Popular Murali deserves success
England made but nothing was going to stop him from becoming the highest Test wicket-taker of all time in his home town.
The delivery which cleaned up Paul Collingwood was a classic Murali ball, one that rushes on rather than spinning sharply into the right-hander, and led to joyous celebrations among the Sri Lanka players and crowd.
Most of the cricket world will be . He is a thoroughly genial man who is on excellent terms with all his opponents, and one who has always had to battle away for his success despite many people believing that his action is illegal.
He was called for throwing in Australia twice, and was later banned from bowling his doosra until the straightening of his elbow returned to the specified limits.
This is the rub - there have been times when his elbow extended beyond the orginal ICC limit of 10 degrees. Umpire Darrell Hair would argue, therefore, that he was in 1995 because the law at the time outlawed any straightening, or partial straightening of the arm.
Two years ago, the - the argument being that every bowler flexes his elbow to some extent - and Murali’s entire repertoire became legitimate once again.
But there is the further complication of his double jointed wrist. Murali can bend his fingers inwards beyond the palm of his hand until they touch his forearm and this enables him, entirely fairly, to flick the ball out of the back of his hand in both directions.
Combining this with precision accuracy has made him he is today.
He has age on his side and, importantly, the enthusiasm to carry on for another five years, or so. This should take him beyond 1,000 Test wickets, and set a target that will remain unchallenged for generations.
Another Sri Lanka stalwart, at the age of 38. He signed off in tremendous style, taking six fours off one James Anderson over, and while bowlers the world over will be glad to see the back of him, we have all been royally entertained by his devastating hitting.
Jayasuriya eventually fell for 78, lbw to a borderline decision, leaving England urgently needing wickets on the fourth morning to avoid another trial by Murali on the final day.
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌýPost your comment
Murali's elbow didn't flex more than 10 degrees in '95. It was only after he introduced his doosra in 2003 that it went above the 10 degree mark. By which time science had proved that even Glen McGrath and Alan Donald were had flexations above 10 degrees!
So well done Murali. Cricket is richer because of him.
Complain about this comment
Is there any way to compare the source of Murali's wickets to Warne's wickets?
A significant number of Murali's wickets came against minnows like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, whereas Warne for example hardly ever played those teams. Is there anywhere I can test this theory?
Obviously Murali is a class act, but I do think Sri Lanka have played the so-called minnows an awful lot in the last decade...
Complain about this comment
Murali has achieved the record despite a lot of sour grapes and hypocrisy by many. If his action is illegal, call him. Also, at the same time,apply the rules to Brett Lee, Shaun Tait, Andrew Flintoff, Shoaib Akhtar, Shoaib Malik, Harbhajan Singh, James Kirtley, Johan Botha et al. He deserves the record and the related applause.
Jayasuriya has been a credit to the game. A dignified, decent man with respect and kind words for all his fellow cricketers. We need more like him.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations Murali. We had a right old argument on Saturday night in the pub over whether Murali or Warne would make your all time Test team. Murali the more prolific wicket taker or the all round ability (and intimidation) of Warne. What do people think? What do you reckon Aggers?
Complain about this comment
Come on Aggers this guy's action remain suspicious even today. Your respcted colleague Geoff Boycott summed it up nicely last week when he said that Shane Warne would be remembered as a great bowler, but that Muttiah would be remembered only as a great wicket-taker. This is a very crucial distinction. For me, Warne will always be the best becuase he didn't always take his wickets on spinner-friendly pitches. Remember that Muttiah has played half of his tests on the wickets in Sri Lanaka which are always spin-friendly.
Complain about this comment
Murali proved to everyone that he is a class act and I am delighted that he was able to break this record in front his home crowd. Whatever people may say, but you do not get 710 wickets without being something special
Congratulatios Murali. You are simply the best and may you entertain cricket lovers around the world for many years.
Complain about this comment
Just on the above 2 comments.
Murali's average is better than Warne's against every team except for Pakistan (and that not by much). So the Zimbabwe Bangladesh argument is the reddest of red herrings.
You may like to peruse the following article:
Complain about this comment
Staunch Aussie and Warne fan that I am, I have to point out the bleedin obvious: Warne never had to bowl against Aussie batsmen, did he? I reckon that should even up the 'minnows' argument.
They're both great - leave it at that.
Complain about this comment
Re Adrian McElholm's comment about the source of Warne's and Murali's wickets.
You can get the full stats on www.cricinfo.com in the Statsguru section. However, if you want a quick answer, Murali has taken 163 wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe compared to Warne's 17.
I think it would be fair to leave the comparisons until wickets against the major teams are more equal. That said, both have been a privilege to watch.
Complain about this comment
Adrian, I once compared Warne and Murali's records against the six major teams they have both played, England, India, Pakistan, New Zealand, South Africa and West Indies. Murali had a significantly better overall average, and was better against I think five out of six of those countries. I don't have the numbers to hand now, but you can get them all from cricinfo's statsguru.
Statistically there is no doubt that Murali is a more successful test bowler than Warne. The only serious argument for preferring Warne is the position that Murali's action is illegitimate, and I don't think that stance has any credibility left. Murali is the greatest spinner of all time. Warne is simply the second best spinner of his generation (but perhaps ranks first among the most overrated players of all time).
Complain about this comment
Well done to murali to beat the record because it has obviously taken a lot of guts and determination to overtake warne. However, IMO i think warne is a better bowler. He made spin bowling popular again and has done more for the game that murali.
I just hope that eng can get kumar and jaywardene out early tommorow to give us a chance, we dont want to be chasing any more than 200 to win on the last day.
Complain about this comment
The idea that it is a disadvantage to Warne to have played in a better team is nonsensical. Murali has carried his team on his shoulders. Warne has been taking the wickets of batsmen who expect to lose - often of tailenders who know they are going to lose, because the Australian quicks have already dealt with the top order.
Complain about this comment
How daft to say that Warne's wickets were against better opposition.
Smacks of Aussie sour grapes to me as they lose another record holder.
Murali had to bowl against the Aussies in there prime! How many times did Warne have to bowl against Australia with the world best bating line up?
