• 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.

Murali's Record

silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Jono said:
Warne ****s on Donald, I'm sorry because I'm a Donald fan, but Warne was a much much better bowler. Murali too.

The rest are close calls, but I'd take Warne over Wasim. That whole 'twenty year' claim isn't as extravagant as you claim either since you've chosen an era with many of the great fast bowlers in history.
Click to expand...
Well, if there was no twenty year limit, I'd make the list as:

Marshall, McGrath, Imran, Wasim, Ambrose, Hadlee, Donald, Lillee, Garner, Holding, Roberts, Trueman, Lindwall, Miller, Spofforth, Tyson, Lohmann, Barnes.


That's eighteen, and I bet I am missing another ten, and there are a bunch of iffy guys who could be around the same level, such as Statham. This is just reciting names off the top of my head. And its not stats based either, since several of them have worse stats.

Obviously, a lot of this is due to my strong bias against spin - don't like watching it at all. But even without the bias, there would be a minimum of 10 guys better than the best spinner.
 
Last edited:
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Firstly, if you don't like watching spin, its a blight on the credibility of your argument immediately anyway.

Secondly, I'd love you to give me justification on how Garner, Tyson and Lohmann are better than Warne and Murali.

Its obvious you didn't watch them. And you said you haven't gone by stats. So what the hell are you basing this all on? Really where do your ratings and opinions on cricketers come from, because I don't think I've ever seen anything more arbitrary.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Sanz said:
I think you are contradicting yourself, In one post you consider it debatable in another you declare them (fasties) as better.
Click to expand...
They are better, but I know some people like them and thus its debatable. Its not clear cut as Jono implied. There certainly are 5-7 better bowlers.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Jono said:
Firstly, if you don't like watching spin, its a blight on the credibility of your argument immediately anyway.
Click to expand...
Well, obviously. I am not the fountain of objectivity when it comes to spinners. I thought that was obvious. :laugh:

Jono said:
So what the hell are you basing this all on? Really where do your ratings and opinions on cricketers come from, because I don't think I've ever seen anything more arbitrary.
Click to expand...
Lately, my fad of the month is getting my hands of videos from the 70s and 80s, and I have about 1500hrs of footage on old VHS. So I've been working my way through that. I didn't 'rate' anyone - I just gave a list of bowlers who were better, because (IMO) all things being equal, a fast bowler is more valuable to a team than a spinner.
 
E

Engle

State Vice-Captain
silentstriker said:
Well, if there was no twenty year limit, I'd make the list as:

Marshall, McGrath, Imran, Wasim, Ambrose, Hadlee, Donald, Lillee, Garner, Holding, Roberts, Trueman, Lindwall, Miller, Spofforth, Tyson, Lohmann, Barnes.
Click to expand...
FWIW, Warne/Murali have 60+ wkts more than Miller+Spofforth+Tyson+Lohmann+Barnes combined.
 
Sanz

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
silentstriker said:
a fast bowler is more valuable to a team than a spinner.
Click to expand...
Different from what you have been arguing and its not true anyway. Its like saying that an opener is more valuable than a middle order bat and hence better.

There are just too many factors to decide what is more valuable. For Example Murali is much more valuable to SL than say a Vaas or Pushpakumar and Kumble is much more valuable to Indian team than say Srinath or KapilDev.
 
Sanz

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
silentstriker said:
They are better, but I know some people like them and thus its debatable. Its not clear cut as Jono implied. There certainly are 5-7 better bowlers.
Click to expand...
In other words, it is not a fact but in your opinion they are better and that is fine with me.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Sanz said:
In other words, it is not a fact but in your opinion they are better and that is fine with me.
Click to expand...
Well of course. I don't see how any comparison of player can ever be anything other than that, unless you are talking about Bradman-Chris Martin type of thing.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Engle said:
FWIW, Warne/Murali have 60+ wkts more than Miller+Spofforth+Tyson+Lohmann+Barnes combined.
Click to expand...
Tendulkar + Lara have more Test runs than runs Bradman + Hobs + Grace + Trumper + Pollock + Barry Richards combined. Who is better?
 
Last edited:
E

Engle

State Vice-Captain
silentstriker said:
Tendulkar + Lara have more Test runs than runs Bradman + Hobs + Grace + Trumper + Pollock + Barry Richards combined. Who is better?
Click to expand...
Well (shrug), I'm not the one who suggested that Grace, Trumper, Pollock or B.Richards were better than Tendulkar or Lara the way you suggested that the last 5 on your list were better than Warne or Murli :blink ......besides it's a FWIW, an equation u changed somehow :)
 
Sanz

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Engle said:
Well (shrug), I'm not the one who suggested that Grace, Trumper, Pollock or B.Richards were better than Tendulkar or Lara the way you suggested that the last 5 on your list were better than Warne or Murli :blink ......besides it's a FWIW, an equation u changed somehow :)
Click to expand...
:laugh: :laugh:
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
archie mac said:
Phwifft8-) (subtle enought for you?)
Click to expand...
Given it is a Murali thread and the thread starter said it was not about discussing whether Murali chucks or not, it was poor on your behalf really. Every time some one tries to discuss some thing on Murali, bringing the aspect of chucking is pretty irritating and not some thing we need to go over in every Murali related thread which comes up.
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
Pratyush said:
Given it is a Murali thread and the thread starter said it was not about discussing whether Murali chucks or not, it was poor on your behalf really. Every time some one tries to discuss some thing on Murali, bringing the aspect of chucking is pretty irritating and not some thing we need to go over in every Murali related thread which comes up.
Click to expand...
That is like saying "don't mention Bodyline when discussing the captaincy of Jardine"

They go hand in hand in both cases and always will:)
 
archie mac

archie mac

International Coach
Pratyush said:
I don't look at it this way but I get where you are coming from now. Fair enough... :)
Click to expand...
Anyway I think it much more of an advantage to throw when bowling fast.

Just on a side note, I have tried to bowl the 'doosra' and I just can't do it without throwing the ball:wacko: Has anyone else had success?
 
Lillian Thomson

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
archie mac said:
Anyway I think it much more of an advantage to throw when bowling fast.

Just on a side note, I have tried to bowl the 'doosra' and I just can't do it without throwing the ball:wacko: Has anyone else had success?
Click to expand...
If you broke you arm and then deliberately set it so that it can't straighten then you will be able to - Murali's Law Section 4 subsection B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top