quote:

Originally posted by W G GRACE:
Nor did Murali,plus unlike Warne, Murali regulary took cheap easy cheap easy wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe,no skill in that.

Yes, I heard about this point and considered it also, but the way i see it is that what ever one has to realise is that if you think about it it is mostly only the top dog teams of cricket that battle each other regularly and those would be the ones that draw in the most crowds, eg, austrlia, england, india and pakistan etcc. the opthers as RSA have complained about already are left to play each other and really Sri Lanka were always under the others ection so they were mostly put up against oposition such as kenya and zimbabewe, where as austrailia played all comers and have had much less to do with those teams as they only play real competition, So Murali really only worked with what he got, I am sure that if all of his matches against the two most lesser nations were against some other REAL oponents for him then he would stioll be where he is today inevitably, it MAY have taken him a few more games but it would have come none the less.

quote:

Originally posted by h4sunoit:
Thats a valid point in some terms, but you can t be suggesting that facing the likes of Tendulkar and Lara was never a challeng in thier hay day and dont forget that warne mentioed Tendulkar as his biggest challenge with lara second, even McGrath said the same but with the above two batsmen the other way so lara was his first hardest challenge. But I do see where you are coming from, I mean warne never went against Sir Bradman etc.

Warne didn't have to face Australia.
Muralitharan didn't have to face Sri Lanka.

They both faced everyone else.

That makes it a lot easier for one of them and it's not hard to work out which one!

quote:

Muralitharan

Muralitharan I am sure has taken something like 160 wickets against the lesser teams may be wrong but not far out

arne bowed out last winter with 708 wickets at a cost of 25.4 runs each.

To the purists, he remains the superior performer - only 17 of his wickets came against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, whereas Muralitharan's tally has been swollen by 163 successes against Test cricket's two weakest sides.

Actully I think the Sri Lankans batsman have been on a level par with the Aussie batsman.And when you consider how good natural players of spin the sri lankans are,Warne probably had it harder.

quote:

Originally posted by Bamford:

quote:

Originally posted by h4sunoit:
Thats a valid point in some terms, but you can t be suggesting that facing the likes of Tendulkar and Lara was never a challeng in thier hay day and dont forget that warne mentioed Tendulkar as his biggest challenge with lara second, even McGrath said the same but with the above two batsmen the other way so lara was his first hardest challenge. But I do see where you are coming from, I mean warne never went against Sir Bradman etc.

Warne didn't have to face Australia.
Muralitharan didn't have to face Sri Lanka.

They both faced everyone else.

That makes it a lot easier for one of them and it's not hard to work out which one!

I am very sure that that is about right, but its like i said before, sri lanka more or less being one of the lesser known teams before say about 2000, they really only got to play against the sides that australia were not always playing such as india, england and rsa NZ etc, leaving as they have been refered to, the lesser teams behind, I still say that murali was better and the only reason that he has so many wickets against them is because he had to work with what he got, I mean there is no doubt about it that if warne also played that many against them then he would have also picked up that many wickets.

Another way where Murali had it easier than Warne ,was the fact that he was the only decent bowler in his side capable of taking wickets.Its a bit harder when you have a legend like Mcgraph in your side.

If Warne was Sri Lankan he would of taken 180 more test wickets.And if Murali was an Aussie he would of taken 180 less test wickets.

How did you come to that conclusion? and yews that is a point about Mcgrath however, you can not seriously tell me that you think vass is a crap bowler, i mean he is almost like a second mcgrath, very much second, no way close to mcgrath but still in there, and as malinga, fernando and maharoof have proved, they can at least take some wickets.

Good enough to take a few? That just about says it all.And yes Vass was a worthy bowler,but none of the bowlers you named compare to Mcgrath,Gillespie,MacGill,Mcdermott.

Well perhaps not at the moment but they are early on in thier careers and to be fair I have never actually seen any of the other bowlers you just mentioned besides Mcgrath and Warne, and gillespie, but I only saw him in replays of an ashes series so I dont really have an opinion on them, I only go by what I have seen.

You have to remember how many fewer tests Murali has played.
When he has faced the so-called better teams as often as Shane he will have accordingly more wickets against them.

Lol, we are going round in circles with this debate.

quote:

Originally posted by W G GRACE:
Actully I think the Sri Lankans batsman have been on a level par with the Aussie batsman.And when you consider how good natural players of spin the sri lankans are,Warne probably had it harder.

The Sri Lanka batsmen haven't been half as good as the Australians.
They have relied on Muralitharan and Vaas for ever it seems. With good batsmen they would have been near the top of world cricket which they haven't right up until now.

Sri Lanka have had a world class batting line up for quiet some time.Remember the 1996 World Cup? And a certian Aravinda De Silva?

And the late great who revoloustined the powerplay method, Jayusaria, that last ODI in SL's last series in ENGLAND, possibly one of the best knocks i had ever seen in my life, i mean imagine a team up against it, needing six an over from ball one to win and by the time Jayusuria and Tharanga had blasted englands unpenatrable attack out of the park for a massive world record 280 first wicket partnership, the RR was below bloody two, Sangakkara and Jayawardenea finished it with at least twenty overs to spare, it was immense, and up until that point i thought that Jayasuria was all talked up, he proved me dead wrong, he has certainly been able to trouble the best bowlers around the world.

quote:

Originally posted by W G GRACE:
Sri Lanka have had a world class batting line up for quiet some time.Remember the 1996 World Cup? And a certian Aravinda De Silva?

Test matches have been lost not by Murali or Vaas but by the batsmen for 15 years now.

I think that applies for nearly all the Test teams,just subtract Murali and Vass for their particular bowlers.