Murali The Greatest Asian Cricketer Ever

[weldone]

That's an absolutely ridiculous analogy.

Imagine how many runs batsmen would score if they weren't allowed to use their bat! Or if there were 29 stumps (granted Sree and Ishant would probably still miss).

Or if you want me to make it a bit closer to what you said - imagine if a batsman was on his own, and had to run 2 each time

That's a stupid comparison unless you think bats and stumps are human beings like fielders - in which case it doesn't remain stupid, it becomes insane.

For the second paragraph, like a non-striker runs for a batsman's runs, the batsman runs too when he's at the non-striker end. So, it evens out (unless Botham is running with Boycott). But it's not only other bowlers who field and keep wicket for a bowler.

 

[mono]

I think Imran's contribution to pakistani cricket cannot be represented by mere statistics. If you listen to how people like akram talk about him you realize this.

Murali's record in australia has come up. I think it's little unfair that this gets thrown into the equation considering he was pretty much abused by the entire country in the two tours he played there. If you take away those tours his average against the aussies is 26.

It's also not fair to call murali's record against india mediocre when you warne averages 47 ,versus murali's 32, against india

 

[centurymaker]

so he ONLY played twice in australia?

his record there shouldn't really matter then imo

 

[hang on]

twice as in 2 series. 5 tests. not a massive sample size but no reason whatsoever to discount it.

 

[mono]

twice as in 2 series. 5 tests. not a massive sample size but no reason whatsoever to discount it.

not even when the umpires, the media as well as the australian prime minister were accusing you og chucking

 

[hang on]

not sure what happened in 2007. got collared.

 

[Jono]

It's also not fair to call murali's record against india mediocre when you warne averages 47 ,versus murali's 32, against india

Except this isn't Murali vs. Warne, this is Murali vs. Sachin.

 

[mono]

Except this isn't Murali vs. Warne, this is Murali vs. Sachin.

That's true, but what i wanted to show was how difficult it is for spinners to do well against India.

 

[centurymaker]

twice as in 2 series. 5 tests. not a massive sample size but no reason whatsoever to discount it.

5 tests is nothing.
imagine if tendulkar had never played in england before the last series (4 tests)....

you can't judge anyone on such a tiny sample.
if he had failed in 1 more series over there then maybe we coud take into acccount his lack of success in aus.

 

[centurymaker]

not even when the umpires, the media as well as the australian prime minister were accusing you og chucking

this. don't know how anyone can even feel like being in that country let alone playing there when everyone is so strongly against you.

 

[hang on]

5 tests is nothing.
imagine if tendulkar had never played in england before the last series (4 tests)....

you can't judge anyone on such a tiny sample.
if he had failed in 1 more series over there then maybe we coud take into acccount his lack of success in aus.

slightly specious analogy there. it is not just one series but tests over a 10 or 12 year period. so vagaries of form etc. that can afflict a player in one series can be 'cancelled' out. if it had just been one series, it would have been slightly harder to hold it against him.

secondly, it is not that i do not rate murali. i rate him ahead of warne by a whisker. but the whole let's not count his stats in australia due to a small sample size etc. are annoying. then one shouldn't look at stats at all.

 

[centurymaker]

slightly specious analogy there. it is not just one series but tests over a 10 or 12 year period. so vagaries of form etc. that can afflict a player in one series can be 'cancelled' out. if it had just been one series, it would have been slightly harder to hold it against him.

secondly, it is not that i do not rate murali. i rate him ahead of warne by a whisker. but the whole let's not count his stats in australia due to a small sample size etc. are annoying. then one shouldn't look at stats at all.

it shouldn't be given too much weight (his lack of success in aus in just 5 tests that is)

 

[hang on]

not too much weight but to dismiss it out of hand is also silly. being judged against the best of the era in their home conditions is one - according to me - important factor in judging the greatness of a player.

that is one reason why kallis, whom i incredibly highly, is not in the same league as tendulkar or lara, in my book.

 

[Satguru]

I always find it a bit ridiculous when someone compares a bowler and a batsman and says bowlers are more valuable in test cricket, therefore player A> player B because A is a bowler. Its not B's fault that he is a specialist bat, how unfair. Imo, yes, an ATG bowler is probably more "valuable" than an ATG batsman in a test side, but they still should not be compared in terms of "greatness". In the end A is a great bowler, B a great batsman. Its only if B is an ATG bowler and can bat a bit can he be considered to arguably be the better cricketer.
Allrounders > bowlers= batsmen. that is all

Still,coming to tendulkar vs murali, before 2007, if someone had asked me this question i would have said murali. Sachin's second wind though has been sensationally, unexpectedly beautiful. I really cant separate the two now, but if i had to (and i really dont want to) sachin's underrated part-time bowling before the tennis elbow puts him half a hair ahead. He's won matches with the ball on the odd occasion for India. Kolkata 2001 could have been a slightly anti-climactic draw if it wasnt for his spell. I mean, getting Warnie with a googly he himself would have been proud of has to count for something right?

Imran obviously comfortably ahead of both of them though

 

[Sanz]

In my (humble) opinion when comparing Tendulkar to Murali, the fact that Tendulkar performed extremely well against the best and Murali didn't completely overwrites the fact that Murali, as a bowler, is generally more valuable than Tendulkar, a batsman.

Murali did fairly well against Australia at home. Played only 5 tests in Australia over a period of 12 years, are we going to judge his value based on 7 innings of bowling out of 230 ?

Even if we consider his performance against Australia in Australia, your statement would have merit only on the occasions when you have to pick one of Tendulkar/Murali against Australia in Australia.

 

[smash84]

Imran obviously comfortably ahead of both of them though

 

[r3alist]

tendulkar doesnt deserve to be on the shortlist, nor does imran khan.


there are two candidates, murali and wasim.

murali stands out for his incredible figures and records, very hard for someone to touch that.

wasim stands out for his sheer genius and uniqueness, such a comeplete all round adaptable bowler.

imo, we may well see another great all rounder from asia, and i am certain we will see plenty of great batsmen from asia - but the chances of another murali or wasim anytime soon? - very very slim - thats why they are best asia has produced, two utterly unique players who are really ony likely to come from asia.

 

[hang on]

akram is not in the top 3 players produced in asia. at best, a top 3 asian bowler.

 

[r3alist]

akram is not in the top 3 players produced in asia. at best, a top 3 asian bowler.

thats not even a good attempt at a windup

 

[hang on]

it wasn't meant to be one. while yours certainly was.

murali, khan and waqar have claim to be better bowlers than akram. better stats. better ratings. better rankings.