Big deal about Harmison's retirement! What was his record in ODIs, after all. India's Robin Singh had a better ODI record, for both runs and wickets. Endland should wake up and take stock of the situation. They said Champion's trophy was a big, avoidable distraction before "the Ashes". Now they are neither there nor here. Bog losers.

The game of cricket will be that much less entertaining for the loss of Shane Warne. He was unbelievable.
I wish he was given the chance of captaining the Aus team. Thought it was a ridiculous decision by CA to deny him tht on the basis of his short comings off the field. This is professional sport where one should be judged by their deeds on the field. Not once did his personal life get in the way or hamper his performance on the field.
Hats off to the man.
Tim, I have a strong feeling Ian Bell is going to be his 700th!!

Over the last decade, different bowlers have contested for the mantle of best spinner in the world. There was Anil Kumble, Saqlain Mushtaq, Mushtaq Ahmed, Daniel Vettori, Harbhajan, Danish Kaneria etc. But, their flirtation with the crown was very brief. And this I think differentiates them from the two legends---Murali and Warne. To be the best bowler for 15 years is indeed a great thing! Thank you for those wondeful times I have had with my dad seeing you play.

Warney has been the most entertaining criicketer that I have seen. Even though the greatest bowler of the present era is a debatable issue, but I feel that Warne has the srongest case. One should always remember that legspin is the most difficult thing to bowl and this great bowler has mastered that art. His abilty to change the game is far ahead of any other bowler. Murali has the added advantage of the deformed wrist that has proved to be a blessing in disguise for him. Nevertheless he is also a marvellous bowler and can be hailed as one of the greats in history of cricket.
I don't get this that why do you all the time feel that Warne's magic has begun to fade in this Ashes series?? He has played a major role in the famous and improbable Adelaide test win and is responsible for that majestic turn around. Warney has left on his own terms and still being right on the top. Cricket is going to miss this star forever and I guess everybody who knows something about cricket would line up to watch the last two test matches of this GREAT personality who revived this dying tradition of legspin.
WARNEY, we are all going to miss you!!

I nteresting that in the Adelaide Test Warne accomplished someting that few others have done-3000 Test runs and 300 Test wickets.

Tim

First, Respect to Warnie, even with his "Year-out" he is the most outstanding spinner/bowler and thinking cricketer of all time, Murali will always be slightly tarnished over his action (rightly or wrongly as I am certainly no judge!!).

Warne has won matches by his sheer charisma and personality and embodied Waughs "Mental disintegration".

The King is retiring, long live the King!! What are the bets he'll settle in Hampshire and his Kids play cricket for England!!

Secondly, being English!! As to the selection of the ODI squad, Glad to see Harmy give up ODI's and concentrate on Tests, this may well develop potential of the crop of quicks we have maturing.

I agree it's a shame that Broad and Tremlett cannot be used together with Lewis, Freddie and Dalrymple!! And Give Mahmood and/or Anderson time to contemplate their futures!!

Nixon was a surprise, I'd have thought Foster the usurper, Feel sorry for Jones as he now appears to have been axed altogether?? BUT really glad Read should be No.1 ODI Keeper, rightfully!!

My choice for ODI:

Strauss (Capt)
Bell
Vaughan
KP
Collingwood/Dalrymple?
Freddie
Read
Lewis
Panesar
Tremlett/Dalrymple
Broad/Dalrymple

Batting in that order (if Dalrymple plays then he goes in at No.6) with:

Lewis and Broad/Tremlett opening bowling and bowl Lewis 10 overs straight.

Anyway, Good Bloody luck Warnie, you have earned the right to dictate your own destiny and bow out on your own terms. Cricket will be not be the same without you!! England may well be No.1 after yours and McG's retirement, but you (and McG!)have ensured that Oz stayed No.1 for longer than any other team is likely to replicate.

I look forward to hearing and seeing your Commentary, you and Ritchie Benaud would be a dream team!!

the harmison retirement from 1 dayers isn't a suprise, he hasn't been included in the 1 day squad in australia

"If" murali's action is legitimate??
After all this time, you still have to insert that if into your blog. He's been cleared a number of times already and there is no room for an if anymore. "If" he had a suspect action, and the ICC endorsed this, he wouldn't be playing.

