ICF All Time XI: Spinner

[Sooda]

Ideally I wouldnt mind going with two spinners - an offie and a leggie. Ideal attack would perhaps be two fast bowlers - Marshall and Barnes, or Marshall and Lillee/Hadlee, followed by spin attack of Warne and Saqlain, or Gupte and Saqlain with Miller/Kapil/Imran as 5th option. Saqlain, to me, does not get enough credit because he ran out of steam and didnt pick 400+ and beyond as Warne, Murali and Kumble did. But when he was at top of his game doubt any spinner was better than him...even though Warne, Murali, Kumble were all playing alongside him. Not sure if that would make my team a selection of XI players or XIII :--D

Interesting... I know Gupte was a great, but youd rate him as effectively the second greatest leggie of all time? Think O Reilly and Grimmet are highly rated too...I agree re Saqlain..but think longevity ought to count for a lot so Murali is greater still...My ideal side would have two pacemen and two spinners- Steyn and Akram are my pacers and and Warne/Murali pick themselves... I think Warne vs Murali is a close thing so Ill go Warne who edges it because of his cricketing brain will be handy and better bat Im not even sure what my team is anymore I think it is Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Tendulkar, Lara, Sobers, Healy (dont know why) , Hadlee,Akram Steyn...

[Debutant]

Warne

[cameron_black]

Atleast he didn't take drugs. Strong example setting for kids who looked up to the phaggot. Only thing that matters is Murali was cleared by the ICC. Murali>Warne /thread

this is not the world's best disciplined team people are putting together. in any case i don't remember warne being drunk or high while at the grounds. that's what counts.

[Crookbond]

this is not the world's best disciplined team people are putting together. in any case i don't remember warne being drunk or high while at the grounds. that's what counts.

:--D The last I recollect the batsmen played him like drunkards.

[The Outsider]

You guys :headshake:

I am not kidding - the guy used to argue as a zealot to prove Kumble > Warne. Perhaps at some point he got embarrassed by his own posts of stupidity and stopped doing it. The worst part is that his arguments made people say a lot of negative stuff about Kumble, who was a great bowler in his own right.

[Clarke]

Lol' date=' that means Murali took 624 wickets from 108 tests and Warne took 691 from 142. Who's better now? Umad brah? Yeah Umad.[/quote'] That's an incomplete statistic and every cricket fan worth his salt knows that. A bowler could end up with a massive haul with his 5/200 spells, it won't make him an all time great if he manages 600 wickets from a hundred games. Which is why average is an important statistic and only the mathematically deficient would ignore that. By playing even more minnows ?

[CG]

In case you didn't watch them bowl over the years, did you even look at the numbers themselves ? Warne plays 3 tests against Bang/Zim for 17 wickets while Murali plays a whopping 25 games for 176 of the pies. Without all the minnow bashing, he manages 624 wickets from 108 games @ 24.87, hardly anything to seperate the two there. One can consider Murali way ahead of Warnie if the goal is proven minnow bashing. Everywhere else, its a proper contest. Besides, Warnie as an electric character on the field and a worthwhile tailender is much more complete, although his bowling wins enough laurels to ensure his ATG XI position. BTW, your rounding system is well, biased. 25.41 ~ 26 & 22.72 ~ 22 :haha: Not that it matters here.

Actually bangladesh batsman played warne pretty well and they play spin well,so do not bring stats.Warne averages 47 against indians who are known to be best players of spin compared to murulis 32 . But i voted for warne as muruli bowling action has never convinced me.

[Clarke]

:hysterical: Avg 47 against India (the real test). Please go. He was only good in conditions he was used to against inept batsmen (against spin). Murali bad away from home but out of the 2 Murali is better.

Its the real test since it suits you ? I hope Warne gets a chance for the real test after the likes of Marshall, Imran & McGrath are done with their barrage. This is an ATG team with Warne, remember ? BTW i can pull up another 'real test' for a spinner: bowling in Australia. Murali's avg ~ 75+ :winky:

[Clarke]

Actually bangladesh batsman played warne pretty well and they play spin well,so do not bring stats.Warne averages 47 against indians who are known to be best players of spin compared to murulis 32 .

Just letting some who thinks its an open and shut case based on wickets & avg the basic details behind the inflated numbers. BTW if India was the only thing that mattered, one would barely need a spinner in the opposition with the quality of quicks available for the ATG team. I would have liked to see them play Warne over a longer term to really assume that they played Warne well.

[India-KXIP fan]

That's an incomplete statistic and every cricket fan worth his salt knows that. A bowler could end up with a massive haul with his 5/200 spells, it won't make him an all time great if he manages 600 wickets from a hundred games. Which is why average is an important statistic and only the mathematically deficient would ignore that. By playing even more minnows ?

It's not an incomplete statistic. It's the truth, and I understand it hurts for you Warne nuthuggers. I have excluded Murali playing minnows and he is way ahead in wickets if matches played are considered. Also lower in average. Quite frankly these stats are all that matter. More wickets lower average, what do you base Warne being better of, my points are not subjective. Being subjective myself I'll say McGrath cleaned up top order batsmen 80% of the time and Warne mostly cleaned up the lower order. Other bowlers also built pressure which aided Warne and the team was always high on confidence.

[Clarke]

I am not kidding - the guy used to argue as a zealot to prove Kumble > Warne. Perhaps at some point he got embarrassed by his own posts of stupidity and stopped doing it. The worst part is that his arguments made people say a lot of negative stuff about Kumble' date=' who was a great bowler in his own right.[/quote'] The negativity is indeed true, he's been our biggest match winner but then he belonged to the era where two other ATGs turned the ball square while his strengths were outright accuracy & variations. Its like some parent scolding their kid for managing an A- in a very difficult subject just because two others scored an A+ in the class. You very well know where the thread could end up if you insist on that obtuse discussion, hence my lack of optimism.

[India-KXIP fan]

By playing even more minnows ?

Cmon man read my post properly

Actually bangladesh batsman played warne pretty well and they play spin well,so do not bring stats.Warne averages 47 against indians who are known to be best players of spin compared to murulis 32 . But i voted for warne as muruli bowling action has never convinced me.

dafuq do u mean never convinced u? why was it within the rules then? As long is it's aloowed it is fine.

[Vilander]

I dont know who to choose between Murali, Warne.

[Crookbond]

It's not an incomplete statistic. It's the truth, and I understand it hurts for you Warne nuthuggers. I have excluded Murali playing minnows and he is way ahead in wickets if matches played are considered. Also lower in average. Quite frankly these stats are all that matter. More wickets lower average, what do you base Warne being better of, my points are not subjective. Being subjective myself I'll say McGrath cleaned up top order batsmen 80% of the time and Warne mostly cleaned up the lower order. Other bowlers also built pressure which aided Warne and the team was always high on confidence.

:hysterical:

[Clarke]

It's not an incomplete statistic. It's the truth' date=' and I understand it hurts for you Warne nuthuggers [/quote'] Then you are indeed mathematically incompetent. Some of Kaneria's performances of 4/150 would be a milestone in your book. Why the discussion in any thread ? Should the OP publish the averages & minimum runs/wickets as a prerequisite for ATG discussion and then simply shortlist the players ? I bet you didn't watch Ashes 2005 to suggest any of that. Warne put up a majestic performance with the ball in hand, occasionally contributed with the bat and often took control when Ponting was struggling in the field. All of this when McGrath was injured and the rest of the attack looking mediocre. That also explains your love for incomplete statistics, the lack of viewing experience.

[Vilander]

Final Team Gavaskar Greenidge Bradman Tendulkar Lara Kallis Gilchrist Imran Khan Warne Marshal Steyn 12th man : Murali

[CG]

Cmon man read my post properly dafuq do u mean never convinced u? why was it within the rules then? As long is it's aloowed it is fine.

Its not aloo wed.By the way you are a idiot if you do not know what the objective of the thread is.

[Crookbond]

Then you are indeed mathematically incompetent. Some of Kaneria's performances of 4/150 would be a milestone in your book. Why the discussion in any thread ? Should the OP publish the averages & minimum runs/wickets as a prerequisite for ATG discussion and then simply shortlist the players ? I bet you didn't watch Ashes 2005 to suggest any of that. Warne put up a majestic performance with the ball in hand, occasionally contributed with the bat and often took control when Ponting was struggling in the field. All of this when McGrath was injured and the rest of the attack looking mediocre. That also explains your love for incomplete statistics, the lack of viewing experience.

Clarke - Leave it man when a guy comes with 80-20 Pareto rule for McGrath - Warne there's nothing much to really argue with ignorance.

[Clarke]

Clarke - Leave it man when a guy comes with 80-20 Pareto rule for McGrath - Warne there's nothing much to really argue with ignorance.

Where's the level headed Murali supporters though ? Do they realize the cricketing genius of this guy they're voting against ? I respect some sensible justifications & want to hear compelling arguments since this is one contest i have seen unlike most others where we rely on numbers and opinions of others.

[India-KXIP fan]

Clarke - Leave it man when a guy comes with 80-20 Pareto rule for McGrath - Warne there's nothing much to really argue with ignorance.

It was a subjective statement like Clarke saying Warne would have done well against Aus batting. But none of you cann argue the stats. Clarke wtf are you saying seriously. Wickets don't matter? Avg doesn't matter? But your subjective views do? Answer this, how is Warne better if you compare stats excluding minnows? (that's what you wanted right). Seriously what are you trying to say by Kaneria getting a 4 for being a milestone for me? What has that got to do with any of this? Your saying the difference between 700 and 800 is irrelevant? Well I got news for you, it isn't Warne is great but Murali is better. Inb4 Mcleany posts a facepalm due to lack of argument. Sorry for pointing out Murali is statistically ahead when excluding minnows, why do I even debate the all knowing subjective view holding Warne nuthuggers. Back your chit up don't just say you didn't watch this or that. Prove Warne is better (O wait that can't be done).