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

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

No doubt, Warne is/was good . He made spin bowling sexy. Qadir was an ok bowler , pretty helpless away from pakistan. Their comparision is pointless, Warne is far ahead. But as far the best spinner of all time is concerned, It is Muralithrn. Look at his record , it is mind boggling. He even has success against India in India where Warne has been an outright failure.

Absolute rubbish. Come on, the real reason is the one you haven't mentioned: He is from Pakistan and so are you. More cricinfo home-bias.

Forget about the comparison they are both great bowlers in their own time and in their own right, but anyone talking about Qadir getting his wickets through home umpires is utter rubbish.
Just look at any home series played in Australia 80% of the wrong decisions handed out by the umps are always in favour of Australia and that is no co-incidence.
I remember the last series Pakistan played in Australia the so called wrong decisions handed out by umpires were 5 in favour of Pak compared to 19 in favour of Aus and don;t bs if u dont agree watch the footage from the whole series u will know and this is the case every year so I am sure Shane got his fair share of help at home too.

I dont quite agree with the author but i can say qadir was as good as warne, warne never had success against india even in australia let alone in india majority of his wickets were again england and NZ who are not that good playing spin murali is far better bowler than warne he has taken wickets everywhere he played even without any support he single handedly carried the team , the aussies will always says about his action, he has been cleared by ICC so no one should complain about it and he is better bowler period. warne had mcgrath along side without mcgrath his effectiveness would be far less mcgrath is the most underrated great bowler of all time

Hey calm down everyone.Shane Warne has gone on record saying,"The great pakistan leg spinner Abdul Qadir is my teacher and my sole inspiration".He himself said that he had a cupboard full of video footage of Abdul Qadir in his house.
Here I need to men tion a small incident.Once Warne went to meet Abdul Qadir along with a friend of his.As Warne was speaking to Qadir,his friend took out a cigeratte and was about to light it.Warne immediately said,"No boy.Don't you smoke right now because Abdul Is sitting over here."
So when the man himself accepts him as his teacher and guru,what else do u want?so please.....silence.....

I agree with Kamran because shane warne did not play against batsmen with great techniques and he rarely did well against India while Qadir bowled successfully against the "great West Indies" team

Murali is a great example. Fielding, Run support, greatest team and controlling board.. No one can argue that umpires are nice to Murali. Who cares about the 9-56. That may well have been the best spin spell, but it doesn't make him a better bowler overall. Warne gets those LBW's because of Warne. He was the once who chanced that. It doesn't matter to me that Warne has that run support, when Australia doesn't score runs Warne gets the wickets. He gets wickets when he has too. Is anyone doubting he would be successful on another team? Mcgrath is another reason why Warne is great. There is a school of thought, the Richard Hadlee thought, which basically is that if you bowl on a bad team, the greater your achievements look and the more wickets you get. This cannot be the case for Warne.

Warne is clearly better, there cannot be any doubt.

San's point above about Warne and India is worth noting that Qadir wasn't great against India either.

And Murali is a better bowler than Warne, Warne is on record saying Murali will end up with over 1000 test wickets. Warne would probably admit Murali is better.

The stats and everything say Warne is better than Qadir, and its correct.

Hmmm! Kamran, aren't you forgetting that Qadir took most of his wickets at home with home umpires? Seriously, didn't Imran call for neutral umpires because of the extremely biased umpiring in Pakistan causing a lot of trouble?

With Love to;
Kamran,
Writers Buddies
& Salute to Shane Warne

It's writer's own understanding of things. He has opened a discussion but it does not mean his verdict is ultimate. I do agree with some friends, it's never justified to compare the two stalwarts of different times. If you look at the history of Spin bowling at large, you will find number of good names. Skill or mastery in any aspect a comprehensive art is one thing and its utilization to produce results is altogether a different skill. Stat says that Warne was no doubt greatest of all times in his category. It's a useless comparison at the end.

At the same times, it's not justified at all to link Qadir's success with Local umpires help. It's probably biasness at the same time. Umpiring before neutral era was a contradictory issue world over. Guest Teams used to have issues with local umpires. Buddies while bringing poor Pakistani umpiring in focus why forget in aggression that Australia had been one of the worse places in terms of umpiring for guest teams. I am not going to debate because it's an endless chapter. I admire structured system of advanced & developed country's but in the past they used to take help from umpires at the same level as other countries.

I have really enjoyed the aggression & reaction of some of non Pakistani writers. While mentioning biasness, I have found them bias at the other end. Probably, for them no body could be great out of their own countries. For Warne’s greatness, regardless of characters & skills, it's enough for them that he was Australian. NO SECOND THOUGHT. I don't why, some of them While writing, altogether forget the ethics of expression. I would just say at the end debate is a debate; let it be a healthy activity. Respect the legends of all times.

But Sweet Kamran! Though I often love your views: Warne is greatest - No comparison! Yes tomorrow, we might have some body better than Warne. Skill & Art has no end. The top is always vacant for strivers.

Cheers!!

dont be silly shane warne is the greatest of all time. even kumble is better then qadir. you should look at the facts. how many wickets have they taken. shane warne is top of top however murali will beat his record but no1 else in world cricket will. Warne has changed the game of cricket.

Jason your comments make lot of sense .I dont have anything against warne.

But people are hailing him as the greatest ever when he is not greatest among his own era Shane is greatest legspinner everyone has to agree but not best spinner or bowler either.

The best spinner in the world is Murali!!! Warne is the most over-rated bowler in the world.

What next- Mohamamd Yousuf is a better batsman than Bradman? Or maybe Bradman was not good enough as he never faced Qadir?

Can't compare bowlers of different eras... But Qadir did bring leg spin back to life when it was practically a lost art. And Warne did make it sexy again. As a Pakistani I say that hopefully Kaneria can take it to the next level. But they both played a part in the revival of legspin. Who's better, I think you should have kept that to yourself. You will never win an argument whilst comparing someone who has taken more wickets than any other person ever to lay a hand on a cricket ball with someone who averages over 30. At times, such as the 9 for against England, he may have been best, but great players are not determined by one good day, but on whether they can produce that one day again and again.

I like Qadir too but Warne is the best SPINNER (not only legspinner) of all time only if he wouldn't have averaged more than 47 against India.

Warne's record is so strong that it would win any argument you could come up with. He won the games for over a decade consistenly all over the world .. and that all matters .. not how fast you bowl, how many gogglies you bowl....how stylish you bat..

Kamran......Look at these statistics:

Abdul Qadir's Highest Rating -- 710
Shane Warne's Highest Rating -- 905

Abdul Qadir has taken 708 wickets
Shane Warne has taken 236 wickets

Warne is Legend. Don't put your head in sand...come out and accept the fact.

Qadir was the magician his bag of tricks were unbeleivable howver talent doesn't mean a thing when he is up against the greatest cricket brain the game has ever seen one Mr S K Warne.

And this is coming from a patriotic Indian who has lived in Sydney his whole life.

I am sorry but this one ain't gonna win you the Pulitzer! Listen, 2 bowlers of a different era, different playing conditions, and different set of rules. Abdul Qadir was a bold pioneer who mastered the art of spin. Shane Warne is a geniues at the art of spin. Comparing the two is simply not justified. Today we ought to be saluting Shane Warne for his glorious career that reached the pinnacle for a spin bowler, in specific and a cricketer in general.

I have to disagree with Mr. Abbasi here.
True, Abdul Quadir was a great. But, honestly, practically, statistically, etc ... not the greatest. There are others better than him (even without Murali and Warne).
He did keep the art of leg spin alive ... but just kept it alive. Warne pumped life into that art -
Warne made it glamorous in many ways ... not necessarily good ways (remember the incident where he displayed his "spinning finger" to the crowd?).
No other bowler can revive belief his kind of bowling with one ball like Warne did when he bowled Mike Gatting with his very first Test delivery in England.
I believe that more youngsters have taken up leg spin after watching Warne than Quadir.
Again, it is true that Warne had more media coverage than Quadir but Quadir lacked Warne's flair which made leg spin popular/cool and so probably wouldn't have attracted media attention anyway.
I have grown up watching Warne, Murali, Kumble and Saqlain and I truly believe that the former two are in a league of their own.
Here is how the list should go for all time greatest spinners:
Murali (No offence Warnie, but he is still better than you)
Warne
All the others - Saqlain (for his skill and trickery), Kumble (for his grit, determination and pace maybe) and Quadir somewhere close to the top with Laker, Bedi, etc

I also disagree that Quadir had better batsmen to bowl against. Warne has had some pretty good batsmen to bowl to as well (Lara, Tendulkar, Chanderpaul, Kallis, Jayasuriya, Alec Stewart, Inzy, Mohammad Yousuf, Dravid, etc).
And, if good batsmen haven't looked good against him then it’s because of his master class in belittling batsmen, no matter how good they are. Besides, from what I read in previous comments, Quadir had some umpiring decisions to help him out, so that takes care of that.

In describing any achievement or success, we tend to use the help of numbers instead of words. As there is a general belief that words can be false, misleading and deceptive etc., whereas, numbers are hard, unequivocal and concrete. Its true to a great extent, yet the numbers cannot measure the attributes, character, caliber, class and quality of anything and it is hard to describe it only in numbers. Therefore, we need the help of words, adjectives, metaphors in defining and describing quality and excellence.

If numbers alone can talk about a bowler's superiority then right now Shane Warne is at the top. Murali is number two and there is every likelihood that Murali will not only break Shane Warne's record but may go beyond where no bowler could possibly reach that target in the near future. Therefore, measuring his success or his achievement with the help of numbers alone won't be any doubt in calling him the number one bowler. But, the point is, how many people apart from the Sri Lankans would rate Murali as the best bowler in the world? Especially, since he was twice sent for correcting his bowling action and even today Martin Crowe has appealed to the authorities to take a look at his "doosra" which appears very dodgy and dubious.

When Murali will break Shane Warne's record in terms of numbers and when the Sri Lankans would call him as the greatest ever etc., then the OZ supporters will start moaning and groaning like they are doing now when Abdul Qadir is being compared here with Shane Warne by saying its rubbish and crap and blady blah. Then they will come up with this same theory that statistics alone doesn't mean anything and numbers don't matter, it is the class that is more important and they will try to describe Shane Warne's class with the help of words. The day is not far away!

If one can rate a player only with the help of numbers then how about this: "Danish Kaneria took 132 wickets in 28 matches, whereas Shane Warne took 125 in 28 matches." How do you make comparisons here? And Danish Kaneria is the ONLY leggy in the world who unsettled the Indians on their own soil. Bangalore Test match is a proof of that, yet no one rates him along Shane Warne or Murali. On a more similar note, Yousuf broke Viv Richards record last year, yet there are so many who consider Viv Richards as King Richards and call him the best and all time great. Then we say, we simply cannot compare apples with oranges.

When asked, how do you rate Shane Warne? Abdul Qadir himself replied: "There is no rating - he is simply one of the greatest bowlers ever. His record speaks for itself. The best thing about him, what sets him apart, is his heart and bravery." Abdul Qadir went on adding a few more praises for Shane Warne. But, that is Abdul Qadir's humility and his greatness and it doesn't mean we take away Abdul Qadir's class and his caliber as a quality leg spinner.

He is so much different from Shane Warne, not only in terms of the variety that he used to produce, but his action was so magical and the man was very charismatic. His dangerous diabolical bowling action was for show only, it was to create a physical aura, it gave the batsman a feeling of uneasiness and discomfort, as to who and what is this coming in to bowl? He used to work on their minds even before delivering the ball.

It is true that umpires today are much more sympathetic towards the leg spinners in their decision making than their predecessors ever were. And Shane Warne succeeded more than any bowler in the art of appealing for an LBW. He has actually intimidated the umpires and compelled them to give the border line decisions in his favour. That is also a reason that he got more wickets. Another reason is, the English players play leg spin so badly that at times that any spin bowler would succeed against them. To say that several domestic batsmen in the subcontinent would play leg spin better than some of the English batsmen of today won't be wrong.

I remember seeing an ODI in Sharjah where Vinod Kambli smashed three sixes in a row and a four, total 23 runs of Shane Warne's over. When Tendulkar first came to Pakistan, in Peshawar he scored his first fifty and he smashed Abdul Qadir for 2 sixes. The point is the sub-continent players play the spinners better than the Englishmen or the men from Caribbean. And Warne's biggest victims are from the Ashes series. Whereas, Abdul Qadir's victims were all time greats like Viv Richards, Gordon Greenidge, Graham Gooch, Mike Gatting, Ian Bothom and likes. They were terrorized and tormented by Abdul Qadir. Its a shame that his career did not last long enough due to the usual politics and his short tempered behaviour.

It is wrong to say that Qadir's achievements are only at home. At the Oval England all other spinners, John Emburey, Phil Edmonds and Tauseef Ahmed bowled 162.3 overs between them for only three wickets. Whereas; Qadir bowled 97.4 overs for ten wickets. In Caribbean too he mesmerized the greats like Viv Richards and all, he was simply unplayable. Remember what Sir Viv Richards talked about Abdul Qadir? I would like Kamran Abbasi to find that quote and write it here. That speaks in volumes about how effective and how creative Abdul Qadir was at home and abroad.

I would definitely rate Abdul Qadir as a far superior leggy than Shane Warne.

By that token, Prasanna was better than Murli.

My God what an astounding point you have made Kamran…well done. To be honest I always think like that as well. When nowadays I look on media and other fields as well this thing vividly conjure the fact that media exposure and PR is the biggest factor contributing the myths and hypes of modern day’s individuals. For example when I hear that Amitabh Bachchan is the greatest actor of Millennium (As allegedly eked out in BBC’s website some years ago) I do wonder some times what about Dilip Kumar, Prithvi Raj Kapoor, Balraj Sahni etc and many other names which I can include here but can’t cause of relevance of my comments on cricket. For instance Amitabh himself professed in the early nineties (and I think he still persists with his thoughts) that in his professional life Dilip Kumar is his biggest and only inspiration. And now look who got more exposure from the media via PR Dilip sahib or Amitabh. In the same vein I think when it comes to Qadir and Warne comparison, an incident is striking to my memories of 1994 Australian tour of Pakistan. By that time though Warne was still on the fringes of stardom, even went to search Qadir’s home at Lahore to get some tips from him about the leg spin bowling, and I still remember till this day the innings of 237 of Malik at Rawalpindi when Malik and other Pakistani batsmen reduced Warne to a laughing stock and out of frustrations or deliberations (maybe) Warne was desperate to get his art back on trap from the very great Qadir himself. That’s more then enough to illustrate how great Qadir was and still be no matter how much the hailers of rising sun kind of media do shower its hollow praise for Warne today and with the emergence of some new talented player they might forget Warne as well, as it happened to countless legends of the past. Comparisons to me are not justified because every individual has to cope with its environment and paraphernalia of that age. What the intention of Kamran is here in this blog is to don’t carry away in the praise of someone and almost tagged him the de facto or sublime god of some art and talent, which he might have possess but also considers the past exponents of that same art as well which to me serves as one of the prime sources of leads which every individual almost carries and take it to another level, same like an ancient mankind from the stone ages to this digital age learn the skills and civilization in a step by step process. In the end I must say its futile to say who is better and who is not but we should need to admit as a thinking and learning individuals the light of art and knowledge travels and transmits from one generation to another and every individual who brought any particular art or knowledge to some different level from the previous one, which I have no doubt about Warne as well, should be praised and no doubt the past masters of the same art and skills should also be respected and revered (In the context of this debate Qadir I mean).