On to Warne's status as a great...well, hes been the most prolific against the Englsh. And they are notoriously bad players of spin. Correct me if im wrong, but his average against india stands at around 50 odd. Also, what about the other subcontinent teams?

Warne has been a great bowler, but i wouldn't call him the best. That mantle is deserved by Murali and McGrath. But he was one of the best.

I can respect Harmison's decision, the unfortunate timing is perhaps just a reflection of how disappointed he has been in his own Ashes form, and his desire to address the problem. If he can find a formula of test and county cricket that helps him become a consistently potent test bowler again then frankly that's enough in these over-scheduled times.

One Spinner to rule them all.
One Spinner to find them.
One Spinner to bring them all.
and in the mystery, bind them.

The farewell Test of Warne and McGrath at Sydney will be a great opportunity for this young England (please god not 4 zip down by then) to put down a marker for the future. There'll be honour guards when both these greats come out to the middle to bat (IF they do!) but what better opportunity for England's men of the future to play the match, not the occasion.

On the England oneday side, couldn't agree more regarding Stuart Broad, and what James Foster has to do to get a look in presumably Flethcer only knows. This is effectively the world cup squad, and it looks short of class and potential.

Too early. Really see no reason why he needs to retire now.

As an Aussie, I'm looking forward to the new look Australian side. At last some of our younger players will get a chance, Macgill will fill in for Warnie in the short term, Cameron White should be groomed as his long term replacement (He can bat and makes a good captain!). Mcgrath, Langer, Hayden and Gilchrist should follow Warnie's lead, retire at the top, dont do a Tendulkar .... sure we'll lose some series and matches, drop down in the rankings but it wont be long before were back at the top.... !

Shane didn't just have match winning ability, he consistantly went out and won matches in the second innings to the point where you started to feel sorry for the batsmen. Well almost......
Good luck Shane and thanks for some of the best cricket anyone could hope to see!

In all this talk about the greatness of shane warne commentators inevitably end up mentioning Muralitharan and Tim is no exception. It is unfortunate, however, that they must always question murali's action to suggest how great warne has been. Tim writes:
"...you can make a case for Murali, if you take the view, as most umpires and players do, that his action is legitimate."
Well, most of the fans think so too. All this talk about murali's action (emanating mostly from aussie n brit press)makes them look like apologist for warne who hardly compares to the champion offie's far superior record. ignore the fact that warne had the comfort of playing for a a far better team and hardly ever bowled under pressure.

He is the all time greatest bowler in the world.

farewell warne!
now coming to the bloody point.murali is better than warne and so is mcgrath.mcgrath never had nightmares about sachin,did he?

Warne will definitely be missed, but everyone knows when it is time to call it quits, and as you say, Warne has hit the nail squarely on the head, going out at the top of his game and on his own terms. His name will definitely be written alongside the biggest names in the history of the game. His attitude, guile and relentlessness will be missed sorely. Bravo Warnie and I sincerely wish him a good life away from cricket which he deserves after a long career.

I think Harmison's retirement is amazing considering the fact that he has been faring worse in the tests in which he intends to play. In ODIs he can get a wicket here and there with his tall frame even when he is out of form, tests are a different ball game with a different temperament and you dont get wickets without a consistent line and length and Harmy is definitely struggling in this regard. Excess of cricket or lack of it, He needs to cope with the stress of international cricket. If he is over bowled(which is not the case), he gets over payed. You get monitary benefits and recognition for bowling a few extra overs. I think he needs to be dropped and given a chance to get his act together in the domestic season and then come back stronger. In the meanwhile someone like Stuart Broad needs to be given a chance. I saw him in a couple of matches against Pakistan in which he didnt do anything wrong and his batting also looks better than most tailenders. With a legacy of a left handed batsman father, Broad has a bright future as an allrounder which English cricket has been searching for and even tried people like Ronnie Irani. I think Broad is a good prospect for England. Give him a chance.

Cricket lovers from around the world, but particularly those in Australia, are going to feel a huge void in their sporting lives once Shane's retirement becomes a reality. No matter what position his side was in, every one of his deliveries was a potential wicket ball, truly edge-of-your-seat stuff. We will all feel a similar void when Adam Gilchrist calls it a day. I would rather watch one session of Gillie in full flight than a day of Lara or Tendulkar, and I know there are many who feel the same. Who becomes our next superstar will be interesting. We need one now, in a hurry.

good spirit of game & very good player on the fild. no clu of the behind the cricket ground

Warne's Retirement - Professional to the core.Not many have retired when they are riding the crest of success.

