Muttiah Muralitharan and Shane Warne, the two most successful bowlers in the history of Test cricket, were no strangers to courting controversy during their stellar careers – Murali’s came on the field while Warne’s was largely off it.
Warne left the scene first, in January 2007 after 145 Tests, with a world record 708 scalps at an average of 25.4.
On 3 December that year Murali surpassed the Australian’s tally and by the time he retired in July 2010 his 133 Tests had reaped 800 wickets at 22.7.
Murali took his wickets every 55.0 deliveries while Warne’s career strike rate was 57.4.
In terms of five-wicket hauls – often seen as the equivalent of a century by a batsman – Murali is light years ahead with 67, Warne is the second most successful in that area with 37.
Murali claimed ten or more wickets in a match 22 times while Warne again sits second overall with ten.
Murali’s economy rate was 2.47, Warne’s 2.65.
The Sri Lankan’s best innings figures were 9-52 and his greatest match haul 16-220.
Warne’s best was 8-71 and 12-128 respectively.
On raw statistics Murali is clearly superior.
Interestingly, the two both made their Test debuts in 1992 – Warne in January against India at Sydney and Murali in August at Galle against Australia.
In 2001 the sport’s preeminent publication, the Wisden Almanack, chose its five Greatest Cricketers of the 20th Century.
As of 31 December 1999, Muralitharan had played 48 Tests, claiming 227 wickets at 27.0 with 17 five-wicket hauls.
Warne by comparison had made 80 Test appearances during which he claimed 351 wickets at 25.7 with 16 five-wicket hauls.
The panel of 100 eminent cricket luminaries – current and former players and longstanding members of the media – chose Warne at number four.
In all, 49 players received votes.
Murali did not poll one.
In October 2013 – after both Warne and Murali had retired – Wisden celebrated its 150th birthday and to honour the occasion chose its all-time Test XI using a similar method.
Warne was included, Murali was not.
Murali’s career was plagued with claims that his bowling action contravened the laws of the game.
On four occasions he was forced to undergo testing with respect to the legality of his action as a result of being cited by either umpires or match referees.
In 2004 the ICC made changes to the laws covering illegal bowling actions, moving from illegality being a partial or complete straightening of the arm from the time the arm had reached the level of the shoulder to straightening being allowed from that point as long as it did not exceed 15 degrees.
The variance to the law came in the same year that Murali had been found to have a degree of flex in his elbow when bowling his doosra of 14 degrees after testing was conducted at the University of Western Australia.
Many dubbed the change the “Murali Law”.
But, regardless of what changes were made, the fact remains that the Sri Lankan officially took 800 Test wickets.
Is it merely the raised eyebrows over the years with respect to his technique that has seen Murali snubbed for such gongs as the ones mentioned above or is there in fact legitimate claims to Warne being the superior bowler despite the raw statistical data leaning so heavily towards the Sri Lankan?
Murali had a far greater opportunity than Warne to bowl on more spin friendly pitches.
In 73 Tests at home, he claimed 493 wickets at 19.6 while on the road he took his 307 wickets at 27.8.
Taking that a step further, on the traditional spin-biased sub-continent (Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) he played 97 Tests where he claimed 612 wickets at 21.7.
Away from the sub-continent his 36 Tests netted 188 scalps at 26.1.
In Australia, a country with few grounds seen as being as spin friendly as the sub-continent, Warne played 69 Tests for 329 wickets at 26.4.
On the road, in 76 Tests, he captured 379 wickets at 24.7.
On the sub-continent Warne played 25 Tests where he claimed 127 scalps at 26.8.
Both bowlers struggled in India – Murali captured 40 wickets at 45.4 in 11 Tests while Warne played nine Tests for 34 wickets at 43.1.
Warne was of course never required to have bowled against Australia which was the world number one Test side for much of his time in Test ranks.
Murali did, on 13 occasions, taking 59 wickets at 36.1 – his record on Australian pitches was far from flattering with his five appearances netting just 12 wickets at 75.4.
Murali, with the exception of paceman Chaminda Vass, had little genuine quality support for the bulk of his Test career.
In 133 Tests he was on the victorious side 54 times, a winning percentage of 40.6.
Warne savoured victory 92 times in his 145-match career for a winning percentage of 63.4.
