Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[RicePlateReddy]

Anil Kumble has taken 5 wickets in an innings and 10 wickets in a match at a better rate than Shane Warne:

Kumble 110 tests 33 instances of 5 wickets in an innings and 8 instances of 10 wickets in a match.
A 5 wicket in an innings every 3.33 tests.
A 10 wickets in a match every 13.75 tests.

Warne 140 tests 36 instances of 5 wickets in an innings and 10 instances of 10 wickets per match.
A 5 wicket in an innings every 3.88 tests.
A 10 wickets in a match every 14 tests.

(For comparison:
Muralitharan 106 tests 53 5 wickets in an innings and 16 10 wickets in a match
A 5 wicket in an innings every 2 tests!
A 1-0 wickets in a match every 6.625 tests!
Murali is simply amazing)

The 5 wickets in an innings and 10 wickets in a match are just 2 commonly tracked metrics and certainly don't convey the whole picture. Overall the strike rates (number of balls per wicket) of the three bowlers are Murali 55.37, Warne 57.30 and Kumble 65.45. One should also bear in mind that Kumble is overbowled the most followed by Murali followed by Warne. Warne has by far the best bowling support and while this helps in the pressure situation, it also means he sometimes can get less wickets because his teammates run through the opposition more frequently. Also, he has probably bowled on more responsive pitches more often.

Botton line of course - all three are great. They are close to perfect contemporaries too as they will all likely exit the stage within 3 years of each other.

[pieterSAN]

Personally I find it very difficult to rate Anil Kumble at the same level as Shane Warne. I agree that they are both great performers for their respective teams. I just think that Shane Warne was even better. I don't care for Murali (personal choice). 

I know that some people bring up Shane Warne lack of success against India - I feel Kumble would have struggled against Indian batsman too. I just feel that Shane Warne is unbelievable in executing different plans. Kumble has less success with plan B or plan C (if he ever has one).

[vijay]

The other thing to consider is that Australia has other big time wkt takers too e.g. McGrath, Lee, Gillespie. If the Australian pacers are going full throttle, a bunch of wkts could've fallen before Warne is given a chance to bowl.  India, on the other hand, has a thin bowling line up. More need ,and therefore more opportunity, for Kumble to deliver.

[kban1]

vijay:

The corollary to that argument would be
1) Kumble being asked to bowl much earlier than  a normal spinner would -- wheeling away using the new ball whereas Warne often comes in to bowl at the appropriate time for a spinner
2) Kumble bowling more often to well set batsmen because the other bowlers have failed to do their job while Warne getting the chance to bowl at batsmen who have come to the crease recently because the opening bowlers have done their job.
3) Kumble being overused -- as a strike bowler and a stock bowler whereas Warne gets to play his attacking bowlers role.
4) Kumble not benefitting from support from the other end --which means the batsman only have to survive his over whereas Warne benefitiing from economical and or wickettaking bowlers at the other end (Gillespie, McGrath -both or Lee -wickettaking).

At the end of the day, some will argue this is why AK's SR is lower.

This argument for Warne or for Kumble could be framed in different ways. Better just to sit back and enjoy both greats.

PS: I am one of those who holds Warne's lack of success against the better players of spin (SRT, Siddhu, VVS) in the Indian team as a minus point in his resume.

[vijay]

kban1- excellent points. applause.

[Aloo Kashmiri Ul Haq]

it's just a personal choice with spinners, the sight of a shane warne dismissal is just amazing. but you cannot take away the fact that
1. even though kumble might not have bowled to the indian batsmen he has bowled to pakistan and he has been quite successful, i don't think you can say the same about warne
2. muralitharan - i am not a biomechanics expert, so not sure about the chucking bit. but if he doesnt chuck then to me he is by far the better of the 3

didn't someone in the fav batsman/bowler thread say that danish kaneria was their favorite bowler

[ramshorns]

it's just a personal choice with spinners, the sight of a shane warne dismissal is just amazing. but you cannot take away the fact that
1. even though kumble might not have bowled to the indian batsmen he has bowled to pakistan and he has been quite successful, i don't think you can say the same about warne
2. muralitharan - i am not a biomechanics expert, so not sure about the chucking bit. but if he doesnt chuck then to me he is by far the better of the 3

didn't someone in the fav batsman/bowler thread say that danish kaneria was their favorite bowler

No he is not a chucker.  A perfectly normal action for a person with a physical disability. It is the Richie Benaud's of the world with their baised views make you sound that way.  With Bishen the less said the better.