Tim has got it perfectly on the spot. Warne never performed well against India. He finally got a five-for (and that was a 6/125 over 40+ overs) on the last tour when Anil Kumble took a 7/48 on a first day pitch in the same match (this might have prompted Tendulkar on being asked about Warne saying that he considered him a part of the great spinning trio of this generation of Muralitharan, Kumble and Warne himself). His record against India was a paltry 43 wickets in 25 innings with just 1 3-wicket and 3 4-wicket hauls besides. So in 20 innings he wasn't able to get more than a couple of wickets and on 12 of those occasions he didn't capture more than a solitary wicket. I think as Tim said he was the greatest Ashes bowler but to just throw him in as the greatest ever slow bowler, let alone the greatest bowler shows just a little bit of the hype that the bowler weaved around himself during his career. A great bowler against most of the countries would be a better statement, but not the greatest against the best players of spin. At this juncture it makes sense to draw attention to another over hyped Aussie phenomenon, DK Lillee. Not many people probably realize that he has never played outside of Australia, England and New Zealand (fairly average test side at the point he played them) for more than 5 tests in his entire career of 70 tests. And in those 5 tests he had an average of over 100 in 3 tests in Pakistan with a strike rate of a wicket every 204 balls for a total haul of 3 wickets, he took 3 wickets in a test in Sri Lanka who were an extremely weak nation at the point with a strike rate of a wicket every 60 balls and an average of 36 and he never took a wicket in the only test he played in the West Indies in 72/73 when they did not even have as formidable a batting line up as they did later in the 70s or in the 80s. I think if you can't play that well outside of your backyard people shouldn't be playing you up to be the greatest fast bowler or greatest spinner. Lillee makes Warne look like a great success on the sub-continent and making remarks that the sub-continental pitches are graveyards doesn't cut it, just indicates the sour puss that you are. I watched the great Malcolm Marshall (and he deserves that adjective) decimate India to the tune of 33 wickets in 6 tests in 1983 and Holding wasn't too far behind with 30. Now that is what you call great bowling or maybe you could go for that superlative of greatest too and it would not be mislaid.

Why has no-one mentioned Jon Batty as England's keeper? He opens the batting for Surrey (how many of the other keepers in the country would do that) and he is a top, top wicket keeper. Why he's never mentioned or just plain selected, is amazing.

Re Warne: Where is the honour in getting your wickets by sledging the batsmen?

john..so wat is your point?warney 699 wickets..and soon to be a few more unfortunate weak english scalps...sounds like sour grapes to me....to me they are all great bowlers.

The ICC may have cleared Murali's action and told their umpires not to call him for it, but he DEFINATLY chucks. Its obvious for all to see! Read the rules on bowling actions. I suspect a blind eye has been turned purely to promote the game in Sri Lanka.
Its a shame that he will be allowed to take the mantle as test crickets leading wicket taker.

john, youcouldnt have put it better. Refreshing to see your well-articulated deflationof overhyped warnie. Ofcourse, Aussiess would do that, wouldnt they? To them, Warne is the greatestbowler, Ricky is the best batsman after Don(never mind his pathetic record in India - now Sachin is supposed to have performed badly iN Aus, ENg and SA - the least average he has is 37 iN SA- Compare that with our boy Ricky's pathetic sub-20 in India!). Just the way they are - they are the cousins of Americans for whom Boston Red Sox can be "World Champions" in baseball!

Acclaiming a player as a cricketing great should not be reduced to a childish slanging match by denigrating other candidates. The measure of greatness is much more than an analysis of statistics. Statistically Warne is the greatest wicket taker of all time. More significantly, his impact on the game has been extraordinary. He reinvented the dying art of leg spin bowling and became a regular match winner for Australia. His off field misdemeanours are completely irrelevant. As an on field showman, craftsman, entertainer and teammate Warne has been great for cricket. A record crowd at the MCG for a dead Ashes rubber will affirm Warne's status as a modern day Bradman. Farewell to a once in a generation champion cricketer!

