Warne's run at wicket record {R}

[babytiger2001]

He's equalled it, as Australia's second test against Sri Lanka in Cairns has reached its end.

Warne equals record -- foxsports.news.com.au (http://www.foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,10124756-23209,00.html)

Warne bowled 37 consecutive overs and took 4-70 in Sri Lanka's second innings to draw level with Muttiah Muralitharan on 527 wickets in his 112th Test.

Getting the record, I'm sure, will be achieved the next time he bowls.

http://www.foxsports.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,5001,361061,00.jpg

For as much as he's had to endure, and much of it self-inflicted, he's certainly been a great bowler and a wonderful cricketer. And deserving of the record.

[ScouseCat]

http://www.zaheerfazal.com/images/crciketpics/005542.jpg
And he's a Victorian!! :D

Seriously though, Shane Warne is and always will be the greatest spinner the world has ever seen, regardless of the number of wickets he and Muralitharan end up with at the end of their careers. Warne has taken his wickets against the best countries in the world, playing on all types of wickets and different conditions, whereas the majority of Murali's wickets have been taken in Sri Lanka where they make pitches to suit him, and also against the weaker test playing countries. Also, Murali's suspect bowling action will always be questioned, even though it's too late for the ICC to do anything about it.

However, lets not take anything away from Shane Warne... to take 527 test wickets is a marvellous achievement, one which makes me proud to be an Australian cricket fan. Lets hope he can take many more wickets for Australia.

[OldFanatic]

Congrats to Warne. But is it really necessary to put down Murali about his achievements? Unfortunately, I don't expect the controversy surrounding Murali to be be resolved, and there will be a number of books written about it (maybe 5-10 years down the road).

[Andy TAUS]

Different teams, different approaches.

Warne is one of 3-4 top bowlers in the Australian team, thus Shane is forced to wait his turn to share the wickets, after the Aussie "quicks" have had their go.

On the other hand Murali is the best with a few quick bowlers in the Sri Lankan team (Vaas probably being the only other bowler of note in SL's team). He gets to play as their strike bowler and takes most of their wickets in all games he plays.

Warne's potential victims pool is smaller than Murali's.

Both are to be congratulated for their respective achievements.

[BhoysFC1995]

and to Murali's defense, he recently bowled in england with some sort of metal or plastic device on his arm that prevented it from bending. then he also did it without and there was no difference in arm movement.

anyways, congrats to warne, however Murali will get a chance first to overtake it i believe b/c they play a Test before Australia.

[Andy TAUS]

anyways, congrats to warne, however Murali will get a chance first to overtake it i believe b/c they play a Test before Australia.This leap-frogging of tests is always going to be the case, due to the tour schedules of all ICC countries.

BTW, Murali bowled in SL's recent tour of Zimbabwe whereas the Australia tests against Zimbabwe were cancelled. Hence less opportunity for Shane (IMHO - he'd be just ahead at the moment, even if Murali had toured AUS with SL).

The arm device was just a gimmick. Won't be allowed by the ICC as it will constitute an illegal aid to any bowler. It's not in the same rank of approved protection aids as pads, helmets, private parts protectors.

Bowlers have to blowl without any aids.

[BhoysFC1995]

i thought the point of him bowling with and without the device was to show that he wasn't breaking any rules with his style of bowling?

[ScouseCat]

Lets compare Warne and Muralitharan's statistics against each test playing country.

Code:

Muttiah Muralitharan - Si Lanka
Shane Warne - Australia


(6 ball overs) Mat O R W BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 5 10

overall 90 5120.4 11998 527 9/51 16/220 22.76 2.34 58.2 44 13
112 5248.2 13425 527 8/71 12/128 25.47 2.55 59.7 27 8

v Australia 10 515.3 1571 50 6/59 11/212 31.42 3.04 61.8 5 1
0 - - - - - - - - - -
v Bangladesh 2 89.5 209 20 5/13 10/98 10.45 2.32 26.9 4 2
0 - - - - - - - - - -
v England 10 768.3 1431 69 9/65 16/220 20.73 1.86 66.8 4 2
26 1298.4 3040 132 8/71 11/110 23.03 2.34 59.0 7 2
v India 12 637 1680 51 8/87 11/196 32.94 2.63 74.9 3 1
11 514.1 1608 29 4/47 6/113 55.44 3.12 106.3 0 0
v New Zealand 10 536 1232 52 5/30 9/227 23.69 2.29 61.8 4 0
15 734.5 1881 75 6/31 9/67 25.08 2.55 58.7 2 0
v Pakistan 12 623.5 1622 68 6/71 10/148 23.85 2.60 55.0 4 1
12 550.4 1414 76 7/23 11/77 18.60 2.56 43.4 6 2
v South Africa 12 755 1747 77 7/84 13/171 22.68 2.31 58.8 8 2
18 1021.4 2257 101 7/56 12/128 22.34 2.20 60.6 6 2
v Sri Lanka 0 - - - - - - - - - -
13 527.5 1507 59 5/43 10/155 25.54 2.85 53.6 5 2
v West Indies 8 408.1 1039 53 6/81 11/170 19.60 2.54 46.2 6 2
16 547.2 1581 49 7/52 8/117 32.26 2.88 67.0 1 0
v Zimbabwe 14 786.5 1467 87 9/51 13/115 16.86 1.86 54.2 6 2
1 53.1 137 6 3/68 6/137 22.83 2.57 53.1 0 0