What rubbish! I mean Qadir certainly was a great bowler and a matchwinner, but these comments must be based on anti-Warne sentiment rather than reality. Warne was simply the best of the best.
He didn't need several googlies. He had many other deliveries and his guile to do the job. What he didn't have was home pitches prepared for him or non-neutral umpires officiation in home tests. Even his statistics(although they never tell the full story), were far superior. Some people love to focus on things like Warne's record against India. Well....Qadir's is worse.
That counts for little. So what if India are better equipped at handling legspinners. They're supposed to be. That's what theyre' brought up on.
Both men were great. Warne was greater.

Dear Mr. Abbasi,

Either you don't have a clue and have never watcher Warne bowl or you were on dope when you wrote this. Qadir is not even a shade on Warne. The comparison and your article don't make any sense and nor do they merit the attention they are getting.

Joy

Mushtaq Ahmed is by far the best leg spinner to have played county cricket and his performances are much better than Warne in County but due to internal politics he is not allowed to play test cricket.

Stuart McGill's test wickets came very cheaply against bangladesh and he averaged 50 against India in 2004 series and Warne averages poorly against Indians as well. Neutral umpires dont make any difference these days. When warne was out against Panesar, Aleem Dar denied him the wicket. Hoggard and Panesar both had Hayden and Symonds out cheaply but both were denied their wickets. Otherwise the outcome of MCG test would have been a draw. Had the umpiring been neutral, we would have had a much better test series and few draws in this concluded Ashes series. Also kaneria is a fine bowler, much better than Warne in his 20's however he does not have a hayden in 1st slip or Australian fielders and umpires to back him up. Kaneria would be denied 100 legitimate test wickets whereas Warne wouldnt be. I think everytim e i saw kaneria play in Australia he was denied few genuine wickets in each innings and the same thing happened to Monty as well. Kaneria turns the ball better and he outfoxed Kevin Peterson through his gate by a superb googly whereas Warne can never bowl peterson through the gate. Abdul Qadir is the true legend of legspin and had he received the media coverage and most importantly the salary warne was paid, he would have been equally as good if not better than warne. Its all about poor umpiring decisions and pitching in the rough and better fielding that gave Warne 300 extra wickets. Murali has a far weaker bowling side and yet he will outperform Warne soon. Still Warne is the best bowler Australia has ever produced.

How did Sarfraz and Iqbal Qasim feel about being labelled as cannon fodder? I suppose similarly to Lara and Tendulkar to being written of as mortals.
Oh yes with regards to point 9, we all thought that Qadir's 9/56 was a great performance, but try looking at the bigger picture. Scyld Berry may have once said that Qadir was better. So what!
Plenty of legends of the game will disagree. Whay don't you quote them too!

While I agree Qadir was a very fine bowler indeed, and I DO credit him for reviving the dying art of wrist spin, I'm not sure I agree with some of the points posted here by the author.
"Qadir had to bowl to WIndies, Warne didnt have to"... that actually gives the benefit to Warne, since WIndies (specially in the 80's) were very poor players of spin. Even Hirwani managed 16 wkts against them on his debut, and he wasnt even good enough to cement his place in the Indian team over the following years.
"Umpires being more sympathetic to leggies".. umm.. and what about the game of cricket becoming more and more batsman oriented over the years. Bowlers have never had it harder than they have it now. Also consider that Warne has played most of his games on pitches NOT suited for spin, and yet has 700+ wkts.
"Warne cant bow googly"... its a myth that has led to many a batsmen's downfall.. see an example just a few posts below... :-). He CAN bowl the wrong one, just doesnt decide to, or has to, that often.
"Warne had always been part of a powerful bowling attack".. umm for the better part of his carreer, Warne and McGrath were the main spearheads of the Aussie attack. Take them out of the equation, and even India managed to spoil Steve Waugh's farewell party.

Having said that, I must also add that I have derived immense joy out of watching Qadir bowl. A great bowler, yes.. better than Warne.. umm, not really... :-)

One thing most people forget about warne is that he was a failure against India, the best players of spin bowling. It will be a nightmare for him, all his life. He is great , yes but not the best. But I rate him better than Quadir though. And yes Prasanna was better than murali. Ask Ian Chappel.

Share Warne is many folds better than Qadir. Qadir was blasted out of cricket by Tendulkar on the other hand Warne demolished many cricketing careers. I would rate Stuart McGill better than Qadir. Share is well on the top of the chart with no distant second even.

ok ill answer these claims 1 by one as you have put them

1. The fact that qadir used the googly puts him behind in my book. Warne could bowl the googly but his 6 or 7 legspin variations were enough 700 odd times.

2. Thats not a point of fact, its an opinion so not valid

3. Agreed, but I still dont see how that makes him better, just because he had a bad board doesnt make him a better bowler. More concentration would be required granted.

4. When Warne started, Australia were NOT the premier team. He started in 1992, Pakistan, West Indies and arguably India were ahead of them. Pakistan and WI by miles.

5. Indias early 2000s line-up was as good a quality as any. His record didnt stand up but India are notoriously good players of spin. The West Indies are notoriously bad.

6.Bullshit, Pakistan wasnt that bad, you make it sound like he was playing for Canada

7. 1 good point out of 7, not bad

8. Global coverage also means the world has seen Warnes trickery over and over. I doubt Qadir wouldve been secure enough with his talent to actually physically show the world his repotoire as Warne has numerous times.

9. Id be interested to find out whether Mr. Berry said that before or after Warnes 8/71 against England, or 7/52 vs WI. Id go with what Mr. Benaud over Mr. Berry anyway, no disrespect intended and im sure none recieved

10. Scyld Berry obviously loves Abdul Qadir, and let Graham Gooch speak for himself. I doubt any English captains Warne bowled to would say anything bar "Warne is the best bowler I faced, period." Him or McGrath anyway hey Athers?

One thing is for sure that we should respect Qadir.......

TRUST ME IF THERE WAS NO QADIR THEN THERE WOULDNT HAVE BEEN A WARNE!

This is a pointless and fruitless argument. Its an argument that can have no solution or end. Comparing players from different era's is ... well, impossible isn't it?

Now, I'm a Pakistani, and a huge Qadir fan. But its just not fair to compare 2 great bowlers from different era's. And I have to give Warne his dues. If I were to play the devil's advocate, in my humble opinion, Warne wins hands down. Still, I believe it is impossible to compare. Unless they build a time machine, and Warne goes back in time and plays in the 70s and 80s; and Qadir flies to the future and plays todays batsmen.

Playing the devil's advocate:
Qadir had more googlies. But Warne had his flipper, as well as FAR better control on standard leg-spinners - simply becuase he could give the ball much more rip than Qadir. That is, Warne could vary the amount of rip and turn he got, with the same action. And therefore, had a greater variety/variation of leg spinners.

Qadir had to bowl to history's greatest batsmen (the WI of the 70s & 80s). But attacking batsmen work in favor of a wrist-spin bowler because it makes the batsman takes more risks. Which makes sense why Warne took more wickets, since the 90s (and onwards) has seen Test cricket being played in a far more attacking fashion.

Modern Global coverage also means batsmen can keep watching a bowler over and over to figure out his "tricks". When Warne bowled, the world watched. And we all know why Qadir refused to play County Cricket even though he was offered to play there numerous times - to maintain the "mystique". Take for example, Mushtaq Ahmed - great bowler at County level, but not the same anymore at international level. Why? Becuase he lost that "mystique" while Warne always maintained it despite having played years of County cricket himself.

The quality of umpiring is a matter of opinion. As is any other former player's, umpire's, or spectator's; who might have watched both players in their prime. Just like what you and I are saying is nothing more than opinion.

In the end, this discussion has not bearing. Because it has no legs to stand on. I'm not saying Qadir was better than Warne. Nor vice versa. Cerntainly, numbers say Warne was better. But Qadir played in an age of negative and defensive batting (except the WI's and Pakistan I would say), which meant less chances to take wickets.

So anyone saying for SURE, that one of these players was better - is simply WRONG. Which includes you Kamran. No one's right.

Unless, perhaps someone's got a time machine on thier hands?

Tough to say but would there have been Qadir or a a Murali, or a Warne had there be no Grimmett, or Laker or Lock or Gibbs or Underwood (yes Mr. Umbrella himself who England needed for a rainy day) or Chandra, or Bedi, or Prassana, or Ventkat, or ....my oh my oh my...we forget a spinner far more durable and far more valuable than Warne...Anil Kumble. Champion both character wise and ability wise!

112 tests 2000 runs 542 wickets at 28.56
4.84 wickets per test

Warne:

145 tests 3154 runs 708 wickets at 25.41
4.88 wickets per test

and guess what, Kumble possibly is a more humble and better man and one worth praising.

And I've not even mentioned Murali so far have I?

This pro-aussie kid Andrew must have been smoking cabbage when he put those comments up. ok fine both are great, and warne is possibly better because of his ability to unsettle the batsman by his aura, even when he is not getting wickets. but thinking that qadir had no variety like flipper or topspinner is just rubbish haha. watch some old reels yo. warne is still the best spinner ever in my mind, but that can soon change depending how well murli does in the next year or so...not cus of his stats, just look at the clueless faces batsmen have when facing murli. priceless! and plz don't bring up a chucking issue cus that is just one ill-adivsed act of jealousy on non-asians part who cannot digest to see someone succeed like murli. nuff said.

I feel less of a man for having read that.

So what if Qadir had more googlies, and better googlies. A truly great leg spinner can beat a batsman with whatever is in his repertoire. Just have another look at "The Gatting Ball".... "THE GATTING BALL!" I say.

Cricket is a numbers game.... and the numbers point to SK Warne.

Players from different eras should not be compared. The game has changed considerably over time. Would Bradman's average be the same if he had played at places other than Australia and England?

Now if we want to make a comparison between Qadir and Warnie, they were equally hopeless against Sachin. So there!

As for Warne and Murali, one telling stat comes into mind. Murali has over 190 wickets vs Zim and Bangladesh. Warne has 11.

Qadir better than Warne - Thats the funniest thinh I've ever heard! Seriously. You should do stand-up mate.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=IiKTDH0ITyE

Yes, Qair can Win ODI's.thru his batting.
None other than, Off West Indian Great... Walsh.
...

I really think Saqlian was the Best.

I remember Qadir playing in Australia in '83-84, and he was definately an exciting player to watch, he had fizz, pizzazz and was an aggressive spin bowler, like a pioneer of modern leg-spin.

Perhaps if he was able to play over 100 tests he would also have taken over 500 wickets, but i agree with many, it is too difficult to directly compare. Qadir had virtually finished by the time warne played in '91-92, and the best of Warne was evident only after a few tests. Indian batsmen always had the upper hand over Warnie, his average of mid 40's against them over a very long career is telling. But he dominated both home and away, against all other sides, and played against batsmen like Lara, Tendulkar, Yousuf, Inzamam, Dravid and Laxman. In the 80's you had Richards, Richardson, Greenidge, Haynes and Martin Crowe, Gower and Gooch, Australia only really had Border in Qadir's time. Yallop though in '83-84 showed his talent against Qadir in his prime, and maybe that can be a reference point as to where he ranks. Extremely good, inded one of the best, but on the totem pole, below S.K.Warne.

In my view Kamran commits a big blunder in saying that in Qadir's era there were only two good bowlers in an otherwise ordinary Pakistani bowing attack(i.e. Qadir and Imran). How could someone like Kamran forget the fact that Akram was very much part of that team from 1984 onwards? And Qadir's fellow spinners Iqbal Qasim-a classic left arm leg spinner-and Tauseef Ahmed -very dangerous right arm off spinner- were world beaters in their own rights.On the contrary,in Qadir's time Pakistan had the most balanced and lethal bowling attack in the world.Their opening bowlers were left arm, right arm combination who went on to become all time greats.As I mentioned earlier,their spinners were so different from each other, comprising Qadir (right arm leg spinner ,googly and everything else),Iqbal Quasim (Left armer)and Tauseef Ahmed ( right arm offie).Is Kamran trying to say that Pakistan became the best team (along with West Indies)in the 80's on the back of just two bowlers? Their bowling attack was better than West Indian bowling attack which was rather one dimensional because they always relied only on right arm bowlers.(albeit extremely fast and dangerous)

One paradox about Warne....his Pura cup record against duds in other Aussie States is surprisingly moderate. He has had nothing like the success for Victoria as against other countries internationally, and one could maybe argue that if Warne actually had to bowl against the Pontings, Haydens, Langers, etc he would struggle! I mean Victoria as a side even have struggled to dismiss batsmen of the limited ability of Bichel, who always makes runs for Queensland at the tail end. I'm a parochial Victorian, but that is something that is very strange statistically.

Maybe the 'Mystique' that Qadir may have sought to preserve by not playing county cricket worked well for him, although Shane playing in England has hardly enabled the Poms to play him any better.

worst article i have read on cricinfo, enough said

I find it funny that people are getting so worked up over this. What I don't find funny, however, is the way some people are rubbishing Qadir or Warne in order to support their favourite bowler - in some cases with thinly disguised racial or nationalistic overtones (even hatred in some cases). That is truly sad, as both bowlers were great in their own right and will have a special place in cricketing folklore. The biggest irony of course is that the two had a lot of respect for each other.

As to who is the best, I think that is not at all relevant and it was pretty silly of Kamran to even attempt the comparison. Those of us who have had the privilege of watching either or both should be thankful that we were able to witness two different masters at work and true cricket fans will pray that we get to see another one soon - though I suspect that we may have to wait a while.

I will conclude with some quotes from an interview given by the Pakistani wizard himself to the Voice of America.

“Shane Warne is the greatest bowler in cricket history and I don’t have the words to describe his class and success. He has proved to be a remarkably talented and incredibly effective bowler against all oppositions. I feel honoured in saying that Warne learnt some of the finer points of leg-break bowling from me.”

“Shane Warne always respected me and those who respect their seniors are destined to achieve the greatest of landmarks.”

Taking a leaf out of Qadir's book, we should all learn to respect these two great champions rather than attempt pointless comparisons and indulge in nationalistic/racial jingonism.

Qadir was a good bowler in Indian subcontinent pitches, specially in Pakistan where he used the two Paki umpires as two additional fielders. He, like Warne was spanked badly by the Indian batsman. Warne is the greatest! 700 test wickets?? are you out of your mind?? talking about googly? nobody can bowl a better flipper than Kumble does. As per match winning capasity Kumble is the best!

