If Murali also played 5 test matches against England plus test matches with weak spin players in sides like New Zealand and South Africa every year like Warne he doesn't need the wickets from Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.. Its not Murali fault that the ICC doesn't give much matches against teams like Australia and India very often to Sri Lanka. Whatever people say now Murali will definitely be the best ever bowler on earth one day when he retires with around 1000 wickets!!

Ishan, Perth, Australia

The article points out correctly that Murali has taken a significant amount of wickets from the relative minnows of Test cricket while Shane Warne has comparatively far fewer scalps of these teams as Australia have had fewer encounters with the teams in question. Just like Murali has performed poorly against the Indians, who happen to be some of the best players of spin, Warne's wicket tally is bloated with those of English batsmen who happen to be atrocious players of spin. If Murali had the opportunity as Warne did to take more English wickets that are somehow deemed more respectable, I am sure that he would have done just as well or even better than the Australian. Putting cricket aside, the difficulties Murali had to overcome in the terms of an ethnic conflict at home and a hostile cricketing world, speaks volumes of his character and all his achievements are due to hard work and determination and not 'water tablets' that some have resorted to in the past!

Kanishka, London, UK

Exclude all the matches he has played in the subcontinent and Zimbabwe, and the numbers still look impressive - nearly six wickets per Test and an average of less than 22. Shane Warne is retired and Warne is in Murali's shadows.

Warne has too many English wickets. English batsmen are very weak at spinners. Warne has cheap english wickets and many tailenders too.

Shamal Jayakody, Canberra, Australia

Murlis county cricket record is better than shane warnes in terms of wickets per match and 5 and 10 wicket hauls. Also australia have accused shoib aktar of throwing in the past anyone who their batsman have difficulties facing is called a chucker by the australians, this is double standards.

Murli takes wickets at 32.5 against india
Shane Warne at 50 plus against india

that says alot

hugo, london,

What a load of nonsense.

You point out that Murali's average is "no more than adequate" against India - 32.5 is your figure; but what is Shane Warne's average v India - 47.5 - that's only just better than Ashley Giles!

In my opinion you've read S Rajesh's excellent and impartial article on cricinfoDOTcom from 13th July and you've plagiarised, and then cannibalised it to fit your argument.

Stick to reporting Mr.Wilde and leaves the stats to the experts.

Henry, London,

So sad to see "journalists" trying to take a milestone away from a legend.. This is ridiciculos. The aussies never gives Sri Lanka more than a 2 match test series. Sri Lanka does not play the aussies BECAUSE of Cricket Australia! Therefore we have to fill up the itenary with other test teams.. Mind you, before 2002, Zimbambwe was an average team. So please, just keep ur mouths shut and take your hat off for one of the greatest players of all time!!

Danuka, Oslo/, Norway

Even Shane Warne can be accused of using performance enhancing drugs before bowling
It is not that Shane Warne was any cleaner character

Anand Sharma, Longmont, USA/Colorado

Cheap publicity against Murali. Except for Pakistan Murali averages better than Warne against all countries. Have a look at this.

Warne Murali
Mats Wkts W/M Mats Wkts W/M
AUS - - - 11 55 5.0
BAN 2 11 5.5 6 50 8.3
ENG 36 195 5.4 13 93 7.2
ICCXI 1 6 6.0 - - -
IND 14 43 3.1 15 67 4.5
NZ 20 103 5.2 12 69 5.8
PAK 15 90 6.0 14 79 5.6
SAF 24 130 5.4 15 104 6.9
SL 13 59 4.5 - - -
WI 19 65 3.4 10 70 7.0
ZIM 1 6 6.0 14 87 6.2

Warne is definietly the second best. And the stats prove it beyond doubt.

Ranga, Colombo, Sri Lanka

It astonishes me how you can ignore surely the most important comparative point in your article, Simon: namely, that Murali averages two less against the top eight Test sides than Warne (and is handicapped by playing against aus rather than Sri Lanka).

Tim, London,

As the stats at the end of the article make clear, Murali is better than Warne. He has a better average than Warne against major countries, even though Warne has never had to bowl against Australia. If he had had the chance to play as many matches against major countries as Warne has, he would be ahead in total wickets against them as well.

It's the same story if one looks at the ICC ratings, which take difficulty of opposition into account, where Murali's record is in a different class from Warne's. He has spent years with a ranking above 900 (the mark of a great bowler), whereas Warne only reached that level for one week. Murali is hugely underrated, and Warne is overrated. Warne is merely the second best spinner of his generation, not one of the greatest cricketers of all time as his acolytes would have us believe.

Oliver Chettle, Bedford,

This was alwayas going to be the case as murali approached warne's record. Those jealous of the great mans achievements and as well as those who still cant accept he is much better than warne - both statistically and in the flesh. Once murali breaks the record in australia there will be talk that he is now throwing again and will need to be tested. I wish people would just leave the guy alone - he is a testament to the game and as steve waugh said he is the BOB bradman of bowlers. RESPECT

Neil, Brisbane, Australia

look at their stats against majors murali still tops warne and i less games too

swagger, london,

I was comparing their respective records in the so-called majors and is it just me but Murali's figures seem superior. I agree with yam there's too much bias. That was certainly the case when listening to some pompous ass on Paul Allott's show earlier today. Remember Warne got plenty of cheap wickets of England tailenders throughout his career.

Paul,Burnley, Burnley, U.K.

Lies,damned lies and statistics!
Compare Murali and Warne only on results vs. majors -- MM averages 5.97 wickets per Test at 23.4 with an SR of 50.2 but SW averages only 4.87 wickets per Test at 25.4 with an SR of 57.7.On all three statistical counts,MM beats Warne.
[An apparent issue may be "why have Sri Lanka played so many more Tests vs the Minor countries,compared with the Aussies?" -- happenstance or deliberate fixture policy?]
Of course,both are great bowlers,players who cricket fans always want to watch,because they have immense skill and "make things happen" but they also find the humour in events on the field and respect good opponents.
For these,we should honour and treasure them,not because they amass huge numbers of wickets.

Peter Clemens, King's Lynn, Norfolk

When people write like this I sense biasness. Donot you all think Murali is a player who should play with all the teams? In my view the way Australian react on Murali's spin is a disrespect to a great Great and better bowler of the world. When Murali throw ball it is called chucked and when Shane throw it is a throw. I sense doulble standard in writing the column.

yam, London, UK