Cricinfo - Blogs - Pak Spin - Qadir was the best of the lot

7. Warne had always been part of a powerful bowling attack. For most of Qadir's career it was him and Imran and much cannon fodder.

8. Global cricket coverage made today's stars more prominent than even the stars of the 80s. Many of Qadir's dazzling performances were never seen in England and Australia, the countries that dominate cricket writing and coverage.

9. Scyld Berry, the incoming editor of Wisden Almanack: "It is impossible to believe that wrist-spin has ever been bowled better than Qadir did in his home city of Lahore in 1987-88, when he took 9 for 56 against England."

10. More from Scyld: "Graham Gooch, who faced him that day, said Qadir was even finer than Shane Warne, to whom he passed on the candle." Gooch faced both bowlers in their prime.

Thank you Shane but let's not forget Abdul the Googly.

I agree with much of what you've said Kamran-except for one great thing you ignore. Over the time since Qadir required, helmets, pitches, bats, just to name a few important aspects, have improved, tipping the balance of power far more towards batsman in the era Warne has bowled, than the one Qadir did, so Warne's acheivements must be given some degree of greater weighting on that basis. The only true measure of who's greater would be if we could get Qadir to play against today's batsmen in today's conditions and see how he did-unfortunately we'll never get to do that.

i do agee with you. But now since somtimes glamour and media enhances can enhance the image of anything to anywhere, however, it is a fact that Warne has spun the entire cricket through its demolishing spells over the past few years

Agree with you. But I dont think Aussie Yobos will agree. They are blind to feats of "foreigners".
Some of your points dont make much difference though.
#3 - I cant see how this makes a difference once you enter the playing field
#5 - is very devious. WI succumbed to even Hirwani. Enough Said :-). Success in Spin Bowling should be measured by success against India. In any case, Shane Warne fails that test. Records against WI shouldnt count as a measure of greatness as far as spin bowling is concerened.
By the same token, ofcourse, Warne's "Feats" against ENgland, SA, NZ etc dont really deserve accolades. But try telling that to Aussies and English men...
I agree with 1,2,8 & 9.
Graham Gooch - well his testimony can hardly be taken as the final word. But then, if an Englishman, despite being an Englishman, says that an Asian is actually better than a White, then we must believe that he was really impressed by the Asian otherwise he wouldnt have admitted it. So, in that sense, it is an important testimony to consider.

Let us hope one thing: The author of this fasard was drunk or atleast under the influence of a very powerful mind-altering drug at the time of relese. I can not for the life of me belive that anybody could be so dim-witted as to claim such an obsurdity. Shane Warne couldnt bowl a googley? I hate to rain on your parade but lets look to the 3rd test of the ashes in adelaide. The following is an exact copy of the online commentry deleivered by the un-biased good people at cricinfo: 57.5 Warne to Hoggard, OUT, lovely, lovely bowling. A big, flighted googly, 18 inches wide of off stump and it's too much for Hoggard to resist ... he shapes to drive and the ball snorts back and into his stumps, aided by a big inside edge. The height did for Hoggard there ... his eyes lit up as he saw it arcing towards him. "C'mon!" cries a grinning Warne, pumping his fist and sending Hoggard on his way with a raised index finger which screams 'You're out'
MJ Hoggard b Warne 4. As an ametur bowler playing in a average suburban senior cricket side (the clubs 3rd 11) I do not begin to claim for a second that i am even a respectable leg-spinner (infact i dont even bowl legspinners in matchs such is my incompitence). However, occasionally I like to bowl some "warney's" in the nets at training for a bit of fun. Whilst bowling my slow, loopy,offen inaccurate leg cutters I occasionally throw in a googley. Therin lies my point! I CAN BOWL A GOOGLEY. Now, certinly if i can bowl a googley surley shane warne can (as he has proved on countless occasions). It is interesting to note however, I (like abdul qadir) am incapeable of bowling a slider, flipper, zooter or any of the other delieverys shane warne has utilised effectivly throughout his illustrious career. To the author of these ridiculous lies i say this: Stop wasting people time with lies about wrong 'un's and the like. We all know shane warne can bowl a damm good wrong un' and your making a fool of yourself. Quit being an envious sod and apreciate Warne's supreme skill. last of all I would like to make a point that our intelectually challenged author "forgot" to point out. Qadir played the vast majority of his cricket on raging turner sub continental pitch's. Shane warne has not had that privilidge. My suggestion for you would be to properly research your facts before coming out with such crap. I have a deep, deep sympathy for you as any viewer of this page who knew the first thing about cricket is probably in the midst of a belly laugh at your sheer ignorence and biasm.

Yes, I agree with all but one thing that you didn't mentioned is that, warne bowled in the era where batsman are not well equipped with their techniques, i mean most of the batsman are unlike Viv Richard, Clive Llyod and so on, there fore it was easy for warne to get them, but on contrary it was very tough for Abdul Qadir, that is why i will give Qadir full marks. WELL DONE ABDUL QADIR.
Thanks
Adil.

And my brother was a better batsman than Yousuf Youhana just that nobody's gave him a chance to play for India!

There's no place for what-ifs and maybe's in this world.

Warnie is the best! Period.

PS: So what if he didn't have a googly. His stock
deliveries were hard enough for most to handle.

I've been debating this point of view for some time now but it has been ignored as 'sour grapes from a bitter Pakistani'. Qadir was a far more menacing bowler than Warne, his amazing control over the devices of flight and spin was nothing short of mesmerising.

I don't think comparing players of different eras is a good idea. Like comparing Murali to Shane makes more sense then to Qadir. There are lots of parameters that changes with the time so i think they are both champions of their era.

It is interesting to note that Sambit Bal writes on the same site that "Mohinder Amarnath once recounted to me with relish how he and Sunil Gavaskar used to shout out "googles" every time Abdul Qadir tried to bowl a googly"
Having said that, Shane Warne too has fared poorly against Indians.
But you will have to tip the scale in favour of Warne for having done outstandingly well for more than 140 tests..700 plus wickets is no mean feat.

Agree with u on some arguments, but disagree on others. Qadir possessing a variety of googlies does not make him a better leg spinner than Warne. Mushy, also possessed a great googly and so does Kaneria, but none of these two come anywhere near Warne when compared in stature. It is not how much variety u have in your bowling arsenal, but rather what u do with those deliveries in the context of getting batsmen out, which really matters.