Murali is a genius like SRT.  That's all there is to it.

Visit the thread on "NAME YOUR FAVORITE BATSMAN/BOWLER".  I have Murali in my list of greatest bowlers.  Because you said you learned a lot on cricket on this DG and that thread has some good posts.c

[Aloo Kashmiri Ul Haq]

it's just a personal choice with spinners, the sight of a shane warne dismissal is just amazing. but you cannot take away the fact that
1. even though kumble might not have bowled to the indian batsmen he has bowled to pakistan and he has been quite successful, i don't think you can say the same about warne
2. muralitharan - i am not a biomechanics expert, so not sure about the chucking bit. but if he doesnt chuck then to me he is by far the better of the 3

didn't someone in the fav batsman/bowler thread say that danish kaneria was their favorite bowler

No he is not a chucker.  A perfectly normal action for a person with a physical disability. It is the Richie Benaud's of the world with their baised views make you sound that way.  With Bishen the less said the better.

Murali is a genius like SRT.  That's all there is to it.

Visit the thread on "NAME YOUR FAVORITE BATSMAN/BOWLER".  I have Murali in my list of greatest bowlers.  Because you said you learned a lot on cricket on this DG and that thread has some good posts.c

i did read that post  and i was surprised that you didn't have vvs in your list of favorite batsmen, wouldn't the disability give him(murali) an advantage then? also seen you have been following cricket for long would a chandrasekhar be considered to have a controversial action

[ramshorns]

it's just a personal choice with spinners, the sight of a shane warne dismissal is just amazing. but you cannot take away the fact that
1. even though kumble might not have bowled to the indian batsmen he has bowled to pakistan and he has been quite successful, i don't think you can say the same about warne
2. muralitharan - i am not a biomechanics expert, so not sure about the chucking bit. but if he doesnt chuck then to me he is by far the better of the 3

didn't someone in the fav batsman/bowler thread say that danish kaneria was their favorite bowler

No he is not a chucker.  A perfectly normal action for a person with a physical disability. It is the Richie Benaud's of the world with their baised views make you sound that way.  With Bishen the less said the better.

Murali is a genius like SRT.  That's all there is to it.

Visit the thread on "NAME YOUR FAVORITE BATSMAN/BOWLER".  I have Murali in my list of greatest bowlers.  Because you said you learned a lot on cricket on this DG and that thread has some good posts.c

i did read that post  and i was surprised that you didn't have vvs in your list of favorite batsmen, wouldn't the disability give him an advantage then? also seen you have been following cricket for long would a chandrasekhar be considered to have a controversial action

No not at all. If anything the disability is taking away what he has in bowling with so much variety, by looking like a chucker where in appreciating his bowling we second guess.  There are chucksters like Shabbir/Shoaib(Occasionally) then we have Murali who has a deformity.

Also on VVS, ofcourse I like him a lot.  But he comes next to Vishy in my personal list of favorites.  But the list I named is based on all the batsman I have seen to date in the last 29 years of following cricket since I was 7 or 8.  So it is tough to fit VVS in the top five.  At some point you have to show balance.

Chandra's action was a whippy one.  To answer your question his action looks very clean to a naked eye as compared to Murali.  He would take 8-10 paces and appeared like a military medium pacer and then turns his wrist in one motion.  Because of the polio, some of his deliveries used to be so whacky that may be you and I can milk them for 4's.  But then they are followed by deadly turners that make a great look like a novice.  Ask Viv about it in his debut series.  He will tell you what Chandra is.

[kban1]

vijay:

kban1- excellent points. applause.

Thanks. Much appreciated.

[fineleg]

vijay:

The corollary to that argument would be
1) Kumble being asked to bowl much earlier than  a normal spinner would -- wheeling away using the new ball whereas Warne often comes in to bowl at the appropriate time for a spinner
2) Kumble bowling more often to well set batsmen because the other bowlers have failed to do their job while Warne getting the chance to bowl at batsmen who have come to the crease recently because the opening bowlers have done their job.
3) Kumble being overused -- as a strike bowler and a stock bowler whereas Warne gets to play his attacking bowlers role.
4) Kumble not benefitting from support from the other end --which means the batsman only have to survive his over whereas Warne benefitiing from economical and or wickettaking bowlers at the other end (Gillespie, McGrath -both or Lee -wickettaking).

