Shane Warne vs Muttiah Muralidharan.Who is better?

[puddleduck]

Drugs, cricket and women. Warney lived the life alright

But that path lead to a discarded and well used Liz Hurley. Must be like parking a kayak in the Thames.

 

[dancingmongoose]

Heres the difference, and it has nothing to do with stats:
try to spin the ball with the angle, then try to spin the ball against the angle. Which one will be harder? The laws of physics says against. So it is harder for Warne to spin the ball than Murali, yet spins it just as much. Then there is the small statistic that Warne was of greater value to a team because he can bat better. And finally, the ICC had to change their rules so that Murali could legally bowl. Im not calling him a chucker, but a bent arm definitely allows you to spin the ball more (trust me, I have tried it and it works. Just dont try it in a game ).
If you want stats, Australia had better fast bowlers than SL. So Warne had less work to do, so less opportunity to take lots of wickets. And...
Warne - Test career of 15 years, ODI career of 12 years
Murali - Test career of 18 years, ODI career of 18 years.
Yet again, Warne has less opportunity to take wickets.

I personally would say that Jim Laker was a better offie than Murali. And 2Black2Good, the man who denied Warne his test 100 with a no-ball doesnt deserve to be better

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

actually in that 18 year period murali just walked about bowling at things in his day to day life, his kids, friends in the garden, and of course at practice. 800 test wickets yes, but I've heard his day to day wicket tally is somewhere in the tens of thousands.

 

[puddleduck]

@ Dancingmongoose. The reason they set a specific percentage for arm straightening is that when they basically put Murali through the same tests as other people, it turned out that the stringent existing number pretty much only allowed one person in international cricket to bowl. I think it was a Windies part timer or something.

Essentially, Murali turned out to be far more legitimate than nearly every other bowler, and it really is just a physical anomaly.

 

[aayush93]

Heres the difference, and it has nothing to do with stats:
try to spin the ball with the angle, then try to spin the ball against the angle. Which one will be harder? The laws of physics says against. So it is harder for Warne to spin the ball than Murali, yet spins it just as much. Then there is the small statistic that Warne was of greater value to a team because he can bat better. And finally, the ICC had to change their rules so that Murali could legally bowl. Im not calling him a chucker, but a bent arm definitely allows you to spin the ball more (trust me, I have tried it and it works. Just dont try it in a game ).
If you want stats, Australia had better fast bowlers than SL. So Warne had less work to do, so less opportunity to take lots of wickets. And...
Warne - Test career of 15 years, ODI career of 12 years
Murali - Test career of 18 years, ODI career of 18 years.
Yet again, Warne has less opportunity to take wickets.

I personally would say that Jim Laker was a better offie than Murali. And 2Black2Good, the man who denied Warne his test 100 with a no-ball doesnt deserve to be better

if you talk Opportunities, then let me tell you 1 theory according to cricket.

For right hand batsman its difficult to face Leg spin as it turns away and similarly for left hand batsman facing off-spin is difficult as it turns away.
(you will know why it is difficult if you would have played some cricket in your life.) and in almost every team their are 70% or more right hand batsman.

So Murali had only 30-20% batsman who will have difficulty against his bowling and for other 70% he had to work even harder. It was in 2001 when he learned doosra and that made him extreme lethal, but before that any right hander could come down the track and smash him on leg side or straight as batsman knew if he misses the ball it will hit pad only and he won't be given out as he is 4-6 feet away from stump.

So to have 800 Test Wickets is very big achievement for off-spinner and similarly for warne for having 700+ test wickets even after playing half of his cricket in Australia. In 2002 SL and Aus played a test series in SL and both the guys took equal number of wickets.
So like in Physics as we do assumption, similarly we can assume both were Equal in terms of Talent, Performance.

 

[cricket_icon]

Dancingmongoose dont be silly, Laker is miles behind Murali.

 

[dancingmongoose]

Dancingmongoose dont be silly, Laker is miles behind Murali.

Whos taken a 10fa? not Murali

 

[aayush93]

Whos taken a 10fa? not Murali

so on basis of 10fer in a innings,

Kumble - Best Leg Spinner
Laker - Best Off-spinner

thats what you want to say ?

 

[dancingmongoose]

If thats what you want smart arse.

