[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

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.



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]

And he's a Victorian!!

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]

Originally Posted by BhoysFC1995

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]

Originally Posted by 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?

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_data...09JUL2004.html