He is a joy to cricket and is as down to earth a guy as one could wish to meet. Long may he keep smiling! Congratulatiuon Murali!
Complain about this comment
Warne wouldnt have got 200 wickets against the minnows as mcgrath, lee etc would have got most of them with the newer ball
Complain about this comment
Of course, the counter arguement to the "Muralia played the minnows, & Warne was not the only big-name bowler in the Oz side", is that equally, Warne never had to bowl against the Oz batting line-up, and the fact that having a great bowler bowling at the other end from you, building pressure, helps you get wickets. When you are "on your own" you don't have that help, and in fact have a tremendous weight of expectation on your shoulders.
All in all, I don't think there is much to choose between them, and trying to suggest one is clearly better than the other is subjective folly. Let's just be thankful we got to see them both in our lifetime, I say.
Complain about this comment
Pointless to compare Warne and Mutali as bowlers - both great but totally different.
Warne is however the better CRICKETER - very under-rated batsman, good fielder, incredibily competitive and motivated, and an imaginative captain.
So while Murali will undoubtedly be the greatest wicket-taker of all time, if I had to choose I'd prefer to have Warne in my team any day.
Complain about this comment
The match is fascinatingly poised. Sri Lanka have been playing catch-up all game and, once again, can say that they have their noses just in front. Having given away a large first innings lead Sri Lanka needed a good start and have got it. However, to give Muralitharan something to work with they need at least 100 more tomorrow. If England were to dominate the morning session again, as they have done every day so far, things could look oh so different at lunch.
This is a wonderful match and a great advertisment Test cricket. Muralitharan, as usual, has done brilliantly to give his side a chance. Now, can England trump him???
Complain about this comment
For all those people want to compare Murali's wickets against Warne's:
v England
Murali 13 matches 93 wickets@19.74
Warne 36 matches 195 wickets@23.25
v West Indies
Murali 10 matches 70 wickets@17.34
Warne 19 matches 65 wickets@29.95
v South Africa
Murali 15 matches 104 wickets@22.22
Warne 24 matches 130 wickets@24.16
V New Zealand
Murali 12 matches 69 wickets@21.00
Warne 20 matches 103 wickets@24.37
Vs India
Murali 15 matches 67 wickets@32.47
Warne 14 matches 43 wickets@47.18
Vs Pakistan
Murali 14 matches 79 wickets@23.31
Warne 15 matches 90 wickets@20.17
Source: Cricinfo's StatsGuru
Complain about this comment
Those who claim that Murali had bowled a lot against minnows should remember that Warne also took most of his wickets against England. No disrespect to the current England team but the ones that played him in mid nineties were not that better playing against spinners than the so called minnows. Compare the stats of Murali and Warne against Eng and you will realise that if only Murali played England that often then there was no need for him to play against Minnows to get the wickets he got so far.
Complain about this comment
Congrats to Murali - it's nice to see a sportsman be the best at his art and do it with a smaile on his face.
Obviously comparisons between Warne and Murali begin again. For me, a good comparison between the two would be to look at their respective performances in England, WI, NZ, SA, Pakistan and India. Yes, Murali has 150+ wickets against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. He's also played lots more tests on wickets suited to spinners on his home turf. Take away home advantage and weaker opposition - how do the two stack up then?
By these criteria (away test not at Zimbabwe, Bangladesh or SL/Aus), I think Warne has 62 matches, 308 wickets at 25.98. Murali has 36 matches, 213 wickets at 23.52. If you add in Warnes excellent record in SL, and Muralitharans awful record in Aus, this comparison changes somewhat to read Warne 70 matches 345 wickets at 25.50, Murali 41 matches, 225 wickets at 26.29. Murali had the advantage of bowling at weaker batsmen. He also had to bowl at the best batting line-up of modern times. Do the two even themselves out?
In the end, though, who cares. we should consider ourselves lucky that we were arouns when the two greatest spin bowlers of all time were playing the game and respect each just the same.
Complain about this comment
look at the history books. It took Murali 27 tests to get to 100 wickets. SF Barnes had 189 test wickets by then. If he had played as many tests as Warne he would have had 1015. Murali and Warne mere boys in comparison
Complain about this comment
To counter the argument that Warne is better than Murili, Warne has played in a far better team than Murili which would often put huge totals on the board and therefore be able to set very attacking fields which would enable Warne to "buy" some wickets. It might also partly explain why his average is 4 or so runs per wicket worse than Murili's.
It would have been great if one or both of them had been English!
Complain about this comment
ALL HAIL THE GREATEST BOWLER EVER!!!
MUTTIAH MURALITHARAN!!!!!!
His record speaks volums compared with Warne (29 Less Tests) With lots of injuries. And you must remember with all of Warnes wickets none were against the best team (Australia). As for Murali, his record against Australia is one of the best. As of with every sport you can only play against the oposition in front of you, I dont think to play matches against the so called minnows is the choice of Murali, to enhance his chance of breaking the world record.
Keep up the great bowling Murali and keep your great smile beaming, Cricket needs you !!!!!!
Complain about this comment
Oliver Chettle. Please explain to me (someone who is totally impartial to the 'who is best' argument)why you say Warne is overrated?
Complain about this comment
If Murali and Warne's wickets against the world's "minnows" are being taken into account, then it is only fair that England fall into that category! Warne has played many more tests against us and we are like frightened rabbits in the face of decent spin bowling.
Complain about this comment
The thing to consider, as partially alluded to by previous posters, is that firstly Warne never had to bowl at the Australian batsmen, and secondly, Warne will have taken wickets by pressure. Warne was part of a far superior bowling attack which will have created more pressure than the Sri Lankans, Vaas perhaps aside.
The Australians pioneered aggressive, relentless cricket. They are constantly in the batsman's ear, constantly in the umpire's ear too and the sheer ferocity of many appeals and media comments by Warne and others will have got him many wickets. I wouldn't suggest that Sri Lanka do none of the above, but the Australians did it before anyone else in the modern era, and they've perfected the art too.
Tom: If you have two spinners of such quality available to you, both of whom are dangerous and restrictive even on the most docile of surfaces, you'd have them both in the team! 2 seamers and a seaming all rounder should do the job and can rotate in short spells while the spinners tie one end up.
