Sport Today

by **Larry de Silv** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:27:16

An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
guts.

Laz
--------------------------------------------------------------

Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

Wisden Cricinfo staff

August 23, 2004

Richie Benaud, the former Australian captain and current doyen of television
commentators, has named his World XI of the 20th century. Jack Hobbs, whose
England career spanned 23 years, and Sunil Gavaskar, who scored 34 Test
centuries for India, open the batting for a team that is made up of four
Australians, two West Indians, two Indians, two Englishmen, and one player
from Pakistan.

Don Bradman makes an appearance at No. 3, followed by Sachin Tendulkar, who
is one of three cricketers in the team still playing international cricket,
at No.3 and Viv Richards at No. 4. Pakistan's Imran Khan and the West Indian
Garfield Sobers are the two allrounders in the side.

Australia's Adam Gilchrist is the side's wicketkeeper, batting at No. 8. Rod
Marsh may have been more acrobatic, and Ian Healy had more finesse behind
the stumps, but Gilchrist's contribution as a top-class batsman earned him a
place in the side: he averages 15 runs per innings more than any other
keeper in history, and has a strike-rate of 82 per 100 balls faced in Tests.

Shane Warne squeezed into the side, somewhat controversially perhaps, ahead
of Muttiah Muralitharan, Sri Lanka's prodigious offspinner, as the side's
only specialist spinner. Warne is only just behind Muralitharan in the Test
bowling record stakes with 527 wickets to Murali's 532, but Murali has taken
his wickets in 21 fewer Tests.

Sydney Barnes, who remains the only man to be picked for England while
playing league and minor cricket, is one of two specialist fast bowlers in
the squad. He took 1432 wickets for Staffordshire at less that nine runs
each, and played for the county until he was over 60. The other is Dennis
Lillee, who took 355 Test wickets for Australia between 1971 and 1984.

Apart from Muralitharan, some notable exceptions from the World XI include
Graeme Pollock, the South African batsman, his fast-bowling nephew, Shaun,
and New Zealand's leading wicket-taker Richard Hadlee. Benaud himself would
arguably have been in the running for a place in the side himself. As a
legspinning allrounder, he took 248 Test wickets at an average of 27.03 in
63 Tests and retired as Australia's leading wicket-taker at the time.

Benaud, 73, is chairman of a five-man selection panel for next month's ICC
Awards that will choose the best World one-day international XI and World
Test XI of the year.

Benaud's Greatest XI

1 Jack Hobbs, 2 Sunil Gavaskar, 3 Don Bradman, 4 Sachin Tendulkar, 5 Viv
Richards, 6 Imran Khan, 7 Garfield Sobers, 8 Adam Gilchrist, 9 Shane Warne,
10 Sydney Barnes, 11 Dennis Lillee.

by **conehea** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:45:25

Quote:

> An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

> Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
> guts.

> Laz
> --------------------------------------------------------------

> Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

> Wisden Cricinfo staff

> August 23, 2004

> Richie Benaud, the former Australian captain and current doyen of
television
> commentators, has named his World XI of the 20th century. Jack Hobbs,
whose
> England career spanned 23 years, and Sunil Gavaskar, who scored 34 Test
> centuries for India, open the batting for a team that is made up of four
> Australians, two West Indians, two Indians, two Englishmen, and one player
> from Pakistan.

When a bowler in Benaud's team was called for chucking, Benaud didn't use
that bowler again.

Benaud has form. He also has a bit of class. Why on earth would he pick a
bowler with a suspect action in a best-of team?

If he wanted a great finger-spinner, he probably would have gone with
Prasana.

--
conehead

by **alve** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:13:11

snippo

Quote:

> If he wanted a great finger-spinner, he probably would have gone with
> Prasana.

I just can't understand how Benaud left out Merrily. After all, he is
SL's best ever bowler...

alvey
in brisbane, sshhh. Don't mention Aravinda.

by **Colin Kynoc** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:38:09

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:27:16 +1000, "Larry de Silva"

with this:

Quote:

>An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

Certainly wasn't ever likely to be picked by Benaud on two points.
One Murali was called and has tested well outside tolerance levels and
acted like a spoiled brat when his results were so far outside the
tolerance levels.

