Once in a generation player

[plugger66]

Mmm

Stats can tell a whole lot of stories can't they?

Good figures in Sri Lanka... Perhaps helped by a couple of tours when Sri Lanka were not far from minnows status

Sharjah... Who did he play there? And where were they positioned in world rankings ATT?

What exactly was Warne's record like on the slowest Bunsen burners .... In India?

Say it again.... Warne much preferred wickets with bounce and pace than massive sideways grip, which takes pace of the ball... Most over spinning leggies do? Apart from Kimble, more a top spin bowler who bowled 10k quicker than most wrist spinners.

The argument of whether Murali had a legal action is separate from who is the better performed bowler?!

So true. We know just from looking that one chucks and the other doesnt. we also know that Warne is regarding by wisdom as the top 5 cricketers in the 20th century. Maybe we will have to wait another 86 years to see if they rate Murali that high. We certainly know they rate Warnie.

[BigMart]

Are people actually aware of his numbers.... In all forms of the game, in all countries....

[dragit]

Are people actually aware of his numbers.... In all forms of the game, in all countries....

Nick Riewoldt - Superstar - 5 B&F's, 4 AA, 500+ goals, will end his career with close to the most marks taken of all time. Unlucky to not be a premiership captain. 1 game played overseas so far.


Superstar.






Couldn't give a sphincter about douserers or flippers.

[st.byron]

Mmm

Stats can tell a whole lot of stories can't they?

Good figures in Sri Lanka... Perhaps helped by a couple of tours when Sri Lanka were not far from minnows status

Sharjah... Who did he play there? And where were they positioned in world rankings ATT?

What exactly was Warne's record like on the slowest Bunsen burners .... In India?

Say it again.... Warne much preferred wickets with bounce and pace than massive sideways grip, which takes pace of the ball... Most over spinning leggies do? Apart from Kimble, more a top spin bowler who bowled 10k quicker than most wrist spinners.

The argument of whether Murali had a legal action is separate from who is the better performed bowler?!

It was you who suggested earlier in this thread,
"Should I actually put up a statistical comparison to illustrate what is meant by a better record... ".........

So stats are relevant or not? Haven't seen you put any stats up yet Mart. Only try to pick holes in the ones I put up.

Sharjah - 2 tests vs Pakistan. 16 wickets at 9.62. Strike rate 25. Not bad playing against a sub-continental mob who play spin well.

His record in India was poor - the figures suggest this was at least partly due to playing there just prior to and just after injury. But we've covered that already.

Warne was a genius on any wicket. Apart from his Indian figures, his career was one of consistently taking wickets on all surfaces against all countries.

Say it again. 45% of his wickets at home. Murali 62%.


Mart if you want to make loose hypotheses like "Good figures in Sri Lanka... Perhaps helped by a couple of tours when Sri Lanka were not far from minnows status," then how about doing a bit of research yourself? That statement is crap.

He played two tests in SL in 1992 taking 3/158 in total. Average 52.66.

He didn't play there again until 1999 and then again in 2004. 2 series - 6 tests against Sri Lankan teams including Jayasuriya, Aravinda de Silva, Ranatunga, Vaas, Herath, Murali, Jayawardene, Sangakarra, Dilshan, Tillekeratne, Samaraweera. Nowhere near teams of minnow status. 34 wickets for 626 at 18. Strike rate 39.5. 5 x 5 wicket hauls.
In 2004 against Sangakarra, Jayasuriya, Dilshan, Jayawardene, Samaraweera and Tillekeratne he took 26 wickets in 3 tests on their home pitches. Your theory about him on the sub-continent holds no water, apart from in India.

[st.byron]

Are people actually aware of his numbers.... In all forms of the game, in all countries....

Nick Riewoldt - Superstar - 5 B&F's, 4 AA, 500+ goals, will end his career with close to the most marks taken of all time. Unlucky to not be a premiership captain. 1 game played overseas so far.


Superstar.






Couldn't give a sphincter about douserers or flippers.

Yes, it could be moved to the other forum if it's pissing people off on the footy forum.

[st.byron]

Are people actually aware of his numbers.... In all forms of the game, in all countries....

