Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

t20 asked in SportsCricket · 1 decade ago

who is the better bowler? Murali or warne?

I think murali is a better bowler on the record. considring da no of wickets he has taken in a fewer no of matches than warnie.what is ur view?

26 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Warne is recognised as the better bowler, even though Murali has more wickets. Murali got most of his wickets against such teams as Bangladesh & Zimbabwe.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Warne was way better and always will be.

    Murali always gets heaps of cheap wickets coz srilanka tend to play the not so good sides more often than the good ones. Murali doesnt have a great record against some of the better sides like Australia and South Africa. Warne played good against absoultely everyone not just sides like Bangladesh and Pakistan etc.

  • Bill P
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Muralia has played 25 tests against both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh whereas Warne only played three tests against these two minnows so I would say that the quality of all Warne's victims was higher. So Warnie for me though Murali is still a great bowler.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    If I was a batmen I feel I would struggle the most against Warne. Totally agree that Murali is a chucker, I can't beleive he is allowed to continue with that disgraceful excuse of an action. His cricket stats should be wiped

  • 1 decade ago

    Warne was a way better bowler. For Murali, just look up the word "chucker" in the dictionary.

  • 1 decade ago

    Warne. His wickets came against better batsmen. Murali has 160 wickets against absolutely crap teams.

  • ph
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Murali

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Murali might have played more matches against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, but you have to consider other factors.

    1) Zimbabwe used to be good at cricket. They even won test matches in India and Pakistan, which is no mean feat.

    2) Most of Warne's matches were against England. Most of the English teams that Warne has played have been pathetic. They were as bad as New Zealand and Zimbabwe, until Kevin Pietersen came to the rescue. Look how long it took them to win back the Ashes.

    3) Warne has never had to play against Australia, has he.

    Murali is a better bowler. They're both equally good players. Warne's batting and fielding makes up for his bowling.

  • 1 decade ago

    Every body knows that murali have more no of wickets tahn any other,

    but look the bowling average, murali' average is way better than warne.

    Murali

    career statistics

    .............................tests..odi

    Wickets ..................756... 490 ......1

    Bowling average.... 21.96...22.64..

    5 wickets in innings. 65 10

    10 wickets in match. 21

    Shane Warne

    Career statistics

    ............................tests...odi

    Wickets..................708.. 293

    Bowling average..... 25.41..25.73

    5 wickets in innings..37

    10 wickets...............10

    Although Warne is an excellent bowler,

    but Muarli is the best.

    Source(s): wikipedia
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Murali isn't a bowler

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.