At the end of the day, some will argue this is why AK's SR is lower.

This argument for Warne or for Kumble could be framed in different ways. Better just to sit back and enjoy both greats.

PS: I am one of those who holds Warne's lack of success against the better players of spin (SRT, Siddhu, VVS) in the Indian team as a minus point in his resume.

Applause - kban.
I agree with many points here, but STRONGLY agree with the following two:
* Kumble not benefitting from support from the other end  - puhleezzzz....don't say HS or V.Raju is "support"...they 'need' support.

* Kumble bowling more often to well set batsmen

[kban1]

fineleg:

Thanks

[psk213]

vijay:

The corollary to that argument would be
1) Kumble being asked to bowl much earlier than  a normal spinner would -- wheeling away using the new ball whereas Warne often comes in to bowl at the appropriate time for a spinner
2) Kumble bowling more often to well set batsmen because the other bowlers have failed to do their job while Warne getting the chance to bowl at batsmen who have come to the crease recently because the opening bowlers have done their job.
3) Kumble being overused -- as a strike bowler and a stock bowler whereas Warne gets to play his attacking bowlers role.
4) Kumble not benefitting from support from the other end --which means the batsman only have to survive his over whereas Warne benefitiing from economical and or wickettaking bowlers at the other end (Gillespie, McGrath -both or Lee -wickettaking).

At the end of the day, some will argue this is why AK's SR is lower.

This argument for Warne or for Kumble could be framed in different ways. Better just to sit back and enjoy both greats.

PS: I am one of those who holds Warne's lack of success against the better players of spin (SRT, Siddhu, VVS) in the Indian team as a minus point in his resume.

very good points kban. Indeed it is difficult to compare them because of the teams they play on. Playing on a winning team definitely helps your confiidence. I think, in most peoples' mind including mine, on a decent wicket it is easier to play out Kumble for a draw than Warne (ex Pak in Chandigarh in 2005 or recently concluded WI series). It is very much possible that since I follow indian cricket more closely these are more etched into my mind. To me Warne has the capability to produce a magical ball that can change the face of a game. That is why in my book I rate Wasim Akram higher than Glen Mcgrath. It is possible to defend a total of 100 with Akram around.

However, Like you i do hold Warnes' poor record against India as a minus point. I do think that the batsmens ability to use their feet and play against the spin (SRT in chennai and for me VVS' knock in Calcutta) did get into his head. I also think he would have a better success against the current batting lineup if they happen to play tommorow. It so happened that for Warne SRT/RD/VVS/SG were in really good form when India played Aus.

[RicePlateReddy]

kban1, Excellent points and applause.

To add to your 4 points, I think one could include that

5. Kumble has also likely had a weaker set of fielders in close catching positions (certainly compared to Australia and arguably compared to Sri Lanka)
6. Kumble's bowling style means he has to rely on a lot more LBW decisions than the other two and that does influence the positive success rate.

On the other hand, both Murali and Warne seem to extract prodigious turn to good effect on unresponsive and flat wickets. Perhaps they have better stats on batsmen friendly wickets?

Also, 5 wickets is just a number that we are used to. Warne's rate of taking 4 wickets per innings (once every 3.11 tests) is clearly better than Kumble's (once every 4.07 tests).

My intent in starting the thread was because I was just surprised that Kumble's "strike rates" of 5 wickets / innings and 10 wickets / match were better than Warne's: without looking at stats, I wouldn't have thought so.

There is no end to dissecting this (one may pull up a statistic showing 3 wickets per innings - where does it end?) So perhaps the strike rate per balls bowled is the most meaningful among these. But again this has to be interpretted in the context of all the caveats being discussed. 

Personally, I hold Murali on a wee-bit higher pedestal than these two greats, if I accept that his action is permissable (I don't have a firm opinion on the legality of his action because I simply don't know what should be allowed!). Also, I think that Murali bamboozles the tail enders far more than either Warne or Kumble, even though all three typically nail the tail enders very effectively - wonder if there are stats to back this assertion.

Yet again, I wish that someone keeps track of a weighted wicket metric for bowlers: basically weighing a batsman's wicket proportionally more if he has a higher average, after a base number of innings for newcomers. A difficult metric to measure as batsman averages are constantly varying but this will provide insight into the "cheap wicket" factor.