Complain about this comment
No way Murli will get past 1000. 800 maybe...he's gonna be pretty pooped by then.
Complain about this comment
Murali is an absolutely inspirational cricketer and i'm very pleased for him to break the record in his own back yard. I still can't decide whether i'd pick him over warne in my all time test team...maybe they'd both get in! no doubt warne's the better all round cricketer (esp. with his slip fielding as well as batting) yet murali just seems to constantly win test matches for sri lanka and has carried their bowling attack for so many years. Without him, sri lanka would have been the worst of the major test playing nations for all that time so because of his impact i would say he's done more for the game than warne.
Complain about this comment
Murali is undoubtedly one of the greatest wicket takers of all time, his stats are phenomenal! The debate between Warne and Murali will rumble on I'm sure and despite all the stats people thow out I'm sure they will never tell the full story of two remarkable bowlers. There are only two more stats I'd like to see (both probably very difficult to work out). Firstly, Murali's total of 5 wicket hauls is amazing but that does mean he's taken nearly half his wickets in only around a quarter(ish) of his innings - I'd be interested to see the distribution of wickets per innings between the two players. Secondly, I wonder how many times Warne was denied a 5 wicket haul by the quality of McGrath and Lee etc. I wonder what proportion of wickets available to them the two players have taken i.e. for each player how many wickets had fallen before they came on to bowl. Now aren't cricket stats fascinating!!
Complain about this comment
Just imagine how many wickets Warne would have got if he had thrown the majorety of his deliveries, Jim Laker would turn in his grave,Underwood & Bedi must despair.
Complain about this comment
Both Warne and Murali are genuis's and picking one would be down to personal preference. Both will win you a game.
Personally id go for Warne as I dont think I have seen anyone change as many games, win matches, change situations as Warne has. Witness Adelaide 2006, Warne changed and won that game. May have only taken 3 wickets that morning, but he started the rot, put doubt in the mind of england, got KP for 0 (after ist inns 100), and dragged his team mates into believing they could win.
Mind you, Murali's record is stunning, amazing that hew has had 20 ten wicket matches. And that average is incredible.
Like i say, couldnt split them but id take Warne. I am english, not an aussie.
Complain about this comment
one argument that hasn't been considered is that Murali will have played aorund half his test's in Sri Lanka where the pitches can often aid spin bowling, while Warne will have played around half his matches in Australlia where the pitches are alot flatter and batsmen friendly
Complain about this comment
There is a major problem comparing averages as they were not gained in similar circumstances.
If Warne had played the majority of his home matches on the pitches at Galle and Columbo he would have had a far lower average than he did.
For me the big issue about Murali's stats is not just about how many wickets he took against the minnows or the big boys but the number he took on dustbowls specifically prepared to suit him.
Complain about this comment
Murali and Warne!
There is little left to say other than what an honour it is to have been able to watch both these greats in a single generation.
Oh and by the way, Murali may have played against a lot of minnows but Warne never had to play against Australia.
Complain about this comment
The Murali vs Warne debate never seems to get very far as it's always hard to compare the value of cricketers despite the stats. There's always another stat that can be found to suggest that one bowler is better than the other.
One thing that it's important to remember to describe Warne's legacy is that, especially when I was discovering cricket as a schoolboy, he was an absolute phenomenon who changed the way spin bowling was viewed. Spin bowling suffered during the 80s, and Warne went completely against the grain, becoming the most effective bowler in the world for a while using one of the least fashionable methods. In that sense, Warne was an inspiration to us growing up, and I remember my brother trying to bowl like him as a kid.
If there is one thing that can be said of Murali, he is inimitable. In fact, trying to bowl like him is actually illegal! This phenomenal player, though exciting to watch, is somewhat uninspiring because emulating him is impossible.
This said, if Warne was big inspiration for young cricketers, you would expect lots of young Austrialian spinners. And there don't seem to be any! So it seems, as the stats suggest, that both of these players are phenomena, the like of whom we may never see again.
Complain about this comment
To say that Murali is not as good because he's taken a lot more wickets against 'minnows' is ridculous. "You can only beat whats infront of you." He doesn't arrange the matches and at the end of the day Murali's wicket record will NEVER be passed by Warne:)
Also Murali has had to have a career where people keep putting him down because of his action. I think as he was able to overcome all this and still remains as great as he is, he has to be the better player.
Complain about this comment
When I was in school I had aspirations to be a fast bowler. I was never really very fast, but could bowl pretty decent outswing. There were a couple of other kids in my school who were significantly faster, but, to be polite, had somewhat dodgy actions. It was quite galling to see them being picked for the school team at my expense, by a coach who was interested in winning and not much else. Most other teams also had a couple of bowlers with dodgy actions, so everyone sort of mutually agreed to ignore the issue. In those days, as these bowlers went up the chain, they would eventually start getting no-balled by umpires and would then either have to modify their actions (in most cases reducing their effectiveness significantly) or drop out of the team. That no longer happens - and thousands of kids with proper actions suffer as a result. The only real recourse for them is to introduce a kink of their own in their actions, to get that extra bit of pace or turn. If you go into the school and neighborhood cricket fields of South Asia today you will see this trend has become an epidemic. That, in essence, has been Murali's, Shoaib's, Lee's and Harbhajan's contribution to the game. And for bending the rules related to bending the arm, the ICC, the BCCI, and the University of Western Australia are just as much to blame. To put a positive spin on it, you may call it an evolutionary step for the sport. However, it is difficult to see anything positive in this situation.
Complain about this comment
Definite sour grapes from Aussies...they cannot accept that someone else (and should I also add, someone of a darker hue?) has overtaken Shane Warne's record.
To all Aussies (where relevant!): get over it! MM & SW are both extremely special. Comparisons between them are non-sequiturs.
If you had to choose, let's base it on other factors. Look what Aggers says about Murali - he is "a thoroughly genial man who is on excellent terms with all his opponents" - I don't think you could as easily say the same about Warney.
Complain about this comment
You could argue that Warne was the better cricketer. He could be a nuisance batsmen and a handy slip fielder.