Well how about you stop making references to the numbers and actually put some up instead of doing sfa research and making rubbish statements with nothing to back it up.

[BigMart]

I really don't have to research, he is the world record holder in tests and ODI's so his numbers are pretty much known by cricket followers...

I would say I'm 90% cricket and 10% footy so I would consider myself a follower

He took 800 wickets at 22 in 130 odd tests
530 something wickets in one Dayers at 23

He is the bowling equivalent of Tendulker on 'numbers'

I would consider Warne a magician comparible to Lara (a match winner no doubt, often a game changer) but on pure consistency of performance 'numbers' Murali has no peer...

Stats over a career is how cricketers are measured... Can't hide fro the scoreboard in cricket

[plugger66]

I really don't have to research, he is the world record holder in tests and ODI's so his numbers are pretty much known by cricket followers...

I would say I'm 90% cricket and 10% footy so I would consider myself a follower

He took 800 wickets at 22 in 130 odd tests
530 something wickets in one Dayers at 23

He is the bowling equivalent of Tendulker on 'numbers'

I would consider Warne a magician comparible to Lara (a match winner no doubt, often a game changer) but on pure consistency of performance 'numbers' Murali has no peer...

Stats over a career is how cricketers are measured... Can't hide fro the scoreboard in cricket

As per usual if you have one opinion you never see the other and other that you fail to address over and over again is Murali was a chucker who had the rules changed so he could bowl unless of course you thought the Australain umpire, Darryl hair, was a cheat. So which is it BM. Did Murali cheat until they changed the rules or did Hair or maybe Murali just had a bad day. By the way if you just use wickets as a guide I suppose you have to use runs. Poor Bradman is about the 50th best batsman ever now.

[st.byron]

I really don't have to research, he is the world record holder in tests and ODI's so his numbers are pretty much known by cricket followers...

I would say I'm 90% cricket and 10% footy so I would consider myself a follower

He took 800 wickets at 22 in 130 odd tests
530 something wickets in one Dayers at 23

He is the bowling equivalent of Tendulker on 'numbers'

I would consider Warne a magician comparible to Lara (a match winner no doubt, often a game changer) but on pure consistency of performance 'numbers' Murali has no peer...

Stats over a career is how cricketers are measured... Can't hide fro the scoreboard in cricket

It seems you're saying that the most basic raw numbers show you everything you need to know. Basically you couldn't be arsed looking stuff up to prove whatever theory you have. When that theory is shown to be bollocks you just return to your default position without even addressing where you've been shown to be bullshitting. No comment on your statement about Warne playing Sri Lanka when they were minnows. No comment about Murali taking 62% of his wickets on home doctored pitches. Pitches are relevant though when it came to Warne and where he took his wickets.
You have a habit of speaking like an authority without actually having any evidence to back it up. And you wont do any stats leg work to support what you're saying. End of discussion for me on this subject with you.

[BigMart]

From Cricinfo

His Bio.... Some areas highlighted

Perhaps no cricketer since Douglas Jardine has polarised opinion quite like Muttiah Muralitharan. For the believers, he's among the greatest to ever spin a ball. For the doubters, he's a charlatan undeserving of the game's greatest records, responsible for changes in the laws that they think have legitimised throwing. What was undeniable was his ability to turn the ball sharply on just about any surface, and bowl the sort of marathon spells that would have seen a lesser man retire after five seasons rather than 18. Whether Sri Lanka played at home, on pitches where he was often unplayable, or overseas, Murali was the go-to man for half a dozen captains. He seldom disappointed.

Scion of a family with confectionery interests in Kandy, he first came to prominence during a tour game against Australia in 1992-93, when no less a batsman than Allan Border failed to pick him. From the outset, his action was an object of wonder or ridicule, depending on which side of the fence you stood. A deformed elbow was only part of the story. Murali had exceptionally supple wrists and a shoulder that rotated as rapidly as a fast bowler's at the time of delivery. A combination of all these factors combined to enable him to turn the ball far more than most orthodox finger-spinners, but it was only with his mastering the doosra, the one that went the other way or held its line, that he became Shane Warne's rival in the wicket-taking and greatness stakes.

