*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[Pratters]

Winning the toss seems to be of vital importance for Murali.

Also Murali is some how not that good in Zimbabwe with an average of 27

 

[parttimer]

I don't think Warne can fairly described as crap against India. The super test showed that their batsman are no less fallible against him than the rest. He dismissed Dravid with a beaut classic leg break and felled Sehway to.

His lack of success on tours to India have IMO been in no small part explained by his shoulder and finger injuries. On the last tour (yer the excuses are comin thick and fast but are IMO valid) by poor form. In regards to the latter, he suffered from a technical fault ie. bowling around himself that caused him to lose drift and loop that has made him so effective in the past. The relative lack of success at home v NZ and then Pakistan, where he was outbowled by Danish Kaneria confirmed for me it was a technical thing.

His then subsequent return to form in Eng followed a crucial coaching session with Troy Cooley on the eve of the first test when Cooley helped him overcome the problem. As we know, he hasn't hasn't looked back since. As i type this he bowls Edwards with a beaut WRONGIN. Great to see him back to his best here..

Correction: It was Terry Jenner he consulted in England.
As i was saying I don't doubt Warnes ability to have success in India, if he's free of injuries and in good form.

 

[Top_Cat]

At present, Warne. Both at their peak, injury-free, etc., far too close to call. Too different to compare in my eyes.

One thing I agree with Jack is that Murali has been a lesser bowler since he started making the doosra almost his stock ball. Conversely, Warne has been a far better/smarter bowler since he has been less able to land the flipper. Because of that, he's had to bowl with more subtle variation, etc. because if there was one area Warne was lacking early in his career, it was variation. He basically had the leggie, flipper and toppie and concentrated in bowling them very, very well. Now he has several variations on the ball which does absolutely nothing. And it gets him wickets! ****


***** Yes I KNOW they don't do absolutely nothing but vary in flight/drift, etc. If you thought I didn't based on what I posted, get to a docter and get a facetiousness chip installed.

 

[Sanz]

I don't think Warne can fairly described as crap against India. The super test showed that their batsman are no less fallible against him than the rest. He dismissed Dravid with a beaut classic leg break and felled Sehway to.

His lack of success on tours to India have IMO been in no small part explained by his shoulder and finger injuries. On the last tour (yer the excuses are comin thick and fast but are IMO valid) by poor form. In regards to the latter, he suffered from a technical fault ie. bowling around himself that caused him to lose drift and loop that has made him so effective in the past. The relative lack of success at home v NZ and then Pakistan, where he was outbowled by Danish Kaneria confirmed for me it was a technical thing.

His then subsequent return to form in Eng followed a crucial coaching session with Troy Cooley on the eve of the first test when Cooley helped him overcome the problem. As we know, he hasn't hasn't looked back since. As i type this he bowls Edwards with a beaut WRONGIN. Great to see him back to his best here..

Correction: It was Terry Jenner he consulted in England.
As i was saying I don't doubt Warnes ability to have success in India, if he's free of injuries and in good form.

Firstly, Dravid has always had trouble against Warne with the possible exception of his innings @ Eden where he batted with Laxman and scored 180 runs.

Is it possible that Warne hits the poor form when he plays against India and not other way round. After all it cant be just a co-incidence that Warne has played India a quite a few times and every time he was either injured or out-of-form.

Anyways, I am in no way suggesting that Warnie is any less of a great bowler because of his poor performance against India, the fact is that he has done pretty well against Dravid the best Indian batsmen in last 5 years and has had his moments against Sachin.

 

[parttimer]

Firstly, Dravid has always had trouble against Warne with the possible exception of his innings @ Eden where he batted with Laxman and scored 180 runs.

Is it possible that Warne hits the poor form when he plays against India and not other way round. After all it cant be just a co-incidence that Warne has played India a quite a few times and every time he was either injured or out-of-form.

Anyways, I am in no way suggesting that Warnie is any less of a great bowler because of his poor performance against India, the fact is that he has done pretty well against Dravid the best Indian batsmen in last 5 years and has had his moments against Sachin.

My theory is that it IS a coincidence.

 

[honestbharani]

My theory is that it IS a coincidence.