John Beamish has lost his mind...
Did you actually for a second think that McGrath was better than Akram? That was the most idiotic comment i've read. However, Warne and Qadir cannot be compared. Warne is better hands down.

Facts
Abdul Qadir got over 35% of his wickets against the english
Warne got 27.5%
this stat shows Qadir got his wickets against the 'useless'legspin playin England
Fact: Warne has a better average against India then Qadir, including playing India in India
Cold hard facts
However both were superb bowlers we should be appluading their geniuses they were both superb bowlers

Let compare Warne With Qadir by looking at test match agaisnt England. It is the second test between Pakistan & England in 1977. Qadir playing his second test, venue Hydrabad, pitch is dreadful. Qadir picked up several wicket in first inning and english batsmen are mesmerized. Pakistan is all hyped up and English defeat is immanent. English batsmen are looking ever so fragile against leg spin. JM Brearley and G Boycott open inning 2nd time , first Wicket to fall at 180 or so. England lost only 2 wicket and comfortable drawn the test.
If you offer similar score and playing conditions to Warne. 99 times out of 100 Warne will eat the opposition with in 2 sessions.

Qadir had several varieties under his sleeve and I do not argue on that, Warne will bowl 90% of his deliveries leg spinners. Where as Qadir will bowl 4 different type of deliveries in one over.

Qadir will become a nightmare to his Captain, Qadir will bowl at least a one loose bowl in every over, Warne will bowl loose bowl after many overs and captain will take him of the attack.
Qadir does not like to be taken of the attack, he was always emotional on the field, often aggressive. He only offer respect to the Imran Khan, even Imran was some time intimidated by his on field antics.
Qadir was not a team player, Warne is a team player, an exceptional fielder.

Qadir was a very ordinary fielder. Qadir was fired from a tour in Australia and sent home even before the test series begin.
Warne never faced any of such humiliation. Qadir was praised by Richie Benued and from there on his head was grown to the size and never went back to normal.

To conclude a comparison between Warne & Qadir, Warne was coached to understand, it is not the variety that matters, it is the quality that matters. If your best bowl is a leg spinner, then bowl as many and more often.
Qadir was never coached, there was no sole in Pakistan who can tell this lad a thing or two, he considered him self above the rest.

Warne delivered the bowl almost 10~12K faster than Qadir & with lots of control and big big leg spinners, it was the most successful killer of all his deliveries.
Warne bowl googlee to Tail enders, because he knew his googlee was not so cleaver nor disguised.
Qadir will bowl half Googlee, Top Spinner, Leg Spinner, Full Toss, Low Toss and all. Looked very good from the commentary box, at times he was so expensive that the captain had to get him off and then he goes to dressing room and 12 man is on. He was a shocker in the field, once taken off the attack, captain had to watch him, he use to go Monkey.

Warne is cleaver bowler, bowl to his strength and exploited the opposition weakness and got the rewards for his team, much better bowling average for a Lad who bowled lot more than Qadir. Australia owe Several years of great Cricket ratings to Warne, Pakistan does not. Abdul Qadir never delivered when the Pakistani team were relying heavily on him.
However, he did revive the art of Leg Spin bowling in 70’s when it was almost forgotten and Warne is the fruit of it.

phew, well ,posting an article at the time when warnes performance is at its peak, is highly questionable ?there is no doubt on the abilities of qadir,but warne is not less talented either,but one thing which makes huge difference is notice able,although many aussies wold not belive but this is true "abdul qadir in of tv shows mentions that i went australia and warne invited me and me tha how big fan he is of him,an dhe showed qadir his pictures whilst bowling googly,which warne said i learned most of my bowling by analysing the way you use to bowl.QADIR has 18 deliveries of diferent styles
so QADIR IS TEH BEST ,

qadir, was useless abroad, never could he bowl well to indians......amarnath and gavaskar used to yell out 'googles' as soon as Qadir bowled so called 'googly'.
And u write about west indies.....so this means that Narendra hirwani, Alan border.. were also better bowlers than shane warne.
no doubts Qadir had a better googly, so what.....Venktesh Prasad had a better slower delivery.....does it means he was better than Mcgrath. Even Kumble has a better flipper than Warne.......it doesn't proves anything.......after all Stats are always not damn lies.

Actually, Ashanif has hit the nail on the head. It's much better to enjoy the skills of who play rather than get upset at comparisons. Maybe the words spoken by each man about the other should be given the greatest weight. Cheers.

absolute rubbish,

1. wow Warne can't bowl a wrongun... that makes him less superior? haha ok... perhaps he doesn't need the wrongun?
2. If the ball pitches on middle.. and straightens [ie. slider or flipper] then surely it has to be out, and umps at that time would've known.. if the ball pitches on middle and turns and then hits the pads then no it shouldn't be out, and thats the same nowadays.
3. I dont really see how that makes him better
4. You could say there is more pressure playing for the best team and more fight to be in the team and stay in there... for Qadir he knew if he played not that well he would still make the team
5. Not many people really knew leg spin then and the Windies didn't really know what leg spin was, i think Indias current batting lineup play spin better
6. Warne bowls on first days a lot and does well!
7. You could say the other bowlers in Warnes team steal the wickets
8. And your point?
9. Wow i have an opinion too
10. I'm sure there are other batsmen who think otherwise

Anyway Warne is in the top 5 Wisden thing isn't he?
And also he is like Mohammad Ali and Michael Jordan... people who don't know much about the sport still know these men.. he has an aura around him that cannot be matched..

Ooooh its really crazy to say that Qadir is better than warne.I would like to quote one of the reason stated by columnist,QADIR BOWLED TO GREAT WESTINDIAN BATSMEN.But i think westindian batmen's greatest weekness was spin bowling,eventho they were gr8 batsmen they were never a gr8 player of spin bowling and moreover i think the columnist shud look back at the 1999 world cup final and c how warne ran thru the pakistani lineup.

MacGill, Kaneria and Mushtaq have a far better googly than Warne. Does that mean they are all better as well? Warne didn't need one.

Always use facts as the foundation of opinion!!
Facts: Shane Warne 4 or more wickets in an innings 59% of Tests played. Abdul Qadir 32.8%.
Shane Warne 5 or more wickets in an innings 25.5% of Tests played. Abdul Qadir 22%.
Abdul Qadir was a truly great bowler, Shane Warne a champion!! Wishing something were true does not make it so!!!

hey, what joke book did u get this from? QADIR BETTER THAN WARNE?? HAHAHAHA c'mon mate, please dont add anything else to ur blogs because your just making a fool of urslef.

Warne is Warne - A LEGEND
Qadir is Qadir - a spin bowler

Well Kamran if you measure the success of your blog by number of replies then you really hit the jackpot with this little misinformed trifle. However if it is balance and historical perspective you seek then I'd suggest you have a chat to Gideon Haigh. It's just ridiculous and blatantly divisive to compare Qadir and Warne in such a manner. Maybe that's what you are trying to achieve? Certainly some of the replies indicate you've stirred up the old "Nasty horrible Austalia versus the rest of World" battle again. I just wish people would look at the facts and not let prejudices and inferiority complexes cloud their judgements. I am simply amazed at the anti-Australian sniping that goes on in some blogs. Like this little chestnut from Kirston "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". That sure has a lot to do with Warne and Qadir. See what sort of camaraderie you inspire Kamran. As for your 10 points they have all met with responses from other readers that they deserve. However, I can't let point 4 go without adding my 2 cents worth. You say "Warne played for the premier team of his age. Qadir began when Pakistan were nowhere and ended with Pakistan battling for the top spot". Did it ever occur to you that the reason why Australia have remained the "premier team of their era" for so long might have had a fair bit to do with Warne's presence. Certainly their record when he has been battling injury(1 trip each to India and West Indies) or absent (India in Australia last time)indicates that Australia very much come back to the pack. For the record I think that Qadir was a brilliant bowler; energetic,clever,mischievous and great to watch. While he didn't, as some have suggested, invent attacking leg spin (see Grimmet and O'Reilly for that) he certainly did invigorate a dying art and Shane Warne owes him a great debt. Qadir was without doubt the premier slow bowler of his era. Warne is quite simply the smartest-thinking bowler to have graced the game. To suggest that he is Qadir's lesser is an insult and one that, in present circumstances, only serves to diminish you as a writer.

As far as im concerned this whole discussion just soils Qadir's name. He was a good bowler, and we should leave it at that. Comparing him with warne is as ridiculous, and unfair, as comparing a good batsman with Bradman. All it does is make people think less of Qadir because this discussion is only going one way. Qadir was a good leg spin bowler whos main contribution was bringing the art of leg spin back into the public eye. Warne is arguably the best bowler of all time.

It says a lot when Brian Lara, who is unquestionably the best player of spin in the modern age (and if there was one better it would be something to watch) calls Warne the greatest bowler he has ever seen. Seen mind you, not played, and this includes bowlers of all varieties from the Windies golden age and the rest of the world.

I don't know about Qadir since I was too young then. A simple question though: Would you rather watch Warne or Murali bowl?
I'd rather watch Warne any day.

One cannot compare players from different era.

1> I have no doubt that Qadir had more variations that Warne.

2> What Warne has achieved that is simply great. You can't compare Qadir with Warne on that point.

It's the same like Vinod Kambli having more strokes than Tendulkar. But when it comes to what Sachin has achieved, Kambli does not stand anywhere.

3> Warne's record in Indian subcontinent is not at all good. But can we argue that he was not a good bowler on spin-friendly pitches?

4> It is well known that apart from Asian players, players from other countries are not so good in playing good spin. And I do believe that helped Warne in taking so many wickets and gaining that 'aura'.

There are so many factors in a players success. No doubt Warne got the benefit of playing for Australia at a time when he had great bowlers like McGrath at the other end. Very good Australian batting line which consistently scored heavily at brisk pace which created immense pressure on opposing teams.

Umpiring was sub-standard even in Australia. If you see the India-Australia 76-77 series, I remember one Indian commentors remarks that Bob Simpson was given not out 22 times in a 5 test match series. Take that against series result of 3-2 in favor of Aussies.

To my mind that was one of the hardest-fought series. Some of the matches were won by just 2 wickets, 16 runs or 45 runs or so by eaither team.

I'll tell you a better question you could ask: Was Wasim better or Mcgrath?

Against New Zealand Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w

Shane Warne 20 103 6/31 24.37 3
Abdul Qadir 9 26 6/160 36.15 2

Against New Zealand Warne has better bowling average than Qadir. However, Warne has only 3 five wicket hauls against them. Qadir has 2 in less than half as many tests as Warne. Performance against New Zealand is not significant, because New Zealand did not possess the best of batting talents in either Warne or Qadir era. ADVANTAGE WARNE

Against England Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w
Shane Warne 36 195 8/71 23.25 11
Abdul Qadir 16 82 9/56 24.98 8

Warne and Qadir have almost identical averages against England. Qadir, however, seems much more successful. He has 8 five wicket hauls from only 16 tests. Warne has only 11 from 36 tests. Therefore Qadir terrorized England more than Warne ever did. Also England had much stronger batting line up during Qadir time. ADVANTAGE QADIR

Against India Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w
Shane Warne 14 43 6/125 47.18 1
Abdul Qadir 16 27 4/67 51.51 0

Warne obviously has better record against India. His average is slightly better. One can argue that Indian batting during Qadir time was less accomplished (Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, Amarnath)than during Warne time (Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman). Qadir only bowled on sub continental pitches against India. Warne did not. ADVANTAGE WARNE

Against West Indies Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w
Shane Warne 19 65 7/52 29.95 3
Abdul Qadir 10 42 6/16 30.83 1

Qadir bowled much better against West Indians. His averages, though slightly lower than Warne’s, were against very formidable West Indian sides (Richards, Haynes, Greenidge, Llyod, Kalicharan, Dujon, Richardson). Warne had only a few world class batsmen to counter in the West Indian sides. ADVANTAGE QADIR

Against Sri Lanka Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w
Shane Warne 13 59 5/43 25.54 5
Abdul Qadir 5 14 5/44 32.35 1

Warne has better average against Sri Lanka. ADVANTAGE WARNE

Against Australia Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w
Abdul Qadir 11 45 7/142 35.86 3
Qadir performance against some good Australian sides has been below par.

Against Pakistan Mat Wickets BB Bowling Average 5w
Shane Warne 15 90 7/23 20.17 6
Warne performance against decent, but not exceptional, Pakistani sides has been above par.

SUMMARY

ADVANTAGE WARNE against New Zealand, India, Sri Lanka.

ADVANTAGE QADIR against England, West Indies.

Which bowler is better?
Qadir obviously did much better against strong West Indian and English sides. West Indian side was as formidable, if not better, as the current Australian juggernaut. English side had the likes of Boycott, Gower, Gooch, and Gatting. Most of them were in their prime while facing Qadir.

Warne obviously feasted on New Zealand, India, Sri Lanka. He has 205 wickets against these sides. Warne’s wicket tally is also impressive against Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and other minnows. Therefore, total wicket tally should not be a criterion for greatness.

Warner also had the following advantages in his career:
1. A strong Australian batting as compared to Pakistani line up. He could, therefore, experiment with his bowling. Qadir could not.
2. A strong and supportive bowling support throughout his career. They would tenderize the opposing batting before Warne ran his magic.
3. A committed and professional cricket board.
4. A superior fielding side to make difficult catches. Qadir never had such benefit.

That Qadir mostly got wickets on subcontinent’s dusts bowls is unworthy of examination. Warne obviously fared better against India and Sri Lanka than Qadir did. Therefore the theory of subcontinent dust bowl pitch support to Qadir is disqualified.

Thus arguments can be made for Qadir being a better bowler against better oppositions.

Is there anyone in world other than PAKIS who even think there is a comparision between the two...
Qadir is just a bowler. Maybe would make top 100 of all time...
WARNE is a World Class Bowler. Top 5 in history..

Lets not waste time on this. This article is posted to provoke people and get more ratings for cricinfo...

Nice try cricinfo...

1) I can say KapilDev is better pace bowler than McGrath because he was gifted with far superior out swinger, he played against same WI, his banana swingers are feast to eyes, and he played in slow pitches with absolutely no suppport from other bowlers and pressure of low runs. But I am honest enough not to claim so.

2) Even if (1) is wrong, Warne has a very good googly.

3) West Indies was humbled by Hirwani, Yadav, Bedi , Patel (NZ). They were greatest batsmen particularly against speedsters.

4) Quadir was well supported by Akram,Imran,Surfaz. So authors claim is wrong.

7) Author forgot that Quadir played more than half of his matches in spin pitches. ( I know this is point number 5, but intentionally typed 7 to match with brain of the author)

5)The quality of a spinner is not measured by googly alone.

List how many times Warne thwarted Pak & Quadir thwarted Aus. This might be one way to finalize.