The controversies always kept him company, yet Murali seldom lost his wide-eyed smile, or the ability to run through batting sides. Darrell Hair called him for throwing on Boxing Day in 1995, and Ross Emerson followed suit three years later. In 2004, he was asked to refrain from bowling his doosra, after it was found to exceed the 15-degree tolerance limit that had been agreed on after extensive analysis of his and other actions. While the sceptics continued to denigrate his achievements, Murali even bowled on television in a special cast, going through his entire repertoire to try and convince the doubters.

Part of the World Cup-winning side in 1996, he was instrumental in the run to the final 11 years later, and he played his part in some of the country's greatest sporting moments. It was his 16 wickets that helped rout England at The Oval in 1998, back in the days when Sri Lanka were deemed worthy of only one Test. He averaged less than 30 with the ball in every country except India and Australia, and he finished a remarkable Test career with more than 100 wickets against India, England and South Africa.

Backed to the hilt by Arjuna Ranatunga, he blossomed in the late 1990s, and there was a period when the opposition routinely budgeted for 20 Murali wickets or more in a three-Test series. As the years passed, his shyness gave way to a quiet confidence and wry sense of humour, and he won admirers around the world for the energy, time and money that he invested in reconstruction after a tsunami had devastated the Sri Lankan coast in 2004. Often the only Tamil in the side in a time of ethnic conflict, he became as powerful a unifying force as any in the country. That he was such a hero with ball in hand was only part of the story.

My point with numbers is pretty obvious I would have thought

You cannot get away from his total output (at an exceptional average).... You can spin it what ever way you want(pun), he has the performances on the board that suggest he can be regarded amongst the best in history... And in comparison .... His output is better? Pretty simple.
The cheating argument is absolutely ridiculous! He didn't cheat, it's up to the authorities to determine that... If they cleared his action.... Should he have simply said... No some superior Aussies are not happy so ill not 'cheat' in there eyes?! How ridiculously stupid?!!!!

Btw
Few world cricketers label him a cheat... Warne scoffs at suggestions he is... Even fierce rivals India have never whinged about his action.... Especially after the ICC cleared it.
They also changed the rules as it was noticed that express fast bowlers, Akthar, Lee, Bond had a query over some of their deliveries .... But the naked eye couldn't pick it up

Murali looks worse because his arm is bent all the way through to the delivery.... From behind it appears it straightens because you're looking at the arm lengthways At the point He rotates his shoulder so his arm crosses his chest...you Lose the elbow joint bend at a point from one angle.... This was quickly discovered when other angles were looked at... At the same time

60 motion senses at UWA discovered he does have a bend, but it does not exceed levels deeming a throw? He also has a condition which means he cannot straighten his arms?!

Haven't even mentioned the flex of the wrist,.....
His action is different, yes, is it legal.... Well he played 133 tests?!


Really, its Just those with little knowledge think its obvious?

Not panels of umpires, biomechanics experts, opposition player and commentators? Interesting

[plugger66]

From Cricinfo

His Bio.... Some areas highlighted

Perhaps no cricketer since Douglas Jardine has polarised opinion quite like Muttiah Muralitharan. For the believers, he's among the greatest to ever spin a ball. For the doubters, he's a charlatan undeserving of the game's greatest records, responsible for changes in the laws that they think have legitimised throwing. What was undeniable was his ability to turn the ball sharply on just about any surface, and bowl the sort of marathon spells that would have seen a lesser man retire after five seasons rather than 18. Whether Sri Lanka played at home, on pitches where he was often unplayable, or overseas, Murali was the go-to man for half a dozen captains. He seldom disappointed.

Scion of a family with confectionery interests in Kandy, he first came to prominence during a tour game against Australia in 1992-93, when no less a batsman than Allan Border failed to pick him. From the outset, his action was an object of wonder or ridicule, depending on which side of the fence you stood. A deformed elbow was only part of the story. Murali had exceptionally supple wrists and a shoulder that rotated as rapidly as a fast bowler's at the time of delivery. A combination of all these factors combined to enable him to turn the ball far more than most orthodox finger-spinners, but it was only with his mastering the doosra, the one that went the other way or held its line, that he became Shane Warne's rival in the wicket-taking and greatness stakes.