Secondly Benaud was a leg spinner and is more inclined to pick a
leggie over an offie, particularly one who can bat better than Murali.

Quote:

>Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
>guts.

More likely there is generally only one place in a side for a spinner
(in best teams anyway) and most Aussies would pick Warne over Murali.

I wonder how many World XI teams picked by Sri Lankans would include
Warne over Murali?

I am guessing a similar proportion to those picked by Aussies that
have Murali over Warne.

I know for one I would prefer Warne in my side than Murali. Warne is
a better fieldsman and a better batsman.

Murali has a marginally better SR and a marginally better Econ, and a
bit better bowling average.

But Warne is the better all round cricketer.

<snip>

Colin Kynoch

by **Mad Hamis** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:56:25

Quote:

>If he wanted a great finger-spinner, he probably would have gone with
>Prasana.

Laker.

by **Larry de Silv** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:00:35

Quote:

> > An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see
that!!

> > Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
> > guts.

> > Laz
> > --------------------------------------------------------------

> > Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

> > Wisden Cricinfo staff

> > August 23, 2004

> > Richie Benaud, the former Australian captain and current doyen of
> television
> > commentators, has named his World XI of the 20th century. Jack Hobbs,
> whose
> > England career spanned 23 years, and Sunil Gavaskar, who scored 34 Test
> > centuries for India, open the batting for a team that is made up of four
> > Australians, two West Indians, two Indians, two Englishmen, and one
player
> > from Pakistan.

> When a bowler in Benaud's team was called for chucking, Benaud didn't use
> that bowler again.

Yeah! Great support from the captain to his bowler!
He has always sucked up to the cricket bosses.

Quote:

> Benaud has form. He also has a bit of class. Why on earth would he pick
a
> bowler with a suspect action in a best-of team?

I guess this definition is in the eye of the beholder.........I see only
that the tolerance limits for spinners are wrong.

Laz

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> If he wanted a great finger-spinner, he probably would have gone with
> Prasana.

> --
> conehead

by **Larry de Silv** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:07:29

Quote:

> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:27:16 +1000, "Larry de Silva"

> with this:

> >An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

> Certainly wasn't ever likely to be picked by Benaud on two points.
> One Murali was called and has tested well outside tolerance levels

WHICH are totally unrealistic and will be changed soon.

Quote:

>and
> acted like a spoiled brat when his results were so far outside the
> tolerance levels.

No he didn't. He just said it like it was (as I also did at the time) and
hasn't bowled the doosra now for months. I think you are as usual being
totally unfair & irrational when discussing Murali but then again, I'm so
used to your thought system now dude.

Quote:

> Secondly Benaud was a leg spinner and is more inclined to pick a
> leggie over an offie, particularly one who can bat better than Murali.

> >Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
> >guts.

> More likely there is generally only one place in a side for a spinner
> (in best teams anyway) and most Aussies would pick Warne over Murali.

Try 99.9%. The others would be expat SL's or non Aussie born cricket fans I
reckon.

Quote:

> I wonder how many World XI teams picked by Sri Lankans would include
> Warne over Murali?

You will be surprised. Warne IS extremely popular in SL dude. They love him
over there.

Quote:

> I am guessing a similar proportion to those picked by Aussies that
> have Murali over Warne.

Not by a long shot. Warne IS respected in SL, Murali is NOT in Aus.

Quote:

> I know for one I would prefer Warne in my side than Murali. Warne is
> a better fieldsman and a better batsman.

Fair enough. I would prefer Murali. More potent and deadly.

Quote:

> Murali has a marginally better SR and a marginally better Econ, and a
> bit better bowling average.

> But Warne is the better all round cricketer.

A matter of opinion.

Laz

Quote:

> <snip>

> Colin Kynoch

by **Tom Boltwoo** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:22:06

Quote:

> Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:07:29 +1000
> Subject: Re: Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:27:16 +1000, "Larry de Silva"

>> with this:

>>> An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

>> Certainly wasn't ever likely to be picked by Benaud on two points.
>> One Murali was called and has tested well outside tolerance levels

> WHICH are totally unrealistic and will be changed soon.