Not for 3 tours, no... I think he was fit and well in 2001. In 98, maybe he had a few problems but not in 2001. And he wasn't great shakes in 2004 either. The main threat was McGrath, Gillespie and Kasper all the way. The wickets Warnie did get, a good number of them were because of the pressure from the other end.

 

[parttimer]

No he had a finger injury in 2001. It was widely known, and Buchanon mentioned something about it during the tour.

 

[honestbharani]

He mentioned something about Warney being fat. I am not sure when he mentioned any injuries. Steve Waugh certainly didn't, and neither did Shane Warne while the tour was on. Funnily enough, the only series in India when Warney actually missed a test was in 2004, not in 98 or 2001.

 

[parttimer]

Not for 3 tours, no... I think he was fit and well in 2001. In 98, maybe he had a few problems but not in 2001. And he wasn't great shakes in 2004 either. The main threat was McGrath, Gillespie and Kasper all the way. The wickets Warnie did get, a good number of them were because of the pressure from the other end.

Re 2004, I explained his poor performance by a technical problem - not that that is not his fault or anything, but what i'm trying to say is that if he was FIT and in FORM, as he was during the Ashes, he would have similar success in india.

Proof of this (that his perf in 2004 was due to a lack of form) is the way he bowled like crap in the following Australian summer v NZ and PAK, and also the county season. County batters expected Warne to get hit during the Ashes and told Eng batsmen so. I've no doubt they would have been right, but as Warne said the session with Jenner saved him.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't think Warney in any kind of form or fitness would get 40 wickets in 5 tests against India. We are way too good against spin and way too poor against McGrath for that to happen.

 

[parttimer]

He mentioned something about Warney being fat. I am not sure when he mentioned any injuries. Steve Waugh certainly didn't, and neither did Shane Warne while the tour was on. Funnily enough, the only series in India when Warney actually missed a test was in 2004, not in 98 or 2001.

Heres an interview with Warne previewing the 2004 tour, that also touches on past tours..

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/14/1089694425046.html?from=storylhs

 

[honestbharani]

Heres an interview with Warne previewing the 2004 tour, that also touches on past tours..

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/14/1089694425046.html?from=storylhs

yeah, but he never mentioned it when the tour was on, which is what I said.

 

[parttimer]

yeah, but he never mentioned it when the tour was on, which is what I said.

Immaterial..

 

[honestbharani]

I don't know, he may have been injured. It just sounds strange that neither Waugh, or Buchanan or Warney himself, brought it up back then. I remember talking to him at the end of 3rd days' play at Chennai and he said "I bowled my best in a fair while, but Sachin was just too good today." So which statement of Warne should I think is true?

 

[parttimer]

I don't know, he may have been injured. It just sounds strange that neither Waugh, or Buchanan or Warney himself, brought it up back then. I remember talking to him at the end of 3rd days' play at Chennai and he said "I bowled my best in a fair while, but Sachin was just too good today." So which statement of Warne should I think is true?

Maybe someone else knows, i thort it was quite well known..

 

[honestbharani]

Maybe someone else knows, i thort it was quite well known..

maybe he was speaking relatively, saying that this was the best he had bowled in India upto that point. Anyways, I still don't think even at his peak, he will be all that devastating against India.

 

[parttimer]

maybe he was speaking relatively, saying that this was the best he had bowled in India upto that point. Anyways, I still don't think even at his peak, he will be all that devastating against India.

Maybe we'll get another chance to find out

 

[honestbharani]

Maybe we'll get another chance to find out

Hopefully. I would like to see him in India without McGrath too. Not many spinners have had that luxury of an awesome fast bowler to tie up things from the other end.

 

[parttimer]

Hopefully. I would like to see him in India without McGrath too. Not many spinners have had that luxury of an awesome fast bowler to tie up things from the other end.

It didn't hurt him at Edgebaston or Trent Bridge where he took 10 and 8 wickets respectively at 22.

 

[honestbharani]

yeah, but our boys won't be as flat footed as the Englishmen. And I don't think the Indians particularly care about the brand name of "Warney", at least not since he said he had nightmares of Tendulkar.