Complain about this comment
Warney or Murali in a best ever team? NO CONTEST
There remain genuine unanswered questions about Muralitharan's action.
The fact that the laws of the game were changed to accommodate him does not automatically make him the best bowler of all time.
I could go on but I won't. However, I would ask these two simple questions to all cricket fans and especially to all wrist spinners.... After that you can decide
Did you ever think Murali was chucking it?
Did you ever think that Warney was chucking it?
For me it is a YES and a NO
Greatest ever spinner? Thanks Shane - it was great to watch
Complain about this comment
Never heard or seen anglo-saxons ever admitting someone else better!
Complain about this comment
There's no dispute that Murali is a great bowler. His action has been debated enough. But for me Warne is the Greatest, for his ability to impose his personality on a game and he had to fight for his wickets alongside another of the top wicket takers Glenn McGrath. As Aggers says too Murali's talent is partly due to a physical quirk, which can't be said of Warne. I'm English but for me nobody will eclipse Shane as the best bowler of all-time even if he's no longer the top wicket-taker.
Complain about this comment
I would just like to say how much we have enjoyed Roshans slots on TMS , as a listen for over 25 years I can honestly say he has been superb
James Brindle
Charles Baxter
Complain about this comment
Congragulations Murali. I have followed your carieer since you played for St Anthony College. My friends and I knew then you were somthing special. You had to endure all kinds of comments which you took on your chin with a smile and you have got on well with all your oppents. May I thank you for the previlage of having watched you and may you continue to impress all cricket lovers. I am in no doubt you will take 1,000 wickets before you bow out of the game.
Complain about this comment
I believe simply because of the amount of aggrevation Murali has had to deal with over the years he is the better cricketer. Its funny how on an international level most cricketing nations and pundits feel his action is illegal and then on the domestic scene you have players from those nations complimenting him and saying how nice a guy and talented a player he is. This confuses me, is it because of the threat he poses and the fact that he comes from a tiny island in the middle of the indian ocean which have facilities which pale in comparison to those of the bigger cricketing nations. I think its excellent that a country such as Sri Lanka has such a huge star such as Murali and it can only inspire countries when thinking about Sri Lanka at one stage being a minnow before they went on to win the World Cup reach the final again and having produed two of the games greats in Murali and Jaysuria.
Complain about this comment
Not only Tamils got their eyes wet, ears open and palms touched - but we all. All Sinhalese, Tamils and the rest - we all Sri Lankans celebrate Murali's world record. Ringing bells were heard from both the Hindu Kovils and Buddhist temples. Keep going Murali...! You are our ambassador to the world, carrying the message of ethnic unity of my country
Complain about this comment
The Murali vs Warne debate never seems to get very far as it's always hard to compare the value of cricketers despite the stats. There's always another stat that can be found to suggest that one bowler is better than the other.
One thing that it's important to remember to describe Warne's legacy is that, especially when I was discovering cricket as a schoolboy, he was an absolute phenomenon who changed the way spin bowling was viewed. Spin bowling suffered during the 80s, and Warne went completely against the grain, becoming the most effective bowler in the world for a while using one of the least fashionable methods. In that sense, Warne was an inspiration to us growing up, and I remember my brother trying to bowl like him as a kid.
If there is one thing that can be said of Murali, he is inimitable. In fact, trying to bowl like him is actually illegal! This phenomenal player, though exciting to watch, is somewhat uninspiring because emulating him is impossible.
This said, if Warne was big inspiration for young cricketers, you would expect lots of young Austrialian spinners. And there don't seem to be any! So it seems, as the stats suggest, that both of these players are phenomena, the like of whom we may never see again.
Complain about this comment
Althogh Courtney Walsh was the the first in the 500 club Murali will establish the 900 club before he retire and the joy and pleasure that he brings to the game continue to make test cricket the spectacle that makes the sport the ultimate test of skill.
Complain about this comment
You are quite right to praise one who must be the greatest in the game at the moment. The discussion over whether Warne is greater is unnecessary: let Murali be the king of off spin and Warne the king of leg spin. As to the flexing issue, surely the legimitacy of his action has been proved by the thousands of batsmen who have faced him and not quibbled -and the dozens of umpires who have not no-balled him- and not the one sourpuss, D Hair, who did take offence.
Complain about this comment
On whether Warne is a better cricketer (not just as a bowler), I would rather have Murali in my team. Yes he's not such a good batsman, fielder or captain, but I get the impression that Murali would bowl till he dropped whereas there is more ego with Warne. Still, they're both greats and well done Murali.
Complain about this comment
It was not so very long ago that Sri Lanka was among the minnows of cricket and had a hard time getting test series' against the greats. I think it is commendable that they, as one of the top teams in cricket now, still give countries like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh the opportunity to improve by playing them often! Murali has amassed a large number of wickets against every country so this should not be used to belittle his achievement.
Complain about this comment
Why argue whether either Warne or Murali should be picked in the greastet XI ever...play thEm both. With Gilchrist at 6, Sir I.T. Botham at 7, Warne bats at 8, Murali at 11. You can then pick two specialist seamers between them and five specialist batsmen before them...UNBEATABLE
Complain about this comment
Firstly congratulations to Murali on his outstanding achievement. Inevitably him surpassing Warne will lead to comparisons between the two.
I would like to echo what others have said - it is unfair to say Murali has only picked up so many wickets because of the number of matches vs "minnows". This is only because SL are "unfashionable" and thus only get a few matches vs the traditional teams, while making up the rest of the cricketing calendar vs minnows. Looking at Murali's record, had he played England every two years in 5 match series (like Warne), he too would have thrived and would have ended with 200+ wickets against us. Were SL a traditional cricketing nation like England or Australia, Murali would have played a lot more matches against the stronger sides.
