Murali vs. Warne

[Predator_05]

Warne is a drug cheat!

Warne cheated at one stage of his career and was rightfully banned for it. He came back clean and took sh*tloads of wickets, proving that he didn't need drugs to spin the ball a mile. That spear-chucking spastic Chuttiah Chutiahlitharan has been cheating THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER, but has never been reprimanded for it. The ICC just BENT their rules (pun intended !) to accomodate him... Chuttiah = Cheat Warne = Legend

[MundaPakistani]

Warne cheated at one stage of his career and was rightfully banned for it. He came back clean and took sh*tloads of wickets, proving that he didn't need drugs to spin the ball a mile. That spear-chucking spastic Chuttiah Chutiahlitharan has been cheating THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER, but has never been reprimanded for it. The ICC just BENT their rules (pun intended !) to accomodate him... Chuttiah = Cheat Warne = Legend

why miss the "i" in "sh*tload" when you are going to use the word "Chuttiah" in the very next sentence?

[The Outsider]

Anyone who thinks Murali chucks probably also believes that the earth is flat and the sun goes around the earth because that's how it appears to their naked eyes. Also, stars are just points in the sky because that's how my naked eye perceives them. Fack telescopes and all that cr@ppola.

[Predator_05]

Also' date=' stars are just points in the sky because that's how my naked eye perceives them. Fack telescopes and all that cr@ppola.

You mean they AREN'T ?!?!?!?!!!!! :hysterical:

[SightForTheGods]

I don't know what to say about the correctness of Murali's bowling action but his doosras are very scary. His bowling action is so that batsmen cannot make out when he will bowl a doosara. I feel the only way to play him well is not to defend on the back-foot but rather attack him on the front-foot....But this means risk.

[SightForTheGods]

I posted this before but for all the folks who have not seen this check it out...he actually becomes Shane Warne here...

[CC1981]

Yep...thats one reason why Murali is so much superior to Warne- Murali can bowl leg-breaks with a genuine leg break action...while Warney doesnt know the first thing about bowling off-spin. Warney is a great bowler, no doubt and in any other era, he'd be the clear #1. But his misfortune is to be playing in the same era as Murali. Sort of the same situation with Hadlee-Imran-Botham-Kapil. Any one of them woul've been the best allrounder today or in the 90s....but they had the misfortune to all play in the same era.

[Ram]

Yep...thats one reason why Murali is so much superior to Warne- Murali can bowl leg-breaks with a genuine leg break action...while Warney doesnt know the first thing about bowling off-spin. Warney is a great bowler, no doubt and in any other era, he'd be the clear #1. But his misfortune is to be playing in the same era as Murali. Sort of the same situation with Hadlee-Imran-Botham-Kapil. Any one of them woul've been the best allrounder today or in the 90s....but they had the misfortune to all play in the same era.

I have no idea what you mean in that post. Why would Warne have to bowl off-spin at all ? its like saying , Glenn Mcgrath doesnt know a thing about bowling left arm over the wicket. And Playing along with Muralitharan has help to add the Warne's greatness as much as anything else. Their rivalry has lifted the sport, added spark to it. And to many eyes , Shane Warne is the undisputed number of all time , let alone this era.

[Donny]

Oh dear. The interminable comparison game. To dsr's rather snide and puerile remark: "Where are you Donny? Whats the matter dont like the questions being posed!" I was asleep. Where do I start ?? Comparing these two is really nonsensical as the only similarity is they both spin the ball. I don't really want to go into the legitimacy of Murali's action as it's been done to death. However, it must be noted until the ICC changed the flex allowance from 5 to 15 degrees, some of his deliveries - certainly the doosra (found in tests to be 14 degrees) - were clearly illegal. I do not blindly defend Aussie players because I am an Aussie. I am first and foremost a cricket lover. Although I admire what they've achieved, I don't particularly like some of the Aussies - Matt Hayden and Shane Warne, to name a couple. In Warne's case, I share Richie Benaud's opinion of his incredible ability as a leg spin bowler.

I am actually not trying to claim Murali's record is so good because he played more matches against the minnows than warne. I am with you on this topic. Warne's claim that Murali plays the minnows more than him is so typical of the man.

Warne's claim ?? Fact: Murali has played 21 Tests against the Zimmers & Banglas. Fact: Warne has played 3. Fact: Zim & Bang are rated 9th. & 10th. in a 10 team comp and are way behind 8th. placed West Indies.

Warne's claim that Murali plays the minnows more than him is so typical of the man ( and his country i might add ' date=' Even the prime minister takes time off to comment on cricket). Aus has Murali paranoia.[/quote'] That's a rather crude, racist generalisation.