The controversies always kept him company, yet Murali seldom lost his wide-eyed smile, or the ability to run through batting sides. Darrell Hair called him for throwing on Boxing Day in 1995, and Ross Emerson followed suit three years later. In 2004, he was asked to refrain from bowling his doosra, after it was found to exceed the 15-degree tolerance limit that had been agreed on after extensive analysis of his and other actions. While the sceptics continued to denigrate his achievements, Murali even bowled on television in a special cast, going through his entire repertoire to try and convince the doubters.

Part of the World Cup-winning side in 1996, he was instrumental in the run to the final 11 years later, and he played his part in some of the country's greatest sporting moments. It was his 16 wickets that helped rout England at The Oval in 1998, back in the days when Sri Lanka were deemed worthy of only one Test. He averaged less than 30 with the ball in every country except India and Australia, and he finished a remarkable Test career with more than 100 wickets against India, England and South Africa.

Backed to the hilt by Arjuna Ranatunga, he blossomed in the late 1990s, and there was a period when the opposition routinely budgeted for 20 Murali wickets or more in a three-Test series. As the years passed, his shyness gave way to a quiet confidence and wry sense of humour, and he won admirers around the world for the energy, time and money that he invested in reconstruction after a tsunami had devastated the Sri Lankan coast in 2004. Often the only Tamil in the side in a time of ethnic conflict, he became as powerful a unifying force as any in the country. That he was such a hero with ball in hand was only part of the story.

My point with numbers is pretty obvious I would have thought

You cannot get away from his total output (at an exceptional average).... You can spin it what ever way you want(pun), he has the performances on the board that suggest he can be regarded amongst the best in history... And in comparison .... His output is better? Pretty simple.
The cheating argument is absolutely ridiculous! He didn't cheat, it's up to the authorities to determine that... If they cleared his action.... Should he have simply said... No some superior Aussies are not happy so ill not 'cheat' in there eyes?! How ridiculously stupid?!!!!

Btw
Few world cricketers label him a cheat... Warne scoffs at suggestions he is... Even fierce rivals India have never whinged about his action.... Especially after the ICC cleared it.
They also changed the rules as it was noticed that express fast bowlers, Akthar, Lee, Bond had a query over some of their deliveries .... But the naked eye couldn't pick it up

Murali looks worse because his arm is bent all the way through to the delivery.... From behind it appears it straightens because you're looking at the arm lengthways At the point He rotates his shoulder so his arm crosses his chest...you Lose the elbow joint bend at a point from one angle.... This was quickly discovered when other angles were looked at... At the same time

60 motion senses at UWA discovered he does have a bend, but it does not exceed levels deeming a throw? He also has a condition which means he cannot straighten his arms?!

Haven't even mentioned the flex of the wrist,.....
His action is different, yes, is it legal.... Well he played 133 tests?!


Really, its Just those with little knowledge think its obvious?

Not panels of umpires, biomechanics experts, opposition player and commentators? Interesting

BM I didnt realise you were so gullible. No Warne doesnt label him a cheat in public but i can tell you he does in private as most other cricketers would. not many are going to call him a cheat in public as they just look like bad losers. Also you are right he doesnt exceed the level for throwing because they tested him and then decided the level. And testing is crap anyway. the test doesnt show if he is really trying to spin it.

[Mr Magic]

What a load of codswallop, IMHO.
If the ICC didn't change the law would his action be deemed legal?
Nope - 2 Australian umpires 3 years apart had the gumption to do what everybody in world cricket was talking about doing but were afraid to do in case they 'upset' the Sri Lankan Cricket authorities.
They deemed his action as illegal - a chucker. The same way Charlie Griffiths and Ian Meckiff were deemed 'chuckers'.
He didn't change that action, the authorities changed the law to make that illegal action legal.