For every supposed advantage Murali had, this can be countered by some advantage Warne enjoyed. For example, Murali has taken more wickets vs minnows; on the other hand Warne has never had to bowl to the dominant Aussie batsman. Warne's record against the best batting side he faced, India, is rather mediocre, which suggests he benefitted from not having to bowl to Australians (the strongest side for over 10 years). Murali had the advantage of picking up more wickets since he had less competition for wickets. To counter this, Warne clearly benefitted from bowling in tandem with McGrath/Gillespie. There is always pressure from both ends when Australia are bowling, and this invariably forces batsmen into mistakes. Furthermore Warne often comes into bowl when the opposition have lost 3-4 wickets, so he can set very attacking fields and he is bowling to new batsmen. Meanwhile Murali often comes on to bowl when the score is 100-0, and the batsman are settled. Australia also often set huge targets which further allows attacking fields to be set, and Warne also has more opportunity to bowl twice in an innings, and on day 4/5 pitches. SL often struggle on away tours and sometimes lose by an innings, thereby only allowing Murali to bowl once.
In summary I think both bowlers have experienced some advantage over the other, and over the course of their careers, these tend to even themselves out. Therefore I think it s fair to compare their records as they are. When doing so Murali has a better average against every nation, with the exception of Pakistan. Furthermore he has a superior average in every country, with the exception of Zimbabwe and SA (plus Australia, but they were bowling to different batsmen). At the end of the day both are great bowlers, and they have troubled us (England) on far too many occasions! However if I had to choose, Murali would get the nod due to his unparalleled wicket taking ability.
Complain about this comment
What a test match is shaping up at Kandy, and i am sure whover comes out on top after the first 2 hours of play on tuesday will take the game.
Monty Panesar bowled well with no luck but he has to bowl batter tomorow to benefit from the good luck england seem to have when starting up on a day, if he causes some damage, by utilizing that rough and then Hoggard + Siders star with the new ball, england should have a reasonable chase on their hands.
if later in the day and on day 5 all the english batters can bat with the gritty determination, even if they find it tough, this attitude has been epitomized by Vaughan, Vandort and Collingwood so far, everyone has to chip in and throw nothing away.
if SL get over a 225 lead it will be interesting, if they get any higher than 275 its game over.
Complain about this comment
If you want a comparison between Warne and Muralitharan, try the LG ICC ratings. They show that only 19 bowlers in the history of Test cricket have passed a rating of 900.
Shane Warne is 15th on the all-time list with a peak rating of 905.
Muttiah Muralitharan (spelt wrong in the ICC list) is 4th in the all-time list with a peak of 920, only ever beaten by: Sid Barnes (932), George Lohmann (931) and Imran Khan (922).
Among spinners, Shane Warne is also beaten by Tony Lock (=6th) and Derek Underwood (14th).
Complain about this comment
For those comparing the two, remember the bowlers that Warne bowled in tandem with. Murali would have done much much better if he had McGrath, Gillespie, Bret Lee bowling with him from the other end, never letting the pressure off. And add the Ozzie fielding.
Complain about this comment
Has anybody commenting here ever tried to 'throw' a delivery? If you have a normal wrist like 99.9% of us then you will notice that it doesn't turn any more than a normal leg break and that bowling a consistent line and length is very, very difficult.
Murali is in the tiniest majority whose wrist acts like a double ball-and-socket joint and therefore he can generate huge amounts of revolutions on the ball at release. Now you go and try it! You honestly wont turn it any more than a normal wrist spinner and you certainly wont turn it both ways.
I don't think he chucks it anyway, but if he did straighten his arm, it wouldn't make a difference - it's his wrist that is special and there are no rules pertaining to wrist flex.
Complain about this comment
I agree with RODG, would pick both of them with Gilchrist and another fast bowling all rounder, hey, why not go the whole hog and pick any three from Botham, Imran, Hadlee or Marshall, Warne would then probably bat at number 10! Well done Murali, remember the performance against England in 1998, 15 wickets in the match and won the game on his own.
Complain about this comment
Darrell Hair was quite correct in no-balling Muralitharan. The Laws of Cricket and the Test match regulations of the time stated that the umpire must be satisfied of the fairness of the delivery. There can be no doubt that Muralitharan's action was unusual and such as to give rise to reasonable doubt about the absolute fairness of the delivery.
After this the regulations were changed so that now suspect actions in Tests are reported and not called. The Laws of Cricket have also been changed so that the umpire will call 'No ball' if he considers that the ball has been thrown, thus shifting the onus of proof.
Complain about this comment
Murali vs Warne the arguments will go on but after a period of time the record books will show one thing "The leading wicket taker in the world of test cricket."Muttiah Maralitharan".
This comparison we now are engaged in will be for a few more years but the record book will speak for itself.
The fact remains that he has been cleared on his bowling action by people who lay the rules for the game and so the matter ends there with no further controversy.
Complain about this comment
Murali is a class of its own. He was humble to the core when he was even discredited by John Harward, when he labelled him in public as a chucker.
Murali you have proved a nation proud and hope you will go into getting a thousand wickets.
Good luck and all the best.
Complain about this comment
The fact is that Murali is the worlds best spinner
no one likes to accept that he is and its very unfair that people say Warne is when the figures show that he is the best
I'm sure if Murali was playing for the aussies and shane warne was for SL, then murali would be hayled as the greatest
think about it
Complain about this comment
The debate as to who is better,Murali or Warne, is inevitable and will continue for a long time to come.As far as I am concened we have been privileged and honoured to have witnessed two supelative proponents in the art of spin bowling.So hats off to Murali for acheiving the record of most test wickets.Well Done! Congrats!
My Verdict -the jury is hung.What is your take Aggers?Do you have an opinion to share on this hotly debated subject?
In closing,let's hope the game comes to an exciting conclusion.It will surely be the icing on the cake for Murali if Sri Lanka wins
Complain about this comment
Otherwise a good article, marred by Jonathan Agnew's insistence to write in such length about Muralis action which was proved to be legitimate, instead of concentrating on the the grat mans legendary service to cricket fans the world over! Thats what should be talked about and remembered.
Complain about this comment
Warne V Murali?
and the winner is.....
Cricket (and long may it continue)
Complain about this comment
I think its very hard to judge between Warne and Murali because of many factors which I will list below.
i) Warne didn't play much against minnows but didn't have to play against Aussies either.
ii) Murali has bowled more on spinner friendly wickets.
iii) But Warne had support of an awesome batting lineup and great Fast bowlers and that helped him create more pressure and helped him be on the attack most of the time without fear of giving away runs.
iv) Warne has played against England an aweful lot and I think the whole English team was Warne's Bunny.
