subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It really doesn't matter because overall both did miserable in India. Murali in that Nagpur spell was neutralised in the second innings and SL lost. Murali was then slaughtered in 2009.Australia's attack was demolishing a very poor Indian batting lineup in the 1999 series and Warne still averaged 40+. The pitches shouldn't even have mattered.
And while his record in India wasn't great either, I'd give Murali the edge even there, because :
1) Unlike Warne, Murali had the misfortune of not touring India much in his peak period from 1998-2008 ish.
2) His 7fer in Delhi in the 2005 series is one of the ATG spells of bowling in India. Warne never managed anything of this caliber on any of his tours.
In fact, I would say Warne had a more respectable series in 2004/5 than Murali in 2005 even though it wasn't anything remarkable. At least he owned Laxman.
Last edited: