India-KXIP fan Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 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. :hysterical: Your relying on opinions. You haven't seen Murali bowl every ball and same with Warne. Sure you were impressed watching Warne do well, Ashes is more popular then an SL series. But when deciding whos better you have to look at the stats. Warne is great but how possibly can he be better than someone with a lower average and more wickets (adjusting matches played) against big teams. All wickets count against these teams. They are no minnows. So all Im concluding here is people voting Warne have seen him alot more in Ashes and would rather skip watching something like SL vs WI. These people like Warne more hence stats become irrelevant. But obviously stats clearly show Murali is better cause he is ahead in most important areas so these people's opinions are irrelevant.
Vilander Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 :hysterical: Your relying on opinions. You haven't seen Murali bowl every ball and same with Warne. Sure you were impressed watching Warne do well, Ashes is more popular then an SL series. But when deciding whos better you have to look at the stats. Warne is great but how possibly can he be better than someone with a lower average and more wickets (adjusting matches played) against big teams. All wickets count against these teams. They are no minnows. So all Im concluding here is people voting Warne have seen him alot more in Ashes and would rather skip watching something like SL vs WI. These people like Warne more hence stats become irrelevant. But obviously stats clearly show Murali is better cause he is ahead in most important stats so these people's opinions are irrelevant, just my view. :cantstop:
Vilander Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Where is Bhajji with 400+ Test Wickets in his cabinet :hitler: in his praji's carpentry workshop.
Clarke Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Clarke wtf are you saying seriously. Wickets don't matter? Avg doesn't matter? But your subjective views do? Answer this' date=' how is Warne [b']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. You're the one who said wickets per game wasn't incomplete and now you back averages as the ultimate decider. FYI there's more to judging a cricketer than numbers such as a difference in avg of 0.5-1 when competing with top teams, something you'd know if you watch test cricket. :hysterical: Your relying on opinions. You haven't seen Murali bowl every ball and same with Warne. Sure you were impressed watching Warne do well, Ashes is more popular then an SL series. But when deciding whos better you have to look at the stats. Warne is great but how possibly can he be better than someone with a lower average and more wickets (adjusting matches played) against big teams. All wickets count against these teams. They are no minnows. So all Im concluding here is people voting Warne have seen him alot more in Ashes and would rather skip watching something like SL vs WI. These people like Warne more hence stats become irrelevant. But obviously stats clearly show Murali is better cause he is ahead in most important areas so these people's opinions are irrelevant. Most of us have seen a LOT of Warne & Murali with the ball in hand, the point about opinions was wrt Bradman & Co. which doesn't have much to do with the discussion. Have you seen any test cricket with Warne/Murali at their prime ?
India-KXIP fan Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 You're the one who said wickets per game wasn't incomplete and now you back averages as the ultimate decider. FYI there's more to judging a cricketer than numbers such as a difference in avg of 0.5-1' date= something you'd know if you watch the game. Yeah that's what my post said... Nevermind
21cent Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Has any one bothered to bring up Warnes yearly massacre(Ashes) of the English players (most likely the worst players of spin bowling) that hugely inflate his numbers. If Murali had the same chance as Warne to play the POMS on an yearly basic with 5 tests. He would have easily took 1000 wickets. The few chances he did get to play the POMS, he royally raped them. (122 wkts from 16 matches @ 20.06 vs Warne's 196 wkts from 36 matches at 23.25)
21cent Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 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. If Warne took recreational drugs and got caught it would have been fine. Probably not great as he would have been looked up to by kids. But that fat kunt took performance enhancing drugs- that is a whole another story. Just the fact that he got caught for those should have disqualified from any cricket related discussion. But then he said, his mom gave it to him, so it is all fine then right boys?:finger:
Ultimate_Game Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 If Warne took recreational drugs and got caught it would have been fine. Probably not great as he would have been looked up to by kids. But that fat kunt took performance enhancing drugs- that is a whole another story. Just the fact that he got caught for those should have disqualified from any cricket related discussion. But then he said, his mom gave it to him, so it is all fine then right boys?:finger: Get your facts straight before commenting. Warne was caught for taking a diuretic which is not a performance enhancing drug. Warne said he took it for weight loss but he was banned as the drug can mask other banned drugs. However, the fact is Warne was not banned for taking "performance enhancing" drugs but just a diuretic for quick weight loss.