Will you please change the ***ing record? I'd love for all the test bowlers
to be tested just to shut you up about this one.

In terms of him not being picked, as someone pointed out on UKSC, Murali has
done much of his finest work in the 21st Century and it is a 20th Century
team. Having said that, when asked on Channel 4 by Mark Nicholas when the
team was announced, Benaud said that he felt wrist spin was more useful than
finger spin. However, doesn't Murali use a mixture of both? Anyway, those
were his reasons, and Murali was in the shortlist that the final team was
picked from, he just didn't make it into the final IX.

Despite all Murali's abilities and acheivements and disregarding the
chucking issue, I rate Warne as the better bowler and cricketer, so would
have him in my side. If that means I'm a racist Sri Lanka hater then so be
it.

by **Mike Holman** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:36:28

tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

Quote:

>Despite all Murali's abilities and acheivements and disregarding the
>chucking issue, I rate Warne as the better bowler and cricketer, so would
>have him in my side. If that means I'm a racist Sri Lanka hater then so be
>it.

So does Atherton, who has the small disadvantage of actually having
played against both of them and says that Warne is a genius while
Murali is just excellent - which is like his view that Lara is a
genius and Tendulkar merely excellent.

Cheers,

Mike

by **Larry de Silv** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:54:07

Quote:

> > Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
> > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:07:29 +1000
> > Subject: Re: Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

> >> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:27:16 +1000, "Larry de Silva"

> >> with this:

> >>> An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see
that!!

> >> Certainly wasn't ever likely to be picked by Benaud on two points.
> >> One Murali was called and has tested well outside tolerance levels

> > WHICH are totally unrealistic and will be changed soon.

> Will you please change the ***ing record? I'd love for all the test
bowlers
> to be tested just to shut you up about this one.

Temper temper..........!! Chill out dude!

Quote:

> In terms of him not being picked, as someone pointed out on UKSC, Murali
has
> done much of his finest work in the 21st Century and it is a 20th Century
> team. Having said that, when asked on Channel 4 by Mark Nicholas when the
> team was announced, Benaud said that he felt wrist spin was more useful
than
> finger spin. However, doesn't Murali use a mixture of both? Anyway, those
> were his reasons, and Murali was in the shortlist that the final team was
> picked from, he just didn't make it into the final IX.

Shocking omission but to be expected really.,

Quote:

> Despite all Murali's abilities and acheivements and disregarding the
> chucking issue, I rate Warne as the better bowler and cricketer,

In your lousy opinion dude.

Quote:

>so would
> have him in my side. If that means I'm a racist Sri Lanka hater then so be
> it.

Well if you admit to it, so be it. Takes all types you know. Such is life.
Some are racist, others are not.

Laz

- Show quoted text -

by **Master Chie** » Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:17:54

Quote:

> An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see
that!!

> Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his
SL
> guts.

> Laz

So you start a new thread on a topic that is being discussed in two
separate threads just to get the focus on Muralitharan and repeat your
broken record that the world hates SriLanka.. You really need some
help.

I am surprised why your machangs here have not tried to put any sense
in you!!
They seem to be intelligent.. wait..that must be the reason. Maybe they
are intelligent enough to know that you are a hopeless case.

by **Chan Fonse** » Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:57:58

Quote:

> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:27:16 +1000, "Larry de Silva"

> with this:

> >An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

> Certainly wasn't ever likely to be picked by Benaud on two points.
> One Murali was called and has tested well outside tolerance levels and
> acted like a spoiled brat when his results were so far outside the
> tolerance levels.

Yes. Warne on the other hand has never acted like any sort of brat, or
said anything offensive to women, or verbally abused children, or
taken performance-enhancing substances or anything of the sort.
Besides, all of that pales against "acting like a spoiled brat".

Quote:

> Secondly Benaud was a leg spinner and is more inclined to pick a
> leggie over an offie, particularly one who can bat better than Murali.

Particularly.

Quote:

> >Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
> >guts.

> More likely there is generally only one place in a side for a spinner
> (in best teams anyway) and most Aussies would pick Warne over Murali.

> I wonder how many World XI teams picked by Sri Lankans would include
> Warne over Murali?