I am sorry Mr. Abbasi, but you missed by a wide margin here. Abdul Qadir was a magical bowler who revived a lost art of bowling. But he was never the great match winner like Shane Warne. Qadir played his part in many famous wins for Pakistan, however could never really produce outside of Pakistan. A look at his statistics would show you that he took 5 wickets only 3 times outside Pakistan. And Pakistan did not win these games. He may have troubled the great West Indian teams of the 1980s, however he was never consistent enough. Maybe Qadir was the best spin bowler of the 1980s, however he truly cannot compete with Shane Warne.
Warne may have bowled against depleated batting sides with the umpires being bullied to an extent, but he cannot be denied the label of the best leg spin bowler. I am disappointed about his positive drug tests, but that is another story....

Style: Qadir
Variety: Qadir
Killer Instinct: Warne
Match Winner: Warne + Qadir (on Pakistani pitches)
Statistics: Warne

Bottom Line: Shane Warne

I agree to Kamran's comparison and also want to add one thing to it that Qadir brought back spin bowling into the game. At his time spinners were barely used to relax fast bowlers. Qadir and Saqlain Mushtaq were the people who brought new dimensions to Spin bowling and Cricket.

Love Spinners

Cheers

I agree with Paul as well as I think Warne cannot be looked down upon for being in a successful team which was made successful by him and McGrath. If you need evidence of what Warne can do under pressure look at the 05 Ashes

I agree that Qadir was a better leg spinner and also an immensely good human being (although that's not the point of discussion). I generally agree with your views. I also must add that Warne had the support of much better fielders and more settled captains during his playing days.He also had support of Australian Cricket system. I feel Warne is over-rated.

Nice try, Kamran, nice try. In the days when I wrote for "The Cricketer Pakistan" I always set out to be thought-provoking. I dearly hope that that was your aim here.

I would add a few other points.

1. Qadir had more variety than Warne, but much less control of his stock ball, and so he struggled to tie batsmen down on good pitches.

2. Qadir was, to say the least, psychologically erratic.

3. Qadir had an additional element of novelty: he was the only top class leggie most batsmen had ever seen in the eighties. Warne's adversaries have generally already been exposed to Kaneria, Kumble, Mushtaq Ahmed and MacGill.

4. Qadir at home had the runs of Miandad, Zaheer, Mudassar and Imran behind him.

I loved watching both enormously. Both are heroes of mine, and I'm a grown man. But Warne was the greatest. When Qadir was on the wane (e.g. Australia 89-90) he had nothing to fall back on, whereas for the last two years Warne has still been a world-beater with little more than a range of leg-breaks. I would compare Qadir to MacGill, who I would put ahead of Benaud, Grimmett and O'Reilly as the second best of all time.

They should get this list into new editions of the Tencyclopedia...it'll be studied in english classes everywhere as an example of irony and bathos. good work kamran.

I totally disagree with everything you say. Comparing players from different era's is rubbish because from the way Shane Warne bowled he would have done equally well back in Qadir's time. If shane warne cannot bowl the googly who cares! He has 708 wickets to his name. What he didn't have in special deliveries he made up with gamesmenship, unnering accuracy and working out the batsmen. I do not believe for a second Qadir did not figure out batsmen weaknesses and bowl to them! I think if you do that your a bit mad. Look at shane warne in almost all of Australias tight games. Early in his career he took 3/0 in 15 balls to steal an inevitable victory off Sri Lanka and 15 or so years later he can still do it! Takes 4/20 odd off about 25 overs straight and almost certainly ends any possibility of coming back in the ashes! He has had countless more. Look at the semi finals of the 96 and 99 world cups. He took Australia out of what seemed to be unwinabble positions i doubt Qadir had the accuracy of Shane Warne. Although Qadir had superior variations to the stock leg spinner, Shane Warnes biggest asset was his ability to use his stock ball as his biggest wicket taker. He continuously varied the amount of side and overspin on the ball and bamboozled batsmen for one and a half decades. There are many many reasons Shane Warne is a much superior bowler. His ability to turn a tight match in the space of a few overs is second to none. Even when he is being dominated he still thinks im gonna get this bloke out next ball. He never stops looking like he is going to take a wicket. As shown in the Adelaide test in 2006 against England. He bowled the best i have ever seen anyone bowl to have been rewarded with the unflattering figures of 1 for 100 in about 40 overs. There was always one ball of every over he caused the batsmen problems. This was one of hte reasons Ponting found it so hard to take the ball away from him. And there is a little matter shane warne has on his side! 707 wickets its just oh 150 wickets away from everyone else apart from Murali. Stats don't lie. Shane warne has been the best bowler ever. The best cricketer since bradman. And everyone who's seen him bowl can say i was around in the Shane Warne Era. I don't think too many ppl would tell there grandkids i was alive during the Qadir era would you? I think not! Someone will have to be very special to ever eclipse Shane Warne as the best bowler in cricketing history. He would have done well in every single era. I am sure he would have caused even bradman a problem or too.

Dr Abbasi you've certainly received a great response by irritating a lot of Warnie fans. Well done !!! Try something logical next time.

TO:::::::::: Posted by: Andrew Johnson at January 5, 2007 1:30 PM

Andrew Johnson! Shane Warne can bowl googly. But there was no need to mention here that HOW WELL WARNE DELIVERED THE GOOGLY TO HOGGARD. If you see the 2005 PAK v ENG series’ last wicket of the third test, that Kaneria bowled to HOGGARD then you will find that Kaneria’s googly was very much better than Warne.

TO:::::::: Posted by: T G at January 5, 2007 1:35 PM

It might have been a good thing, if you write here your brother’s name and his first class record in order to ensure us that your brother was a better batsman than Mohammad Yousuf and no one give him a chance.

Please for heavens sake. This argument is absolutely lame. Warne is the best bowler the world has ever seen

Well, Hassan, old chap I was only going by numbers:

Akram:
104 22627 9779 414 7/119 11/110 23.62 2.59 54.65 20 25 5

McGrath:
124 29248 12186 563 8/24 10/27 21.64 2.49 51.95 28 29 3

McGrath bowling average of 21.64 vs. 23.62

And besides I am English and can't abide McGrath but the facts remain.

How can it be said that Qadir is a better bowler? What rubbish. There are many reasons this is so:

*Even if Warne often bowled with a huge score behind him, he did as often bowl teams out when there seemed to be no chance of anything happening (Adelaide, WC 1999 semi, WC 1996 semi, Ashes 2005 the list goes on).

*Warne had so many variations and such control that it didn't matter if he did not have a great wrong'un (he did before his shoulder operation and even after this still bowled some rippers).

*The West Indians, however great, were weak against spin so that doesn't prove much.

*Warne played a huge majority of his matches in Australia where wickets are not suited to spin as much as the dustbowls of the subcontinent.

*Warne played in the 'golden age' of batting (that particular point also highlights that McGrath should be considered the best pace bowler of all).

*The fact that Warne kept up such a consistency over 140+ matches and cameback from so many things (shoulder and finger operations that caused him to have to change his action) is testament to his greatness.

*Thompson was faster than Lillee and Lee faster than McGrath. That does not make them greater fast bowlers. MacGill spins the ball more than Warne, that does not make him better. Brad Hogg has perhaps the best wrong'un in world cricket, but does not make him the best bowler or even one of the best bowlers (he often does not even make his state side for first class matches).

There are more points but if I continued to go on I would merely be droning. The point is that to say such a thing is ridiculous. Warne is the greatest leg-spinner, greatest spinner and possibly greatest bowler of them all. Don't sulley his name by sprouting rubbish such as this.

Let's keep the comparison between two bowlers and not include Murali who has never "bowled" a single delivery.

Reading this latest blog is a good reason not to read future blogs. Abdul Qadir was a great bowler, but Warne's career is the pinnacle of legspin.

Fine.... there wasnt much media coverage of Qadir's feats, but even so, Shane Warne mesmerized batsmen for 140 odd tests.

I've had the privilege of watching the two bowl and I must say Warne is the superior bowler. Qadir had problems against the left handers since he couldn't turn the leg-break half as much as Warne and he didn't didn't dip it either.

What Qadir had was a superior googly, of which he had several, but, like Danish Kaneria, he bowled with a too high arm action and could not turn the leggie as much as his googly.

The Australians did not have too much trouble playing Qadir since they stacked their sides with left handers who swept Qadir at every opportunity. One has to look past the 'nostalgia' and 'nationalism' to see that Qadir's and Pakistan's record against admittedly average Australian sides were not good.

This arguement is a total waste of web space, first of all it is not right to compare two players from a different era. One thing I do feel bad about is that Qadir is always forgotten when they say that Shane Warne saved the dying art of leg spin. However, the circumstances were absolutely different for both players to play in. You do try to present it that Qadir had it really bad but leaving out Pakistan's odi record in his days; they were a pretty good Test team, in fact much much better than the one we had in the recent times. They are players of two different eras, batsmen were different, pitches were different, the amount of cricket was different. Qadir was one of the best leg spin bowlers world has seen but nothing should be taken away from Shane Warne. I don't agree with people when they go as far as saying that he is the greatest cricketer ever but he is one of best for sure. It is not the skill that he had, it was his brain that was something else.
It is like you yourself shot down the ideas of people saying that M. Yousuf is a better batsman than Javed Miandad, but than agains Javed has a great brain on his shoulder which makes him better.

The comparison of Abdul Qadir with Warne is laughable - one was a mini while the just retired one was a Rolls Royce.

As to those who are claiming that Murali is and will be greater than Warne, the fact that this possibility is being allowed to happen is one of the great travesties ever foisted upon cricket or sport in general.

Fact is Murali's doosra is illegal and yet he is still allowed to play and take wickets with that delivery. He has been cleared with the rest of his action after an appropriate bending of the rules to accomodate him.

A lot of the posters claim an anti Asian bias against Murali but it seems pretty clear that Murali would not be playing cricket today if he was English, South African, New Zealand and Australian. He just would have ended up like Ian Meckiff, the Australian bowler who burst onto the scene with tremendous figures and was later barred due to a suspect action. Murali should have been banned a long time ago.

Also before I am accused of anti Asian or other bias let me just state that Imran Khan was probably the greatest allrounder after Sir Garfield Sobers and that Wasim Akram and Malcolm Marshall were probably the greatest fast bowlers that ever played, with Dennis Lillie, Glen McGrath and Sir Richard Hadlee way up there.

Murali - the greatest chucker that ever played the game.
Warne - The greatest spinner I have seen play the game.

The only real fair way to decide which one was the better is to work out the math. Take the amounts of games warne played (145), multiply that by the amounts of wickets Qadir took (236) n divide that number by the amounts of games he played (67). Your anwer is about 511. That means that even if Qadir played the same amounts of games as Warne, he would have still taken about 200 less wickets. Warne has taken 708 wickets. I don't really care if they played in defferent eras n what not, n that warne pressured umpires in to rasing their pointer finger. I just don't care. I've worked out the stats, n they show that warne was a much better bowler then Qadir. Enough said i think.

Lets accept the fact, Qadir was one of the most ill tempered players in the world, and this pleasure of having this player is enjoyed by Pakistan. He was a bowler but even we can't compare him with a middle school level bowler.. He was horrible, Warne is a very neat bowler has got all the qualities of a GREAT.....

Hahaha that just makes me laugh.... I might be a one eyed Aussie but you simply cant compare between different eras. But really.. Qadir seemingly could not bowl outside Pakistan and like Warne struggled against India. But when it boils down, they were both fantastic but you are pulling a long straw to suggest that Qadir is better then Warne.... simply cant compare.

In my opinion though Warne might not have had the greatest variety but how does being able to bowl 58 different varieties of spin make you a better bowler. If I could bowl 250 different devliveries it doesnt make me the greatest ever.

What I think stands Warne apart from every other slow bowler is his ability stand up to be counted when it was really needed.... its all nice to take 9-50 in a dead rubber or whatever but its the key wickets that count- the moments that swing a test match or a match like the 99 World Cup Semi. It is getting the best batsmen out and making that breakthrough.... and simply Warne is in a class of his own in that regard, but again that is my own opinion.

As for those calling Murali the greatest- if only the rules didnt have to be continually altered to keep his action legal then he'd be in the picture. Whether he chucks or not, and so the ICC (The pathetic organistation that it now is) has ruled he doesnt, he is incomparable as well. The biggest difference between Warne & Murali is the bowling attacks... throughout his career Murali has been the one superstar in the bowling (Perhaps when Vaas was at his peak you could argue) lineup whereas Warne has shared his wickets with numerous other great bowlers. If Warne had of been the mainstay of the attack by himself I believe he would have well over a 1000 wickets by now. Both are great bowlers but how do you honestly compare their achievements.

But in the washup you simply cant compare players from different eras. It is hard enough to compare players from different countries. So I dont think trying to write down the brilliance of SK Warne is what should be done- we should all celebrate and admire what he has given the game. And for me, he is the best spinner ever and maybe even the greatest bowler, but it is all within the eye of the beholder!

Australia have been partly successful due to Warne. Like many have already said, you can't compare quality players of different eras, and both were great leggies in their own right. Different conditions, quality of opposition and all these 'what ifs' do affect success. Although i didn't see Qadir, it seems he kept the art of leg -spin going, like Warne has for Australia and world cricket. Warne was Australia's best spinner since Benaud, and revived a long lost art in australian cricket, if not world cricket where fast bowlers were the go. Warne with the more matches and consistency indicate to me he was the better of the two, but bowlers from different eras are hard to compare.

This article has taken parochial romanticism to its highest.For the life of me i could not comprehend the need Mr. Abbasi felt to downgrade a great cricketer like Warne. Yes! this is plain downgrading someone who is probably the greatest exponent of a dificult art.I have seen both Warne and Qadir in their Prime. While Qadir was Cannon Fodder for most Indian batsmen , Warne still enjoyed his moments. More than that who can forget the great bamboozling legbreak spinning crazily as if caught in a whirlpool. It was this wizardry which made Warne great this single weapon was too much for ordinary mortals to handle.He is the man who romanticised spin bowling. If Shakespeare gave birth to literature's ingenuinity, Warne was cricket's greatest Doyen in the nineties.

I saw Qadir bowl in Australia. He was very disappointing. I have seen Murali bowl too and not been overly impressed. A lot of his wickets have been taken against Bangla Desh and Zimbabwe who shouldn't have test status.The only spinner from overseas that has impressed me when bowling in Australia in recent times was Kumble in the last series India playd here. He doesn't spin the ball much but his control almost rivals Warne. As a Pom who migrated to Australia in his teens I have to say Warne has caused me more anguish than any other player. His brilliance over such a long period of time has been astonishing.He has taken wickets everywhere, Australia, England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, South Africa. The only place he hasn't dominated is Inda and to a lesser extent the West Indies. Just like there has never been another Bradman I doubt whether there will ever be another bowler that matches Shane Warne.

Shane Warne: One of Five Wisden Cricketers of the Century (Bradman, Sobers, Hobbs, Richards, Warne) even before all the records tumbled. Qadir wouldn't rate a mention. Nuff said.