India-KXIP fan Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Get your facts straight before commenting. Warne was caught for taking a diuretic which is not a performance enhancing drug. Warne said he took it for weight loss but he was banned as the drug can mask other banned drugs. However' date=' the fact is Warne was not banned for taking "performance enhancing" drugs but just a diuretic for quick weight loss.[/quote'] Diuretics only lead to loss of water weight. Wouldn't lose fat that way. You can also become dangerously dehydrated. Probably to mask other drugs. But then again they wouldn't help much in cricket.
Ultimate_Game Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 But wouldn't a diuretic only lead to loss of water weight. Wouldn't lose fat that way. That's why it is taken as a weight loss drug by some people as you can easily lose water weight. It's the easiest way to lose weight other than entering the sauna or "steam room" which professional fighters do for making the weight just before official weighing.
India-KXIP fan Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 That's why it is taken as a weight loss drug by some people as you can easily lose water weight. It's the easiest way to lose weight other than entering the sauna or "steam room" which professional fighters do for making the weight just before official weighing. This is different though, there is no restriction for weight. You'd only lose 2-3kg of water weight anyway (and losing water weight can't help Warne in any way). Why would he risk becoming dangerously dehydrated? Especially for a long game like cricket... Fighters probably refuel with Isotonic drinks after weigh in
Ultimate_Game Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 This is different though, there is no restriction for weight. You'd only lose 2-3kg of water weight anyway (and losing water weight can't help Warne in any way). Why would he risk becoming dangerously dehydrated? Especially for a long game like cricket... Fighters probably refuel with Isotonic drinks after weigh in For a guy like Warne I am sure the weight would be slightly more than 2-3 kgs :winky: Either way it was hardly a "performance enhancing" drug. It's not as if Warne was trying to run a sub 10 100m sprint and TBH other than fast bowlers I can't think of cricketers using a performance enhancing drug.
Khalpat Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 I have always maintained that Leg Spinners are must for the team under any circumstances, I have opted for two spinners in my team: Warne is a must, the best thing happened to cricket as far as spin bowling is concened. He is similar to what Wasim Akram is for Left Handed Fast bowling sometimes we portrait a bowler as a synonym to a certain bowling type and Shane Warne is for spin bowling, period. I have opted for Twefth Man as a spinner and this man can be none other than BS Chandra amazing playe, the person responsible for many of our team's win during the 70's. Just imagine we didn't had Kapil or any decent pace bowler but we still maintain to win matches under foreign conditions and this man was most lethal. My Team: Hobbs Gavaskar Bradman Sachin Richards Sobers Gilchrist Wasim Marshal Warne Mcgrath Chandra
Raghav_12 Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 Diuretics only lead to loss of water weight. Wouldn't lose fat that way. You can also become dangerously dehydrated. Probably to mask other drugs. But then again they wouldn't help much in cricket. This is not correct statement. Spinners need extra-ordinary stamina to keep wheeling throughout the day. They need shoulders, wrists and fingers to support for long hours. Performance enhancing drugs can definitely help there. However, Personally I would pick Warne over Murali.
India-KXIP fan Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 Has any one bothered to bring up Warnes yearly massacre(Ashes) of the English players (most likely the worst players of spin bowling) that hugely inflate his numbers. If Murali had the same chance as Warne to play the POMS on an yearly basic with 5 tests. He would have easily took 1000 wickets. The few chances he did get to play the POMS, he royally raped them. (122 wkts from 16 matches @ 20.06 vs Warne's 196 wkts from 36 matches at 23.25) :clap: My XI: 1. Gavaskar 2. Richards (can definitely open in Tests) 3. Dravid 4. SRT 5. Lara 6. Waugh © 7. Gilchrist 8. Akram 9. Ambrose 10. Murali 11. McGrath Fuuaarrkk this team would kill any other All time XI.
cameron_black Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 murali for me for the simple reason that i don't like chubby blonds, nothing else.
India-KXIP fan Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 Interesting vid, only first 25 secs are relevant rest is just Lara BSing for some consolation to Warne. As if great bowlers lose confidence. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sSyYSFhTLA]Brian Lara on Shane Warne & Muttiah 'Murali' Muralitharan spin bowling - YouTube[/ame]
Ultimate_Game Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 Interesting vid, only first 25 secs are relevant rest is just Lara BSing for some consolation to Warne. As if great bowlers lose confidence. I am sure if Lara had scored 2 back to back double hundreds against Warne he would have nominated Warne as the best spinner :haha:
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now