Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yorkshire Soul

It's just a shame that Muri is going to seen, in the records, as a better bowler than Warne, he has achived a similar record in 22 fewer tests.

And it's a shame that either of them may rank better than Courtney Walsh.


The list of top wicket-takers is one that is always going to "lie" in a way because of the debates of the relative strengths of the eras each bowler played in.

That is why people have to look beyond that list and examine the stats which, in relation to Warne and Murali, continue to show a distinct disparity between their averages, ability to take wickets at home or away, and the number of wickets taken against weaker opponents like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

I stated in a previous post that Warne simply had it over Murali on all of the above counts:

*Warne has taken more wickets away from home than in Australia (about 60-65% of Murali's are on his home country's pitches).

*Warne's average is as good, if not better, away from Australia than at home. (Murali's is about 7 runs better at home)

*Warne's average overall is better than Murali's.

*Warne has taken only 6 wickets (and played only one test) against easybeat Zimbabwe and Bangladesh teams, Murali has taken 70 or more wickets against them. Also, against the best team in the world (Australia), his average continues to balloon.

*And finally, Warne's batting average is better than Murali's.

These stats don't lie.

And I have to say, from my observations of the Aust/Sri Lanka series, while both bowlers have taken 20 wickets, Warne has been far more economical and has dismissed consistently a better quality of batsman (top or middle order, as well as tail-enders) than Murali (who has taken many more of his wickets late in Australia's innings).

Remember also that while Murali has played way fewer tests than Warne and Courtney Walsh, the number of overs he has bowled in his career is not too far removed from those two - he may have played fewer tests, but he has bowled more overs per test than Warne or Walsh to get those wickets.

And, as a final point, he chucks, simply put.


Now. Mike. Mate. You're obviously taking the piss -- like a good Aussie -- but just for the record....

1) If you were allowed to throw like the chucker you'd dominate for Ilkley Academical too. You're what, 35, you'd likely be up to 1000 wickets by now and out of the West Yorkshire Premier League and they'd be looking to slot you in for Ashley Giles. The fact Murali's taken ONLY 22 tests less means that he's a shithouse chucker -- still a very obvious one -- but not as good as he should be given his "licence to throw". He should have taken more wickets in less Tests.

As I've said before -- congratulating Murali for wicket-taking excellence is like congratulating Ronny Biggs for becoming a millionaire.

2) And you're definitely taking the piss about Walsh being a better bowler than Warne. That's Tommy Cooperesque. From today's paper, Spanky Roebuck....

"Of course, the number of wickets taken is not the only measure of a bowler. No one pretends that Courtney Walsh is the greatest leather-flinger the game has known, least of all the amiable Jamaican whose mother cooked for her local cricket club in Kingston."


I just wrote all that before I read Chris's excellent listing. That's the case writ large. What he said.

Brett  Pee

A worrying trend is emerging. During the recent under-19 world cup, a spinner emerged who seems to have a very similar action to Murali, all rotating wrists and an obvious 'thrown' Doosra. He is Pakistani and i wonder if his career will be allowed to progress......i hope these imitators are quickly nipped in the bud, but i fear nothing will be done. A well known spinner recently admitted that the 'Doosra' cannot be landed by bowling it with a straight arm, it has, to some extent be delivered by throwing. A strong body MUST emerge to clear cricket of these outrageous law breakers.


Fortunately the ICC seem to be clamping down on the juniors. Pity about the serial offenders. They've got free pass. One in particular.


Just thought in the interests of accuracy (and to be a decent, ethical journo ... hmmm) I'd correct an error I made in my previous post to this thread.

Murali in fact does have a better bowling average than Warne, by about 1.5-2 runs per wicket (23.something to just over 25).

However, take out the 70 cheap wickets Murali's got against Zimbabwe and B'desh and they'd be about equal.


Don't worry Chris. Although I'd noticed your mistake, I refrain from corrections. As long as what's written backs me up.

The comments to this entry are closed.