in Australia 2 92 348 3 2/224 2/224 116.00 3.78 184.0 0 0
52 2439.4 6165 235 8/71 12/128 26.23 2.52 62.2 12 4
in England 3 239.5 517 24 9/65 16/220 21.54 2.15 59.9 3 1
17 872.2 2034 89 7/165 11/229 22.85 2.33 58.8 5 1
in India 5 264.2 731 15 5/162 5/162 48.73 2.76 105.7 1 0
6 319.1 1045 20 4/47 5/107 52.25 3.27 95.7 0 0
in New Zealand 4 167 382 13 5/64 6/105 29.38 2.28 77.0 1 0
6 288.2 670 32 4/8 7/86 20.93 2.32 54.0 0 0
in Pakistan 7 409.5 1053 49 6/71 10/148 21.48 2.56 50.1 2 1
3 181.4 504 18 6/136 9/240 28.00 2.77 60.5 2 0
in South Africa 6 353.1 911 35 6/39 11/161 26.02 2.57 60.5 3 1
9 485.5 1060 46 6/161 8/231 23.04 2.18 63.3 1 0
in Sri Lanka 52 3083.2 6884 337 9/51 13/115 20.42 2.23 54.8 30 10
9 317.2 982 48 7/94 11/188 20.45 3.09 39.6 6 3
in U.A.E. 0 - - - - - - - - - -
2 69 154 16 5/74 8/24 9.62 2.23 25.8 1 0
in West Indies 4 174.4 456 25 5/34 8/106 18.24 2.61 41.9 3 0
7 221.5 674 17 4/70 6/142 39.64 3.03 78.2 0 0
in Zimbabwe 7 336.3 716 26 6/45 8/82 27.53 2.12 77.6 1 0
1 53.1 137 6 3/68 6/137 22.83 2.57 53.1 0 0


home 52 3083.2 6884 337 9/51 13/115 20.42 2.23 54.8 30 10
52 2439.4 6165 235 8/71 12/128 26.23 2.52 62.2 12 4
away 38 2037.2 5114 190 9/65 16/220 26.91 2.51 64.3 14 3
57 2684.4 6918 265 7/165 11/229 26.10 2.57 60.7 13 3
neutral 0 - - - - - - - - - -
3 124 342 27 7/94 11/188 12.66 2.75 27.5 2 1

[Andy TAUS]

i thought the point of him bowling with and without the device was to show that he wasn't breaking any rules with his style of bowling?The testing in front of the high-speed video cameras (at U of WA) tried to do that but proved his Doosra ("wrong-un") broke the standing ICC rules wrt over-bending of the arm (double the amount permitted) in the bowling action. SL have supported him to the degree where they want the rule changed to accommodate such. I'd say NO and that the rules shouldn't be changed to accommodate any individual. He should stop bowling an illegal delivery or change his action to make it become legal, just like the rest of his repetoire of deliveries (which are legal).

IMHO it's pointless doing a test in such test-lab conditions as anything could happen in a real-live match, where it counts.

I'd leave it up to the umpires (that's what they're there to do). If arguments flow about intimidation of both sides (umpires &/or bowler), so be it.

They are all grown & mature people, I would hope.

[Craig the Aussie]

He should have been no-balled out of the game well before he even got to Test cricket, or very soon afterwards - same as happened to blokes like Meckiff, Rorke and Giffen

Read this for some interesting background on "chucking"

http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/JUL/013285_WCM_09JUL2004.html

[ScouseCat]

He should have been no-balled out of the game well before he even got to Test cricket, or very soon afterwards - same as happened to blokes like Meckiff, Rorke and Giffen
Agreed.

When Muralitharan was no-balled in the Boxing Day test of 1995, the ICC should have stood tough and banned him from the game altogether. The fact they didn't means there'll always be doubts over his achievements because of his suspect bowling action.

[Capt. Socceroo]

Interestingly, after the comments by the PM (John Howard for those that were too embarrased to ask :) ), the leader of the Opposition, Mr Mark "I am NOT a cry baby" Latham has come out and said in an interview with Inside Sports that he supports Little Johhny......he also thinks Murali is a chucker.

[OldFanatic]

Bump. Move to cricket forum.