasnt played tests in IND in the last 7 years or so. He will get his chance very soon and i expect him to comprehensively overtake Warne in IND.

 

[Jono]

I don't think anyone uses poor form as an excuse - injuries, however, is a viable excuse.

Injuries was mentioned for all the previous tours, but when Warne was injury free heading to India in 2004, if you look at the previous posts, 'poor form' and the fact he was coming back from his lengthy ban was the excuse. This of course made no sense seeing as it wasn't his first series since the ban. Added to that, the Indian batsman he faced weren't excused for their poor form.

And keep in mind that Murali hasnt played tests in IND in the last 7 years or so. He will get his chance very soon and i expect him to comprehensively overtake Warne in IND.

Exactly, that's a vital point. Whilst I don't think (as I've mentioned before in this thread) that Murali will destroy India, I think he will do fairly well. Better than both he has, and Warne has in the past.

And once again, my posts against Warne in India isn't saying he isn't a great bowler, because he's one of the best I've ever seen. However you can't ignore this obvious flaw in his record, and its quite amusing that people try and pass if off as a coincidence and 'bad luck'. As I've said many times, I can't really seperate both players. However how Murali performs in Ind in the 3 test series will India will go a long way to seeing just how good he is.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Too bad..He should relocate to India then.

Well, you can't have a point for Murali not work the other way for Warne.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Except that Warne got injured after he was shellacked by Tendy,Sidhu and Azhar in the tests, not before.

Wrong. His shoulder was painful thoughout the 1998 tour, and when he got home he discovered that because of it he very nearly didn't play again - in other words, he was injured in India, but it wasn't documented how bad it was until after he got home.