Warne or Murali?

Question

seemingly Murali is better on stats (better average, has potential to take alot more wickets due to age etc) but its always said that 'Warne is the best of all time'.. nationality (or 'chucking') based bias or has Warne brought more to the game and stats tell little of the story?

what do yous think?

Answer 1

Personally I like Murali better for his attitude. He will defniteley surpass Warne's wicket count in due time.

Answer 2

If you take away the wickets taken against the lesser test playing nations Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, the two totals would read as follows: Warne: 689 wickets, Murali: 537 wickets. I think this shows Warne to be the superior bowler.

Answer 3

If it wasnt for Warne to recreate spining, to make it an offensive art rather than a defensive one, to redefine the dead art of spinning Murali would never ever get a chance to play internationally.

Not just Murali but all other spinners as well. Warne came onto the pitch when pacers were the only form of attack in cricket. Yet he managed to change the world.

And that is why he is one of the 5 wisden criketers.

Answer 4

Shane warne was given those titles as he has been the best Leg spinner around for over a decade, he revived the art to a point and could 'turn it on glass' to manufacture spin where it is improbable.
Murali is probably going to take more wickets, but plays on more grippy pitches on the sub continent, is an off spinner (turns the ball the otherway) and still has a dodgey looking action (yes we all knoiw about the elbow thing - but he had to change one of his deliveries to make it legal). He may take more wickets, but Shane was a better Test match Crickiter. Murali wins hands down in ODIs though.

Answer 5

Warne is unquestionably extra useful. they're the two stable, yet Murali has been the only stable bowler in his team for years, and Warne has had to compete with Lee, McGrath, McDermott and all the different australian bowlers because of the fact that he's been enjoying for wickets. Murali bowls a hell of alot extra in suits aswell, as much as twenty extra overs than Warne throughout assessments, because of the fact he's extra heavily depended on, this ability that he could get extra wickets. additionally, as what grew to become into reported till now, Murali has gotten maximum of his wickets against lesser experienced factors.

Answer 6

warne is bettter that murali because warne is not the only high wicket taker in the Aus team so he comes to bowl later(25th 30th over) in the innings and by then he has less wickets to take.but murali on the other hand always makes it a one man show because he comes in the 19th 20th over where less wickets have falllen.because if mgrath was no in the Aus team warne would have taken over 1000wickets

Answer 7

Its true Shane Warne is for test matches on the other hand
Muttiah Muralitharan is for ODIs as well as test matches.

The below statistics shows my above statement :
1)Shane Warne
Tests ODIs
Matches 145 194
Wickets 708 293
Average 25.41 25.73

2)Muttiah Muralitharan
Tests ODIs
Matches 110 283
Wickets 674 426
Average 21.73 23.27

Answer 8

warne is the best and never been suspected of being a chucker while murali have been suspected of a illegal bowling and shane is much better looking than him and its proven because he got more sms from many sheilas around the world,just ask simone

Answer 9

Murali is better than Warne but yes Murali in underrated....as compared to warne. Murali is now doubt the best one !!!

Answer 10

warne in test matches
murali in odis