Warne's greatness lies in his ability to out duel and outthink batsmen by wearing them out, step by step in the process. I have read Lara declaring that Warne never troubled him as a leg spinner, but it was Warne's perseverance and fighting spirit which made him such a great bowler. According to Lara, even when he was dominating Warne, a look at Warne's eyes would never suggest even a hint of defeat. Warne still believed that he is going to get Lara out eventually. Warne never backed off a fight, a duel. He always believed that ultimately, he is going to win the battle. For me, this ability of Warne to keep coming back and refusing to give up is what makes him greater than his peers.

All in all, in my opinion, Warne has been far more efficient and effective in the context of dominating and getting batsmen out, than Qadir ever was, with inferior natural talent. This is a tribute to Warne’s iron-willed character, his mental strength and dogged resistance.

I agree with Kamran. It is often easy to forget the wizardry of Qadir when Warne is constantly breaking records in todays game. At a time when fast bowlers were the weapons of mass destruction, Qadir proved that cunning and skillful spin bowling could take out batsmen also. He made spin bowling cool, kids in the streets would twirl their wrists to emulate him. For that purpose he is a giant in his own right.

In response tp Paul's comments: Right that the cricket gear has improved a lot, but that is not only for the batsmen, it is true for teh close-in fielders as well. Now look at what warney has as close-in fielders and what Qadir used to have.

It is the weirdiest and funniest comaprison. Qadir was not 10 percent as good as Warne, a true legend. I think I should stop here otherwise, such naive and non cricketing comparisons may lead us no where. Warne played coz of his superfluous skills and Qadir only coz of Imran's rigid likings..

Those aren't reasons why Qadir was better than Warne, they're excuses for why he achieved less. All except point 1, to which Warne might reply (as did the great S F Barnes) "I never needed one".

For me Qadir's memory, great performer though he was, will be forever tainted by association with some of the most conspicuous home-town umpiring ever. Warne had neutral umpires.

I remember watching Qadir and loved the way he went about his cricket. My brothers and I used to imitate his bouncing, angled run to the wicket trying to bowl all the varieties that he delivered. He was one of the reasons that I grew to love cricket.

Saying all this I thought I would look at his figures via the statsguru as I couldn't remember his average offhand and one very noticeable thing occurred to me. Qadir took the majority of his wickets at home in Pakistan and his away record is fairly unflattering. The one thing that Warne has over Abdul Qadir is that Warne has performed consistently well in almost every country over a long period of time in various conditions which is the mark of a champion bowler. Yes Qadir had a larger armoury but I would have to say that Warne used his repetoire better as he was able to stop the batsmen scoring more regularly than Qadir and hence was able to build pressure until he could bowl/frustrate the batsmen out.

One other thing that goes for Qadir is the mindset and the ability of present day batsmen that have dropped to such low levels that even a comparison with the batsmen of 80s and early ninties has become impossible. South Africa, Srilanka, New Zealand and England do not have even one world class batsman. Pakistan and West-Indies one each and India and Australia perhaps two each. So eight test playing nations have produced six good batsmen in the past decade. That makes Shane Warne's job a lot more easier than Qadir's.

Kamran I believe your view is very biased. You should make a comparison between their statistics and see who really stands out. another point although warne migth not be the greatest googly bowler, he has alot of other variasions. warne is definatly the greateswt leg spin bowler.

Did Qadir have a flipper?

"Warne had the smartest cricket board behind him." Are you forgetting that Warne went 1/150 in his debut and if it wasn't for Alan Border Warne would have been lost?

To be honest I'd never heard of Qadir before, but now I'll see if I can find some footage and read some more articles. Definately sounds like something to enjoy. Thanks Kamran.

I agree with some of Kamran's analysis two great bowlers from different decades. Qadir was the lone wrist spin bowler in the time when fast bowler dominated the world of cricket. Qadir kept this art alive, furhter more to this.....In shane's own words he visited Qadir at Lahore to learn more about this great art.

Shane did benefit from the global coverage...both bowler were & are great but for me I will vote will go to Great Qadir (The Bul Bul).

Dr. Abbasi
There is no fair comparison even when you want to compare two players who played in same era, e.g. who is better between Botham and Imran.

You are saying that Qadir was better than Shane, maybe, but an Indian may claim that Gupte was better, the WestIndians too wil agree.
The only objectivity we know come through numbers and thats where Shane has exceeded everyone.
Lets not draw comparisons and bring the champions of different era down to the level of ordinary players.

I am sorry but Abdul Qadir's bowling average outside of Pakistan (i.e without the benefit of Pakisatni umpires) is 47.58.

Enough said.

Qadir was perhaps more talent but Warne is/was scientific. i.e. the same difference between Australia and Pakistan cricket teams. During the Wasim/ Waqar era Pakistan had the best side on paper but they suffered humiliating defeats against the Australians.

As can be said of Shoaib and Lee. Shoaib is better bowler but Lee will be more effective and have an illustrious career.

Both of them are part of the same family....spin bowling. which they have kept alive to benefit cricket world wide.

Qadir was the inventor of what Warne continued as a leg spinner.I think a great era of leg spin bowling is ended now.The only difference between them was that Qadir belongs to the the system who never utilize him till the end and never appreciates his efforts but Warne belonged to CA who knows how to utilize their best players and let them play for years, the best example is worldcup 2003 where Warne was banned for 1 year but he got selected again,came back and ended his career successfully.

kool comments but can't go any thing wrong against ausies these days.... this is a fact that in todays cricket even umpires are under pressure when they are in an australia's match..... u might have seen alot of wrong decisions against opponents even by great umpires....

"2. Umpires have become much more sympathetic towards legspinners over the last decade or so. Qadir had some of the plumbest decisions turned down for no better reason than the ball "might" spin."

Maybe so, but Qadir also benefited enormously from some partisan home umpiring - and that's putting it mildly. I recall a video that was posted on one blog here showing the most shocking lbw decision being given against Mike Gatting. That was not an isolated incident.

Other than that, very fair points, though I agree with Aaron that Qadir didn't have a flipper, and thus your first point is a bit weak: also, variety itself does not make a great bowler.

Trying to compare great players from different eras is just about impossible. Would Qadir have taken the wickets Warne did had he played in the current Australian side? Probably. Would Warne have had Qadir's influence on the Pakistan side? Probably. Who was better? Does it matter?