I don't care who else was suddenly ok under the new law (15%), it is Murali who was the obvious beneficiary of that law change.
Most people know it. Only those determined to pick a fight over it seemingly claim otherwise.
How many of his 800+ wickets were taken before the law was changed?
They certainly shouldn't be counted in his wicket tally, just like Lillee's Rest of the World aren't and all statistics from WSC are not.
At the time he took those wickets his action was against the cricket law for a legal delivery. Only those taken after the law was changed to make his action legal should be counted

He was the complete opposite of Larwood who was never the same after Bodyline (leg side theory) was banned by Cricket's authorities.
Murali on the other hand 'blossomed' when the ICC kowtowed to the sub-continent and changed the law to suit him and Shaob Akhtar. If Lee was a chucker then he too should have been called, along with anybody else who transgressed the laws governing a legal/illegal delivery.

[stevie]

Bloody A1 in the Stick Cricket app is a cheat!

4 times I've made it to the final of the IPL only to find the total I'm chasing is 260 or better! Lol

[st.byron]

What a load of codswallop, IMHO.
If the ICC didn't change the law would his action be deemed legal?
Nope - 2 Australian umpires 3 years apart had the gumption to do what everybody in world cricket was talking about doing but were afraid to do in case they 'upset' the Sri Lankan Cricket authorities.
They deemed his action as illegal - a chucker. The same way Charlie Griffiths and Ian Meckiff were deemed 'chuckers'.
He didn't change that action, the authorities changed the law to make that illegal action legal.

I don't care who else was suddenly ok under the new law (15%), it is Murali who was the obvious beneficiary of that law change.
Most people know it. Only those determined to pick a fight over it seemingly claim otherwise.
How many of his 800+ wickets were taken before the law was changed?
They certainly shouldn't be counted in his wicket tally, just like Lillee's Rest of the World aren't and all statistics from WSC are not.
At the time he took those wickets his action was against the cricket law for a legal delivery. Only those taken after the law was changed to make his action legal should be counted

He was the complete opposite of Larwood who was never the same after Bodyline (leg side theory) was banned by Cricket's authorities.
Murali on the other hand 'blossomed' when the ICC kowtowed to the sub-continent and changed the law to suit him and Shaob Akhtar. If Lee was a chucker then he too should have been called, along with anybody else who transgressed the laws governing a legal/illegal delivery.

Agree with all of this. If you were to consider legal his wickets taken after the laws were changed his wicket tally would be 315.

[6621104]

Who gives a rats about Murali- when the once in a 100 year player is an ex sainter! And we all saw him play!

[st.byron]

Who gives a rats about Murali- when the once in a 100 year player is an ex sainter! And we all saw him play!

Nice take on it. An ex-Sainter is one of the 5 cricketers of the century. Really a once in a generation player.

[White Winmar]

If Murali couldn't fully straighten his arm, the theory goes he couldn't throw. Why then, did he always field in the outfield, patrolling the boundary? His "arm" was respected and feared by opposition sides. He fielded where he did because he was an exceptional thrower of the cricket ball. This was transferred to his bowling.

The so-called official testing was a joke. As though anyone under that supposed pressure, with their career and livelihood on the line, would test the margins. I believe it's logical to assume he threw well within himself in those tests, although he couldn't, under any circumstances, not throw his doosra. I doubt that delivery can be legally delivered by anyone.

The fact he wasn't named in Wisden's five cricketers of the century speaks volumes. By BM's reasoning, he should've been included on his stats alone. The fact he wasn't, clearly demonstrates what the wider cricketing community truly believes. That is, he is a chucker, he knows he's a chucker and therefore he's a cheat, who tried to fool the authorities in testing.

He was always going to pass, as the pathetic weaklings in charge of cricket caved into the demands of the sub-continental block. Both Warne and Gilchrist have been "caught out", publicly labelling him a chucker when they thought they were speaking at private functions. He's a chucker alright. Every time he hurls a flat throw in from the outfield, he confirms that the contention that he can't throw, is a lie. Those who propagate it know it, and unless the man is a complete idiot, so dies he. Chucker, cheat, confirmed. All the facts confirm it and so does the judgement of the wider cricket community. Except when kowtowing to the reverse racists.

