Rik E Boy wrote:As for putting in the chucker you reckon that's cricket but I don't. Richards is the spinner in my world XI.
regards,
REB
So the question is there. Does Muralitharan, a man whose name sits at the top of the Test wicket takers list, deserve to be considered amongst a list of players for the safooty.net Best XI?
133 Test matches saw him scalp 800 wickets exactly. The next best is the other man vying for the position of spinner in this hypothetical team, Shane Keith Warne.
My thoughts personally, which won't be liked by all, are that Muttiah Muralitharan was called, by both Darrel Hair and Ross Emerson, for throwing. When Muralitharan was tested biomechanically, it was found that he did not have an illegal action.
Warne on the other hand was found guilty, and suspended for, banned substance use.
One guy was found to pass all Tests, and is called a cheat, a chucker, and generally most think his record should have an asterisk next to it. The other was banned for drug use. He is apparently the best spinner ever.
On the other argument, a purely statistical one, Muralitharan was, as a player from the sub continent, given more overs to ply his craft on spin suited, spinning decks, in Galle, Hyderabad, Calcutta and many more. Warne was not, and his impressive record has a noticeable blow out against India.
Muralitharan snared 89 wickets (11 matches), 105 wickets (22 matches), 80 wickets (16 matches), and 87 wickets (14 matches), against Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka respectively.
Of 800 wickets, 176 alone between the minnows of Bangladesh and India, Warne loses just 17 of his 708 wickets to the minnows.
Murali 624 wickets versus 691 Warne wickets.
This is without delving into the statistic of Home tests against other nations on the dust bowls, either.
I think Warne is better justified to be in the World XI if one is done, but not because Muralitharan is a dodgy thrower, because Warne performed better, IMO.
Thoughts?