Even the prime minister takes time off to comment on cricket)

Why shouldn't he ? He was asked and gave his opinion. It's very well known he's a 'cricket tragic' (cricket enthusiast). From Time magazine: " .. while Howard may regret his diplomatic faux pas, though not enough to issue an apology, his comment was based on sound principles. At issue is one particular delivery known as the "doosra." It is Muralitharan's secret weapon, a slight-of-hand delivery only he can bowl. The International Cricket Council (ICC), after a series of biomechanic tests, ruled the delivery "illegal" and told Muralitharan to shelve it or face a 12-month ban from the game. Though he insists his action is legal and will be vindicated, Muralitharan has not bowled the doosra in a match since the verdict. (SL Prime Minister Mahinida) Rajapakse has threatened to take the ICC to court, claiming that it is the Sri Lankan government's duty "to protect one of our national treasures." And last week, the Sri Lankan cricket board made a formal request to the ICC to change the rules to allow for Muralitharan's confounding pitch. Neither effort is likely to succeed." That was 2004. The last bit, however, proved to be wrong as the ICC did cave in and changed the flex rule to placate SL interests. For the record: I really like Murali.

[yoda]

What percent of Murali's wickets are from the much debated doosra? Any stats out there?

[King]

Murali is miles ahead of Warnie IMO, no comparison.

[gator]

What percent of Murali's wickets are from the much debated doosra? Any stats out there?

a rather naive question.... him bowling the doosra does put the batter in 2 minds for every delivery he bowls..... it is irrelevant how many wickets the doosra actually took...

[gator]

Murali is the biggest gripe i have with cricket.... for a pure cricket romantic like me, it is so jarring to watch him with his bent arm.... and then it facking p1sses me off no end to see records of all hard-working, legal bowlers being torn to pieces by this bent-arm bekham...

[Ram]

Warne's claim ?? Fact: Murali has played 21 Tests against the Zimmers & Banglas. Fact: Warne has played 3. Fact: Zim & Bang are rated 9th. & 10th. in a 10 team comp and are way behind 8th. placed West Indies.

My bad , I shouldnt have used the word "claim". Rather i should have used the word "alluded" . And just to go on with the discussion, I can list some stats too about Warne that may seem comprimise his record. Like the number of test matches he has played against England , Who have been well documented minnows agaisnt wrist spin. As was alluded in a earlier post, If murali had played the same numer of tests as Warne did against the english , he would have taken 180 wickets more , going by the numbers. As i dont hold Warne for playing so many matched against his bunny english ( How can i ? its not his fault) , its not fair for anybody to refer to Murali playing so many matches against the minnows.

That's a rather crude, racist generalisation.

I am no racist ( atleast i think so ) , but i do have some genuine grouses with the way Murali has been treated by the English-Aussie media nexus and in general by the Australian public. Is it no surprise that most of the controversies that have happened in Murali's career either happend in Aus or involves Australians ? I just voiced my opinion about it. Now, is that racist ?

Why shouldn't he ? He was asked and gave his opinion. It's very well known he's a 'cricket tragic' (cricket enthusiast).

If and indeed John Howard did make a comment against Murali , then it is probably the first time in sporting history that head of state has said something that at best can be termed as " insensitive" . Whether what he said was right or wrong is not the question here. Just the fact he said something like that is what i meant when i said " Aus has Murali Paranoia"

[The Outsider]

I don't really want to go into the legitimacy of Murali's action as it's been done to death. However, it must be noted until the ICC changed the flex allowance from 5 to 15 degrees, some of his deliveries - certainly the doosra (found in tests to be 14 degrees) - were clearly illegal.

Completely agree and so were the actions of every tested bowler barring Sarwan.

Warne's claim ?? Fact: Murali has played 21 Tests against the Zimmers & Banglas. Fact: Warne has played 3. Fact: Zim & Bang are rated 9th. & 10th. in a 10 team comp and are way behind 8th. placed West Indies.

If Warne's claim had stopped at this simple statement which is a fact, it was fine. But he went on to allude that he would have been the leading wicket taker if this fact was not true. That is false because Murali has outperformed Warne against every opposition in all respects.

That was 2004. The last bit, however, proved to be wrong as the ICC did cave in and changed the flex rule to placate SL interests.

They did but at the bottom of it was a sound scientific reason exposing the earlier fallacy in the ICC's implementation of the rule of different flexion for different speed of bowling. It should have been universal in the first place because it is the speed of the delivery arm which causes flexion and not the speed at which the ball is delivered.

[King]

Those that talk about Murali's action read the following :

