The greatest inditement of Aussie wickets ever: if any stat warranted just tearing the lot up (or simply deeming them unfit for Test cricket) then it is the one you offer. It's not as if Murali bowls badly in Australia.... it's just (as the great England finger spinners of the 1950s, 60s and 70s found, and as even the very best medium pace seamers have found)... most Aussie pitches absolutely suck.

Warne bowls extremely slowly and his weapons are flight, dip and bounce... hence his periodic struggles on low and slow pitches. Murali bowls slightly more quickly and gives the batsmen less time to pick the delivery and get to the pitch of the ball... but his craft is based on exploiting the pitch and conditions - which he does far better than Warne, but cannot do on Aussie pitches that give him nothing to exploit (especially on the first few days, but quite commonly even towards the end of the game).

Now factor in one final, absolutely crucial difference: Warne's team. Murali has not just had to carry his attack... he's had (very often) to compensate for the inadequacies of a passable rather than decent batting side. His own side's batting has rare given him runs to play with. He's rarely been able to crowd fielders around the bat. IN many cases, as in the second Aussie innings of this game, he's had to bowl against batsmen who've already batted his side out of the game and who have a license to play VERY aggressively.

Statistics shouldn't be used to seperate these two bowlers... who are no more comparable than Warne and McGrath: they both bowl at less than 80 mph and spin the ball... but that's where the similarities end. For the purist (like me) the flight, drift and dip of Warne is more pleasing... but just as the measure of a swing bowler is found when the ball swings... and the measure of a seamer is found when the seam is prominent and the bounce is good... so the measure of a finger spinner is ability to exploit rough, cracks and uneven bounce... and in that, Murali has been supreme.