Warne has just finished a fantastic career in which he has made a massive contribution to not only to the Australian side but to the whole of world cricket. Right now we should be thanking a great player for all he has done, rather than debating whether other players are better.

Frankly, I find an article posted at this time complaining that Warne is second best somewhat insulting to a great career.

Are u deliberately creating a contrevorsy?

Nice joke..make a better one next time

Alas the proof of the pudding is in etc.. Warne--loathsome, chubby and Australian he might be--has taken more wickets than Qadir. And for the same reason I'll risk the wrath of the entire Pakistan population by saying that McGrath--loathsome, annoying and Australian he might be--is a better bowler than Wasim Akram or Imran Khan.

Qadir a better bowler than Warne? I doubt it but each for their own. Did Qadir play in a successful team which won series after series including World Cups and away series. Did Qadir ever play for a side which won a series in Australia. Qadir might have had multiple googlies but cricket is a team game and a tick in the win column for mine is the most important thing. Kamran, like a number of folks from the subcontinent, seems obsessed with secondary measurements like bowling averages and variations and seems to forget the main objective is to win. Who had a better career - Qadir with all his variations or Warne playing in winning teams? It's a no brainer for me!

I am a cricket enthusiast but i seriously am laughing at his comparison

u just cant compare legends of yester years to legends of today

I think warne is like tendulker and qadir like viv richards in batting terms. One is statistically great the other is brutally great!!!

Its simply a mattaer of Opinion for some Qadir was the bettwe bowler and for some it's Warne, they both were great Bowlers without a doubt, but we cannot know for certainty who was the better of the two due to the fact that they played in different times.

Comparing bowlers from two different eras is an exercise in futility. Because if you swap both bowlers, you can never know if they would have performed better or worse.

these comparisons are so difficult to make....i cannot compare warne to A.Q simply because i never saw Abdul Qadir bowl!!!! of what i hav watched of warne has left me in awe....he is a fantastic bolwer, mayber A.q was even better but its not for me to judge. some people may argue murali is the best ever, he is an offspinner though and even if warne is the best ever leg spinner he is not the best ever spinner of all time, this distintion should go to murali!unfortunately his career has been tainted by countless chucking accusations from the "whites" of this game,Abdul Qadir's brilliance might not have been exposed to the cricketing world because of his origin and skin colour!!!

Personally, I think we should consider how many of Shane Warne's wickets were gained by unsporting behaviour, backed by an aggressive and often over-aggressive team. My estimate is that about 150 of those famous 700 wickets were gained by tactics that damaged the game, and were little short of cheating. As for the umpiring issue - the last decade has seen an obvious dilution in quality, with umpires lacking the strength or support to stand up for the rules of the game. Warne benefited from both trends. For my money Murali is the better and more dangerous bowler - and a far superior sportsman.

Bowlers from different times cannot be compared.
The conditions, umpires, cricket has changed
Abdul Qadir was a very a great bowler. But at the end of the day the stats matter. And Warne simply tops it all.

If there has to be a comparison, then it should be between Shane Warne & Murali.

Just remember that the great West Indian side which Qadir played against were absolutley useless against spin bowling just ask Bob Holland and Hirwarni, hell even Allan Border's part time tweakers were enough to destroy the might of the West Indies.
That's why the Australian selectors wanted Warne in the team so much in the beginning. Granted Qadir kept leg spin alive but Warnie took it to an entire new level and entirely changed the pace-dominated bowling attacks that were around before his time. The fact that Qadir was one of the only two decent bowlers in the team meant his record should have been better than Warne's.

Also bar Sydney most Australian pitches are not conductive to spin bowling unlike some of the Pakistani dust bowls.
Whislt you also mentioned that Qadir had a turbulent relationship with the Pakistan cricket system Warne's entire life was front page news!!! How he managed to go through the the very public breakdown of his marriage and at the same time still put in that heroic, gargantuan and simply brilliant performance in 2005's Ashes series boggles the mind as much as his deliveries.

Saying Qadir is better than Warne is like saying Boycott was better than Bradman.

Never have I read such biased rot in all my life!

Its like saying Martha Grace was a better bowler than Dennis Lillee because she started bowling overarm!!

You can make arguments for anything.

The guy that wrote this was also defending shoaib and asif last week. And he's supposedly a medical professional.
His credibility was shot then and is a farce now. who is he? and why are we putting up with him!?

I won't compare the two as if we are engaged in some batle of right and wrong.

As a young Aussie leg spinner in the pre-Warne era, I idolised Abdul Qadir. He was my favourite cricketer and he was always on my mind when I spent those countless hours in the nets.

After Abdul Qadir disappeared, I have loved every minute of Shane Warne's bowling and wished I was 15 years younger, so I could bowl here in Australia in an age when leg spin might receive more 'love' than it did in the 80's.

The point is that Shane Warne + Abdul Qadir is not a zero sum game. Few enough of us really appreciate the greatness of both bowlers that we should each of us have big smiles on our faces that we were fortunate enough that we saw and learned from both their styles.

Kamran, seriously dude, where do you come up with these ideas. It is absolutely absurd to compare Qadir with Warne. Is this all you have left to write about? It is highly unfair for both of these high class athletes to have compared with eachother. You tried to churn the same rhetoric when you tried to compare Imran with Inzimam. Warne is the best, he is a legend. You are naive to say that Qadir was better than him. Although I regard Qadir as a great leg spinner and I also believe he actually invented the art. But that doesnt bring him nowhere near Warne. I bet you will create more haters than lovers for poor Qadir by this.

Absolute rubbish. Umpires? Abdul Qadir had the benefit of some of the dodgiest home umpires in the entire history of world cricket!

Googlies? Who cares? Warne has a decent googly, just not an amazing one. What about his other variations that do everything except take the batsmen's pads off for him?

Warne is, THE best legspinner the world has ever seen, to take so many wickets, at such a great average in the batsmans era is INCOMPARABLE.

I am sorry but Abdul Qadir's bowling average outside of Pakistan (i.e without the benefit of Pakistani umpires) is 47.58.

Enough said.

That needs to be reiterated.

This original blog is the most biased piece of journalistic writing I've ever seen.

Utter Nonsense!
I am a Pakistani who loved A. Qadir but give everyone a break, have a big heart and give a credit to SK Warne that he deserves - a best ever spin bowler and a finest cricketer of his time.

