Gilchrist v Dhoni

[honestbharani]

Warney's replacement Pollock can do it umpteen times better.

Which is why I said it depends on the rest of your attack.

 

[trundler]

A tie-breaker like that would make sense if Warne was in the same stratosphere as Murali and Saqlain in ODIs. Unless you believe Mike Veletta was better than Sangakkara.

 

[honestbharani]

A tie-breaker like that would make sense if Warne was in the same stratosphere as Murali and Saqlain in ODIs. Unless you believe Mike Veletta was better than Sangakkara.

Talking to me or @stephen ?

 

[trundler]

Heck, Hogg was an adequate replacement for Warne. I do think he's underrated but you'd deservedly get laughed out of the room if you implied he's better than Saqlain or Murali.

 

[stephen]

Heck, Hogg was an adequate replacement for Warne. I do think he's underrated but you'd deservedly get laughed out of the room if you implied he's better than Saqlain or Murali.

Adequate, yes, but he's was a clear step down.

All three of those spinners were special and clearly Warne was the least consistent of the three. But he was also the most likely to step up and win an important game for his side from nowhere.

I also think it's clear that different conditions favoured Warne than the other two - he preferred faster wickets with more bounce. Saqlain in particular was more suited to lower, slower decks.

 

[indiaholic]

I don't exactly base my ratings of players on charts. I base it on their performances particularly in world cups for ODIs.

I consider Murali's performance in the 2007 WC final to be a big black mark against him. In a final, on the same pitch where Clarke and Hogg took key wickets, where he could have set up the match for his side he took 0/44 (7). The funniest thing about this was that Sri Lanka rested Murali for their earlier match against Australia so they wouldn't get a look at him before the final.

I also hold Warne's 0/58 (10) in the 96 final against him, but his performance in 1999 redeemed him. Murali never took a match winning haul in a world cup final (the 1/31 (10) was as close as he got) and never really took a decent haul of wickets against Australia in a world cup march at all.

This is quite arbitrary.

 

[honestbharani]

Heck, Hogg was an adequate replacement for Warne. I do think he's underrated but you'd deservedly get laughed out of the room if you implied he's better than Saqlain or Murali.

Hogg did a job when he needed to, though. What I mean is that Warne is clearly the inferior spinner to Saqlain and Murali but he is still in the same level IMO. And depending on the composition of your bowling attack, you can still go for Warney where the batting ability might come in handy too.

India preferring Jadeja to Chahal as the second spinner in ODIs is an example of such a decision.

 

[Migara]

I don't exactly base my ratings of players on charts. I base it on their performances particularly in world cups for ODIs.

I consider Murali's performance in the 2007 WC final to be a big black mark against him. In a final, on the same pitch where Clarke and Hogg took key wickets, where he could have set up the match for his side he took 0/44 (7). The funniest thing about this was that Sri Lanka rested Murali for their earlier match against Australia so they wouldn't get a look at him before the final.

I also hold Warne's 0/58 (10) in the 96 final against him, but his performance in 1999 redeemed him. Murali never took a match winning haul in a world cup final (the 1/31 (10) was as close as he got) and never really took a decent haul of wickets against Australia in a world cup march at all.

Probably might base it when it suits the argument. That is because Australia chickened out of the matches maybe?

 

[Migara]

Hogg did a job when he needed to, though. What I mean is that Warne is clearly the inferior spinner to Saqlain and Murali but he is still in the same level IMO. And depending on the composition of your bowling attack, you can still go for Warney where the batting ability might come in handy too.

India preferring Jadeja to Chahal as the second spinner in ODIs is an example of such a decision.

Clearly inferior and Same level with Saqlain and Murali where the rating show a yawning gap. But clearly better than Qadir whose ratings are closer to Warne, than Warne to Saqlain / Murali. Interesting logic.

 

[trundler]

Ajmal is next in line after those 2. Much better average than Warne in a much, much more batting friendly era. Could bowl at any stage too.

 

[vcs]

Ajmal is next in line after those 2. Much better average than Warne in a much, much more batting friendly era. Could bowl at any stage too.

 

[honestbharani]

Clearly inferior and Same level with Saqlain and Murali where the rating show a yawning gap. But clearly better than Qadir whose ratings are closer to Warne, than Warne to Saqlain / Murali. Interesting logic.

Where did I claim he is better than Qadir? Dude, I rate Saqlain and Murali as better spinners than Warney, just not such a huge difference that they are at different levels. That is all.

 

[Red]

Jayasuriya is a weird choice when you have plenty of other bowling options

Gilchrist as a specialist bat would be easily superior (as would several others)

My team was one selected from players harsh hadn't picked. He'd picked Gilly.

 

[Burgey]

shouldn’t surprise you that these sort of apologists always overlook the small matter of chucking

 

[Daemon]

I'm reading Ajmal's bio on Cricinfo and there's literally no mention of his chucking. Instead there's even an article seriously discussing Ajmal's inclusion in a Pakistani XI of the last 30 years. Shameful.

 

[Dan]

I don't exactly base my ratings of players on charts. I base it on their performances particularly in world cups for ODIs.

I consider Murali's performance in the 2007 WC final to be a big black mark against him. In a final, on the same pitch where Clarke and Hogg took key wickets, where he could have set up the match for his side he took 0/44 (7). The funniest thing about this was that Sri Lanka rested Murali for their earlier match against Australia so they wouldn't get a look at him before the final.

I also hold Warne's 0/58 (10) in the 96 final against him, but his performance in 1999 redeemed him. Murali never took a match winning haul in a world cup final (the 1/31 (10) was as close as he got) and never really took a decent haul of wickets against Australia in a world cup march at all.

I too like basing my analysis of players' performance on approximately 1.2% of their entire career and holding it against them that they've never done something done by literally four people ever.

 

[stephen]

I too like basing my analysis of players' performance on approximately 1.2% of their entire career and holding it against them that they've never done something done by literally four people ever.

All three bowlers were fantastic. Only one of the three turned an entire world cup in its head. That's a more than adequate way of splitting the players in my book.

Peyote say that Murali and Saqlain were better than Warne on the basis of a couple of points of bowling average. I don't rate players entirely by their bowling average. Larwood as one of the best pace bowlers ever despite him averaging 28 with the ball and only having played around 20 tests.

I say Warne was more likely to win big matches than either, based mostly on the big matches that he won. Not doing quite as well in the occasional low key tri series is just not as high on the radar.

 

[harsh.ag]

Murali took 4-31 in the 2007 WC semi. Probably not enough for you, though.

 

[h_hurricane]

Warne deserves some credit for being a big match player but was also fortunate to be up against some poor lineups against spin in those matches.

Indians struggled against Mcgrath in 1999 WC but took Warne to the cleaners then.

Ranatunga and Gurusinghe annihilated him in 1996 WC final.

 

[Daemon]

Murali played 5 WCs and averaged under 20 in 3 of them. In the '07 one he averaged 15 ffs.

But of course that doesn't really count because he failed against the greatest ODI team ever in the Finals, where he started his spell bowling to a rampaging Gilchrist and still hit his pads 3 times in the over before his fellow bowlers were taken to the cleaners.

Imagine using a sample size of literally one match to have a "big black mark" against someones 500+ wicket career.