I think although Warne's a great bowler he's not the greatest. He got most of his wickets against weak players of spin. Against the best palyers of spin, the Indians, he only took 43 wickets at 40 apiece in 14 tests played mostly on spinner friendly pitches. The Indians, however, have struggled against Murali repeatedly, which is why he is the greatest (he also averages more wickets/test and has a better average and strike rate). Let's also not forget that Murali has proved his innocence repeatedly whereas Warne is a proven drug cheat.

John, you're right in that Lillee never succeeded on the subcontinent. But then, he never really had a chance. A couple of disjointed tests is far too small a sample to reasonably criticise someone's career, and saying he's not great due to a couple of bad tests in Pakistan is no fairer than criticising Murali's record in Australia. Also, that test in West Indies was, as you say, in 1972/73 when he was in fact struggling with a back injury that would later threaten his career.

It's obvious that hardly anyone outside the sub-continent rates Murali ahead of Warne. Most impartial cricket fans can see beyond the ridiculous comments about Warne's record in India or the fact that Murali averages 4 runs better per wicket (has that 15 runs per innings really helped?)... And Raghav & Ashish - Murali's action will always remain suspect, well after he's retired - we all know that they have changed the rules just to accomodate his action, and even still his doosra arouses suspicion. The biggest blight on the modern game is the fact that the sub-continent nations & the cash they generate through television dictate to the ICC. That and the fact that those countries play the race card as soon as something goes awry. That's why Hair no longer umpires, but Akhtar is allowed to play on. That's why the umpires that called Murali for chucking were either run out of the game or had their powers to do so again reduced. Yes, Murali's been cleared, but we all know why & we always will... It's only political correctness & the threat of being unfairly branded a racist that stops more commentators & ex-players from calling it how they see it. Doesn't matter if Murali ends up with 1500 wickets, he won't displace Warne as the best spin bowler of this generation...

The ICC re-wrote the rules of cricket, specifically what is arguably the most vital rule in cricket, for no reason but to allow Murali to continue playing.

At the time of the review into Murali's bowling action, Murali was a bowler who had already built up a stellar reputation as one of the world's best. In the eyes of much of the cricketing world, not least the ICC, he was a player who's existence was vital to the game of cricket, ecspecially the development and success of cricket in Sri Lanka. Murali was a bowler who got people through the gate and TV's onto the cricket, and no business would be daft enough to throw that away.

It was in fact determined that within the laws of cricket as they stood, Murali did infact have an illegal action and subsequently under those laws should not be allowed to bowl. So the ICC did this. First they smokescreened by pushing the case that Murali has a deformed wrist and elbow, subsequently allowing him to bowl in the manner he does, but (arguably) at 'no fault of his own'. But this was just a smokescreen. In the fine print, the ICC then went on to change the most vital rule of the game, 'keep your arm straight'... and instead changed it to allow 45 (FORTY-FIVE!!!) degrees of bending, purposeful or accidental, of the bowling arm when releasing the ball.

Say whatever you want about Warne... matchfixing, drugs, sledging, India-record. I have made my point about Murali and Murali alone. It is clear that Murali is a 'chucker' being allowed to bowl under the protection of the ICC.

Anyone here trying to promote Murali as a better bowler than warne..get a grip. How many wickets has he picked up against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh? 137! Wow that's a lot. Real hero. Warne has played 3 tests for 17 wickets.

Warne has been the mastermind behind an Australian dynasty which has lasted over a decade. Greatness can't be measured in stats. All Murali fans point to stats. Well I don't think I'll be telling my Grandkids how great it was when I saw Murali take another five-for against the mighty Zimbabweans.

Onto Warne, thank you for all the memories, all the fun. No one brought that same personality to cricket as Warne. He pulled Australia out of so many holes we owe him so much. My favourite memory of him has to be the 99 WC when he was being written off and then came out and hammered South Africa, running fear through the dressing room like only Warne can. That WC has his name all over it. We will never see another Warne so anyone who follows cricket should make an effort to see him in his last two tests. I like the way James Sutherland put it.

"There are a generation of Australians who were privileged enough to see Bradman. We are the generation that will always say we were privileged to see Warne."