And the list goes on but there is one point which I would like to make is that Murali has a divine gift in his special arm, but Warne never had such kind of gift. This point should not be used as an argument to declare Warne better over Murali or vice versa but its a fact that for a youngster it would be almost impossible to learn Marali's art.
Complain about this comment
As a keen follower of the game and an England supporter for many years, I take my hat off to Murali and congratulate him on this brilliant achievement. In my small basement flat in Camden Town, things like this, broadcast on TMS, bring a boost to an otherwise dull December London day. Thanks Murali! - And thank you all at TMS for being there to celebrate this!
Complain about this comment
A flawed record at best. The whole argument that the laws were changed to fit all bowlers is the real red herring here. The laws were changed under severe pressure from the Asian Cricket Council following the outcry from other cricketing nations regarding the legality of Murali's action. The rush for political correctness of course means that this will never be said on such forums, or people who do are deemed to be either racist or insular. The ICC will never admit this fact in public of course...
Complain about this comment
Some who claims masters of the game claims that Murali has claimed 163 cpeap wickets [referring to Bangladesh and Zimbabwe]. These so called masters have failed to realise that Murali has nothing to do with Test Match schedule settings. He only plays what Sri Lanka is offered. On the other had had Sri Lanka offered more test matches by socalled "leading nations" such as England and South Africa he would have definitely taken more "cheap wickets". So far against England alone he has taken 99 wickets. Let statics speak not twisted vulgar talks.
Complain about this comment
In reference to post 17, Since England had a better head to head vs Sri Lanka in the mid nineties then if you compare them to minnows what does that make Sri Lanka? Oh and just like you said, no disrespect meant?!?! Warne will always be king and all true cricket lovers know that. We wont go into the obvious reasons why as we all know what the reaction would be to counter the subject. Sorry but without Murali Sri Lanka are a very average team, and you simply cannot say the same for the Australians.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations Murali. You are truly a champion.
Complain about this comment
Warne got to play against the minnows of spin - England and purchased lot of easy wickets against them. In fact Bangladesh are better players of spin than the Poms !! So I will not discount Murali.
In fact Murali did better against the best players of spin i.e the Indians who walloped Warne . Warne conceded that he had nightmares about Sachin Tendulkar hitting him all over the park !!
Complain about this comment
Both Warne and Murali are champion spinners. While Murali's action has been the subject of fierce debate, he has never been found with illegal substances in his system!
Complain about this comment
A couple of points on Warne v Murali. Warne is a great bowler, and living in Brisbane with cable tv, I've seen most of the test matches he's played in. Two points: many of his wickets were tailenders, Warne cleaning-up after others broke through; and it seemed to me that a very high proportion of bad decisions went in his favour, perhaps in part due to the strength of his personality and the ferocity of his appealing. So there are many elements which make comparison difficult. Let's just be delighted that we've lived in, and enjoyed, the Warne-Murali era.
Complain about this comment
I want to remind people who ever discriminate Murali's action as illegal.
The fact is, Warne banned for a while for drug adictive. It's true and we need to take into mind when u compare with Murali. Warne also backed up with some greatest bowler in his team.
E.g- Mcgrath and Lee. It's always easy to bowl when u are backed up with good bowlers. Where Murali is not. He is carrying the whole team in his shoulder. I can't even think about Srilanka Team without Murali.
I welcome any comment for this.
Thanks
Complain about this comment
These arguments will be made irrelevant in a couple of years when Murali has taken 900-1000 wickets. He will have consigned Warne to the history bin the same way greats such as Barnes, Hadlee and Walsh have been.
Complain about this comment
Both great bolwers, You can argue forever about this, but the arguement that Warne had the advantage of McGrath/Gillespie/Lee is stupid.
You state Warne came on to bowl when teams were under pressure 3/4 wickets down for less tha 100 runs, that maybe correct (McGrath took 500 wickets bowling with Warne) that hardly leaves 10 wickets to get per innings. Murrali had to carry his team and take most of the wickets,Sri Lanka have no other bowler getting wickets, the Aussies shared the wickets around. Question would Murrali get as many wickets playing for the Aussies, when all the bowlers contribute to the taking of wickets? He would get his fair share and more but not at the rate he is now. Plus I feel the authorities changed the laws to accommondate Murrali's action check out how many wickets Murrali has got since the law change.
Complain about this comment
Both Warne and Murali are great bowlers, but when comparing them it is just as well to remember that spin bowling is a psychological affair: you get wickets by putting pressure on batsmen, created not only by your skills (and sometimes also by verbal intimidation!) but also by bowling in tandem with great bowlers. In the case of Warne, McGarth and company should be given credit for some of his wickets.
Complain about this comment
Alan (post 67) How bitter do you sound? The man has a unique gift but it is not his elbow that generates spin, its surely his wrist and fingers. Saying that is like saying a batsman like viv Richards, with fast reactions, had an unfair advantage over fast bowlers cause he could react faster than most.There are other humans out there have the wrist and elbow like murali. Im sure by the law of averages there are a few, but none others have taken 710+ wickets. Murali has used his gift to his advantage just like millions of others do. But he has had to work so very hard to get the ball to do what he wants. The chucking issue is a non starter, he has been proved as having a legal action so no case to answer, just cause he has a hyper flexing joint it should not be held against him. As for the argument who is better between him and warne it doesn't "pain me as an Englishman" to say Murali is in my opinion a better player. He never failed a drugs test for one.
Complain about this comment
As an Irishman, now still living off the great Irish performances in the West Indies this summer, I knew little about cricket until recent years, hurling yes, but cricket no!
However, a great friend from Sri Lanka has for a number of years tuned me into the brilliance of Murali and his teammates.
I find some of the negative comments from Warne's mentor and followers to be sour grape-ish in the extreme. Murali has never failed a drugs test and he is an amazingly talented sportsman and ambassador for Sri Lanka. His bowling action has been absolutely proven to be legal. End of story! Give the man his due!
Complain about this comment
Adrian McElholm check www.cricketonly.com and do the comparison. Muruli has more than have of his wickets in Sri Lanka
Complain about this comment
Muralis action is an abomination.