Well... the reality is that Abdul Qadir kept it alive and Warne took it to new level. Both have their own greatness and weakness as well. But if you want to compare it would be nice if we comapre the Murali with Warne. And in that I think Murali has faar faar ahead than Warne in all respect. No doubt Warne is great bowler but Murali is ahead of him.

qadir was a great legspinner
anil kumble is a great legspinner
shane warne is the greatest legspinner

Hahahaha! Wow we needed that bit of comedy Kamran! Qadir better than Warne? Of course...hahahahahaha! The guy whom Sachin Tendulkar hit for 4 sixes in the first over he faced, that too in Pakistan! The man who needed Pakistani umpires to take ever second wicket?

No one denies that Qadir was a great legspin bowler. But better than Warne? Get some perspective. Of course that's asking too much from someone who supports drug cheats and calls himself a doctor. So all I can say is...well playes Kamran. You represent Pakistani ethos very well indeed!

.... and Qadir had Pakistani umpires for half his matches. We all remember 1986/7.

Qadir was a great bowler who should be applauded for keeping legspin alive. Warne, he is not.

Come on Kamran! Just look at the number of wickets they have taken. There is no comparison. Warne has also had to bowl to some of the best batsmen in the history of the game including Lara, Tendulkar, Dravid, Inzi and Yousuf. So point 5 does not hold. Qadir was and will always be unique and a great bowler. But Warne is definitely ahead. (I'm a Pakistani.

Your analysis of Warne vs. Qadir suffers from the same flaw as most of your other commentaries. You ignore the facts, the actual record of their performances. While Qadir was a fine bowler, by any OBJECTIVE measure of bowling excellence, Warne is superior. I also agree with comments that it is difficult to compare players from two different periods.

i am a bit disapponited with this blogg with the S.A series coming up and there is still much to talk about. however matching Shane warne to another other legspinner is diffivlut but not to Abdul Qadir. SHane warne is still better but Abdul Qadir did carry the legsoinners flag suring the 70' nad 80's. if it wasnt for him leggspinn wouldnt be what it is now. Bu Shane deserves all the credit he can get and rightly so.

In 30 years of closely following test cricket I have heard some utterly stupid comments, but to suggest that Adbul Qadir was a better legspin bowler than Shane Warne is complete parochial rubbish. Records do not lie, especially when considered over a long period of time. I would respectfully submit that that original comment of Qadir being better than Warne has come from either his brother, father or Rip Van Winkle who just awoke after 25 years of extremely deep slumber.

Just shut up Kamran. You dont know what you are talking about.

Qadir revived the art and was the only legspinner of his time who could dominate batting attacks. He is the pioneer of modern day legspin bowling and Warne ackowledges it. Being the saviour of a dying art and the pioneer of its new school in itself is compliment enough.

We will never know who had the better physical skills (I believe Warne is the better spinner) but in terms of spine, zest and competitiveness, Qadir has the edge. He was the first spinner to bowl like a fast bowler, wanting a wicket every ball, staring down the pitch and even growing a goatie to look tough. Trust me, I saw him bowl, and he was never the one to lull the batsman into a false sense of security, hoping to induce an edge off a drive. Qadir aimed for the stumps, fizzed all sorts of deliveries down the pitch and followed up with stares, snide comments and smirks. Cricket does owe a little bit to Qadir, so let's give him that.

i wish u hadnt written that!

There are no doubts that both players are the best at their places. They had different times, different places, differents environments or circumstaces. You better ask Umpire Dicky Bird who will give you the best answer. No matter what, Honestly A. Qadir has many edges over S. K. Warne. Unfortunately the Crocodiles of Pakistan Cricket Board played dirty politics to spoil magestic A. Qadir.

Finally an opinion of substance on legspin! Qadir was and is the greatest, for all your reasons and more Kamran. When the teams other than Australia, England and South Africa were beating the world there was only criticism and rule-changing; which has contributed to the change in status quo. In today's cricket world the Aussies can do no wrong and are the greatest ever at whatever they do. Plain and simple: Warne is overrated, Qadir is the best leggy and in today's context, Muralitharan is exceptional.

I think this blog has crossed the line of unbiased journalism.Agreed A.Qadir was very good.He did battle against a lousy board(its still the worst around) and very good batsmen.But Warne did (as many fans have correctly mentioned earlier) what nobody else has done.He has transcended the border of the home advantage and has performed like a champion in all conditions.He bowls with an aggression that only he can muster and sustain all through the match.The manner in which he outthinks and mentally disintegrates his batsmen makes many more of his deliveries unplayable.C'mon Mr.Abbasi,you gotta be joking.Qadir better than Warne?Its like saying Tauseef Ahmed was better than Murali.Are you kidding me?

Whatever the Author feels is his own idea, so Luke and Leggie, how about you stop ranting. If you dont like what the Author has to write, then dont read it. Who is asking you to read it.
Personally, Warni is a great spinner. I cant compare the two. But most of your points do make me wonder....

Heretic! There, I called you one.

I think both are great bowler's. There is no reason to compare each other. The only thing i want to mention is that Warne got more wickets because modern batsmen have poor temprament because of so much one day cricket. Earlier batsmen have more temprament. If you look at warne record he got more wickets now as compared to before. I think its just a hipe. He is just a lucky bowler played in a strong team against poor teams. Since they get strong because of rest of teams loose players just like australia is loosing the playes right now one by one. Just one question why we consider him a great bowler when he got most of his wickets from england and south africa. We all know both these countries can't play spin. If he is truly a great bowler then australia shouldn't loose last ashes. They even won this one is because england played poorly their batsmen couldn't score runs, not Warne factor. So don't waste time. He is just luck one if that's the case he should top in oneday cricket too becasue he knew he can't so quit long time before. Number of wickets not a point of comparision.