Thanks again Shane, you will be missed.

Warne is a great and those who don't think so must be jealous that he never got to play for their team. Murali is definately a great as well, however to those fans pushing the Murali case and putting down warnes performances in the subcontenant (which I agree isn't as great as what it has been elsewhere in the world) I feel have failed to give a balanced case when comparing the two. Murali's record in Australia is very ordinary and lets not forget that Murali has also claimed massive bags of wickets against borderline test teams such as Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Two different types of bowlers, two great bowlers with terrific records.

In Answer to John who wrote about Lillee's record, well you can only play against those you're scheduled to play, suprised you didn't have a swipe at DG Bradman as well considering he only played Test Cricket in England and Australia. So maybe Bradman is hyped up too, he only performed well in 2 countries, didn't even play in the first test across the tasman creek in NZ :-)

um, about warney, John, every bowler has been pasted in certain conditions and failed, as have batsman, but it doesn't make themany worse than another that fails at a different place or time....

John H., it is no more or less honering in taking wickets while sledging people. He actually would tell people how to play him sometimes, so that is actually helping a batsman.

If people didn't like warney, they are the most dull, unimaginative, boring, deadbeat people on this planet! Attack his off field life, but on the field criticise him to your peril. Warney always has the last laugh!

Well its really a big blow for the aussies but i dont really feel that i might marr the teams bowling dep because there are future replacements for warne.I fell cameroon white is going to be the next spinner to marshall the aussie bowling line up but he should be given some chance to prove his mettle.When it comes to england i feel bad about harmisons decision to quit the ODI side because the brits are in a spot of bother and no sooner they will be termed as 'The worst ODI side'.Harmison isthe only experienced bowler after flintoff and is a must for the england side as the world cup is nearing.I feel england must work really hard as they have had two bad world cup campaigns. all i should say is harmison should be requested by the selectors to rethink his decision.

reading some of the above posts, i would like to say that shane warne is beter then murali, shane warne might not be no angel but atleast he has a legal action. im sorry but murali will never be great, il agree with martin crowes recent comments

Finally the England selectors have realised that the only way to stop Fletcher/Flintoff picking Jones as keeper is to axe him from the squad. What a shambles to see Jones training with the Melbourne slip cordon rather than Read. Trust me they really are going to stick with Jones for Melbourne. There has been a massive row at the top of English cricket but Fletcher and Graveney are in their own ways so buttoned down the truth may never emerge. The Nixon choice is a good one and entirely understandable, he is a stong character and excellent one-day performer. Just as important he has nothing to prove to anyone and will not waste his time trying to impress the England management or convince them that he is the man of the future.

The dire Jones/Read situation is a stage managed tragedy. The blinkered favouritism for Jones has clearly got to Read and may well have damaged his mind set when batting, let's hope he sorts it out if given the chance. The continued preference for Jones when he is so clearly out of touch with the bat has come to haunt him, he has been unable to cope with the pressure of his situation and the England selectors have done him a favour by leaving him out of the one-dayers. In my view Fletcher has wrecked the careers of two promising keepers.

What an irony it would be if either England keeper made a ton at Melbourne, someone in one part of the England management will be made to look even more of a fool.

In choosing Nixon, Graveney and co. have made it clear to Fletcher that they are not going to let him mess up another young keeper and that this selection issue will only be sorted out after a change of coach. I believe that Graveney and co are not blind to the international potential of Batty, Foster, Davis etc but they realise that Fletcher post 2003 is the wrong man to help fulfill it. Maybe that's why Stuart Broad has been left out, to keep him out of the way of a failing and flawed coach.

For my money, Warne has ben past his peak for a year at least. Murali is far more dangerous - and a better sportsman. Yes, Warne got wickets - but his appealing is often no better than cheating! This series, England have got themselves out, rather than Warne being particularly effective. I think Warne knew that even they were starting to look at him with a harder eye, and that other teams would take him apart. Murali for me is far more dangerous - and is much the better sportsman. Time to retire!

That was a quite good piece, and I do concur about the greatness of Warne and Mcgrath ,now maybe Australia will be put to the test and maybe a chink or two in the armour will be revealed. Of all the test fast bowlers I rate Malcolm Marshall as the best I have seen, with the pace and the ability to think in the heat of the battle.

