Murali v Warne

[Sureshot]

Only if Murali boycotts the next tour of Australia. The stats will never even themselves out anyway.

Just watch, he'll get flogged in the Hobart test just like he did in the Gabba test last week but he'll go home to Sri Lanka and rattle the supposed England batting lineup that can't play spin to save their own lives and his average will drop back down 20 thanks to those spinning paradises.

Just to prove the difference in difficulty.

You've already stated that Sri Lanka's pitches are 'made for' Murali, and most opposing batsman struggle in Sri Lanka. We play spin pretty well imo, better than we used to.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Yeah, it doesn't help when people keep asking the same questions that have already been answered.

Who knows, England would probably be strong favourites against Sri Lanka if the Test Match was played in Australia.

 

[Sureshot]

They do seem to lack firepower in these tests, mind you Australia is one of the hardest places to bowl (apart from the Oval of course).

 

[usy]

I'd only vote of there was a bowler called "muri"..

 

[sohum]

Has had allot less chances then Murali has had to play on.

So.... Murali hasn't exactly been bursting with opportunities to get used to the Aussie circuit. I mean Warne played most of his domestic cricket in Australia so obviously he knew how to bowl there. If you're going to claim that Warnie would have done better in Lanka if he'd played there more, I'm going to claim the same thing about Murali. Especially since he has a better average than Warne in many statistical calculations in different parts of the world and different opponents.

 

[irottev]

Warne has played India in Australia as well as in India, as opposed to Murili who played India in the 2 countries renowned for having spinning pitches. So what if Murili bowled better against India though? That doesn't automatically make him better.

Murili is sure having an impact on the Aussies at the moment. A nice 103.33 average and it isn't getting better in this innings either.

 

[isaac_cricket]

warne is a better bowler coz he doesn't chuck

 

[aussie_ben91]

So.... Murali hasn't exactly been bursting with opportunities to get used to the Aussie circuit. I mean Warne played most of his domestic cricket in Australia so obviously he knew how to bowl there. If you're going to claim that Warnie would have done better in Lanka if he'd played there more, I'm going to claim the same thing about Murali. Especially since he has a better average than Warne in many statistical calculations in different parts of the world and different opponents.

Yeah Warne learned how to sheild himself on Australia surfaces and get the best of what any spinner could playing in Australia while Murali got the chance to feast on weak batting lineups in the subcontient and whenever he got the chance to bowl to a quality lineup he had the luxury on bowling on turning paradises. That's why he has better statistics.

 

[SciD]

For Aussie and Englishmen --- Warnie you are God man.

For Subcontinent --- Murli you are genius.

Also Warnie is gr8 because he party hard, take drugs to reduce his fat, cheats on wife, make fun of his parents for money....
Go on say praises abt him

 

[cameron thomas]

warne prob bowld the best ever bowl murli just chucks

 

[SciD]

In fact Uppal Chandana of Sri Lanka bowled bowl of centuries in game against Zimbawe which will put Warnie to shame.
It was media that hyped warnies bowl. Indias junir cricketer would have alos slapped that bowl for six.

 

[sohum]

Yeah Warne learned how to sheild himself on Australia surfaces and get the best of what any spinner could playing in Australia while Murali got the chance to feast on weak batting lineups in the subcontient and whenever he got the chance to bowl to a quality lineup he had the luxury on bowling on turning paradises. That's why he has better statistics.

If you think Murali only has better statistics because he played on subcontinental wickets, then you are just ballistic. If you're not going to give him any credit at all, then you are also similarly ballistic. Warne learned how to shield himself on Australian surfaces which is exactly why he has better stats than Murali in Australia.

And Murali didn't get to feast on just weak batting line-ups. Murali has been tremendously successful against almost all batting line-ups. Even against subcontinental ones who are supposed to be used to some of those tracks. If you really think that all of Murali's wickets came from helpful pitches rather than some of his skill, then you are, unfortunately, quite an idiot.

 

[Adarsh]

Also, the thing is, Warne didn't bowl to the Aussies. He did not play against the world champions. I know that's due to no fault of his own, but if he had to bowl against the likes of Hayden, Ponting and Gilchrist maybe his stats would've worsened.

 

[ivanvdm15]

yeah thats also true but that show's you he was good enough to get into the Aussie side ( well murli if he was an aussie probaly would also have made it into the side )

 

[SciD]

yeah thats also true but that show's you he was good enough to get into the Aussie side ( well murli if he was an aussie probaly would also have made it into the side )

He would not have been picked because of his action only.