Who is a better bowler Murali or Shane Warne ?

Murali. ofcourse Shane Warne took banned substabce ,.. remember~

lol

Murali has had more wickets and in the future will take many more

wickets. He is a really great bowler, no doubt whatsoever.

Yet for me, Shane Warne is the best. He is simply fabulous as

an entertainer, motivator, leader of men and strategist.

Also Warne, because of his human qualities, is more exciting to

watch of the two. Murali is more like an infallible robot.

Muttaih Muralidharan became miles greater useful than drug addicter shane warne . Murali had 1434 Internation wickets . which isn't at risk of be broken via the different cricketer in close to destiny . He became not chucker like some aussies say .

Murali coz Warne took most of his wickets against England and we all know Bangladesh plays better against spinners than Eng or even RSA.

Seriously Murali performed best against Australia or England its just that we don't get enough test matches with the big boys.Eng and RSA do not pose a threat at all to Murali's bowling.

Like one user said I'm willing to concede that Wane played a lot of games on fast tracks but Murali's performances are good on them too but he hasn't played as much as Warne.

So I'd say both are equal in terms of cricketing ability.Murali has better bowling average and a better strike rate but Warne is a better batsman and more of a tactical thinker.

You guys seems to have not much information abt Cricket. Whoever is the best it doesnt mean dat u compare them with what they did and what they were accused of in the past. First comes Murali, hes a great spin bowler but the problem is dat hes an asian and hes been always the target of critics like other asian bowlers like Shoaib Akhter.No doubt Shane Warne is also one of the best spin bowlers with sm great performances like in world cups and most of all Ashes series. U cant compare them cus both had allegations in their career lives whether its personal or professional lives. So i just wanna say dat whatever it is they got their own positions n couldnt be compared with each other.

Shane Warne is a better bowler because he has a wider range of deliveries and has better stamina. Murali has also taken most of his wickets agaisnt B'Desh or Zimbabwe. He only has three deliveries; offie, doosra and toppie. He should be called Right Arm Doosra as he bowls 4 or 5 doosras an over.

As a player Warnie is also better as he is a better batsman and better fielder.

But when it comes to sportsmanship Murali wins.

Both are greats with different styles and backgrounds. Considering Murali had more spin friendly pitches to bowl on, I'd put Warne slightly ahead of him. Let us say 51:49 in favour of Shane Warne.

Definitely Murali. I have nothing against Warne ( he is a great player ). But Murali got his Wickets in less matches and the fact that Warne used Drugs makes me think he isn't the best.

And for the guy who said Murali was accused of illegal action in 1995, It was never proven.

Shane Warne half his wickets have not come against Bangladesh.

Warne.

Murali doesn't even bowl it. If the ICC had enough guts they would of deemed his action illegal back in 1995. There isn't one of his test wickets that should be considered an actual wicket.