Sigh - we have had many discussions and threads where interesting stats and a different angle of viewing player's performances have been discussed. One of these days I will try to enumerate everything I remember across discussions in one thread (batsman and bowlers) - perhaps we can even have a poll on what seems more interesting?

[fineleg]

"SRT/RD/VVS/SG were in really good form when India played Aus"...

Those 4 "in-form"...now, *that* is a middle order...

Frankly, I wonder if in the next decade, will this above middle order ever be matched by *any* combination of
Gen-Next Indian players? seems highly unlikely.

[kban1]

psk213 & kop:

Thanks.

psk213 -- yes, it seems like Warne always has a magical delivery waiting but on the other hand I also feel most batsmen do not play Warne correctly (and I mean the English, WI, NZ, et all) because they allow him to dictate from the line outside the leg which allows him to fully utilize the drift and then the spin.

I remember seeing the ball that got Gatting (the so called ball of the century) as well as a few other Warnie dimissals on tv along with my dad. And both of us opined that there is no way someone who knows how to play spin well will allow Warne that much latitude to spin it past them.

Over the next several years, Siddhu, SRT, VVS, and even RD (on a few ocaasions although I feel RD's orthodox style makes him more prone to fall victim to Warne) have shown this to be true numerous times.

On this note, Murali is even better in producing the magical delivery.

kop -- fully agree with some weighted stats which provide more information about batsman, pitch, state of game etc.

also excellent point about Kumble's lbw decision factor.

Applause to both for well made points 

[psk213]

psk213 & kop:

Thanks.

psk213 -- yes, it seems like Warne always has a magical delivery waiting but on the other hand I also feel most batsmen do not play Warne correctly (and I mean the English, WI, NZ, et all) because they allow him to dictate from the line outside the leg which allows him to fully utilize the drift and then the spin.

I remember seeing the ball that got Gatting (the so called ball of the century) as well as a few other Warnie dimissals on tv along with my dad. And both of us opined that there is no way someone who knows how to play spin well will allow Warne that much latitude to spin it past them.

Over the next several years, Siddhu, SRT, VVS, and even RD (on a few ocaasions although I feel RD's orthodox style makes him more prone to fall victim to Warne) have shown this to be true numerous times.

On this note, Murali is even better in producing the magical delivery.

kop -- fully agree with some weighted stats which provide more information about batsman, pitch, state of game etc.

also excellent point about Kumble's lbw decision factor.

Applause to both for well made points 

Good point on the "drift" Kban. Applause. To me that is what makes Warne great. Most leg spinners pitch middle and spin it outside off. Warne has the ability to pitch it outside leg bowling over the wicket and get the drift. Most batsmen are taught to play with the spin, so typically they would play the legspinner on the off side. When the ball drifts that much, it is difficult to play with the spin. SRT by constantly sweeping him and VVS by using his feet and driving him on the on-side showed that this can be tackled. But to me these guys are the exception rather the rule. Completely agree that RD with his orthodox style is more prone to succumb to Warne specifically getting caught in the slip region or forward shot-leg. Also SG being a left-hander, the drift actually helps him to play his favourite shot, have seen him play some glorious cover drives of Warne.

Re: Gatting, he was regarded as one of the better players of spin bowling in England, he did play well against India in India. I don't think he expected the ball to do as much in that ASHES series. I am pretty sure that now knowing what Warne is capable of doing, he would have played the ball differently.

And he is very economical in his bowling, most leggies have gimme balls in an over.  This is what makes him a true great.

Agree that Murali produces the magical delivery better than these two. That delivery action (and i am not into debating the legitimacy of it) is so deceiving, often wondered what it would be like to play against him and pick up the delivery. Really Really tough.

[yorker]

Does anyone remember the delivery Murali bowled to get Dhoni in Delhi Test last year. For me that is the best delivery I have every seen him bowl. He came round the stumps pitched if outside leg and turned it so much that it got the off stump. Yes it was a doosra. But the amount of turn he got. My God. He IS the master of doosra

[suraj]

Does anyone remember the delivery Murali bowled to get Dhoni in Delhi Test last year. For me that is the best delivery I have every seen him bowl. He came round the stumps pitched if outside leg and turned it so much that it got the off stump. Yes it was a doosra. But the amount of turn he got. My God. He IS the master of doosra

I remember that one too- reat delivery to watch if you like spin, bad one to watch if you want Dhoni to go on forever and hit mighty sixes