Complain about this comment
I find it amazing that so many people think having McGrath, Lee, etc. At the other end helped Warne take more wickets.
How strange......?
How many wickets did McGrath take? Usually before Warne even got a chance to bowl.
If Australia were a one man bowling attack like Sri Lanka have largely been, Warne would have had many many more wickets.
Another thing to compare the two bowlers is success as a team. Cricket is a team game. Taking wickets or scoring runs in a losing team is hollow. How many games did Warne wine for Australia?
Big game player. I'd much prefer Warne in my team, I think I would win more games.
Complain about this comment
"MURALI'S ACTION IS AN ABOMINATION"
yeah, if he'd learned to play in good 'ole England they'd've coached all that out of him, right?
in fact, they'd've probably had him bowling orthodox offies or something. then he could've worked nicely in tandem with gilo. i can hardly contain my excitement.
don't you wish someone had told malcolm marshall to bowl off the correct foot?
i wish people would remember the text book is not a rule book.
Complain about this comment
Just reading the comments as i dont have Sky TV at University! Im doing SPotrs Journalism!
There is much assistance for Monty, ok does that mean the pitch is getting easier to bat on?
Can England possibly chase down 300 because its looking like its gonig to be? Or is it going to turn into a mine field?
Complain about this comment
Post 74, Fred. How crazy, u say Murali has more than half his wickets at home?? What a shock, how many games has he played at home just over half? I bet warne has a quite a good average on wickets on the sub continent. Another shocking stat is that Warne has just less than half his wickets at home, after playing just less than half his games there! Amazing isn't it? As for the warne being better cause his team is winning, not sure i follow that. Are you telling me that Damien Martyn was a better player than Brian Lara just because Martyn was part of a winning team more? I think not! Do u know how hard it is to play knowing your team are not able to support you?
Complain about this comment
When he bowls his fast ball, i.e. around 60mph/100kph his arm has a noticeable snap. That is throwing.
Complain about this comment
Not that anyone reading this will care but the plain fact is this. Murali throws the ball, he has taken advantage of a weak ICC and good luck to him, he seems a nice guy. But best ever? I hope not, not for the good of the game I hope not.
Complain about this comment
Finally a bit of well-deserved praise for the greatest bowler of all time. The media have been mendacious (for various reasons) in how they have presented Murali's career, to the extent that they have actively deceived people. People seem to think that the Warne v Murali debate is a close-run thing, and depends much on personal preference (like Lara v Tendulkar for example). It is not. The gulf between the 2 as bowlers is VAST. The gulf between Murali and any other bowler in modern cricket is VAST. By single possible measure (test record, ODIs, first-class, 5fers, 10fers, strike rate, average, economy rate, etc) Murali is FAR ahead of Warne. It is quite absurd to be having this 'debate' still. This simple fact (that Murali is the greatest bowler ever - this is a FACT) is the reason for people like Terry Jenner still trotting out the 'Murali's action is dodgy' 'argument' - Jenner knows full well that, once you accept Murali's action, the overwhelming evidence forces you to admit Murali's dominance.
Complain about this comment
Being a Sri Lankan, I want to say a bing thank you to many of those who stood by Murali on this site for his achievement. As for those unsportive lot who question Murali's action and call him a cheat, don't forget that Warne did take wickets with the help of drugs, (and he did give information to bookies for disgusting little amount of money). Give credit to Murali for what he has achieved with out the help of drugs as what Warne did (I do not mean to dis-respect the great bowler)
Complain about this comment
Being from Lancashire, I like Murali as much as the next man, but for me Warne is a better bowler.
Mainly because he played in an attack where the othr bowlers were well capable of bowling out teams.
I can't see Murali's record being beaten though. So many of the factors that have helped him get here are very unlikely to be repeated by anyone else.
Complain about this comment
You have feigned happiness at Murali's record by damning him with faint praise. How else do you justify your assertion that he had to work hard for his success "despite many people believing that his action was illegal".
And you have failed to mention that the reason for the change in the law from the 10 degree limit to the 15 degree limit had nothing to do with Murali's action, and you have left the reader with the impression that it was done for Murali's benefit. Muralli was singled out to a degree of scrutiny.
Complain about this comment
My point is how does one say Warne or Murli is the better bowler? For me becoing a role model and a gentleman cricketer is more important than mere records, in that respect Warne does not stand anywhere near Murli because of Warne's shameful deeds, like women and drugs and he was even punished for it. I would like Warne to admit how many wickets he took while under the influence of drugs.
Complain about this comment
Credit should be given where credit is due. Warne's time is over, and now it's Murali's turn. May he keep on doing what he does best, that's bowl.
Complain about this comment
Thank you not no-balling my comment but it has suffered a cut probably in transmission. I intended to say that Murali was subjected to a degree of scrutiny that no other cricketer was subjected to.
Complain about this comment
Muralitharan's portrait has been unveiled at Lords.A postage stamp has been issued in Sri Lanka with Murali in commemoration of his achievement.The Sri Lanka Parliament is going to fete him at a special session.
The celebrations go on. Well Done old boy you are truly magnigicent and also very humble in victory.
He is a perfect Ambassador of Sport.
Complain about this comment
He throws the ball
Complain about this comment
To Distanced Neutral (34) While your body may be distanced from your brain, you comment show you are certainly not a neutral. You should learn to read - especially the comments on the page before yours, before making such silly remarks. There are a number of people above you who claim to be Australian who are full of praise for Murali.
As for Murali v Warne, surely the 1st innings figures here v's the figures Murali posted in his last series show that Warne had it the easier of the two by playing England so much. Don't forget it was V England that Warne made his name (and his money and female friends and text messages and new hair......)
One other question - Why do Australian's spell Murali's name differently to the rest of the world? I blame Mark Taylor, but I'd like to know the reasons for the difference.
