not many aussie posts after that jolly good

Of course not. That would be too even handed.

i know this thread is meant to be about if murali would be called if he played for england but how many wickets do you think he will get before he retires

I'll go 850. Briliant bowler as we have learned to our cost.

I actually came here to start a thread about this but I'll just continue here. I wrote about this on my site about if yuo were Murali you'd be a bit miffed at the moment with all the hype surrounding Warne's 700 wickets. If you look at their stats, Murali is by far the better bowler:


mat balls runs wkts bbi bbm ave econ sr
Murali 110 36705 14649 674 9/51 16/220 21.73 2.39 54.45
Warne 143 40315 17818 699 8/71 12/128 25.49 2.65 57.67
There's no doubt that Warne has done HEAPS for the game, but it does seem unfair that Murali is overlooked so often, despite having his action cleared time and time again.

__________________
Six and Out: Fine cricket journalism: http://www.sixandout.net/

Maybe because we have no desire to enter into circular discussions. But i will humor your post (31)

I covered that very question with post #23.

Off topic and like this issue has been discussed ad-nausium. If you want to revisit the issue then start a thread on it. This thread however, is about Muralitheran and his action. All i will say is this:
The diaretic Warne was caught with in his system was not performance enhancing. And even if he played with while using the stuff (he did'nt), it would have had no effect on the way he delivered the ball. Unlike certain others in recent history, Warne served his ban.

The poll on this thread reflects opinion in the sporting world. Half think his action should have been legalised, half reckon he should have been thrown out of the game. He was'nt, he will take the record, and that record will always be a controvesial one won't it? But there will never be any question about Warne's greatness as a player.

__________________

it wasn't brought in JUST for him, but it was brought in because of murali nonetheless

__________________
viva monty!

It doesn't escape the principle of the matter though - Warne used a banned *illegal* substance, and yes, rightly got a ban for it, BUT it doesn't exactly set the a good example to the millions of kids who look up to him, does it? It was a bit like Linford Christie as an ambassador for British Athletics... everyone thought he was touchless, the perfect example of a great athlete... then we found he used steroids...

(and off topic here, but the drug wouldn't be banned if it wasn't deemed to give an unfair advantage - yes, it's commonly used to cover up the use of other drugs, but in Warne's case he said he was using it to help control his weight, I think - surely if it was controlling his weight / strength / fitness then it IS going to affect how he delivers the ball / how long he can bowl for etc etc.)

And this is the problem I have - so many people are expressing their opinion as quasi fact - that is, "well Murali was cleared of his action, but we all know it's illegal" - it's simply not so - he does not have an illegal action according to the powers that be and people should accept that. Sure he has a very unorthodox action but I don't think his action gives him any unnatural advantage (in a using steroids / rocket launcher up his sleeve type way) - it's just the way he bowls and he's good at it (same as Malinga - he's got a butt ugly action but he's still good with it...).

You're right here... Warne IS a great player, and he WILL go down in history as probably the best ever (leg spinner at least). He definitely appears to have given a lot more to the game as a whole than Murali ever has / ever will which is why people will remember him.

__________________
Six and Out: Fine cricket journalism: http://www.sixandout.net/

Exactly, Murali along with Shoaib and Brett Lee are the 3 bowlers who benefit from this rule the most.

What concerns me is that when the pressure is on to take wickets whats to stop Murali flexing his elbow at 25 degrees or more and then running through a team? The answer: There is nothing to stop him doing that, and if he did and got reported whats then to stop him "bowling" properly, well within the 15 degree law and then you get all of his fans spouting "his actions fine!"

The fact of the matter is, yes, his action is legal, but his fans have to realise it is only legal because the laws were changed to make it legal.

And he will overtake Warne and i reckon he will go on to take 1000+ test wickets, a record which i doubt will EVER be beaten (unless Zimbabwe get full test status again and start playing 5 match series), unfortunately that record WILL always be tainted because of his action.

That said he is still a GREAT bowler because of his variations and control because surely it must be harder to control the length with that much arm flex?

__________________
Mark.

Firstly I'm very impressed at an aussie using a Latin phrase (I'd have been even more impressed if you had spelt it correctly )and if indeed this continued discussion makes you feel sick as that phrase implies then I apologise.

Just found it interesting that you assert that half the cricketing world feels murali's action is unfair. As far as I can see its mainly Australians who feel that and despite many of your countrymen's views to the contrary you do not represent half the cricketing world or anything close to it.

Regarding Warnes drug ban he did not serve the proper sentence as it was halved. I think Dick Pound's stance on that issue says it all.