It always was nonsensical trying to compare great players of different eras, is now, and ever shall be. I was fortunate enough to see Qadir in England around '82 - he was just a delight to watch. I don't believe anyone could ever have more mastery of flight, control, and spin than he did then. let's all be grateful for witnessing great players whenever, wherever they play.

No disrespact towards Qadir/Warne, in my opinion
in spin department i think Chandrasekhar/Bedi/Prasnna were best. during that time there were great batsmen.......and present time only few are best batsmen.

It is totally uncalled for to even make that comparison. What complete nonsense.

Qadir had the benefit of Pakistani umpires in all of his tests at home on turning wickets. He had very little success abroad.

There is no single bowler, with the exception of Murali, who can be compared to Warne. This discussion is really a waste of time.

What's next--that Mansoor Akhtar was a better batsman than Ricky Ponting???

I do not agree with Kamran.
Warne's figures against pakistan are note worthy.
Googly is just 5% of total art of the spin.

And just look at the statistics ... when the sample is 140 tests there is less chance of error.

Bottom line Warne is best of all spinners.

Qadir averaged 61 runs per wicket in Australia, 41 runs per wicket in England, 52 runs per wicket in New Zealand, and a touch under 70 runs per wicket while playing in India. While Qadir was a good bowler in his own right, he was not even as good as India's Subhash "Fergie" Gupte. Comparing him with a genius like Warne is nothing short of blasphemy. Kamran,please remember that at Cricinfo, your audience is a very knowledgable crowd and not some pseudo-jihadi you can shag around in the dirty streets of Multan.

Qadir's bowling average against India was 51.51 and only 27 wickets from 16 tests! There should'nt be any comparison whatsoever. Kumble is better than Qadir.

Both are legends of their era. Credit has to be given to Qadir for reviving the art of leg spin/googly bowling and to Warne for carrying the torch further. I will like to have the statistics regarding % of top order dismissal. To sum it up, it is a debate of who is better bowler. To me there is no doubt as to the greatest spinner of all time - Muralitharan.

For some reason, a lot of people seem posting comments seem to think that Qadir invented leg-spin. Australia has a far, far better tradition of leg-spin than any other Test-playing country. Starting with GJ Bosanquet, who invented and perfected the googly, through Clarie Grimmet, Bill O' Reilly, Arthur Mailey, Richie Benaud, Bob Holland, Peter Philpott, and Terry Jenner, Australia have had a long assembly line of good and great leg-spinners , whom us sub-continental people are unaware of. Bosanquet spun off legions of googly bowlers with his invention of the googly, and at a point there were as many as 4 South African googly bowlers plying their trade at the same time (known as the SA googly quartret of 1900s), Subsequent to Bosanquet was the great Clarie Grimmett, who picked up 240 odd wickets after starting his Test career at the ripe Husseyesque age of 31 in a carreer that continued till he was 44. Grimmett was a prodigious turner of the ball and was partnered by the great Bill' O Reilly (nicknamed Tiger), who was a Kumble style legspinner, nominated by Bradman to be the best bowler he had faced. Now that is saying something. Richie Benaud, before he became the venerable septugenarian presence in the commentatry box, was an impeccable legspinner of the 50s and 60s. Somewhere in between, there was the renonwned Arthur Mailey , known as the the millionaire, nicknamed so for his tendency to buy his wickets with guile and massive turn - Mailey has the best figures by an Australian in Test cricket in a single innings, so he must have been upto some good. Then there the assorted twirlers Terry Jenner (SW's coach), Bod Holland and Peter Philpott who all had their occasional moments while serving to add up the numbers. To add to an impressive CV of the Australian legpin foundation are the follwing facts: the flipper was invented by Grimmett, the googly by GJ Bosanquet and the backspinners and the sliders are all of Austrailan origin too.

So, Anyone who claims that AQ invented leg-spin or discovered it is obviously ignorant and distorting facts.

Also, going through some of the reasons, they were nowhere conclusive. To contest some, your claim of Warne not having a googly is plain wrong. Warne had a googly. Hell, I have a googly - it's not so hard to bowl a googly. He used it sparingly because batsmen fell like nine pins to his other variations and he he didn't need to. The googly is useful only when well disguised and Warne's slider was harder to pick than his googly and it made more sense to bowl it. AQ's second googly, and was bowled using the fingers, was the harder one to pick and didn't spin back a whole lot ; it went straight if anything and Warne's slider was an able challenger to that. Given Warne's use of rpping legspinners and his legstump line, a slider which skidded from leg/middle stump was more effective than a googly would have been.

Conveniently, no mention is made of the fact that Warne drifted and spun the ball so much more than AQ despite AQ playing on dustbowls at home. Warne ripped the ball across even on Austrailan pitches, and could control the amount of turn and the line and length of the ball so much better. And to the question of his googly, his googly was the where AQ's flipper was.

Warne did speak to AQ when he was on an A tour; so would have AQ if he had been an aspiring spinner. Warne coached with Terry Jenner for 13 years, taking advice from him repeately - this doesn't make TJ a better bowler than Warne.

And of course, there is the small matter of extremely biased Pakistani umpires. There is a youtube video of AQ getting Gatting lbw (leg-before-wide would have been appropriate) which shows this better than any series of descriptions from me can.

AQ was a quite a sight and had his moments, and carried the torch manfully in the dark era of spin bowling that was the 80s, but it would be a rather big folly to say he superseded Shane Warne. There were aspects of his bowling like the rhythmical run up and the biomechanical completeness of this action and the loop that were quite a treat to watch. As a lg-spinner, I am not going to deny that, but Warne was more successful, more devastating, scarier, gave it one heck of a rip and got going when the going got tough. He was the person that made every club side and international side scurrying off to unearth a leg-spinner.

It is alright to have personal preferences, because AQ brought personal joy to you and other Pakistanis than Warne would have brought to you as a neutral observer, but let us not try to cross the border between preference and fact. AQ is a fine bowler who deserves to be respected for the legacy that he left and treated with a dignity deserving a former great of the game. Let us not have to beliitle their achievements in your quest to feel vicarious pleasure through national pride.

I just wanted to know one thing, Who was the mentor of Shane Warne....?

Kamran,Tell me one thing! Did you think of this outrageous topic just to get some posts on your article? If you so, then you really succeeded.
Most of the points mentioned by you are "excuses" why Qadir didn't achieve as much as Warne. Either way, both Warne & Qadir failed miserably against the best players of legspin - India. England's 1987 tour - probably Qadir's most productive - saw some of the worst umpiring Test Cricket had ever seen. And who was the beneficiary? Abdul Qadir, of course!

No way mate! No sane person can claim that Warne is second to any spinner. If you really suggest that, then you're ending up doing a great disservice to Qadir... because people will inevitably try to pull Qadir down to show that Warne was greater!

Did suppliments help warne get more wickets? He was banned for a year. Total disgrace....

It's unfair to compare players across generations. That said, your heretical comments seem to stem from a biased support to players from your country rather than looking at the big picture. Qadir was probably the best leggie that played for Pakistan. That's very much it. Arguments such as Warne not being to able googlies or Qadir having only Imran for support hardly hold (Btw, if there was a bowler that bowled with minimum support from the other end, it was Kapil Dev, Imran had Afeez and Akram and others as well). Warne was one of the main reasons Australia has won (and not just drawn) matches abroad and at home. None of the other leggies, either earlier or during his tenure have shown the kind of control that Warne did. And, it was Warne who bowled Australia to victory in the 1999 1-day world cup as well, on seamer friendly wickets.

While Pakistan have demonstrated talent, they have hardly been anywhere close to world beaters.

Australia rose to the number 1 team in the world only during Warne's tenure, and have been at the top for a long time now.

It is trivial to see why the world rates The Don as the game's best batsman. Pretty much the same reasoning seems to hold when arguing that Warne was the best leggie.

warne is the best simple as that who the hell is qadir

Kamran,
Being a Pakistani, I love Abdul Qadir, but honestly you must be smoking a lot better stuff than me my friend. Warne is the best leg spinner that ever lived. Your list is biased and irrelevant. Compare the stats alone because at the end of the day, that is all that matters. Mindsets and batting strenght do not make a difference.

Most of the bile put out on the comments by 'Warneistas' is simply cricketing ignorance. There is also an anti Pakistan bias coming through.

The umpiring stance (not bias) of the two eras is absolutely key. Were Warne operating in the same era as Qadir ie with the same umpiring stance (remember pushing forward with the bat tucked in behind the pad was allowed then, isn't now - to refresh your memories try and get hold of a video of a Kepler Wessels batting who exemplified this point in ludicrous proportions) he would have ended up with 200 not 700 wickets, assuming he would have been a regular selection for Australia in the first place. Take lbw out of it and a leg spinner, any leg spinner, is a veritable 'buffet' bowler.

I do not for a moment agree with the umpiring stance of Qadir's time. The present one is correct. Had Qadir being operating in the same time period as Warne and Murali the bowlers would have probably lined in the order 3rd Warne, 2nd Qadir, 1st Murali.

Well although I agree Abdul Qadir is one of the best leg spinners ever and is horribly underrated and has underacheived..but I simiply cannot agree with the statement that Qadir is better than Warne..I like Qadir much more than Warne, I would love to believe it but as much as I dislike Shane Warne, I cannot deny the fact that he is probably the greatest spinner ever to have played the game. Simple.
Agree Qadir is underrated and had a lot of factors going against him. Agree the media for certain reasons never gave him the limelight, but they do that for most Pakistani players anyways dont they??
But that does not make him better than Warne. Yes Warne has always been smashed all over the park in India even by the likes of Nayan Mongia but what he has acheived all over the world overshadow that.

I wonder if Kamran Abbasi decided to coincide this blog entry with Warne's retirement to enrage Aussie readers. I don't know if Andrew Johnson is Australian, but he's as pissed as anyone I've ever seen.

So many people are saying here that you can't compare two great bowlers of different eras. Well, then I fail to understand who do critics compare Sir Don Bradman to. After all, he is regarded as the greatest cricketer EVER. Greatest compared to who... every other cricketer in the world, right? So drawing comparisons between Qadir and Warne is not wrong by any means.

Warne is usually credited as the one who revived a dying art... WRONG!! It was Qadir who did it. Warne merely carried the torch forward. And Warne has himself on numerous occasions regarded Qadir as one of his inspirations.

I fully agree with Mr. Abbasi !!

@Khalid Zafar: Who taught Michelangelo to sculpt? Who taught Titian to paint? Who taught Shakespeare to write? Who taught W G Grace to bat? Why the implication that the pupil is less than the mentor?

Someone mentioned the lbw law earlier. The law was never changed to make the spinners' task harder - prior to 1935 the ball had to pitch in line, until the 1970s ball had to hit pad in line. Ramadhin wasn't legislated out of the game by a white conspiracy.

And talking of white conspiracies, there's a whole list of white bowlers who either had to remodel their action or quit cricket. Ian Meckiff, Tony Lock and Geoff Cope are three to start with, and you can find more. Whereas when Murali throws on a regular basis, suddenly we're all about giving spinners 15 degrees of flexion. It's not *white* cricketers we bend over backwards to accommodate for fear of offending people!

@Rajeev: Bosanquet (BJT, by the way), the inventor of the googly, was English! It was said of him "He is the worst length bowler in England, and yet he is the only bowler the Australians fear".

Oh Dear. You've lost all credibility, Mr.Abbasi. It's one thing havingan opinion, it's quite another justifyng it. You have failed on the latter. Those are mere excuses you have trotted out. No spinner in the history of the game (not even Murali) has demonstrated an uncanny ability to deliver in crunch situations as Warne has.

Warne is a million times better than Qadir.Warne has 700 wickets and Qadir has 236.Enough said

Abdul Qadir ad=nd shane warne are not comparable.
Shane warne is one among the best 5 in this century. He did not needed a big score to back him up. He was equally effective when Aussies had posted a low total. Abdul Qadirwas nothing infront of Shane's greatness. Please have a comparision of records and then speak. SAying shane gets the leg before's easily than qadir shows disrespect to the old and current umpires and speaks of ignorance of cricket.

Kamran i persnally feel that Qadir was a better bowler than Warne. What Qadir did in lesser number of test matches(67!) needs to be appreciated. What would have been the number of his wickets, had he played 145 tests. I m follow ing cricket for 35 years. I have met Australian great cricket writers like Jim Maxwell who always praised Abdul Qadir. We were covering 1998 test series in Pakistan when Australians were here . It was when Shane Warne visited Qadir at his residence to pay regards in Lahore and get few tips. It was a great gesture shown by Shane which MUST be lauded. My comments are not meant to downgrade Shane,s achievements. He was a great bowler, a legend but Qadir was a legend too. Qadir was more aggressive a bowler than Shane, had more variety and Shane had edge over Qadir in playing mind games. I have seen Qadir bowling and have seen Shane bowling too particularly in SCG. Someone wrote above that Australian wickets were not favourable to spinners. I contradict this, i have been to Australian test venues on more than one ocassion. Wickets at Sydney, Hobart and Adelaide favour spinners. At SCG, wicket takes vicious turn after third day. I was lucky to be in ground when Warne bowled Basit Ali with a beauty on the last ball of the day in 1995 at SCG. I was again lucky to see Mushtaq Ahmed and Shane weaving their magic at Hobart same year. Qadir and Warne were both geniuses and we should not compare them but salute both of them. Dont forget that Dharampura Gymkhana cannot be matched with any Australian club from where Qadir started his career. We should not be unfair to Qadir nor we should be unfair to great Shane Warne. And while talking about controversial umpires, do we forget about Max-O-Connells and other Australian umpires who were known for biased decisions? In 1995 when we anded in Australia with Pakistan cricket team, press was already writing on poor umpiring by Ausatralian umpires which cost Springbks the series. So please the contributers, dont compare the umpires too, Australian umpires were notorious for biased decisions on their day too !

Kamran Abbasi..a Pakistani..yup this was expected..
1- qadir was able to bowl a googly.so you are saying that makes him a better bowler? what about those 708 test wickets
2-decisions going against you..well its all part of the game..it is nothing more than an excuse
3-madness of pakistan system is not warnie's problem mate..that is your headache.
4-Mr Abbasi you are sadly mistaken..when warrne made his debut australian team was strugglin..He took his side to a new level which qadir was unable to do..bowlers win you test matches..look at australia's record over the last decade..Warnie played a vital role in almost every single match
5-What are you trying to say..Mate, good bowlers just dont care who they are bowling too.Warne was unplayable.
6-Its a team game after all mate..everyone has to perform.
7-imran and qadir..well the aussies have Mcgrath and Warne only..They do bulk of the bowling..
9- Mate i dont care what people say..i concentrate only on stats..and stats says "Warnie is the REAL DEAL"
10-Gooch faced both bowlers in their prime.
excuze me?? that was just the beginning of warne's career/..that was not his prime mate..
this article is just a waste of time..i mean there is no comparison..qadir introduced the art of leg spin..Shane Warne mastered it.cheers

I agree with you that Abdul Qadir was better bowler than shane warne. beause of following resons.
Qadir have more varity than warne warne never bowled to greats batsmans
like ViV Richards Gavasker, Amernath, Javed Miandad,
I watch almost fifty test matches in which warne played but i never saw he take a wicke on googly. he bowled just two type of balls leg break on the batsmans leg side or stright one. on the other hand Qadir bowled five different type of balls in a over,

People are flying off the handle a little bit here, Qadir played the game against different teams in different conditions in a different time and at the end of the day was a different kind of leg spinner. If you are going to compare Warne to Qadir you may as well try comparing McGrath to Malcolm Marshall!! Also, am I the only one who's getting sick of the racist nonsense that tends to get posted every now and then? To 'Safwan': Last time I saw a picture of Bishan Bedi he looked very Asian and was calling Murali a chucker, last time I saw a picture of myself I looked very white and I don't call Murali a chucker. To 'raj': Lay off the stereotypes, you'd be surprised about the high regard 'Asian' cricketers are held by the 'White' countries if you bothered to open your ears and your mind.