Complain about this comment
In response to post 70 and 76 (M.Jones and Chris):
I agree that part of the reason Murali takes more wickets per match (WPM) is due to less competition for wickets. Warne had to share the wickets around with McGrath/Gillespie/Lee. However this does not explain why Murali's average is almost 4 runs/wicket superior to Warne (21 compared to 25). In the above scenario you would expect Murali to take more WPM but his wickets should come at a higher cost. Bowling with McGrath means there are fewer wickets available, but Warne was often bowling to new batsmen/tailenders, in which case his runs should have come at a lower cost. Clearly this is not the case as Murali has a superior average compared to Warne (not to mention WPM, strike rate, economy etc).
When comparing two great fast bowlers in Hadlee (NZ) and Marshall (WI) we have a similar comparison to Murali vs Warne. Hadlee played in a poor NZ side and was the sole world class bowler, and hence took more wickets per match (WPM) than Marshall. Marshall shared his wickets around with Holding/Garner/Roberts etc. However his average is superior to Hadlee since his wickets came at a lower cost - Hadlee had to bowl in longer spells since the onus was on him to take wickets, while when Marshall bowled there was extreme pressure from both bowling ends.
Finally comparing the number of matches one is a meaningless comparison in this case. Warne was a member of arguably the greatest team in history, since Australia had a number of match winners. Murali meanwhile has played in a relatively poor team, especially away from home. Using your logic the likes of Martyn/Langer > Lara since they won more matches.
Complain about this comment
It's quite interesting to have a look at statsguru on cricinfo and compare only the away games of Warne and Murali. Warne has played 73 away tests for 362 wickets at an average of 25.50, economy of 2.69 per over and a 56.7 ball strike rate. Murali played 51 tests, 272 wickets, 25.99 ave, 2.61 economy and 59.6 s/r. Pretty close with Warne just shading it.
Now look at home tests. Warne played 69 tests, 319 wickets, 26.39 ave, 2.60 economy, 60.8 s/r. Murali played 64 test (not including this current match), 432 wickets, 19.12 ave, 2.26 economy, 50.6 s/r. As you can see Murali wins this comparison by a country mile.
What that tells me is that Murali playing at home had pitches made to order and wrecked havoc. Warne got no such favours at home due to Australia having a few handy pace bowlers!
By the way, Murali played 14 tests against Bangla and Zim (7 each) at home and took 121 wickets at an average of 11.38. Warne never played a single test at home against Bangla or Zim.
To prove further how good Murali has it at home lets look at Warne's record against Sri Lanka. Warne in Australia played Sri Lanka in 5 tests, 22 wickets, 32.40 ave, 2.68 economy, 72.4 s/r. Warne played Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka in 8 tests, 37 wickets, 21.45 ave, 3.02 economy, 42.5 s/r. In other words Warne performed much much better in Sri Lanka than he did in Australia.
Now lets look at Murali against Australia. He played Australia in Sri Lanka in 8 tests, 47 wickets, 26.02 ave, 2.88 economy, 54.0 s/r. Playing against Australia in Australia he wasn't quite so good! 5 tests, 12 wickets, 75.41 ave, 3.45 economy, 131.0 s/r. Phil Tufnell had a better record against Australia away than that!!
Perhaps if Warne had played for Sri Lanka he would have taken 1,000 wickets before he retired. If Murali had played for Australia he would have been dropped and replaced by Stuey MacGill.
Complain about this comment
Get off your high horse, and give credit where credit is due. You make it sound like the laws were changed because of Murali! and don't we all know about Darrell Hairs credibility? when will any Brit or Aussie acknowledge Murali as being the best? Coming from a strife torn land and achieving what Murali has achived not only makes him great, it makes him the greatest there ever was. Congratulations to the greatest and most amazing cricketer to ever partake in the game!
Complain about this comment
I do agree with those who claim that Murali took more wickets against the minnows.
As the stats say
104 against South Africa
93 against England
So did Warne against the same minnows.
195 against England
130 against S/A
By the look of it Both Warne and Murali have taken more wickets against poor minnows like England and S/A.
Complain about this comment
The Warne v Murali debate is not the real issue, and that he is undoubtedly a nice man is totally irrelevant.
The real issue is the legality of his action on the pitch and not in a lab.
To me he appears to be throwing the ball all the time. The first time I saw him bowl I couldn't believe it and I still can't.
Professional cricketers are in a lose/lose situation as to condem his action as illegal would lay themselves open to accusations of sour grapes.
I am pretty sure that a genuinely secret ballot of all cricketers who have faced him would conclude his action is not legal.
Complain about this comment
in response to Adrian McElholm:
firstly, Murali himself does not get to choose who he plays, so that is hardly his fault.
secondly, Warne grabbed many of his wickets against England, who are not exactly consummate spin-masters.
in fact, compare the stats between Warne/Murali and every team they've faced and you see Murali's stats are better. Murali could dominate the best players of spin (india) whereas Warne could not.
with the understandable exception of Australia, Murali's figures against everyone else are fairly consistent (meaning that if he were playing Eng, WI, instead of Zim and Bang he would still have returned similar performances)
Warne was also surrounded by a much better and dominant team than SL (no disrespect to the lankans). Aus won so many more test matches and Warne could bowl from much stronger positions than Murali ever could.
finally, it does not matter: the two are incomparable greats but nit-picking over such subjective trivialities as 'easy wickets' sours the whole debate a trifle.
Complain about this comment
It is worthless to do all these comparisons and arguments now, as Murali has proven he is the BEST BOWLER all time. No disrespect to Shane Warne he is a great bowler, but Murali is the true legend. I am sure most of the Australians can’t imagine that Murali is better than Shane Warne… but I am afraid that is the truth. So well done Murali!!! and we are proud of you
Complain about this comment
i stand corrected! i didn't realise murali had such a good average against all the major nations. i'm undecided who's better. but in the end, who cares?!
Complain about this comment
Once wickets against minnows like Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and England are taken into account and subtracted from Warne & Muralis’s totals then maybe other bowler’s records begin to look rather better. Still I suppose in Warne’s favour he was never accused of being a chucker or having the rules changed to accommodate him.
Complain about this comment
Re: Entry #16:
Thank you Mohamed for the plain stats of it all..Just the simple truth out there, Murali's stats vs Warne's..
This should silence at least some of the arm-chair critics:-)
Thanks again Mr.M!!
Complain about this comment