And regarding 'difficulty' why then, me being a right hander, is it easier for me to carn leg spin all over the park but have a tendency to be dismissed by offies?

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

because you're not a professional cricketer?

 

[aayush93]

regarding 'difficulty' why then, me being a right hander, is it easier for me to carn leg spin all over the park but have a tendency to be dismissed by offies?

have you ever think why captains bring off-spinner as soon as Left hand batsman comes.

Ex: Hafeez is just a ordinary off-spin bowler against any Right hand batsman, but he suddenly becomes very lethal against Left hander.

For a right hand batsman hitting balls on leg side is easier than on off side. (i hope you agree with me on this ) So According to physics for a right hand batsman it will be easier to hit with the spin (offies) rather than against the spin (Leggies)

You may play leg spin very well (like sachin) but majority of right hander in the world find playing off-spin far much easier.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Im not calling him a chucker, but a bent arm definitely allows you to spin the ball more (trust me, I have tried it and it works. Just dont try it in a game ).

Massive problem with this. I have tried it. It isn't easier. I don't think you understand how the chucking law works. If your arm starts bent, it has to stay bent, you can't straighten it. That's what Murali/Mushtaq/Ajmal/Hafeez all do. It isn't easier. It might be if that's the way you naturally bowl, but not if you force it.

And FTR, under the whole old laws the only legal bowler was Chanderpaul IIRC.

 

[Owzat]

I steered clear of chucking as we were discussing their statistics/performances etc not their means of getting there.

However, it is quite right to say that we don't know how much advantage Murali gained from the dispensations he was given. Was it Hair who was the only/most noted umpire to call him for it, but it was always controversial and without Murali I doubt they would have changed the laws over throwing.

For me Malinga must gain an (unfair) advantage the way he bowls. Maybe we all have different ideas on what is and isn't chucking, and who is or isn't guilty, but when an arm isn't coming down straight, or is not exactly standard over-arm, you do have to wonder how much of an advantage they gain in terms of spin for a spinner, angle to the batsman for Malinga etc

Murali will always have that controversy surrounding him, but even if someone could prove conclusively he chucked or gained advantage, you can't in any way factor it in to a comparison so might as well leave it out. We can't knock off say 200 wickets from Murali on the basis he chucked say every fourth ball.

 

[MUFC1987]

Right, lets clear this up once and for all. The old degree allowed was 10 (5 for slow bowlers? Not sure), which was then changed to 15. This article talks about it. A quote from it:

What revelation wrought this miracle? What new scientific insight goosed the ICC into preparing to abandon its recent chucking guidelines? The clincher, it turns out, was the news that a survey of the bowlers in the ICC Champions Trophy revealed that 99 per cent of all bowlers chucked. This isn't so different from earlier declarations that 90 per cent of all bowlers chuck, so the turnabout must have to do with the names named rather than the general conclusion. It turns out that under the current definition of a legitimate delivery, such pillars of the bowling establishment as Glenn McGrath, Shaun Pollock, and Jason Gillespie chuck. They straighten their arms in excess of the current 10-degree allowance for fast bowlers.

That's from December 2004, referring to the ICC Trophy of that year.

Now, unless someone wants to discuss how McGrath should be ignored from history for 'chucking' I suggest they shut their mouths about Murali 'chucking'.

----------

Oh and just to add:

Just to illustrate the need for discussion: why 15 degrees? Geoffrey Boycott thinks the limit's been raised and extended to slow bowlers to include Murali. This is so wrong it's perverse. Murali doesn't need 15 degrees: after remedial work, his arm only straightened in the region of 10 degrees while bowling the doosra. A cynical Sri Lankan could more plausibly argue that the ICC stretched the rules to fit the fast men in and then tossed a bone to the others by giving them equal latitude.

Turns out Murali has been a lot closer to legal than a lot of fast bowlers down the years. I don't see their careers being questioned though.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

For me Malinga must gain an (unfair) advantage the way he bowls. Maybe we all have different ideas on what is and isn't chucking, and who is or isn't guilty, but when an arm isn't coming down straight, or is not exactly standard over-arm, you do have to wonder how much of an advantage they gain in terms of spin for a spinner, angle to the batsman for Malinga etc

what law is malinga breaking, his advantage is he's good?

always liked malinga for this. it helped seperate out the people that actually knew what the law was and those that thought a black guy doing something different probably means he's cheating.