I can see why this is called 'the mysterious world of Pakistan cricket'!!what a strange thing to say. it sparks debate I guess, but not within impartial cirles. Qadir was very good. his record was good if unremarkable. Underwood in the same era had significantly better figures. I am sure some of the reasons put forward go some way to explaining why his figures don't match up to Warne, but I think the main reason is that he was not as good as Warne. a harsh truth to some I guess, the bleeding obvious to others!still if it makes you feel better I guess you can continue trying to make a case for Qadir, futile as it obviously is.

well to be hoenst the reason of playing from a stronger team is pretty valid one,considering abdul qadir played from a low ranked side at that time and was such a grt success and had no peers to instruct or guide him,moreover no one knew the art of leg spin before abdul qadir realy mastered it,though people bowled good leg spin but even now when u talk of good leg spinners qadir is the name u alwaz think of..comparing them may not ba good idea as conditions r not the same...but yes the era in which qadir professed was a difficult one and his team too...

Kamran - you have asked for it this time. Qadir 200 odd wickets - Warnie 700+ wickets - says it all. Regards

I dont agree with you Mr. Kamran i think warne is the great bowler than the A.Q becuase he bowled to the batsmen who are ruthless when hitting the bowlers he bowled to the Great Brian Lara the best batsman the world has ever seen of course after Sir Don Bradman. Warne has the wickets to prove himslef great and they tell the story of the champion bowler.

Its all good and makes sense, but there's no denying that Qadir or any other Pakistani spinner has not done it over a good period of time and everywhere in the world. Qadir in fact has the highest tally for a Pakistani spinner: 237. Now compare that to 708!

It is utterly stupid to go back into the past, pull out a historical figure and make an absurd comparison to someone part of this current generation. I'd say most of us viewers and participants of this blog do not know what Qadir achieved during his day, or at least how he did it. However, we CAN say that we know plenty more about Warnie mostly because we have grown up, watching him terrorise batsmen of all categories and countries. This still doesn't make much sense but all I mean to say is that they both excelled in their respective duties at the time that they were playing. It is mind boggling and pointless to claim that some players were less "fortunate" than others due to the riches and laurels of their country. Oh well. Can't win em all, can we?

Skillwise qadir was a far batter bowler than warne . a true Artist .certain attributes do not have backing of statistics.like some people belives that ponsford was batter than sir don. so yes i watched both qadir and warne and i think in more areas qadir was batter than warne.

Khalid Zafar: I'm not sure why you wanted to know but the answer to your question, who was the mentor to Shane Warne is: Terry Jenner

Raj, it's a bit off the topic but I just have to make a response to your comment about Australians not respecting "foreigners". There is not a single Australian cricket fan that has anything but the highest respect for VVS Laxman. This man has made 3 - yes 3 triple century partnerships against the best attack in the world all within the period 2001-04. I would like to know any other player that has done that against Australia. Can any other blogger think of one ? Can't wait for him to come back down under next summer.

Dear Writer.....All I can say that this is the height of stupidity. Most the reasons that you have presented above are groundless. I have seen Qadir bowling, he was superb but Warne is a legend and you cannot compare them. Warne has performed consistently for such a longer period of time and has got 708 wickets. It is not easy to get this many wickets when you are playing among the bowlers like McGrath, Gillespie and other Australian bowlers. Nobody can can near his status except Murlitaran. I am talking about facts man.

When I first saw Kamran's headline that Abdul Qadir was better than Shane Warne I thought, "Oh, that's a typically bised view from a Pakistani".

However, when I read through his reasons, I realised Kamran might have a point.

Let me say that not all Aussies are blind to the abilities of others. Unfortunately, we might be the Americans of Cricket in our insensitivity to others, but it's not widespread.....at least I hope not yet!

Is Abdul really better than Warne? I don't really know. Even in Australia, the more discerning Cricket followers wonder if Warne is better than the legends of the 1930s - Clarrie Grimmett & Bill O'Reilly - let alone a leg spinner from another country.

Statistically, Warne is the best, but stats only act as a guide, & are not final by themselves.

Warne's blindspot is his failures in India, while his overall record against India is poor. May I say respectfully that the indians play legspin better than anybody, & Warne failed the test against their great batsmen. Salim Malik of Pakistan also handled him quite well.

Abdul may have had more variety, & perhaps even spun the ball more prodigiously, but Warne possessed wonderful control for a difficult art. His unerring control & accuracy set him apart from other leggies. And he out-thought most batsmen.

I remember watching Abdul in Australia in 1983-84. He strugggled in a struggling team, taking 13 wickets in 5 tests for 40-odd runs per wicket.

He bowled with great heart, skill & variety, but lacked control & support from other bowlers. Remember, Imran Khan only played the last 2 tests of this series because of injury, & didn't bowl at all.

With all players, there are many facets that make up their profile. Abdul may have had more variety & spun the ball more, but Warne had supreme control of line & length, & bowled smarter.

As for playing in a stronger team, well that's Warne's good luck. Besides, if Abdul often played in a weak team, then like M.Muralitharan & R.Hadlee, he should have taken more wickets considering there was less competition from team-mates to take wickets in each test.

The argument will go on, but suffice to say, both Warne & Abdul are great legspinners. And we were blest to be presented with them both.

I think that Warne took up the mantle from Qadir, however I think that Qadir was a greater master of the variety and artistry of lefg spin. If we look at both of these bowlers experiences bowling to the best batsmen of their times, I remember Qadir tying Viv Richards into knots and becalming him, not an easy thing to do!He could bowl a perfectly pitched googly first up. Warne on the other hand has done marvellously weel against most batsmen, but Lara and Tendulkar have also slain him. I have seen bothhand I think thatWarne had the better temperement, but Quadir is the greater artist.

Warne is the best spin bowler in the history of the game. He has taken most of his wickets in Australia on pitches that were often not condusive to spin. The write of this blog is on drugs as Qadir is not in the same league. Will be very sad to see Warne's record go to Murali as he is a chucker - I don't care what tests he has to show that he can't straighten his arm but I liken his action to flicking a yo-you out of the back of your hand. He will never be regarded as the best spin bowler even if he takes 1000 wickets

whatever reasons you had are good but let me tell you for the sheer longevity of his career and the number of wickets that warne took he is a better bowler...anyways lets not get into it further because comparing qadir to warne is just like comparing sachin to sunny..not fair to any of the two greats

Has anybody heard of Subash Gupte? He was the best.

In the current climate of cricket, there are many performance enhancers but the Qadir and Imran days, everything was as you saw and nothing to do with performance enhancers. Its has to be highlighted that Mr Warne did have a career which included drug and match fixing claims. Mr Qadir was 'black and white' and without the facilities being offered in the 2006 to the sportsman and he achieved amazing results . . . .

There is a very easy way to settle this argument in your mind - select a spinner for an 'all-time great' test team. Do you choose a man who got all his wickets on friendly pitches at home, with even friendlier umpires, or a man who can take them anywhere on any pitch? 700 wickets speaks for itself.

Warney was never the same after surgery, how does his stats pre-surgery compare post ?

Kamran is right.The above points which Kamran gave in favour of Qadir is apt and appropriate.Again,Qadir was not blessed with the 3rd eye for the stumpings.Qadir turned the ball muchmore than warne and his googlies and flippers were much,much,more dangerous than warne.Qadir is the true spin wizard.

Test Career Bowling - Most Wickets

Based on all matches up to and including
Test # 1826: Australia v England at Sydney, 5th Test, 02/01/2007

Name Mat Balls M R W Ave Best 5 10 SR Econ Team

SK Warne 145 40705 1761 17995 708 25.41 8-71 37 10 57.4 2.65 AUS

BS Chandrasekhar 58 15963 584 7199 242 29.74 8-79 16 2 65.9 2.70 IND

Abdul Qadir 67 17126 608 7742 236 32.80 9-56 15 5 72.5 2.71 PAK

Que?

The record speaks for itself. More tests, more wickets, better average. And Chandra didn't do too badly either.

Warne by a mile

I think you are missing the point. The point is that nobody should care. To compare Warne, and Murali, and Qadir... it's just a waste of time and space. It achieves nothing. Kamran, you are doing your job so keep at it, but stop writing drivel like this and do your job better. Everyone else, get back to doing something productive, the world is waiting for you.

we can compare saqlain VS Muralithran but we cant compare warn and Qadir nor we should.
Can now we peoples start comparing Saqlain vs Murali rather then wasting time on warn and qadir.
now lets start with my words that saqlain is better bowler then Murali if he has been playing regularly he might have way past 700 mile stone before warne.

My comments are to all AUSTRALIANS.

Shane Warne is a kind of Bowler, who is not able to get as many wickets with his spin, but he gets more wickets using WRONG LANGUAGE with the Batsmen.

My top legspinner of all time is M. Atherton.

well, S.Fleming plays a better on-drive than Lara, so does that make him a better batsman? Atapattu might have more strokes in the book than Javed Miandad but everyone knows who the better batsman is. Doesnt Miandad's street smartness, audacity, out-thinking bowlers mean anything? Skills are not the measure Kamran, its how well you utilise them. Mr. Abbasi, you must have expected such hateful tirade and something tells me that your intention was also precisely that.

Now I am a massive Pakistan fan so I am very very biased. But not in my wildest dream would I ever dare to suggest that Qadir was a better bowler than Warne. There is no comparison whatsoever. Yes Qadir was brilliant but no, sorry, no room for what Qadir might have done. Warne has done it so he is a better bowler in my book.

Perhaps we should ask Mike Gatting, or Shakoor Rana? Both played a role in the success of Qadir. Can the statisticians credit an umpire with an 'assist' as we now see with runouts? Qadir was a very good bowler, but to compare him to Warne is ridiculous. You need to consider achievements and longevity as a benchmark also. Only one winner there.

its really difficult for me to see how one can compare two different eras...For example..
Ponting cant be compared with the Don..
Ponting has played more test matches the Bradman..and new equipment(helmets,bats etc)have really changed the balance..things are now little more in favour of the batsman

well well.. i have read all the comments, if u compare Warne with Saqlain Mushtaq as a bowler, i am sure most of you would agree with me that Saqlain was much better but PCB stopped him to do much better..... But as this is the comparison between two leg spinners, both are great heros of their time. When it was Qadirs' era, he was on the top.. this is Warne era, now he is on the top.

Qadir versus Warne is a dilemma. Dilemmas by definition are unanswerable, but they sustain interest, often forever. Kamran makes some excellent points in favor of Qadir. I would humbly submit that one way to approach the comparison is through the experiment of placing Qadir in the modern Australian team and imagining how he would have performed. The outcome of this experiment, at least in my mind, is that Warne would still have done better than Qadir. But you also then need to do the complementary experiment, i.e. placing Warne in the Pakistan team of the 1980s. The outcome of this particular experiment is Qadir emerging better than Warne. By a distance. Which experiment do you go with? No one can say. The dilemma persists. (That's why it's a dilemma.)

Qadir was good, the best of his times, but i donmt think theres any comparison. After all 700 plus wickets is no joke. Warne is a great and theres no doubt. If u want a comparison, make it between Murali and Warne,and i tell u what: Murali is way better. I think Murali is the best of all spinners of all times...

The facts you missed.
1. Qadir played against teams which are far better than Pakistan at his time.
2. Warne played against teams which are far inferior to Australia, and there were not great batsmen played against him. Ofcourse, Lara was there, but he was the bunny of McGrath.
3. Warne has statistical greatness, but no real greatness.
4. For mu knowledge Qadir never took performance enhancement drugs, never cheated and never was the "king of sledgers"

Speaking as someone who earns his living as a sports journalist, it concerns me that some people bring their own bias and predjudice into this debate about comparsions between Warne and Qadir.

Raj, you clearly have a problem with anyone who is a "white" as you call it. This is not about the skills of Warne or Qadir, I think. Your remarks smacks of racism.

You seem to have a complete disregard for the Australian public's, or "yobbos" as you call them, love ofcricket, who I shal;l remind you break attendance records at test matches when most other countries only get a fraction of the crowd through the gates. To suggest Australians don't appreciate the brilliance of a say, Lara or Tendulkar, is laughable.

Why should India be Warne's only measure of success? They haven't been the second best team in the world during his career. Considering their test record outside the sub-continent in the past 20 years, your criteria might suggest they are one of the worst teams in the world during that period.

How also does Warne's recoord against South Africa not count? They have been the second most succesful team in the world during Warne's entire playing career.

Does that mean Murali's a more mediocre bowler because so many of his test wickets have come against Bangladesh and India, and on home wickets? He has struggled against Australia, especially in Australia.

I think Qadir's test record outside Pakistan, especially away from the sub-continent, was very poor - it was about 50!

However, I still think Qadir was an amazing bowler, who like Warne, revived the art of legspin bowling. Warne went one step further - he revolutionised the way cricket is played on so many levels.

And as many people on his blog site have pointed out, why does Warne need a googly if he has half a dozen or so varities of legspinners, an unheard of zooter, a ripper of a flipper and unerring accuracy? I mean Bishen Bedi once defended Anil Kumble over his lack of a big leg break. He said if he keeps hitting the stumps or hitting them on the pads for an lbw because he bowls so straight with the best topspinners in the world, why does he have to turn the ball?

Being a legspinner and have played in the same time and at the same city, lahore, i have watched both abdul qadir and shane very closly. This is not the right time to compare because to pay a tribute to a going legend should not be like that. Qadir had more varieties than shane but the spin,and the nip is the main asset for shane which no other leg spinner has yet. I remember when shane warne came to pakistan first time and Sadiq Mohammad praised a lot about him and he mentioned about qadir that he bowls with all his arms and legs and look at shane how simple is his action and how good is the result. The other thing is Danish is a mixture of Qadir and kumble, so see the result....Crciket world might get another warne may be in next century..thanks

Terry Jenner is Warne's mentor, has been for more than 15 years......Qadir helped him out once. Based on this, Terry Jenner must the greatest spinner the world has ever seen, about a million times over. See the flaw in this argument anyone?