Ridiculous article. Why would you attempt to underwhelm the end of a great cricketing career. Is your next article going to list the pakistani bowlers better than mcgrath? Sensationalism is not just sad, it is getting annoying.

i understand Kamran Abbasi's point but disagree. its true that until the last decade spin bowlers were'nt getting anywhere near bowlings elite 300 club(excluding Gibbs 309) next was Underwood with 297. so either cricket has changed dramatically i.e. attitudes towards giving spinners wickets or that Warne, Murali and Kumble are the best spinners ever. i used to believe that the greatest bowler i ever saw was M.Marshall, over the past 5 years i changed my mind. Warne perfected the hardest art in cricket, legspin. He and Lara are the greatest entertainers the game has seen, is it a coincendence that they are also the holders of the most runs and wickets in cricket???? eddy

kamran,
your articles are normally good, but i'm sorry to say that this one borders on the ridiculous. it is absolutely stupid.
you are right to say that qadir was underrated- absolutely. how the hell does that translate into him being better than warne? then why not say that kumble is the greatest ever- after all, he bowls it faster than anyone. furthermore,warne and qadir needed to extract massive turn to get wickets while kumble does not even need to do that.

absolutely ridiculous, i must say.

don't do these great bowlers a disservice- they're all great. warne is the best

It is 2 different eras, dont compare one to the other. In Qadir's time the ball had to pitch straight and go on straight to be lbw. certain big name teams couldnt play spin so rules were changed.It ruined Sonny Ramadhin's career.

It is not fair to judge stats. batsmen could kick away anything and just play the loose deliveries. it was similar to the restriction on bouncers during West Indies hey days .

Having said that Warne is a gr8 bowler and he mastered his art and his abilities . Having said thar I think murali is just one of a kind and i see him taking 1000 wickets soon.

I love Abdul Qadir, but there is really no comparison here. Only more and more mounting evidence that Kamran Abbasi is running out of logical and interesting things to write about. I hope to God for your patients sake you're a better doctor than a cricket journalist. Stick to your day job and leave the journalism to people who know what the hell they're talking about.

cmon u cant be serious! surely u know more about cricket, Shane Warne is by far the better bowler, there are a million reasons why but i will give u just one:Warne the thinker - the man could outfox you,toy with you mentally and u add that with his natural leg spin abilities and he leaves other bowlers in cricket history let alone leg spinners miles behind

being the member of such a website it is really a shame to know about your grudge feelings about Shane Warne.there r some points for your kind information:
1- if Qadir had googly then what's about the flippers,zooters,sliders of Warne.
2- if Warne has the sympathies of the neutral umpires then Qadir had not played a single match on home soil under nuetral umpires.
3- During Qadirs tenure as a player there was no other good Leg-spinner available but what if Warne would have under performed there is also Stuart Mcgill.and their board is surely not mad and should have brought Mcgill.
4- what happened when AUSSIES got out for lower scores,he is the only spinner in the world to come so early in an inning to bowl for his team.
pls. remember WC 96 SF, WC 99 SF & FINAL.
WARNE's strike rate, average suggests that he is a better bowler than Qadir.
Warne often comes in to bowl with 4,5 wickets down and also have to bowl in Australian conditions which suits fast bowlers more than Warne whereas Qadir played more tests on home soil such as Lahore and karachi.
the foremost point which makes him a better bowler is his home and away record which is far superior to Qadir and even the great chucking master Murlithran

also to add to my earlier comment Warne used to bowl googlies and flippers a lot more frequently until he had a shoulder operation which made him limit the use of those deliveries, especially the googly. but he never totally stopped bowling them. please get your facts right!

Abdul Qadir may have been a better bowler but Shane Warne definitely has been a better package wnen you take into account the mind game, the stare into the eyes of his prey, the psychological pressure put on the batsmaen and, not least, the sledging. Also perhaps a factor in the final figures is the fact that Warne had the support of better catching fielders.

One thing, one can say with certainty is that both were thrashed by Sachin Tendulkar. But one must say that Abdul Qadir played in a different age--had he played the English team on the 1990's & beyond for 5-6 Tests every two years and the Sounth Africans who hardly see spin bowling, his records would have been stunning too.

O Dear o dear...
Qadir was brilliant no doubt about it. But he will always be remembered as the 2nd greatest bowler of all time.PERIOD. Warne's combative abilities and mental toughness are second to none and the fact remains that he's outfoxing batsman in a batsman dominated era.
SURELY NO COMPARISON-WARNE ALL THE WAY.
QADIR a second-OR KUMBLE???

It is difficult to compare two players of differnt era. I think both were great players of their time. I havn't seen Abdul Qadir playing for pakistan, so can't comment. But Shane warne is great, even greater then Murli.

I am a Pakistani fan but your analysis is making me laugh.

Warne was 100 times better than Qadir for a number of reasons:

1. Warne was a miserly bowler who not only took wickets but choked the batsmen and made run scoring difficult for them Qadir on the other hand was expensive and gave alot of easy runs. Also Warne was economical in an era where the batsmen were the most attacking (Imagine he choked those) while Qadir bowled in an era where most batsmen scored at a snail pace and he still got smashed around alot.

2. Warne might not have a good googly but to the credit of the man, he still took three times more wickets than Qadir mainly depending on the legspinner and slider. Kaneria and Mushtaq have better googlies than Warne...So that make them superior to Warne ?...They can't touch Warne's feet.

3. Warne spun the ball far more viciously than Qadir.

4. Both were primarily legspinners. Who had the better legspinner ?...who could turn it more going away from the batsmen ?....Who got more control over the legspinner ?...Who got more wickets with his main expertise (legspinner)?...Warne !!

5. Warne has been a matchwinner all over the world repeatedly and he is one main reason why Australia won everything which came to sight. Qadir didn't do much accept winning a few home series.

6. Warne was feared by batsmen while I don't think Qadir ever was.

7. Everytime Warne came onto bowl, it was exciting and enthralling. Qadir blew hot and cold.

8. Now since Warne is retired, I am pretty sure that teams like South Africa, India and Pakistan think that they have a chance against Australia. When Qadir retired, I dont think it made much of a difference.

9. Warne is more entertaining to watch with the pressure he builds on the batsmen. I am pretty sure many of us would pay to see him play. That cannot be said about Qadir.

10. Last but not the least, looks at the stats man.....No comparison...

The greatest bowler in history has retired. We should give credit where its due and not get biased via our typical desi mentality.

Point 1. Warne was barely able to bowl a googly, Qadir had several.

This is like saying Shoaib Malik is a better batsman than Bradman because he played the cut shot better.