[bergsone]

Marali would have got past district 3/4 with that action.IFanyone thinks otherwise they are kidding themselves

[bergsone]

Marali would have got past district 3/4 with that action.IFanyone thinks otherwise they are kidding themselves

Sorry left out the NOT

[8856brother]

If Murali couldn't fully straighten his arm, the theory goes he couldn't throw. Why then, did he always field in the outfield, patrolling the boundary? His "arm" was respected and feared by opposition sides. He fielded where he did because he was an exceptional thrower of the cricket ball. This was transferred to his bowling. .

What are you talking about WW? He has always been a terrible fielder. Thats why he fields nowhere near the wicket. He has also always had a custard arm. My mum could throw longer and harder.

[White Winmar]

If Murali couldn't fully straighten his arm, the theory goes he couldn't throw. Why then, did he always field in the outfield, patrolling the boundary? His "arm" was respected and feared by opposition sides. He fielded where he did because he was an exceptional thrower of the cricket ball. This was transferred to his bowling. .

What are you talking about WW? He has always been a terrible fielder. Thats why he fields nowhere near the wicket. He has also always had a custard arm. My mum could throw longer and harder.

Which games have you been watching.? He throws as well as anyone. That's why he fields where he does. Don't tell me you've been sucked into the Muralist "bullshyte" wagon as well. Make sure you catch his next BB game. You'll see what I mean. He throws as well as anyone, probably better (especially when he's bowling). In the end, even if he has a "custard arm", which he doesn't, how does he manage to get the ball in? BY THROWING it in, which directly contradicts his claim that he can't. Good grief, some people will believe anything. No wonder this blatant cheat has gotten away with it all these years. Some people will believe anything, even if the physical evidence contradicts it. The point is, he throws from the outfield and at the bowling crease, despite the fact he claims he physically can't. How do you explain his outlawed doosra? If he can't physically throw, how did he manage to fall foul of even the most sympathetic administrators? Give me a break. Custard arm? Only in your perception.

[BigMart]

Again I have reiterate... Some just can't seem to get it, or want to believe it

He was officiated at the highest level for 18 years.... And he cheated? What, by (aussie) arm chair critics?

The rule was changed ATT mainly because Brett Lee and Shoiab Akthar were seriously questioned... It was discovered umpires could not tell the difference from 0-10 degrees? There were actual tests done .... They went down in stages until the naked eye could consistently tell the difference... They found picking a slight bend, was almost guess work.... Do we think a rule was changed arbitrarily?

Ruwan Kalpage whom I know.... was banned, for a straightening arm had to go away and rework his action, but never made it back... Ive asked him about a comparison to Murali and he said his flaw was nothing like Murali, and they had a different action.... He said it was the wrist of Murali that allowed his customary flick over.... And allowed him to bowl over spinning offies... He said the complaints about Murali come from one country, and has a bit to do with Warne comparison, and fear of him? He said there were NO complaints from the Aussies about him... And he WAS illegal He played cricket in Victoria....

Some funny comments though

Especially about Warne thinking Murali was a cheat.... They are good mates, very good. Have been for a long time. A friend of Warnie would know that. You actually don't find too many closer opponents.

Emerson had a nervous breakdown... And wasn't right leading up to the game... Not sure he even umpired afterwards
Hair was a good umpire, but not liked by players for trying to control games rather than officiate. He was an umpire with an ego, like a Ray Chamberlin. He was made a fool of when he called Murali when he bowled a leggie (which is impossible to throw)


I think two things
Some people are so one eyed, the struggle to accept facts.... He played 133 tests over 18 years.... Yet officials just allowed him to cheat?
Some people on here seem to know their footy better than there cricket...

[plugger66]

Again I have reiterate... Some just can't seem to get it, or want to believe it

He was officiated at the highest level for 18 years.... And he cheated? What, by (aussie) arm chair critics?

The rule was changed ATT mainly because Brett Lee and Shoiab Akthar were seriously questioned... It was discovered umpires could not tell the difference from 0-10 degrees? There were actual tests done .... They went down in stages until the naked eye could consistently tell the difference... They found picking a slight bend, was almost guess work.... Do we think a rule was changed arbitrarily?