I had the opportunity of watching Qadir live in Chennai in 1987 when Srikkanth murdered him on way to a century on opening day. He was a good spinner and an eccentric man. I doubt if he had a method to his madness, and such eccentric madness tends to be attractive in short periods of time. Thats why he conjures up images of spectacular performances but statistics dont bear out his effectiveness over long periods of time. The art of bowling is a combination of physical, psychological, and technical skills, and Warne has shown better mastery of these skills than most if not all bowlers who have ever played the game. People point out his record against India , but then check out Lillee's record against Pakistan for example. You cant have spectacular results against everyone, every where all the time. Warney is simply the best leg spinner who has ever played the game ( never mind no one can precisely explain what a zooter or a slider are ) and possibly the best bowler.

PPLLL ....KOOOL DOWN...MR kamran has just said that for some reasons he think that qadir was better than warne n for some he is better n for some hes not ...so just give out ur comments ,comparing both of them .

As someone who cannot stand Shane Warne (drugs, Indian bookies, sledging), I must still disagree with Kamran Abbasi. I saw Qadir bowl in both the '82 and '87 series in England, and while he was certainly a fine bowler, he was not in the same league as Warne. I reckon Qadir was about as good as Mushtaq Ahmed.

As great a bowler Abdul Qadir was, he is not as great as Shane Warne. For statistics minded people, you cannot term a bowler who has 236 wickets in 67 matches GREATER than a bowler who has lasted a little over twice the number of the matches and taken a tad less 3 times the number of wickets Qadir has. And Warne was the greatest not just because the number of wickets he has taken, but for the number of matches he has turned from hopeless situation into victory - Adleaide 2006, was the most recent example. And the fact that he made a great comeback after his drug ban and bowled better than ever before, is just one indication of greatness.

#1. Warne NEVER had a google?. You must be joking. And exactly HOW MANY kinds of googlies a bowler can bowl?
#2. You can consider the umpire's decision making when you are saying a bowler is greater than the 'greatest'. Should you?

#3. What else do you need on the field when you have the backing of a captain as great and powerful than Imran Khan? Who cares about the board anyway on the field?

#4. In more sense than one, playing for a weaker team should bring the best out of a player. Sachin was the greatest in the 90s when India was a one-batsman wonder. However, when India has so many great batsmen in this century, Sachin is no longer the Sachin of old. In that regard, Warne should be complimented for holding his own amongst the other great bowlers he has bowled with.

#5. Warne has in fact bowled to some of the greatest batsman of our era - Lara, Sachin, Kallis, Gary Kirsten, Jayasuriya..and he has come up trumps against them.

$6. This is a valid point, though whenever he had bowl with a low score on board, Warne has delivered, especially in the second innings.

#7. From when did Sarfraz Nawaz become cannon fodder.

#8. Agreed that media coverage is more prevalent now. But how does that take a sheen out of Warne's greatness? Aren't the ex-players (many of them greats) part of this media? So, are you saying that these greats do not have a sense of what they are saying?

#9. How can you hold a comment of a Wisden Almanack editor as a reason for saying that a bowler is greater than the greatest? This is absurd.

#10. Gooch's comment can be valid. However, he was just talking about that one match in Lahore and not the 700 odd wickets over 140 matches.

Your last statement should read, 'Thank you Abdul, but Warne, you are the greatest', not 'Thank you Shane but let's not forget Abdul the Googly.'

read this: Cricket has Abdul Qadir to thank for keeping wrist-spin alive through the darkest years of the late 1970s and '80s. He did it with style, too. Blessed with a fast bowler's temperament and fire, he surrounded his craft with mystique, and after his retirement cultivated the long hair and looks of a rock star. 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. Graham Gooch, who faced him that day, said Qadir was even finer than Shane Warne, to whom he passed on the candle.

If Qadir was superior why did he not last long and take 600+ wickets. That shows Warne can whack Qadir.

i totally agree that abdul was a better leggie than warne.As of all the points noted abdul did not have the support of the press as shane has.So his work and skills were known only to the subcontininent plays and cricket enthusiasts.

well i do agree with most of the things tht kamran have said. but no matter wht happens shane is outstanding. to get so many wickets is not easy. also as v can see now most of the pitches r batsmen favoured or the semers favoured pitces rathen than a spin favourable pitch.

Warney has had a greater influence on the game than any other spinner ever. The only blot in his illustrious career is his failure against India.

I dont think we can compare them. Qadir did have some success against the west indies in his time but Warne too has had alot of success against pakistan and srilanka so you cant compare them. The conditions today are far more in favor of the batmsen and warne has picked up 700 wickets in these conditions. Qadir was a great legspinner but I think warne is better. Ive played alot of cricket in pakistan and warne would have picked up alot more wickets if he had played more cricket in the subcontinent.

Listen Faisal, i totally understand what you said; that it's not a good idea comparing two players of different era's but when you talk about the best of all time thats when you gota think about it and compare, right?

Among all these comparisons, there is a big similarity between the two....Both were massacared by SAchin Tendulkar every time they met.

I remember once Mushtaq Ahmed bowled kilometers outside leg stump and bowled the right handed batsmen around his legs hitting the off stump. All the commentator had to say was " Nice one, Bowled". The same kind of delivery to Gatting by Warney was dubbed as the "Ball of the century".

Warney has always been and will be my favourite cricketer, but most of his wickets were against English team, who are spin bunnies. He was also helped by a strong Australian bowling and batting line up. In addition to that, he would put constant pressure on the umpires without being noticed.

Needless to mention if wickets are to judge the best bowler then I believe Murlitharan will be the best ever.

I have to agree with the writer. I know where he is coming from. The reason Abdul Qadir is branded better than Warney is because he transformed spin bowling at a time when cricket was dominated by fast bowlers.

Cant really say Qair was better- points 4,5,6 & 7 dont make sense..a good bowler is a good bowler regardless of who he bowls against or which country he plays for...also remember, Qadir played many of his matches on Pakistani wickets, suited for his type of bowling, while Warne has toiled away on wickets that simply do not turn as much. Qadir's reliance on spinning wickets is brought by one fact- he averages 26.82 at home, and 47.58 abroad.

I would say this discussion is good only for discussion purposes. The points raised by Kamran have some weight but for it is still difficult to imagine Qadir was greater bowler than Warne. In fact, this makes me more sense that it is difficult to compare and any such ranking would be flawed. There are not the only spinners in the world. There were Richie Benud, Chandershaker and some others in the past. In the present era there are Anil Kumble, Mushtaq Ahmed, Danish Kaneria and MacGill. Each one of them have their plus point which makes the comparison difficult. The thing which goes in the favor of Abdul Qadir is that he started in an era when legspin was a forgotten art. To have legspinner in the team was considered a luxury than the weapon. Abdul did pioneer that trend and he could be particularly regarded as the pioneer of wicket taking spinners in ODI's (his performance in 1983 world cup). Warne on the other hand did inherit such tradition and by the time legspin art was more recognizeable among the umpires. However sheer logevity of his career, number of wickets, better strike rate and bowling average makes him the the greatest legspin bowler. Any comparison made remains on a 'what if' exercise.

We can all speculate with ifs and buts but in the end 700 wickets is a stat that stands out.We can even speculate Kaneria will be a better bowler than Warne because he took his first 50 wickets faster than Warnie but i think give the great SK Warne the credit he deserves..

p.s-Kamran you are becoming disappointing

Just one point .

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.

I find this quite hillarious, if anything the contrary is the truth - the bulk of Qadir's wickets were taken at home, with Pakistani umpires literally raising their fingers at even the slightest appeal by Imran or Qadir.

And there's no better example of this that the Pak V Wi test in 89, where WI were dismissed for 53 -- if anyone has the match, look at each dismissal carefully and you will see how blatantly Qadir was benefiting from local umpires..

Lets accept the reality .. Qadir might have been gifted, perhaps as gifted or even more so than Warne.. but he DID NOT have the same discipline, control over line and length, sheer competitiveness of Warne.

Good Comparison and nice article..
But would have been better with a photo of Qadir. Who is he?

Agree: Qadir was one of the greatest bowlers of his time, but he cud not survive for a long period probably bcs he was not fit enough, physically or politically as the case may be. But Warne is miles ahead of him. Imagine if he had played that one whole year he lost to being banned, he wud have touched even 800 wkts. His biggest pressure point was his SMARTEST BOARD BEHIND HIM. Australian Boards is well known for kicking out a non performer faster than any other contemporary boards. That, in fact, made Warne's job more demanding than that of Qadir in his days, when as you mentioned, the Pakistan board had less choices. Your opinion is very much your own but I find myself among the lot disagreeing with you. Anyway it was an interesting point you raised as apparant by the million comments it attracted. Keep writing.....

Also, let's not forget most of Warne's wickets are against countries that are not traditionally good players of spin, i.e. England, Windies and to some extent Pakistan. His record against the Indians, particularly in India is nothing to write home about. I would rate Qadir the best and it’s about time folks in the white countries, stop the labeling Warne as somebody who revived lepspin, when Qadir had quite conspicuously and ably done so some decade and a half before Warne.

shane warne is one of the greatest bowlers of all times, no doubt. i had always heard that abdul qadir was a better leg spinner. but we cannot compate them because they were in different eras and in the 80's they played a lot fewer tests than now. batsmen were better of that era but none of these spinner ever troubled indian batsmen. i mean nowadays a bowler like anil kumble can get wickets in 500s where he does not belong because he is not a leg spinner. batsmen are conned into giving wickets to bowler like anil because they think he is a leg spinner, but he only bowls medium pace with a googly after sometime.

The best spinner is Anil Kumble. he has done so much without spinning the ball, imagine what he would had done if his balls actually turned!!!!!!

I think Kamran has gone a bit on the far side on this one. I am no great fan of Warne, but he did produce results. His team did well, he took wickets, and most of all, he was an effective bowler on all playing surfaces the world could produce for cricket, with all manner of umpires the world of cricket could present, and against all manner of opposition in any form of the game. Now that speaks on its own.

can someone more informed than me explain what was the political brawling that apparently prevented saqlain musthaq from playing longer for pakistan?

??? Please!!! Says something that warne didn't need a wrong-un!

warnie 706 wickets that too against the likes of brian lara, sachin tendulkar, inzy, yousaf, kallis , vaughn and with neutral umpires and 236 for qadir i wonder howcome a comparison could be tailored

Warne is the greatest leggie ever. He operated with neutral umpires. His stats does all the talking. BTW, both B.S. Chandrashekhar and Subash Gupte had much better figures that Quadir did (higher wickets/per test ratio than Quadir).
Gary Sobers held both Chandra and Gupte in extremely high regard.
What is the highest ICC rating scores for these different spinners? I bet Warne has the highest score for leggies.

No one can judge any bowler better than umpires in the field(as far as my point of view is concerned) and Dicky Bird (The Legendary Umpire) has preferred Abdul Qadir over Shane Warne in his biography when he was selecting Worlds Best Eleven(11). So I think that Abdul Qadir deserves more respect than Mr.Andrew Johnson has expressed in his views. There is no question about Shane Warne's ability and quality (stats are enough proof for this) but he only shaped the design of legspinners(and he did it splendidly) which Abdul Qadir left in his legacy.

Warne and Qadir were the finest exponents of leg spin in their respctive eras. No doubt about it. Shane Warne is perhaps the most intimidating spin bowler of all time. The reasons for this may be many. He belonged to one of the greatest teams ever, always had 3 very fine pace bowlers to back him up and usually had runs to play with...

However, he did the job. Its difficult to say a guy with 236 wickets is greater than someone with 700 wickets.

Shane Warne is a legend. Murali will probably be the best ever. He is as much a chucker as Warne i a doper(will his performances be discounted for taking performance enhancing drugs?). Warne was proved guilty Murali was proved innocent of chucking.

If the argument is that Warne didnt have the opportunity to take wickets because he was part of a world beating side, then he should have a strike rate superior to murali. He doesnt!

In 2006, Murali single handedly beat England in a test. Warne was part of a world beating side which lost to england. But no blame on him he was the shinning light of the series for australia.

You cant put team success or failure to the individual.

Qadir was awesome, Warne is a legend but Murali is simply the best bowler ever, day in day out!

Well John...
The numbers you have provided of Akram and McGrath don't really prove your point. Akram played 20 or so odd matches less and took less wickets. Yes. But as someone stated earlier, numbers alone don't tell the story. What Akram meant to his team, McGrath could never be of the same worth to his. I love McGrath but i'm sorry he could not be better in his wildest dreams if he were to be compared to Akram.

Great Post. I had the privilege of watching Qadir at his prime and Warne. Warnes record in the asian subcontinent is shocking, in comparison.

no i think it would be very unfair to say that qadir was better than warne, although theres no doubt about qadir being one of the best but he was the not the best! qadir did bowl do one to the finest batsmen, but same can be said about warne, qadir was in a week pakistan team give him that, but warne had always had to fight for his place in the australian team where no one really had a guaranteed spot.
In short warne and qadir were both great great leg spinners two of the, its not very easy to compare both as they both played in different eras and again differnt opponents, it ld be best if we dont compare them at all!

It is interesting to read a different point of view among all the plaudits and flattery placed at Shane Warne's feet/ wrist.

Allowe , if you don't mind the space i am going to take, to quote the greatest allrounder the world has seen, Sir Garry Sobers, on legspin bowling, especially on Warne.

These are fragmnents from his autobiography:

"...Glen Mcgrath, Shane Warne and Jason Gillespie, are rated the most potent in the world, and as a unit they are very effective but individually I believe I played against better. ...to me, (Subhash)Gupte was a better bowler than Shane Warne. One reason is that Gupte had a far greaster variety, and his disguised googly was far better than Warne's. Warne is a big spinner of the ball and not many turn it that far though another Australian, Stuart McGill, seems to be abvle to..." (G. Sobers,2002: p.257-258)

Sir Garrygoes on to elaborate on the so-called "ball of the century" that dismissed Mike Gatting and states as only Sir Garry Sobers can, thus: "One ball doesn't make you king and this dismissal was as much Gatting's fault as it was Warne's ability." (G.Sobers, 2002: p.258)

Sir Garry says why he thinks Subhas Gupte was greater than Warne:

" Gupte was always on the spot, bowled a good googly and a good legbreak and had some of the best batsmen in the world confused. The Weekes, Worrells and Walcotts made runs against him but he also ghad them in trouble. Wickets in the West Indies were very good in those days, and spinners found them difficult, but Gupte came to the Carribbean and took 27 wickets in the 1952 series. He didn't play a lot of Test cricket but he took a lot of good wickets. He was so accurate, varied the flight and pushed it through, and he could bowl two different googlies. You had to watch him carefully to play him because of his wide variety.

"Warne, by contrast is a lot flatter. He bowls the flipper well and as I've said, his googly has improved. As far as I am convcerned, great legbreak bowlers don't bowl round the wicket, which he did a lot in his early days..." (G. Sobers, 2002: p.259)

i don't think he had seen much of Abdul Qadir as there are no remarks in the autobiography, but i think you have raised a relevant question amidst adulations being heaped on Shane Warne on his retirement.