To hear comparisons of Shane Warne & Muralia & the cases for Murali is intersting. One thing not mentioned was the bowler & talent prior to a shoulder injury. The raw talent prior to this was as awesome & destructive as probably any batting team will face. Shane Warne was still a very good bowler of the highest calibre for years after until his retirement announcement able to accumulate wickets regularly but there was never full recovery or the full potentail & talent prior to this shoulder injury/surgery depsite what he has achieved. He struggled for possibly seasons afterwards & really was never the same bowler. I am grateful to have seen Shane Warne in his early days single handedly tear through batting line ups bamboozled by something they had never seen & the world will possibly never again witness. Don't compare Murali to this. The reason Shane Warne has finished up current greatest wicket taker of all time was the amazing rate he took them prior to injury.

@ John H: The honour is there, in that the stats says he has the most ever Test Match wickets. End of story.

And you're right Tim; he got the timing of this one spot on, even the timing of the announcement. Long live the King of Spin.

John, you can't judge a player based on a couple of disjointed tests in the sub-continent, no more than you can judge Murali for not performing in Australia. So Lillee had a bad series in Pakistan? Those stats give no indication of any potential injuries he might have been playing with, any level of support, or any plain old bad luck. That test in Sri Lanka? 3 wickets is far from a bad performance. And that test in West Indies was early in his career, when he was struggling with a career-threatening back injury. So if you're going to cast doubt over someone's greatness, you should really, in my opinion, use a sample size of more than 3 tests in a career.

what a privelege to be australian and have had such an incredible run. for mine, the big difference in attitude came from the waugh twins, but warne and mcgrath were the gladiators supreme. may the good times continue.

as for murali, the reason he is not as good a bowler as warne or indeed mcgrath, is because legal or not, his unique action/gesticulation generates outrageous turn in both directions and is responsible for most of his dismissals. warne and mcgrath are classical bowlers, who employ traditional tools outstandingly. this is why they are generally more respected than murali, not some conspiracy to the contrary. they are easier to relate to.

murali lovers will always be able to say look at the scoreboard :)

raghav:
Re: Is Murali's action legitimate?

The ICC changed the rules to accommodate his action. It was entirely political and will forever be a stain on cricket.

In the latest 20/20 game between Sri Lanka and NZ one of the commentators made the following observation regarding Murali:

Murali comes into bowl using all of his 15 degrees.

Says it all I think.

Cut off the various comparisons between Murli and Warne and Warne's struggles against India. He has been as formidable against all oppositions bar India as you get any. He has given allof cricket lovers the world over so much excitement(off the field too) and it should be a thanks giving timefor the great Victorian.

Solid blog Tim. Most of the people here comparing Warne with Murali have made some valid points (with the exception of "ashish"). Analysing each player's record on paper is flawed. Both players have played different countries different amounts of time in different conditions. Murali, as good a bowler as he is, has taken hundreds of wickets against the likes of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and even when playing the good nations has a habit of cleaning up the tail. On the whole, regardless of who took more wickets at what average, Warne took 'better wickets' and frequently instilled a fear in batsmen that no other bowler i've seen capable of.
The comment that "Warne bowled in the comfort of a far better team and never under pressure" is a very poor assertion. Warne has perhaps bowled under more pressure than any other bowler in history, and there is probably no other bowler who took performed as well as he did in pressure situations. The entire 2005 ashes series was pressurised and Warne won man of the series. Playing in a superior team certainly does not make it easier to take wickets, in fact much harder. Warne has to compete for wickets with the likes of 4 of the best bowlers in the world and in many innings the other team has already been skittled by the time he has had a chance. Murali is the centre piece of the Sri Lankan attack, and not one other of the Sri Lankan bowlers he has bowled with would have made the Australian side, with the possible exception of Chaminda Vaas (maybe).