Ruwan Kalpage whom I know.... was banned, for a straightening arm had to go away and rework his action, but never made it back... Ive asked him about a comparison to Murali and he said his flaw was nothing like Murali, and they had a different action.... He said it was the wrist of Murali that allowed his customary flick over.... And allowed him to bowl over spinning offies... He said the complaints about Murali come from one country, and has a bit to do with Warne comparison, and fear of him? He said there were NO complaints from the Aussies about him... And he WAS illegal He played cricket in Victoria....

Some funny comments though

Especially about Warne thinking Murali was a cheat.... They are good mates, very good. Have been for a long time. A friend of Warnie would know that. You actually don't find too many closer opponents.

Emerson had a nervous breakdown... And wasn't right leading up to the game... Not sure he even umpired afterwards
Hair was a good umpire, but not liked by players for trying to control games rather than officiate. He was an umpire with an ego, like a Ray Chamberlin. He was made a fool of when he called Murali when he bowled a leggie (which is impossible to throw)


I think two things
Some people are so one eyed, the struggle to accept facts.... He played 133 tests over 18 years.... Yet officials just allowed him to cheat?
Some people on here seem to know their footy better than there cricket...

I thought you didnt read my posts. Hilarious. And they can still be good mates but Warne can still thinks he chucks which he does think. Want proof. Go ask him in an environment he feels confortable in. And they certainly arent very good mates. And some of your arguments are just plain wrong. You refuse to acknowledge they changed the rules for him. Doesnt matter who else you say, it was for one person. And I would never accuse you of knowing your footy better than your cricket.

[8856brother]

If Murali couldn't fully straighten his arm, the theory goes he couldn't throw. Why then, did he always field in the outfield, patrolling the boundary? His "arm" was respected and feared by opposition sides. He fielded where he did because he was an exceptional thrower of the cricket ball. This was transferred to his bowling. .

What are you talking about WW? He has always been a terrible fielder. Thats why he fields nowhere near the wicket. He has also always had a custard arm. My mum could throw longer and harder.

Which games have you been watching.? He throws as well as anyone. That's why he fields where he does. Don't tell me you've been sucked into the Muralist "bullshyte" wagon as well. Make sure you catch his next BB game. You'll see what I mean. He throws as well as anyone, probably better (especially when he's bowling). In the end, even if he has a "custard arm", which he doesn't, how does he manage to get the ball in? BY THROWING it in, which directly contradicts his claim that he can't. Good grief, some people will believe anything. No wonder this blatant cheat has gotten away with it all these years. Some people will believe anything, even if the physical evidence contradicts it. The point is, he throws from the outfield and at the bowling crease, despite the fact he claims he physically can't. How do you explain his outlawed doosra? If he can't physically throw, how did he manage to fall foul of even the most sympathetic administrators? Give me a break. Custard arm? Only in your perception.

Don't know how long you have been watching cricket. I'll repeat it. He is a terrible throw and a below average fielder. And is well known for it world wide. Not just my opinion. I'm not discussing whether he chucks it when he bowls. It's been done to death. His fielding and throwing is ordinary.

[BigMart]

WW.... Gawd

Murali is a horrible fielder and always was... It was at times laughable... It was like his batting

Also, you realise he's 4 years younger than Warne

He played the majority of games in his career after the turn of the century... Definitely had the most success

If there was a list of best players this century

At the moment he would be sitting 3rd... And the best bowler in that period

Kallis, Ponting, Murali, Gilchrist, Sangakkara, Dravid, Steyn, Hayden, Chanderpaul, Pieterson

Would be my bet

Not too many of the Wisden top 5 in there... I'd say there were a few other unlucky also
Lillee, Hadlee, Imran, Gavaskar, Barnes, Hammond, Miandad, G. Chappell, Marshall, Hutton, Akram, Garner and many more.... In fact Lara and Tendulker must have been close
Sachin nearly a hundred tests at nearly 60 at that stage
And Lara world record scores in Test and First Class and a freak


Anyways... I could speak cricket forever, but it isn't a forum for that... So I'm out