With so many high quality bowling teammates he was greatly aided when it came to team success.
The fact that he had to compete with the likes of Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie, Brett Lee and Stuart MacGill for wickets it logically means he would had fewer opportunities to return five-wicket hauls.
One of the more telling statistics in the Warne-Murali debate is the number of matches the pair played against the minnows.
Warne only played Zimbabwe and Bangladesh a total of three times, claiming 17 wickets at 25.7.
Murali played each on a combined 25 occasions during which he captured 176 scalps at 15.1.
If you remove the matches against those two nations from the pair’s career record it looks like this – Warne 691 wickets at 25.4, Murali 624 wickets at 24.9.
Perhaps another key aspect behind the fact that many have Warne ahead of Murali is the belief that the art of leg-spin is far more difficult to perfect than finger-spin.
Down through the decades leg-spin has traditionally been seen as a more fascinating and mysterious craft although the likes of Murali have added plenty of mystique to finger-spin in recent times by deriving the doosra.
Like so many comparisons in sport, everyone will have their own ideas and draw their own conclusions.
After all, one of the joys of sport is the fact it is such a great platform for debate.
So Roarers, he is your chance right now – who do you believe was the superior Test match bowler?
Moses Ceraman
Guest
Murali by a country mile! Ask Steve Waugh! Murali was no balled only in Australia as Australian Cricket has a winning at all cost reputation! (Under arm bowling for example). He played infront of some ofthe greatest umpires Dickey Bird, David Shepherd, Steve Bucknor et al, and none had an issue. Furthermore, Warne was convicted of drug cheat and betting scandal both of which CA conveniently ignored. Off the field he was anything but a role model!
Sadha
Guest
Yes, Murali is the greatest and most of Warnes wickets were against SA, ENG and NZ, whose players were poor against spin
Big Dog
Guest
Gattings specialty was playing spin though..
Sminu Das
Guest
Its Murali all the way. ......."Change is the only thing that never changes".....goes the saying. Every game which exists in this world rules are changing.....over a period of time. Even in Athletic events like Javalin this is happening. Then why crying over King Muralis action.......even after ICC cleared him. Who was Murali'S greatest opponent?......That is missing in the countless no of comments posted here......His greatest opponent was not any batsman .......not any team. It was the western media and fans .........He had to perform in a world who is shouting Chucker..... Thousands around you Shouting at you.....Ridiculing you....... writing articles against you....... against all these odds he needs to fight. He did it miraculously......and came out with figures any bowler can dreamt of.......Still some cannot admit ......... Anyway world is a funny place........
JB
Guest
Murali was right to be no-balled early in his career! He clearly chucked it! Anyone who thinks he didn't chuck the ball is a joke. And look at all the chuckers who followed...it's finally been stopped 20 years too late. You cannot bowl an off spinner the other way (a doosra) without bending the arm somewhat and thrusting at the elbow or reverting to a leg spin action (eg Ashwin's carun ball) it's that simple. Anyone with years of spin bowling experience knows this and it's an insult to those who have grown up bowling spin legitimately. Murali's records should not exist. Everyone became too pc and didn't want to offend him by banning him but it was the right thing to do. He wasn't following the laws or even the spirit of the game
Kavafy
Guest
Darrell Hair was a terrible umpire. As has been said above, if you are OK with McGrath, Hadlee, Donald, Lillie and most of the greats of the games being chuckers, then yes you call call Murali a chucker too.
fiddlesticks
Guest
"you can only play what is in front of you" that makes no sense and doesnt strengthen your argument one bit. How about archie thompson versus samoa? does that make him a better footballer than ronaldo?
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
If you take out Tests against minnows then both Warne and Murali averaged 25. I will never be convinced that Murali didn't contravene the laws of the game (before they were changed to ensure that he didn't) so to me there's no argument as to who was the better bowler.
Prash
Guest
...and why do you think *Warne* was a chucker?
MICHAEL
Guest
Pubes, SHORT???? and wide.It just spun more than usual???? Who put the spin on it???? And short, it was pitched perfeclty.
Ro Kon
Roar Rookie
If were Murali's opponents Aus or Eng he would achieve 800 wickets playing only 83 matches that's what stats says .