The new proposal comes after the ICC commissioned a panel to examine Muralitharan's action. Muralitharan, whose action has been under scrutiny since he was first no-balled for throwing in 1995, had his doosra reported by ICC referee Chris Broad in the Test series against Australia in March this year. But the panel, which included former Test players Angus Fraser (England), Aravinda de Silva (Sri Lanka), Michael Holding (West Indies), Tony Lewis (England), Tim May (Australia) and David Richardson (South Africa), is recommending a 15 per cent threshold for all bowlers. The advice of experts was that 15 degrees would accommodate any straightening that is a result of biomechanical forces. The experts have demonstrated that this is consistent with the point at which straightening is noticeable to the naked eye. The proposal is likely to get verification at a meeting of the chief executives of all the Test-playing nations in Melbourne in February. With the use of modern technology, the panel also found that legendary bowlers such as Dennis Lillee, Fred Trueman, Richard Hadlee, Curtly Ambrose, Imran Khan, Ian Botham and Allan Donald, although they looked perfect to the naked eye, also bent their arms too much when bowling, meaning they, too, were throwing. "While we watched the likes of [Glenn] McGrath, [shaun] Pollock, [steve] Harmison and Donald, we quickly realised that the levels [of tolerance] were far too low," Fraser said. "All those bowlers possessed actions any youngster would be wise to copy, yet their bowling arms were nowhere near as straight as we anticipated. "Many will feel that, by allowing this, the ICC are legalising throwing. They are not. All the information and opinion collected, along with the fact that is almost impossible to see the arm straighten with the naked eye until it reaches this angle, points to 15 degrees." Australian great Dennis Lillee was bemused by the revelations. "My action never came under suspicion and I would have been shocked if it had," he said. "It is an issue that has been going on ever since cricket started and I don't think they are any closer to solving the problem than they were 100 years ago." Bruce Elliott, one of three biomechanics who conducted the research, denied the issue was specifically about Muralitharan. Elliott was happy with the recommendation. "I'm happy with that [15 degrees]. It's a step in the right direction," Elliott said. "They've seen that a lot of bowlers today sit about 10 degrees ... and it's been shown in studies that's there's no real benefit until you get beyond 15 degrees. "People assumed everyone was zero and if you had asked me two years ago I'd would have guessed that five degrees was a reasonable number of most bowlers but research has shown otherwise. "Murali straightened his arm 14 degrees when bowling the doosra. That's the upper end of what's acceptable and you wouldn't want to see it go beyond that." Elliott said he hoped the proposed guidelines would put the controversy to rest. "I hope it does. It's been unfortunate because, with Murali, he bowls with a strange action. It's one that catches the eye and will always be the case. It catches the eye of journalists and the public alike, so I hope this take the heat out of the situation."

[The Outsider]

Ravi, I have posted that and numerous other articles on various fora over the past years. It's a futile exercise because people who think Murali chucks don't do it on the basis of any science, biomechanics, or analysis but on the basis of believing their naked eyes. I have all but given up on it because their belief is akin to some people believing that the world was created in 7( or was it 6) days by God, or Allah used to whisper things in Mohammed's ears in a mountain. As I mentioned in an earlier post of mine in this thread its like believing the earth is flat or the sun goes around the earth because that's what we see.

[Donny]

I am no racist ( atleast i think so ) , but i do have some genuine grouses with the way Murali has been treated by the English-Aussie media nexus and in general by the Australian public. Is it no surprise that most of the controversies that have happened in Murali's career either happend in Aus or involves Australians ? I just voiced my opinion about it. Now, is that racist ? If and indeed John Howard did make a comment against Murali , then it is probably the first time in sporting history that head of state has said something that at best can be termed as " insensitive" . Whether what he said was right or wrong is not the question here. Just the fact he said something like that is what i meant when i said " Aus has Murali Paranoia"

Apologies, mm. 'Racist' was a bit strong. What I was referring to was the ridiculous notion that 'Australians think this or that' about a certain subject or 'the way Murali has been treated by the Australian public'. The inference we all think alike is rubbish, just as it is about Indians, English or Saffers etc. by their media. The media will always (well often) jump on an incident in a crowd situation, often from a small group of idiots (every crowd has them) and come up with a stupid, sensational headline. The Oz media does NOT represent me, nor does John Howard. He was giving a personal opinion.

[Ram]

Apologies, mm. 'Racist' was a bit strong. What I was referring to was the ridiculous notion that 'Australians think this or that' about a certain subject or 'the way Murali has been treated by the Australian public'. The inference we all think alike is rubbish, just as it is about Indians, English or Saffers etc. by their media. The media will always (well often) jump on an incident in a crowd situation, often from a small group of idiots (every crowd has them) and come up with a stupid, sensational headline. The Oz media does NOT represent me, nor does John Howard. He was giving a personal opinion.

Donny , I have tremendous respect towards you for the time you have spent in this game and the knowledge you have accumulated about it. I wasnt under any circumstance , even trying to portray you in the light of " Oh , you must be biased against Murali too". Infact , your words and opinions brooks love for the game and nothing else. Kudos to you for that. However , would you not agree with me if i say Murali has been treated badly by the Aussie media and public and general ?

[The Outsider]

The scant respect that Australian crowds have shown for a legend like Murali is disappointing to say the least. Shouting "No Ball" every time the guy ran in to bowl even after he was cleared by all tests is rather unlike the Aussie crowds when faced with a true legend from the opposition. The kind of admiration Tendulkar and Lara have received on cricket grounds in Australia is phenomenal. It took a tough character in Murali to survive that but he could never showcase his best in Australia which was ultimately a loss for the spectators there. On the other hand, having watched the '04 SL-Aus series in SL where Warne was making his comeback after the drug ban, there were never slogans of "Druggie" or the likes. I wonder why Murali got so much under the skin of the Aussie cricket fans.