• 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.

Kumble vs Warne - just stats

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
This is not to compare the two and start another debate but just to show how little Kumble's efforts are appreciated.

Honestly, I had no clue the figures were so close and that Kumble had more five fors and 10 in a test than Warne at the same stage..

Murali's figures are shown just to indicate how much he is ahead of these two.

PLAYER.....MATCHES......WKTS.....AVG.....STR RATE......ECO RATE(100 balls)......Wkts/mtch.......5 fors......10 fors

Warne...........99.................436..........26.5..........62.9............42.1.................................4.4..................21..............5

Kumble.........99..................478..........28.0..........64.9............43.2.................................4.78................30.............8

Murali.............98................578...........22.3..........56.7............39.3................................5.90.................48...........14
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Barney Rubble said:
Wow. Remarkable stats. Kumble certainly does go unnoticed if those are his stats.
Of course these are his figures. Yes they are remarkable.
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
SJS said:
Of course these are his figures. Yes they are remarkable.
I wasn't trying to imply that they weren't, sorry, I said that wrong! :) I just never realised quite how good he was statistically before.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Barney Rubble said:
I wasn't trying to imply that they weren't, sorry, I said that wrong! :) I just never realised quite how good he was statistically before.
And I knew what you meant. You neednt feel sorry. :)

I was expressing mock indignation. I shouldbe sorry for not putting an appropriate smiley there.

Amazing how written word without facial expressions on the voice modulation of the spoken word can be misinterpreted. Not your fault though. I should have been careful :D Its happening too often to me. :)
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
SJS said:
This is not to compare the two and start another debate but just to show how little Kumble's efforts are appreciated.

Honestly, I had no clue the figures were so close and that Kumble had more five fors and 10 in a test than Warne at the same stage..

Murali's figures are shown just to indicate how much he is ahead of these two.

PLAYER.....MATCHES......WKTS.....AVG.....STR RATE......ECO RATE(100 balls)......Wkts/mtch.......5 fors......10 fors

Warne...........99.................436..........26.5..........62.9............42.1.................................4.4..................21..............5

Kumble.........99..................478..........28.0..........64.9............43.2.................................4.78................30.............8

Murali.............98................578...........22.3..........56.7............39.3................................5.90.................48...........14
Sorry SJS, plse explain further. Are these his their last 99 tests or first 99 or what??

Obviously Warne has over 600 wickets not 436
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Kumble's poorer reputation is based almost entirely on his abysmal record outside of India. It is extremely difficult for a bowler to gain a massive reputation similar to Warne or Murali when they do not perform often in front of the eyes of the rest of the cricketing world.

For those who don't know them:

Kumble in India
52 tests, 302 wickets @ 23.38, 22 5-fors, 7 10-fors, strike rate: 56.24, economy rate: 2.49.

Kumble outside of India
47 tests, 176 wickets @ 36.00, 8 5-fors, 1 10-for, strike rate: 80.40, economy rate: 2.69.


And also...

Kumble in Australia, England, New Zealand, South Africa and the West Indies (excluding Zimbabwe and the sub-continent)
32 tests, 115 wickets @ 38.75, 6 5-fors, 1 10-for, strike rate: 87.90, economy rate: 2.64.

It's not too hard to see why he isn't considered by the worldwide cricket public to be in the same bracket as the others mentioned. There's also the point that Warne's stats look the worst of his career as a whole after around 100 tests, because that was at the height of his 1998-2001 form slump.

No doubt Kumble is a great bowler, of course, and I am not attempting to discredit him, simply to explain his inferior reputation.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
zinzan12 said:
Sorry SJS, plse explain further. Are these his their last 99 tests or first 99 or what??

Obviously Warne has over 600 wickets not 436
Kumble and Murali have played only 99 and 98 tests each so these are their figures at the end of the delhi test match.

For Warne, I have taken his first 99 test figures.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
FaaipDeOiad said:
Kumble's poorer reputation is based almost entirely on his abysmal record outside of India. It is extremely difficult for a bowler to gain a massive reputation similar to Warne or Murali when they do not perform often in front of the eyes of the rest of the cricketing world.

For those who don't know them:

Kumble in India
52 tests, 302 wickets @ 23.38, 22 5-fors, 7 10-fors, strike rate: 56.24, economy rate: 2.49.

Kumble outside of India
47 tests, 176 wickets @ 36.00, 8 5-fors, 1 10-for, strike rate: 80.40, economy rate: 2.69.


And also...

Kumble in Australia, England, New Zealand, South Africa and the West Indies (excluding Zimbabwe and the sub-continent)
32 tests, 115 wickets @ 38.75, 6 5-fors, 1 10-for, strike rate: 87.90, economy rate: 2.64.

It's not too hard to see why he isn't considered by the worldwide cricket public to be in the same bracket as the others mentioned. There's also the point that Warne's stats look the worst of his career as a whole after around 100 tests, because that was at the height of his 1998-2001 form slump.

No doubt Kumble is a great bowler, of course, and I am not attempting to discredit him, simply to explain his inferior reputation.
Sure. You are right about that.

But his figures are still quite amazing. And his figures are improving with every series !!
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
The thing about Kumble is he's the player we look to when we need a match won. We can get all the runs if Laxman, Sehwag, Tendulkar, Ganguly or Dravid scored in the past, but when it came to bowling a team out it was generally "look to Kumble". Yeah we had Harbhajan in 2001 and Srinath at certain times, but Kumble has always been there.

I specifically remember the Sydney test against Aus in 2004 when Kumble took more wickets in the match than the whole Australian bowling line-up put together. He was our only hope of getting us to victory, and he almost got there. Not enough consistent support from the other end, which has often (but thankfully not always) been the case.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Having watched a lot of Kumble in the last few years, my personal opinion is that he is at his best in the last 2 years and in fact he is currently ahead of Both Warne and Murali at this point in time .

He is in my opinion the number 1 spinner in World Cricket ahead of these 2 who have dropped a lttle bit , IMO. or Batsmen have wisened up to them while Anil seems to be getting better more than ever before .
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
JASON said:
Having watched a lot of Kumble in the last few years, my personal opinion is that he is at his best in the last 2 years and in fact he is currently ahead of Both Warne and Murali at this point in time .

He is in my opinion the number 1 spinner in World Cricket ahead of these 2 who have dropped a lttle bit , IMO. or Batsmen have wisened up to them while Anil seems to be getting better more than ever before .
If batsmen have wisened up against Warne, how come he is having the best year of his career to date, with 84 wickets @ 21, and his average is lower than it has been since 1998?
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
FaaipDeOiad said:
If batsmen have wisened up against Warne, how come he is having the best year of his career to date, with 84 wickets @ 21, and his average is lower than it has been since 1998?
Thats just mostly dummy wickets against England and West Indies who are hardly reckoned as the greatest players of spin.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
JASON said:
Thats just mostly dummy wickets against England and West Indies who are hardly reckoned as the greatest players of spin.
While Kumble's 34 wickets @ 30 this year have come against Pakistan, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka.
 

Top