> I am guessing a similar proportion to those picked by Aussies that
> have Murali over Warne.

> I know for one I would prefer Warne in my side than Murali. Warne is
> a better fieldsman

By miles. Larry how could you miss that aspect?

Quote:

> and a better batsman.

Particularly. Murali averages only 12 while Warne averages a whopping
16.

Quote:

> Murali has a marginally better SR and a marginally better Econ, and a
> bit better bowling average.

Irrelevant.

Quote:

> But Warne is the better all round cricketer.

Yes, all round skills are of paramount importance when selecting the
sole spinner for a side that is so sorely lacking in the other areas
they need those extra four runs.

- Chan

Quote:

> <snip>

> Colin Kynoch

by **Andrew Dunfor** » Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:17:47

Quote:

> > > Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
> > > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:07:29 +1000
> > > Subject: Re: Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

> > >> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:27:16 +1000, "Larry de Silva"

> > >> with this:

> > >>> An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see
> that!!

> > >> Certainly wasn't ever likely to be picked by Benaud on two points.
> > >> One Murali was called and has tested well outside tolerance levels

> > > WHICH are totally unrealistic and will be changed soon.

> > Will you please change the ***ing record? I'd love for all the test
> bowlers
> > to be tested just to shut you up about this one.

> Temper temper..........!! Chill out dude!

In any case, the record can't be changed because it is glued fast to the
turntable. The only option I can see is to get a new hi-fi system.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> > In terms of him not being picked, as someone pointed out on UKSC, Murali
> has
> > done much of his finest work in the 21st Century and it is a 20th
Century
> > team. Having said that, when asked on Channel 4 by Mark Nicholas when
the
> > team was announced, Benaud said that he felt wrist spin was more useful
> than
> > finger spin. However, doesn't Murali use a mixture of both? Anyway,
those
> > were his reasons, and Murali was in the shortlist that the final team
was
> > picked from, he just didn't make it into the final IX.

> Shocking omission but to be expected really.,

Well, the "final IX" probably can't afford the luxury of a spinner, even if
the final XI could.

Seriously, you do need to take the blinkers off and remind yourself of the
20th century criteria. Depending on one's interpretation of when the 20th
century finished:

on 31 December 1999

on 31 December 2000

I imagine the majority regard 31 December 1999 as the cut-off point, at
which point several spinners would have claims over Muralitharan on
statistics alone, for example Clarrie Grimmett. Murali is to-date the
spinner of the 21st century.

<snip>

Andrew

by **Andrew Dunfor** » Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:38:26

Quote:

> An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see that!!

> Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his SL
> guts.

> Laz
> --------------------------------------------------------------

> Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

This headline will appear in various guises around the world. For example,
today's article on the subject in the Barbados Daily Nation is headed "Lara
omitted from Benaud's XI". I suppose I should start looking in the local
press for "Hadlee omitted" articles.

Meanwhile a little closer to home, it is strongly rumoured that the August
issue of Dunford Monthly will lead with "Dunford omitted from Benaud's XI".

<snip>

Andrew

by **Shatada** » Thu, 26 Aug 2004 08:27:03

Quote:

> > > An Aussie to pick Murali in a greatest ever team?? I'd like to see
> that!!

> > > Highly unlikely in this century though............They just hate his
SL
> > > guts.

> > > Laz
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------

> > > Murali misses out in Benaud's Greatest XI

> > > Wisden Cricinfo staff

> > > August 23, 2004

> > > Richie Benaud, the former Australian captain and current doyen of
> > television
> > > commentators, has named his World XI of the 20th century. Jack Hobbs,
> > whose
> > > England career spanned 23 years, and Sunil Gavaskar, who scored 34
Test
> > > centuries for India, open the batting for a team that is made up of
four
> > > Australians, two West Indians, two Indians, two Englishmen, and one
> player
> > > from Pakistan.

> > When a bowler in Benaud's team was called for chucking, Benaud didn't
use
> > that bowler again.

> Yeah! Great support from the captain to his bowler!
> He has always sucked up to the cricket bosses.

You really believe that Meckiff was not chucking?

<snip>

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> Laz