• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Warne Vs Murali

Warne Vs Murali Who's No.1???

  • Warne

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Murali

    Votes: 2 28.6%
  • Cannot Seperate

    Votes: 2 28.6%

  • Total voters
    7
Status
Not open for further replies.

Baggygreen

Cricket Spectator
This should make interesting reading, I'm saying Warne for obvious reasons but please lets keep this to purely on field performances.

I am picking Warne for the simple fact that if Warne had played all of his home tests on the dustbowls of Sri Lanka he would have 700+ test wickets by now.


Here is an Interesting fact:

Warne and Murali VS Zimbabwe and Bangladesh:

Warne 1 test 6 wickets @ 22.83
Murali 16 tests 107 wickets @ 15.66

Overall records:

Warne 110 tests, 30,884 balls, 517 wkts @ 25.43
Murali 90 tests, 30,725 balls, 527 Wkts @ 22.77


Draw your own conclusions and make a vote and have a say :D
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
Baggygreen said:
This should make interesting reading, I'm saying Warne for obvious reasons but please lets keep this to purely on field performances.

I am picking Warne for the simple fact that if Warne had played all of his home tests on the dustbowls of Sri Lanka he would have 700+ test wickets by now.


Here is an Interesting fact:

Warne and Murali VS Zimbabwe and Bangladesh:

Warne 1 test 6 wickets @ 22.83
Murali 16 tests 107 wickets @ 15.66

Overall records:

Warne 110 tests, 30,884 balls, 517 wkts @ 25.43
Murali 90 tests, 30,725 balls, 527 Wkts @ 22.77


Draw your own conclusions and make a vote and have a say :D
Everyone here knows my views on this and a while ago we had this vote on the frontpage. I think Murali got 46%, Warne got 40% and 14% couldn't seperate them. The voting was far from one sided but Murali definitely won.

Murali vs India 637 1680 51 8/87 32.94 2.63 74.9 3 1
Warne vs India 514.1 1608 29 4/47 55.44 3.12 106.3 0 0

including:

45 7 150 1 3.33 3rd Test v Ind in Aus 1991/92 at Sydney
30 7 122 1 4.07 1st Test v Ind in Ind 1997/98 at Chennai
42 4 147 0 3.50 2nd Test v Ind in Ind 1997/98 at Kolkata
13 1 60 0 4.62 3rd Test v Ind in Aus 1999/00 at Sydney
34 3 152 1 4.47 2nd Test v Ind in Ind 2000/01 at Kolkata

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6974
 
Last edited:

Baggygreen

Cricket Spectator
I ask how many wickets would Warne have if he played all of his home tests on the dustbowls of Sri Lanka???, I see you failed to add that to your list of 16 reasons.
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
Baggygreen said:
I ask how many wickets would Warne have if he played all of his home tests on the dustbowls of Sri Lanka???, I see you failed to add that to your list of 16 reasons.
And what would Warne's strike rate and average be like if he had no support from the other bowlers?
 

PY

International Coach
BaggyGreen : Welcome to CW mate. :)

Please do stick around even after what I say. I'm afraid we have had this same argument about 15 times in the last 6 months and about 30+ since I joined. Unfortunately they usually end up as a slanging match and are therefore closed.

With this in mind, I can't see this thread hanging around for long. :(
 

tooextracool

International Coach
a massive zebra said:
And what would Warne's strike rate and average be like if he had no support from the other bowlers?
alot better you might say....more support means those other bowlers would be just about as likely to get the wickets that warne could have had.
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
tooextracool said:
alot better you might say....more support means those other bowlers would be just about as likely to get the wickets that warne could have had.
You obviously don't understand.

If Warne was of equal ability to Murali he would take less wickets per match than Murali (because there are four good bowlers competing for wickets), but would have a lower average and strike rate (because of the pressure brought on by the other bowlers). Murali takes more wickets per match and has a lower average and strike rate.

For another example of this look at Marshall vs Hadlee. Both wonderful bowlers, with Marshall having a better average and strike rate because he played in a better team and Hadlee taking more wickets because there was less competition for them.
 
Last edited:

tooextracool

International Coach
a massive zebra said:
You obviously don't understand.
right since we've had this discussion on countless occasions and on each of those occasions no one has been able to see the other person's viewpoint there is clearly no point in having this discussion again.....where is pickup when you need him???
 

Scallywag

Banned
Warnie is definately a go to man, when the heat is on he has won many games for Australia. In ODI's he has excelled in big games and inspires the team more than any other spin bowler.

Murali is also a go to man and wins many games off his own bowling. In ODI's he is a matchwinner but just doesent find a higher level for big games.

Remember thats from the cricket I've watched and I don't get to see much of Sri Lanka V Ban, Zim and Ind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top