Re Warne: Best bowler I have seen, though I never saw the great West Indian quicks. I can compare Warne to Murali and McGrath. Warne was the best, the ultimate master of his craft of not just leg spin but bowling as a whole. It seems that it took one of the best batsmen of the generation to take the game away from him. I see that people are saying that his failures in India prove that he is not as good as Murali- Murali's record in Australia is poor to say the least, so much so that he has considered not touring. Murali is a another great, but not quite the same as Warne. Murali has often born the entire responsibilty of winning matches for Sri Lanka, and batsmen have been free to play him with a mind to taking advantage of the trundler at the other end. Warne on the other hand has had the likes of McGrath taking wickets and forcing batsmen to take runs wherever they can find them. If Warne had played for a different nation, he would be regaded as the undoubted best.
On retirements- good move by Harmison. I think it will help him. To me he seems a Test bowler not a one day quick. I think he'll improve with reduced pressure.
And on Australia- The depth of young talent is remarkable considering most players haven't had any international opportunities. I'm looking forward to seeing these guys getting a chance. I think Australia will still be near teh peak of world cricket in both forms of the game, just not undefeatable as they have been of late. And England have got major tickets on themselves if they think they are the heir apparent.

Once upon a time, when all the stars aligned . . .

Warne's action has never and will never be questioned. Don't forget they had to change the rules to accommodate Murali. That says more about the spinelessness of the ICC than the legitimacy of Murali's action. Also, don't forget that in the ICC tests he bowled 20kph slower than in a real match. It just goes to show just how realistic the biomechanics tests were. Anyway, how can anyone give Murali or any bowler a blanket pass? He can always "throw" the odd chuck in with his doosra. It's like the ICC giving a particular bowler the blanket pass against the front-foot no-ball rule.

Warne's the best. No question about it.

A lot of people seem to be using the argument of Muralitharan getting too many easy wickets against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. Well, it is easy enough to compute his statistics excluding these wickets. The results are:
Matches: 90
Wickets: 537
Bowling Average: 23.38
Wickets per match: 5.97

Let us say that we let Warne keep his few "easy" wickets against Bangladesh/Zimbabwe and compare.
Matches: 143
Wickets: 699
Bowling Average: 25.49
Wickets per match: 4.87

So clearly, it seems the easy wickets are not buoying Muralitharan vs. Warne. Now on to the argument made by one of posters that Muralitharan is taking mostly tailender's wickets. This is easily repudiated by taking a look at the distribution given at the following pages:

Muralitharan: http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerWicketAnalysisGraph.asp?PlayerID=1234
Warne: http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerWicketAnalysisGraph.asp?PlayerID=1856

The results are that 69% of Muralitharan's wickets are top and middle order (1-7) while 63.1% of Warne's wickets fall in that category. Lest someone now complains about the inclusion of the middle order, the results for the top order (1-3) are 23.2% for Warne and 25.4% for Muralitharan.

Finally strike rates: Excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe for Muralitharan and leaving them in for Warne, the strike rates are:
Muralitharan: 56.89
Warne: 57.67

As for the arm straightening, please read this article first: http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/srilanka/content/story/141558.html

I quote from the article a particularly interesting part: "The current law states that there should be no straightening or partial straightening of the bowling arm during delivery, and in-depth research has revealed that even bowlers like Glenn McGrath and Shaun Pollock, usually considered examplars of the classical action, occasionally go over the prescribed tolerance limit, bending their arms by as much as 12 degrees."

Of course none of this is going to convince anybody who has already decided that Warne is a better bowler but atleast they may consider restricting their complaints to fuzzy feeling, charisma and allegations.

Hi Tim,
Generally good blog but you have spoiled it by throwing in murali into the discussion which deviates everyone's opinion. having read all the way down the comments there is one factor that has not been considered. Throughout his career Murali has played in an average team which would have been below average but for his ability. Murali got 5-6 wickets in an innings even if the opposition scored 500+ as there weren't many bowlers who could get wickets. Warne on the other hand has always competed with McDermott, McGrath, Hughes, Lee to get wickets. They were all wicket-takers unlike the Srilankan support bowlers. I cant imagine how many wickets Warne would have today if he played for a team with poor bowlers.
I am an Indian and I amproud of the way Indians have handled Warne's bowling. It doesn't take away anything from Warne's achievement at all because he has consistently tormented Pakistan & srilanka home & away. It also shows that in tendulkar, Dravid, laxman & co india is blessed with some of the best players of spin bowling in the last decade. Warney, you are the best spin bowler the world has ever seen. It will be in retrospect about 20 years down the line that Warne will be appreciated even more for his skill.
Is it too much to expect "Sir Shane" to retire in 2 weeeks time. (Maybe his retirement was too late to catch this years new years honours list!!!)

