I suppose that's not totally out of the question. He was never a very good athlete I guess.I bet it had something to do with his diet.
Well he did have a good throwing arm tbfI suppose that's not totally out of the question. He was never a very good athlete I guess.
Haha, they are definitely comparable bowlers, I quite agree.australians always bat like beasts at home i don't care if you're paul collingwood or murali, you ain't getting us out cheaply at home
This is a pretty good answer, it is allied to Howe's First Law which states that a player's average in one country is not representative of how he would typically fare under particular conditions.More seriously, it's actually an interesting question. I know most people argue that spinners are really bad in Australia, but that only really applies to finger-spinners - Kumble and Mushtaq Ahmed for example had success in Australia, and Murali was a wrist-spinner.
One thing I will point though is that he did not play a Test in Australia between 1998 and 2006, his most dominant period. 2007 onwards he was still a threat at home but struggled quite a lot away from it. And of course in 1995/96 he hadn't really arrived yet.
You can't prove that.Probably because he didn't take drugs tbh.
lesson 101 of law: innocent till proven guiltyYou can't prove that.