When a bowler breaks the world record for the most Test wickets, it would be churlish to grudge him his feat. But amid all the hype over Muttiah Muralitharan, it’s pertinent to examine some basic indices which pit him against Shane Warne — and show that the record-holder may not necessarily be the better bowler. The figures favour Murali: Warne has played 110 Tests to Murali’s 89, the Aussie averages 25.42 to Murali’s 22.96. But does that mean Murali’s the better bowler?Not really, and here’s why.First, Warne has played 50 of his 110 Tests in Australia, the graveyard for spinners. Add to that 39 more in England, South Africa, New Zealand and the West Indies and you have 81 per cent of his Tests on spin-unfriendly environments.Compare that to Murali’s 89 Tests, of which 52 were at home and 12 more in India and Pakistan. That’s 72 pc of his Tests on spinning wickets. There’s more. Through the whole period that Murali’s been a frontline bowler, Vaas has been the only other decent bowler the nation has had. In contrast, Warne has spent an entire career with McGrath for company and for more than half his Test matches, has had strike bowlers like Reiffel, Lee, Gillespie, Bichel and others with him.Usually, that’s good, because it means the workload is reduced. But we are talking wicket hauls here, and a great bowling attack means the wickets are shared out. Murali comes in to bowl with only two-odd wickets down; Warne’s turn is when the batting order is almost done.Which is why Murali has thus far claimed 43 five-fors and 13 ten-fors, vis-a-vis Warne’s 27 and eight. There’s nothing between them, however, when it comes to strike rates, because Murali hits 58.9 to Warne’s 59.7. A rather conclusive indicator.It’s what made Malcolm Marshall the great he was. 376 Test wickets, but with a best of 7 for 22. Because the teams he played in usually had three other bowlers capable of picking as many.