The only objective measurement that can be used are the stats when comparing players. I think the debate should focus on Murli being the greatest spin bowler to ever grace the game.

i certainly think shane warne was a great legspinner, but some of the stuff said about him makes him seem way better than he actually was. he's hardly carried an attack on his own shoulders, nor has he consistently run through sides. he bowls beautiful deliveries, bowls with exceptional control, and is one of the most astute thinkers of the game; he's not the greatest bowler ever, though. calling him that each time he walks in to bowl, when mcgrath and co have made his job a lot easier, is a little demeaning to loads of top bowlers from every era of the game. and he's not decidedly the greatest legspinner either. o' reilly, grimmett, quadir, gupte, chandrasekhar, the south african quartet of the early 1900s, kumble... all of them merit some sort of place in a debate atleast. and as for the greatest bowler ever, the list is endless... spofforth, barnes, o' reilly, lindwall, laker, trueman, the west indians, lillee... and so on... shane warne has been a vastly overrated cricketer all his life, and i can't help but think that if he hadn't been an australian from an all conquering era, would he have been rated anywhere as highly?

For a batsman, not knowing how much the ball will spin is as bad as not knowing which way it will turn. Therein lies Warne's greatest strength. To be able to land 6 balls where he wanted and letting them spin only as much as he planned, isn't good enough? Damn.. Warney never needed the wrong 'un as much as some of the lesser mortals did.

and what's the precise difference between a flipper and a zooter? don't be fooled by the media hype, laddie...

Some astute comments, No. 5 in particular. However Warne was almost certainly better, you don't get 700+ wickets out of nowhere!

Also it's a bit difficult to take Andrew Johnson's comments seriously when he can't spell...

Warnie is the best bowler. period !! Qadir is no match to him. The way he builds up pressure and chokes the batsmen, no other bowler could even do it. He is a genius...I have not seen Qadir spin the ball as much as warnie. look at the deliveries bowled to Gatting, Basit Ali, Chanderpaul, Strauss, Gibbs , Cullinan and u will know

The only relevant questionmark against Warne, one worth pointing out might be the fact of his rather mediocre performances against Indian bastsmen, that too on pitches best suited to spin - Indian.

Beyond that, have your heart re-programmed to see beyond P.a.k.i.s.t.a.n.

There is little doubt that Qadir had a fuller bag of tricks than Warne. He also played with a poorer fielding side than Warne has enjoyed.

However there can be little doubt that Warne had more guile and was better at out-thinking batsmen.

Coming to the present day, Dinesh Kaneria has a bigger bag of tricks and a better googly than Wanre but he lacks cunning and never seems to tou-think the batsmen.

Icki

I agree that Abdul Qadir is never given his due share of praise by English/Aussy writers because of the reasons you have mentioned. Not least among those is the attitude of umpires now and then, Imran always said that umpires never understood his bowling and hence so many plumb decusions never went his way. I can recall 1987 series in England when Botham and Gatting kept padding Qadir away and saved the match. I doubt it will happen now. Having said that, one should not put Qadir above Warne. Warne, along with Muralitharan, McGrath, Imran, Hadlee, Ambrose, Marshal, is truly among the greatest bowler of all time (I mean if not the greatest). His record, his genius etc.

I 100% agreed with what Umar Siddiqui has wrote above replying to Kamran.Abbasi,
Shane warne is all times great bowler in the world of leg spin department, though i heard that in his 1st tour of pakistan in eraly 90's he went to Qadir's home for learning about leg spin.
But anyway we should give credit to warny he has been the king and name of fear for all the giants of present test cricket.
He really has noched big names like lara, inzmam,tendulkar, quiet often.
I will give him a credit and lots of apreiciations on behalf of pakistanis he really has done a dream job.

Good article written at bad time.

1. Switch "Qadir" with "Warne", and substitute "googly" with any of the following: flipper, top-spinner, slider....

2. I wish I could show you the videos of Gatting being 'dismissed' by Qadir in a test match video in Pakistan. That umpiring was slightly less biased than this article, but only slightly.

3. Warne's start wasn't all that hot either. He needed a lot of support to continue his test career after that debut in India.

4. How this matters in deciding who the better bowler is I don't know.

5. West Indian's weren't the best at spin, even then. Warne too has had some tough players of spin to bowl against...think Tendulkar, Lara, Laxman, even Kambli and Sidhu.

6. I agree, but that issue is more than offset by the fact that Warne bowled on far less spinner-friendly pitches than Qadir did.

7. Agreed. But look at what Murali has done with whatever support he's had.

8. Players today do get more media attention, but then again, with an average of 47 away from home, he didn't do much newsworthy stuff when he went abroad anyhow!

9. If you want to point at a single performance as a yardstick, I would like to officially put forth the name of Jason Gillespie as being a better batsman than Steve Waugh.

10. He faced Qadir on his finest day. It is no doubt he was impressed. The fact that you had to pick out the likes of Gooch as your support speaks volumes in itself.

I like Warne, he's my favorite bowler. But I don't get miffed when people call Murali a better bowler...there might be truth to it. Even I think in some respects Murali is way ahead. But it is such blatant bias like this that saddens me. On a renowned site like CricInfo too!

How can someone compare Qadir & Warne. I think if u compare Warne & Murli that might make some sense.

i think we cant compare bowlers of different era's.both of them were great.so i think we should praise them both.really cant compare them..& there is no such need for the comparison as well.both are legends.thats it.

Completely insane article.All respects to Qadir but its just poor comparison.There were few ind spinners too who were better than Qadir namely Chandra,bishen,Gupte etc.
Warne and murli are best, kumble and saqlain are next.
In PAK i dont think there was any better spinner came then Saqlain, politics has killed his career.
i am saddened to read such articles from you Kamran, complete waste of time, space and cricketing knowledge.
mer

Just compare the Batsmen of that era to this era.Beside Tendulkar and Lara is there any good player of spin bowling outside Australia. And those two guys are not as good players of spin as Gavasker, Mohinder, Miandad, Gooch etc were.Ok Qadir benefitted from home umpiring but he also suffered from it outside. Just think Warne bowling in sub Continent getting no wicket in 6 test(Ask Lillie). Could he survive that period? Difficult to answer. Ask Getting, Gooch And Border. Getting, even though he was a controvertial figure and didnt like to be in Sub Continent, agreed that Qadir was a better bowler.
If Statistical records is the criteria that Murali is going to become the greatest bowler ever.

Lets not disgrace cricket by comparing the LEGEND like Warne with PUPPETS like Qadir.
PS: Sorry I had to use "PUPPET" for Qadir. He was a good bowler but, when you compare him to Warne, he is infact a PUPPET.

