Murali 700: Congratulations

[butchering lee]

Originally Posted by Verso

Murali has got a suspect action. People will question it. Thats cricket!

well - you're right cricket questions everything. Big bats, squash balls, ear plugs, ball tampering, umpires decisions, umpires integrity...

i find it much stranger that the one thing that was not quickly forgotten was the one that was most rigorously tested, re-tested, re-re-tested ... privately, expertly, scientifically, judiously and globally and still remains questioned.

I feel its time to question the motives of the questioners - as rigorously.

Except that most of us who have spent any time talking about cricket have had this little discussion so often and always reached the same conclusions...mine is...well done Murali - spin king extrodinaire!!

[Nostromo]

Superb post BL. You have said in a few lines what most unbiased and genuine cricket lovers feel.

[Milo]

Originally Posted by butchering lee

it seems you are saying murali doesn't do hard work. but with those figures who can seriously argue with the decision to throw him the ball.

That's not what I am saying - of course he does plenty of hard work against better opposition. I am saying that Muralitharan is given every opportunity to take as many wickets as possible. It was not necessary to throw him the ball when other bowlers were taking wickets and would have loved to have had the opportunity of taking out the Bangladesh lower order. I'm not aruging with the decision to give him the ball, but I am highlighting that his 700 wickets in quicker time than Warne are to some extent because of this. If this had been an Australian bowling innings, McGrath, Gillespie and the other paceman would have wrapped up the innings and Warne would NOT have been brought on to clean up the tail and bag himself a nice easy five for.

As I've said, Murali is a fantastic bowler but there are reasons for his remarkable test figures (like 20 odd 10 wicket matches) that will never be equalled.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by Milo

I am saying that Muralitharan is given every opportunity to take as many wickets as possible. It was not necessary to throw him the ball when other bowlers were taking wickets and would have loved to have had the opportunity of taking out the Bangladesh lower order.

This arguement makes no sense. If the Sri Lankan captain chooses to bowl Murali at any stage of his opponents' innings for whatever reason, it is his right to do so. If Murali or his colleagues are not complaining about it, what the b****y business is it to outsiders?

[Milo]

It makes perfect sense to me and others that I have discussed the topic with. You were the one that mentioned that Murali had been the faster of the two to 700 wickets. I was merely trying to explain why this might have been the case.

Why did you feel you had to mention that he got there quicker than Warne?

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by Milo

Why did you feel you had to mention that he got there quicker than Warne?

Just as a matter of fact, that's all. I still am not sure within myself which one of the two is the better bowler overall. I suppose it depends on the definition of "better". I personally think Murali is the better wicket-taker (and hence the quicker of the two to the 700 mark) but Warne the better matchwinner. I suppose that lends support to your hypothesis that Warne takes the more important wickets, which I agree might be the case. But that is probably because Warne's captains have used him more effectively. Murali is also capable of doing that and in fact IMO, rather than being over-used against tailenders, I sometimes think that SL captains have sometimes underused Murali against the higher order opposition batsmen.

[Milo]

I think that's a very fair statement Nostromo. I can't argue with that.

[sittingduck]

Sadly Murali is to cricket what Barry Bonds is to baseball (and no I'm not saying either are drug cheats)

But there acheivements, as amazing as they are, will always be marred by the controversy surrounding their careers.

Like bonds beating Hank Aaron if Murali goes past Warne then in the end these issues (drugs, chucking, whatever) affects the game as a whole tarnishing one of the most cherished records in either game.

And for the record, he's not a chucker the ICC changed the rules to accomodate his action.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by sittingduck

And for the record, he's not a chucker the ICC changed the rules to accomodate his action.

I think it is more like ICC clarified the rules. Furthermore, for a slow spinner like Murali, it is more likley that any attempt at chucking is more than likley to result in loss of control rather than any advantage. Control is something that Murali has in plenty and that in itself suggests that he is bowling with the full whirl of his right arm, which happens to be congenitally bent at the elbow.

B S Chandrasekhar of India had his right wrist and forearm withered by childhood polio, but he used it very effectively to bowl his quickish leg-breaks later in life. If he had been bowling today, someone would no doubt have raised objections because of the "unfair advantage".