The people here denigrating Murali seem to have some very misinformed ideas. "Change the rules to accomodate Murali" what rubbish - the ICC monitored the degree of straightening of all bowler's during the champion's trophy in England and found that most international bowlers exceded the original 10 degree limit. Guys like Pollock and McGrath were found to regularly exhibit ~ 13 degrees of flexion. If the rule makers stuck to the original 10 degrees, most international bowlers in World cricket would have to be banned. Murali's doosra is around 12 degrees, but his normal off-break has even less flexion - his action has no more straightening at the elbow than other international bowlers. Bearing this in mind, it is ridiculous that he should be singled out by certain members of the media and public for having dodgy action. Not only that, Murali is so convinced that he doesn't require elbow flexion to get spin that he even bowled with an elbow brace to prevent any elbow flexion and still got the ball to turn sharply both ways. He shouldn't have to justify his action, but he does in order to educate misinformed people like the posters above.

As for who is the better bowler, Murali has consistently been ranked higher than Warne by the official player ranking systems for the past 7 or 8 years. These ranking systems take every conceivable objective measurement into account, average, strike rate, opposition that wickets were taken against, current form etc.

Furthermore when international batsmen are asked, they all find Murali more dangerous - Paul Collingwood, Andrew Flintoff, Carl Hooper (when he was playing) etc.

Finally, even if you take away the 100 odd test wickets Murali took against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, his average against the remaining teams is still far superior to Warne's. In any case are Bangladesh that bad players of spin? When Warne bowled to them about a year ago he had figures of 0/112 from 20 overs in the 1st innings of the first test.

Sure, Warne is a great bowler, but Murali is clearly greater.

The memory of Warne that stands out most in the mind is the Worl Cup semi final in 1999. The way he single handedly rallied his team into the game after the South Africans had gotten off to a great start was truly amazing. That is what a champion is and no matter how many wickets Warne or Murali take, I would always consider Warne a better bowler and a better cricketer.

I am appalkled by the level of hypocrisy and petty mindedness shown in the comments re warne versus murali, Are we intrested in cticket or petty point scorinrg. They are both great bowlers and we are privileged to see them both at their best. True cricket lovers rejoice in their skills . Anything else is pure CRAP.
Having said that, I condsider Warne the better all-round cricketer due to his batting and slip=catchnhg. but make no judgement on their respective bowling . Let's just recognize their amazing skill and ENJOY!!

Peter - couldn't agree more with your comments about Warne, Murali, Darrell Hair, the politics, etc...absolutely spot on. I'm sorry, but Murali chucks his doosra. Also liked Raju's comments regarding Warne competing for wickets with other fine bowlers in the Australian team over the years. As for "ashish" - is that his name or something he's been smoking? AS, your mathematical treatment of the game and Warne vs. Murali's records is as sadly boring as it is irrelevant. Warnie, thanks for some wonderful memories and all the matches you won us out of your own hand.

All the Murali fans who have bombarded the SHANE WARNE blog need to go back to watching Murali take some more five fors against Zimbabwe in Kandy and try and pull some more statistical analyses out that prove that Murali's average, when bowling with an arm bent 9.5 degrees is 21.05 where Warne only averages 26.3 bowling to left handers. Who gives a crap? Hide behind your stats sheets if you think it makes Murali a better player.

Does that mean that Bevan is a better one day batsman than Sir Viv? Or is Sehwag a better test bat because his current avg is higher than what Viv's finished at? I can go on all day if you like, to prove that stats need to be looked at with a grain of salt.

One day when your grandkids ask you who the best ever was, you can pull out a statistical analysis and show them how great Murali was. I’ll pull out some highlights of Warne winning matches for his country and shaping one of the greatest, most dominant cricket teams the world has ever known. In case you’re wondering, that’s why all these ‘Crazy Non-Sri Lankan-Murali-Fanatics’ prefer Warne to Murali. People remember greatness. Conquests which change and define cricket. Warne has every trophy a cricketer could dream of. He decided to conquer Everest and did so in a way that has brought people through turnstiles in droves wherever he went. His name will go down as one of the greats.

But hey, you and Murali have your stats.