In my view Abdul Qadir was a great bowler of his time.The difference between Qadir and Shane Warne is that warne is supported by the other australian bowlers by bowling tight overs and warne got the wickets from other end.Whereas Qadir was not well complimented by the pakistani bowlers in his playing days.

This article was written tongue-in-cheek to provoke. And has it ever succeeded! Let's give Abbasi a break and layoff the personal abuse.

I am a Pakistani so I spent much of Warne's career comparing him to Qadir. While I enjoyed watching Qadir more and do strongly believe he was a great bowler I wouldn't say he was the best and neither would I give Warne that label. Both had their pros and cons one had his career cut short by injuries the other survived without any career ending blows.

Its quite difficult to compare eras, as Kamran has discovered, equipment changes, rules change and techniques change. The biggest difference in the times the two bowled has to be (1) fitness and (2) umpiring. Honestly have we forgotten the age Qadir bowled in? Fitness was unheard of and players never threw themselves around to catch balls or stop boundaries. Warne definitely benefitted from improved fitness, better coaching, fielding and technology.

Sure Qadir was benefitted by favourable umpiring in his land but come one stop bitching how old were you guys when he bowled umpires from other countries weren't saints they turned down several plumb appeals. Umpiring then was not held to the same high standards as it is today and he (Qadir) was probably robbed of more wickets than he was gifted by the men in white. Sure he had more variety but I think Warne's variations are more than comparable and hey all of us have a ball we love to bowl and one we could do without.

End of the day Warne benefitted and made the most of all that was made available to him. He made use of technology to plan out how he was going to bowl out his victims. Qadir never. He stepped onto the pitch and plyed away. So who's better? the man with all the technology to back him up or the man who eyed it and did everything possible to psych out his opponents with some sufi mystic?

Hey Kamran,

You forgot to add another point,

Qadir almost always had Pakistanis as Umpires!!!
So, that more than neutralizes all your other points.
Warne is the best!!!

Apples and Oranges folks...apples and oranges...

Luxman Gurusamy

I think it is sad that world cricket is so biased in favour of white caucasians, and that the English and Australian media rule the roost.

Murali is undoubtedbly the greastest spin bowler of all time, but will probably never be recognised as such because of his Asian roots.

It is sad but true.

Out of Murali and Warne, who has the better average, strike rate and economy? Who has more 5 wicket hauls? Who will finish his career with more wickets? Just why is Warne hailed as the greatest bowler ever to walk the earth?

Just make No sense. Ridiculous to say the least.

Mr. Kamran Abbasi - A JOB WELL DONE!
The reason being is because you have opened a can of worms. You have opened up a debate to which there is no answer. You have picked a topic to which you might get acclaimed and persecuted. To that I say well done to stir up a debate.

My contribution to the debate will be minimal as I was too young for Abdul Qadir's time to compare him to Warne. To Warney, well done! He is a great bowler and I am sure Abdul Qadir was as well.

THE ONLY FACT here is that as we had a debate earlier with no real answer about Mohammad Yousuf's comparision to the oldies, similarly there will be no real answer in this comparison either. THERE ARE TOO MANY VARIABLES TO CONSIDER BECAUSE OF DIFFERENT CRICKETING ERAS.

Enough said.
Sami Syed from Toronto

I totally agree Qadir was an excellent leg spinner for Pakistan. But you just cannot compare two cricketers who belonged to two different generations. The standard of pitches have greatly improved, easier on bastmen. We also need to keep in consideration about their performances overseas. But again as I said, very hard to compare two players from different generations. We also should not forget the media and technology. I have never seen Abdul Qadir play but i have been fortunate to witness Warne's career. So i would say Warne is the greatest Cricketer ever produced. But thats my opinion and I guess each person is entitled for his own opinion on things Facts apart.

It is ridiculous to say Qadir was better than Warne. Warne has proved time and again with match winning performances. Look at Qadir's record against India Average of 51. It is no good than Shane. Shane was never 100% fit whenever he toured India. Look agains pakistan he has such a great average. What good if you can bowl a googly if you cannot land all your leg break deliveries as Warne could. Nobody had turned the ball as big as warne. Above all think of the comical bowling action that Qadir had. Shane is great that he can be role model for young bowlers as they can follow his easy action.

What you say may have some value. But Murali is a better bowler than Warne in terms of figures etc. Warne is considered a great as much because of his character, his inventiveness and fight, his pantomime expression mixed with the ability to create serious, severe tension. Warne is more memorable than any other post-war cricketer, and he has had a vast impact on the game at all levels in all countries.

So Qadir may be a better bowler, I cannot know having never seen him. Murali is a slightly better bowler in my opinion. But Warne is a greater sporting figure than any other spin bowler.

Sharp choice of topic - I enjoyed the article.

i say wid ashes and so many tests played by australia.. warne is no true great.. but murali is.. as they (srilankans) never play more than 2 test series and yet murali with almost 50 innings short of what warne has played has almost got as many wickets as warne has..and has more to come..

so murali and qadir should be considered true gr8

What 'Supplements' was Qadir using?

Interesting...all the 'whites' think you're talking rubbish. Most of the pakistanis agree.

Is this a cricket debate or a race one?

#7 actually shouts out that warne is the BEST bowler there ever was. In Qadir's team, if anyone was to take any wickets, it would've been him but warne had to compete with the likes of McGrath to get wickets...the same actually goes with murali too...he's like the only guy who takes wickets in SL (maybe vass a few). Shane rules (BTW, murali n qadir are both greats too)

Your history is poor Abbasi, very poor. Australia in 91/92 were a weak team barely winning anything. It's Warne and McGrath who have... turned Australia from a middling team to one of the greatest teams ever. And - as for 'barely being able to bowl a googly'? I guess this is some form of April's Fool joke, in January.

I won't even reply to anybody who says that Murali is a 'better bowler on figures alone'. As that makes a statastician grin his teeth.

“Cricket is blessed that a fine bowler like Shane Warne played the game and he should be remembered as the greatest leg-spinning maestro of all times.” ABDUL QADIR, DECEMBER 27, 2006. Reported in several newspapers around the world.

Kamran, does that sum it up for you?