Mark From Derby
Guest
Ok Murali's action got past the ICC but how did Zimbabwe and Bangladesh get passed as Test Cricket nations. F me. If Lillee's wickets in the super tests cannot be counted surely Murali's against these no hoper nations should be wiped also. Who are the F Wits who decide which nations are good enough to play test cricket. If Kenya beat Bangladesh in a 4 day game would anyone give a rats arse? Oh shit we better let Kenya in!! The Zims and the Bangla stats should only count after they have won a series against one of the big 7. In that case I am declaring Shane Warne as the greatest wicket taker in Test cricket!
Happy Hooker
Guest
Bobby, you are suffering from the same misapprehension that others are. The fact that he couldn't straighten his arm fully is irrelevant. As someone else has pointed out, the fact you can't get it to 180 degrees is not the issue, it is the act of straightening the arm from say 150 degrees to 170 degrees. The fact of making it "more straight" is the issue, not making it completely straight. Whilst there are now protocols for reporting bowlers with dodgy actions, the laws of cricket have not changed. There is nothing in the laws of cricket about a leeway of 15 degrees.
Happy Hooker
Guest
Especially if you were allowed to chuck.
jutsie
Guest
Murali didnt intentionally go out to cheat, and people who think that modern sport is so pure that we should adhere to anicent rules to the letter of law at the expense of generating public interest/revenue are delusional. Yes murali got cleared because of the ICC's comercial interest but who cares, he made the game interesting and he wasnt a systematic cheat like lance armstrong or the guys still playing the game that are fixing matches and taking money from bookies...lets not forget that warnie also has this black mark against his name not just the diuretic incident. Nevertheless i still rate warnie as the better player mainly because of his mental fortitude. as a sri lankan supporter too often i was left frustrated watching murali and his teammates bow their heads and revert to conservative tactics when the opposition got the better of them, murali was known to start bowling around the wicket to right handers to limit damage instead of inviting the batsmen to attack him and often his body language was poor with shoulders slumped and head down after a batsmen got the better of him. Warne on the other hand was supremely confident in his own abilities like all true greats. As some mentioned above warne won more games that seemed lost than murali did. He was the master of dragging his team up from the canvas and he always invited batsmen to slog him as he knew eventually he'd get the better of them.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I understand that, but the way it was declared legal (ie, let's work out what he does and then redefine chucking so that whatever he does fits into the realm of legal) was a pretty poor way to go about things.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I agree. If someone joined any team I've ever played in and bowled with that action in the nets I can't imagine they'd have ever been given the chance to bowl in a game because everyone would have said it was an illegal action. In countries like Australia and England where you tend to get players who are more coached and less of the really unusual techniques, someone with that action would never be able to play any decent level of cricket and never would have reached international level in the first place.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Far from it. I think people don't like the fact that rather than allow him to get called for chucking, the ICC simply redefined chucking in a way that allowed him to play simply because the Sri Lankan's just screamed racism every time anybody questioned his action. Johan Botha has white skin and is just as much a chucker. He just hasn't done as well with it. Basically, anyone who bowls a doosra is a chucker because you can't bowl a doosra without chucking. So the ICC has to go and change the rules to allow Murali and others to keep bowling. That is what gets under people's skin. It's got nothing to do with skin colour. In fact, Murali comes across as an incredibly likable guy. As a person I think I definitely prefer him to Warne, but I can't agree with redefining chucking for someone no matter how nice a guy they are.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Bobby, I'm not trying to argue for Ponting over Kallis, but to mention fielding as being on Kallis side is crazy, Ponting was one of the best fieldsmen ever.
BrainsTrust
Guest
The big thing to advantage Murali was playing in Sri Lanka, though I don;t see Warne as being able to perform that well there because of his weight in the tropical heat. Australia having a superior team was an advantage for Warne in terms of bowling average. If you bowl out teams twice then you get to bowl at the tail twice. Not facing Australia was a big advantage for Warne. ZImbabwe were not that bad in the 90's but Murali got to play Zimbabwe more when they fell off. Bangladesh are niot bad against leg spinners, Warne doesn't have a better record against them. Warne's best record is against Pakistan who are supposed to be good against spin but also notorious for fixing matches against Australia with late collapses. As far as the bowling actions 15 degrees is the degree of permissible straightening. Its the fast bowlers who actually straighten the arm most not Murali, Murali keeps his arm bent but rotates where he is pointing his elbow.