First of all, Qadir had the most friendly umpires in Pakistan where even a meter between bat and ball was given out and anything hitting the pad was an automatic lbw. I think it is a Paki tendency to always prop a Pakistani name as the best. If the world says Lara and Sachin are best, suddenly we find Imran saying Inzi is better than both of them etc etc. I think you guys have a severe inferiority complex. Grow up !!!

first of all.. most aussies will not accept that somebody has better players than them no matter what you say... BUT in this case i don't think qadir was better than warne.. moreover, this is a time to celebrate warne's career not to put him down by comparing him to players of 2 decades ago..

I think it is uesless comparing 2 players of different eras. However i do not blame the author of this article, I think this mistake was made when Warne was labelled as the "best ever". That automatically implies a comparison.

So while we're at it, I think Qadir had more variety, and perhaps an environment less conducive to results but neither of those make him a better bowler. Whatever Warne had going for him, he made sure he took the oppourtunities and obtained results. I think Qadir deserves the credit for really instilling life back into leg spin bowling. And in that I believe Warne owes a lot to Qadir. But still, that doesn't make Qadir a better bowler.

To those who mentioned that Pakistani wickets were conducive to Qadir don't know what they are talking about. Unlike an off-spinner, leg spinners benefit tremendously from pace and bounce in wickets. Dry dusty wickets are not ideal for leg spinners, green hard ones are.

Oh and one more thing to add to the handicap that Qadir had: beyond terrible Pakistani fielding!

In the end, comparison's are subjective. Warne shouldn't be labelled as the best leg spinner ever, but as the highest wicket-taker ever. "Best" is very subjective.

i was too young to watch Abdul Qadir live, all i can go by is what i see in the highlights now. I have however watched Warne alot, i had, yes had, alot of respect for him until the 2nd Ashes test when he stoop to bowling around the wicket to Kevin Peterson, if Shane is such a wizard he doesnt need to bowl negative, now some of you may say its a "strategy", BS becuase he bolwed around the wicket for 2 sessions to him. With all this, i would still rate Shane Warne higher due to the fact that i have watched Shane Warne bowl alot and some deliveries are turtly unplayeable.

I don't know which one is better Kamran, but I know this: Sachin smashed both of them out of the park...lol! So by that standard there isn't much to choose between them.

Utter rubbish this is. Please, just give Warne his credit and move on.

Very true indeed. The career statistics would have looked very different indeed for Qadir had he the benefit of the current view taken by umpires.

In Qadir's day if he beat a batsman either on the front foot or because of bowling a flipper he was very unlikely to get a decision in his favour. Front foot - because front foot lbw's were not often given in those days and as for the missed flipper the umpire did not assume that the ball would continue in its line unless enough distance was travelled after pitching. These days the umpire assumes a ball maintains its line unless he has seen evidence to the contrary. For example a straight full toss which would have pitched before hitting the stumps were it not intercepted by the pads will get a favourable decision today. In Qadir's day the umpire would give not out as he would regard the ball, particularly in Qadir's case to have gone anywhere after pitching.A flipper was denied on the same logic unless it had travelled a significant distance after pitching.

The point about umpiring view is important, not just because of denied decisions which should have gone in favour but how it allowed batsmen to play Qadir.

Warne obviously a great leg spinner. Qadir the magician.

PS Regarding the Sunil Gavaskar / Mohinder Amarnath episode of shouting googly. Was this done from the non strikers end? If so that must be regarded as dodgy practice to say the least. The simple retort to that would or should have been a ring of close fielders shouting googly to every ball just as Qadir bowled. The Gavasker / Amarnath ploy would then have immediately failed.

O'Reilly/Grimmett > all other legspinners

Barnes > all other bowlers

With all due respects, I for one do not agree with single point of Kamran and belives Shane warne is not only the best leg spineer but also one of all time great sportspersons and here are the reasons why
1)Googly or no Googly great players and sportspersons are judged by the attitude and they raise their hand when team needs it most. If skill was the only criteria of judging player's greatness, players of likes of Salim Durani, Carl hooper and Daryll Cullinan would be first to make their claims.
2)Umpures oops! rewind back to Pakistan-England 1986-87 home series and in general all the home series of pakistan in 80's. I believe umpires were rather too sympethatic of Qadir than of Warne.
3)Warne has to battle far more adversiaries in his carrer than Qadir. Shoulder injury, finger injury, Drugs ban everytime he has come out stronger than ever even in the fag end of his carrer not the least in his last series with his arch rivals.
4)Warne did not played for the premier team, infact he and Mcgrath made a reasonable good team into Premier team, same cannot be said of Qadir even though he played alongside the likes of Imran, Javed and Akram all legends in true sense.
5)Warne never had to bowl at anything superior (although Indians might disagree)because he believed he was superior and he had in him all the time to prove that. Such a killer atitude he possesed that most of the teams got shivered before they even faced a ball from Warnie.
6)Low or high scores can never be an excuse for under-performance of bowler infact some of the best performance of Warne had come when the chips were down and team fighting to defend low scores example being '99 WC Semifinal, 92-93 Srilanka test and many more in his illustrious carrer. For Qadir it could be counted on fingers.
7)Well if Akram, Waqar and Imaran are cannon fodders then Lee, Gillespie and Mcgrath are grey hay.
8)Agreed with 8th point that subcontinent performances often do not get enough light by western media but then real challenge of spin bowling is also in the Western countries like Aussie and Eng where the pitches and conditions are more suited to swing and seam bowling. Going by that it is just fair that Warne has got more limelight than Qadir.
9)Wonder what Mike Gatting has to say about the delievery of the century, and oh yes Gatting also faced both Qadir and Warne.

Warne is the best bowler of the modern era. Murali is the best chucker.
Qadir was good with a exciting action and deceptive googly. Went for a lot of runs and picked wickets on the way. Comparing him to Warne is laughable.

Warne and Qadir are very good but they were no Ian Salisbury

ooo thats a big claim. perhaps a qadir a better technical bowler, but warnes psychological intimidation of batsmen creates a whole new level of bowling.

your article is provocative, if u measure records, the wickets, the matches won etc, warne is easily the best leg spinner to adorn the cricket fields. i do think however qadir was the pioneer of spin bowling at a time when bhagwat chadrashekar of india was bowing out and spinners were being thought of as a luxury in cricket so qadir deserves a mention in that regard, and as a pakistani im proud of that, but nah he wasnt better than warne and probably even qadir wouldnt say that, nor would his main mentor imran khan. but we live in a democracy (even if its a military style democracy...lol) and everyone is entitled to his opinion. cheers and happy new yr to all