Had Subhash Gupte and Abdul Qadir been Austraians or British wouldn't their genius be seen/ praised in better light?

Shane Warne, i think is part myth and part legend. Both, created by the market savvy media managers who found him to be a goose that laifd the golden egg.

Shane Warne was perhaps a great spinner of his generation, but certainly not "the" greatest, and never the "greatest ever".

Nevertheless, we celebrated him and we will celebrate him. He made cricket interesting.

This is all bias comments. I would like to see how Kamran comment on Imran Khan and Waseem Ikram on the same context.

The technical aspect of the game changed over the time. Both are true greate bowler in their time.

I completely agree with your views.
I am shocked to see how some of you are struggling to accept that Qadir was much better than Warne. Is it only because Qadir was a Pakistani ? or an Asian?
Its just that Warne's achievements were always blown out of proportions because he was white and of course an Aussie.
People have come up with weird excuses in their comments to prove that Warne was better e.g. someone has had the nerves to comment about home upmiring? how sorry is that? how much more stupid can people become?
Qadir was an absolute magician with the ball and if anyone wants to talk about unfair advantage how about Warne's drug abuse?? the minimum punishment for which is 2 years but Warne only got 1 year?? None of the white boys can explain why that happened!!! So if you look at it pragmatically Warnes last 150 wickets should not even be counted because technically he should not have been playing cricket during the last 2 years of his career.
Warne was a mediocre bowler and much of his success was due to sledging by the fielder around the batsman and not his bowling skills. He was a controversial and least respected player amongst international cricketers. He admitted involvement in drugs abuse, match fixing, sex scandals etc. etc. If anything I would only consider him exceptionally lucky. Bear in mind that Murali will break his record in 2007-08, and btw Murali is an Asian tooo !!

That is one of the most strange cricketing articles i have ever read.A.Qadir was a great bolwer but S.Warne is the greatest leg-spinner ever.If Qadir handled the best batting line-up of his time then Warne countered Tendulkar,Lara,Inzamam,Kirsten,Dravid and Kallis in their primes.And that speaks for itself too besides a huge pile of 700 wickets.Qadir is no way near Warne.

i probably agree with that qadir could probably bowl better googly than warne (just like mushtaq) but warne certainly was a better leggie because he had flippers etc and his normal legspinners were better than qadir.

i think qadir failed against indian batsmen and more badly than warne. there was an incidence when he was bowling against india in a test and the non striker was shouting googly everytime he tried to bowl one. so qadir's main weapon was exposed blatantly.

700 wickets are hell of a number, no argument who is great, who is better, who is smarter, who faced difficulties, no match of warne, oh man he got highest ever wickets, he is 1st man on earth to get this acheivement, Abdul Qadir was great bowler,Quadir is the greater artist of spin bowling, may be inventor of some good spin varities but cant compare him with warne, cant compare a man who is only 1 in this world with his records. Attitude is another unique aspect of warne to debate.

What the hell's wrong with you people? If you can find this blog, you can surely find Cricinfo's StatsGuru! Spend ten minutes analysing Warne and Qadir's respective careers and save yourselves a lot of embarassment! Who was the best? Who cares?
Who was the most successful? Warne, by any objective analysis! And how does Tokeer know Qadir and Imran didn't use drugs? In those days they weren't even tested for, so players could have used anything!
Oh, and by the way that great Pakistani writer Kamran was better than Shakespeare!

Look one could even argue mushtaq ahmed was in this lot..if he wasnt a victim of pcb politics...but the question is IF...Qadir was undoubtedly the father of spin...he perfected the art...but he wasnt the most successfull..700 wickets is no childs play..The fact of the matter is you simply cannot compare a champion from one era to tht of another...i mean it wud be like saying whose better sunil gavaskar or tendulker...u simply cannot decide

Warne was more menacing than Qadir, no doubts on that. But neither Warne nor Qadir had the deception of Mushy. The Warne of mid-90's was unplayable because he could turn the ball a mile, but if deception with a googly is the criteria, then Mushy takes the cake, nearly 400 wickets in 4 county seasons should count for something.

Lets make myself clear: Warne's the best there is.
Comparing players of different era is not fair. And its completely rubbish when some of you had said that modern batsmen are not equipped with as good technique as their predecessors.
Qadir was a great bowler and everybody respects him but Warne is the greatest. Thats the end of that.

Even though I am from Pakistan and have seen Qadir bowl (a wonderful bowler indeed), I feel it is extremely unfair on the part of Kamran to call him a better leg spinner than Warne.
Shane Warne may not have had the best Googly, but he certainly had the best leg spin and flipper and the fact that he played more than 140 tests spanning more than a decade and a half, and on the way picking up a 'meager' 700 odd wickets is testimony of his greatness. These days every team with the help of technology and technical experts analyses the strengths and weaknesses of every bowler and batsmen. Based on these analyses, they come up with ways to counter the threat of the bowler’s weapons (may it be line and length, swing, the doosra, googly or leg spin). None of these has worked against Warne simply for the reason that he was the master of his art and kept improving all the time. The reason why I (and millions of other like myself) started enjoying watching spin bowling was because of Shane Warne. He has bamboozled batsmen from nearly all countries and his failures as a bowler have been close to non existent. He has risen to every occasion all across the world and his performances bear testimony to that fact. Just one unsuccessful tour to India does not make him any less a bowler.
The fact that Warne played for the greatest team of his era whereas Qadir didn’t has absolutely no justification. Qadir may have had a big role in making Pakistan one of the best teams of his times, but it is no hidden secret that getting to the top isn’t as difficult as staying there is. Once Australia reached the top of the cricketing world by beating the West Indies they have never looked back. It has been more than a decade since they’ve been there and no one has ever come close to replacing them as the premier team in the world. In fact the gap between the best and the rest has only grown wider. Just the fact that Australia hasn’t even played a single day’s cricket after Warne’s retirement and there is already talk of whether Australia will be able to survive his absence says a lot about what Shane Warne was to the Australian team and cricket in general.
Granted that the media has played its part in enhancing Warne’s image as a spinner, but it would be nothing short of foolish to call it as undeserved praise or bias from the English or Aussie media.
In the latter half of his career Warne has bowled in an era where pitches and conditions [including neutral umpires] have favored batsmen. Just take a look at some of the batting averages and the highly gloated figures do not do justice to some of the batting greats of the past who had to encounter tougher conditions and sometimes extremely biased umpiring [of which Qadir has been the beneficiary as well]. Warne's performance during the second half of his career on batting paradises and in the presence of neutral umpires have been as good if not better than those of his initial part of his career. Therefore keeping all these things in mind I believe it is fairly safe to say that Shane Warne is the greatest leg spinner to have played the game.
Qadir may have revived the art of leg spin but Warne perfected it!

You said it all and this can only be said by someone who has had the opportunity to witness both of these bowlers’ entire careers. Furthermore, this can come from someone who has studied the temperaments and attitudes of the players, individuals planning and running the cricket establishments and the mindset of the nations.

There is absolutely no comparison. Qadir took more than 80% of his wickets on doctored Pakistani wickets with the help of inept (not biased) Pakistani umpires. He failed miserably whenever he played outside Pakistan, be it India, England, Australia, New Zealand, or West Indies.

Well, whatever the comments, opinions and strength of feeling, I simply commend you Kamran for stirring up a proper vipers nest. Well done. 300+ comments on one topic is one hell of an effort.

I think Subhash Gupte and Chandra were far better than either of Warne or Qadir, and Kumble is right now. They were all vastly underrated. My English friend here feels that Ian Salisbury is the best legspinner. Both these opinions are completely unbiased and have nothing to do with our national affiliations.

THOSE PEOPLE who are criticizing Kamran Abbassi and badmouthing against him and saying he made "a weird, stupid and the most ridiculous comparison between Shane Warne and Abdul Qadir", MUST go to Bob's World and write something in favour of Shane Warne. After all Bob Woolmer wrote a lot in praise of Shane Warne and for the last 17 days no one wrote a single post in Bob's blog :-). Whereas, here you have 300 plus posts in just 24 hours, isn't it interesting? And some guys have the audacity and cheekiness to call Kamran with names, racist slurs and rude comments towards him, as if he has committed a crime or a sin by comparing the two leg spinners?

No one is forcing anyone to read this blog and there is no compulsion on your part to reply if you think this is all trash and rubbish and Kamran must be on dope when he wrote, and he is stupid and lost his credibility etc. PLEASE GO to Bob's World and favour Bobby and Warney and write a nice poem in his greatness and about his "legendary Zooter." OR a book that Shane Warne was not only a great bowler, but a "humble intimidator", who mastered the art of intimidating the umpires and getting decisions in his favour. During the recent Boxing Day match he made a vociferous appeal for an LBW like this ....... Haaaaaaaaaaa, Haaaaaaaaaa, Haaaaaaaaaa and then he stared in to umpire Alim Daar's eyes for a few seconds and said "HUH" !!!!! That was not the end he went on talking to the umpire about why he did not give the decision in his favour? Alim Daar was definitely seen under pressure. If it was Steve Bucknor, he would have given him a warning or reported it to the match referee. Thats why the Australians hate Steve Bucknor.

Warne is over rated. I mean just let ricky pointing and mike hussey face him. Warne will get hammered.

P.S. Even Pieterson hammered him in the Ashes series.

The difference between Warne and Qadir is similar to differences between Akram and Mcgrath.
Consider this for most of his career Mcgrath could have bowled faster but he didnt. I remember his swinging the ball in mid 90's but he did use it. Reason is that he did want to go for that extra run that might result incase the bowl didnt swing. Same is with Warne infact this is the way aussies think.
They are perfectionists, Pakistanis are different they might go for 6 an over just looking for that unplayable and unbelievabe amount of swing or speed or turn.
The fact is that Warne didnt use his variations much and only cricket is the looser here. Qadir had a heart of a lion and you would see him throw everything at the batsman.
This is the basic difference If aussies dont agree well then thats just the way it is.
I would prefer watching a Waqar Younis than mcgrath any day of the week because I want to see someone taking chances.
Qadir had everything in his armoury maybe warne did too. But one was afraid to use it other wasnt.

I agree that Warne is the most over-rated bowler in the history of the game. God knows what would have happended if the spinners from other era had bowled against the current crop of ordinary batsmen around the world. Spinners like Bedi, Chandra, Prasanna, Gibbs, Underwood, Qadir are way ahead of Warne when it comes to abililty and talent. Warne was basically a negative bowler who benefited from ordinary batsmanship when he played. Secondly, How he got away with sledging and for bringing the game to disrepute the most, is beyond me.

I feel it's important that people leave race out of it in this debate..

Murali is undoubtedbly the greastest spin bowler of all time. Murali has the better average, strike rate and economy and more 5 wicket hauls Murali -- the greatest bowler ever to walk the earth!!!!

It is sad that most of the white umpires supported warne not murali.

Why, Kamran? Why did you even write this nonsense? I've always respected your views till now. But this article reeks of, I am sorry to say, bias and an obvious ignorance of statistical facts staring right at your face. Qadir's record in a less- batsman friendly era was good. Wareney's in this age 50+ average batsmen is phenomenal. And compare their oversees record and see how Qadir was the one who benefited from incompetent umpires in his country. I am disappointed with you.

Warne and Qadir both have one thing in common, they both got plastered by tendulkar. Back in 1989 India tour of Pakistan, Qadir had made some disparaging comments to a 17yr old batsman, and how long he would stay at the crease. After the plastering he got, he was dropped. :)

and of course, everyone knows about warne and his nightmares :)... so I guess one is no greater than the other :).

The best way to know how great a player is by finding out how many matches he has won and I bet no man can challenge Warne at that. Mr Author name me another player who has won more matches from hopeless situations than Warne has. The author says Australia have been the no 1 team for a large part of Warnes career but the reason why they are no 1 is Warne. It is widely said that Warne didnt bowl well in India but I would like to point out that Warne had lost a lot to his surgery and only in the last series did he get a decent chance to bowl at the Indians and he fared well though he missed out the Mumbai test (in which Michael Clarke ended with more than 5 wickets in an innings) otherwise the no of wickets against the Indians would have been a lot more. Now coming to the point of Asian and non Asian Mr Author Sachin Tendulkar, Wasim Akram, Imran Khan, Sunil Gavaskar they are all great wherever you go and the commentators praise them if not more than but as much as they praise Warne, McGrath, Ponting etc. Qadir was great, Murali may collect more wickets he too is great but lets accept it Warne is the greatest.

Can't believe you haven't included Charlie Grimmett. His record is second to none.

The best exponent of the googlie wash Mmd Mustaq, who bowled then continuously.

You neglected one very important point, warne was an agressive wrist spinner, able to take 5 fors on the first day. He changed the way the game is played, Qadir never did this.

Qadir had more googlies, warne had drift and fizz to the leg.

your argument overall is irrelevant, they are all very good bowlers, perhaps their influence on cricket is a better measure of greatness

well .....if qadir was still playin then he might have got more wickts than warne .....but i think that if u compare bowlers who got more wickets then u should be comparing wasim n waqar with warne ...

As an Australian with a particularly soft spot for Pakistan, and the geo-political difficulties courageously faced by that nation, I immediately state that these are profoundly learned, insightful and illuminating comments of Dr Abbasi, master of medicine. But they fail to take into account just one factor, which I unfortunately view as determinative.

Hair is what I speak of, both as it concerns the face and also the scalp (and particularly the scalp). I do not refer to the umpire, of course.

We should all confine ourselves to our areas of expertise and competency. For this reason, much ink would not have been so wastefully spilt had the originator of this delightful (but over-extended) thread confined himself to the medical merits of hair transplants.

Shane has sunk to new lows with his promotion of transplants and his vain attempt to capture the long-gone virility of his twenties. Abdul, of course, was more richly gifted in that field (I speak of hair, not necessarily virility), with his match-winning and crowd-pleasing coiffure.

Hair is more relevant than one may first think, particularly when one dispassionately and scientifically anslyses the suggested possible deep-rooted psychiatric causes of excessive appealing (eg, unresolved internal conflict and frustration, possibly of a sexual nature). Had the initial comments focused on this, we would all have quite correctly concentrated on such key issues as ball-tampering, who turned his balls the most prodigiously and, of course, who had the bigger balls in the games that counted most.

dudes
.
when warne came to pakistan he went to see Abdul Qadir in his home town for tips.Does this ring any bells????

Well, at the end of the day I say, "greatest happiness for the greatest number".

Records are beleived to echo a player's performances and abilities and Warney is definitely the king at the moment.

Both Warne and Qadir have ordinary record against India, who are the best against spin bowling. Warne has more wickets, better average and strike rate than Qadir. On the other hand, Prasanna was the greatest leg spinner of his era. So, it's not easy to compare players of different era.

I can't believe so many people are wasting time commenting on this... Different players, different eras, different and very significant contributions. Right now is no time to compare b/w the two.

It was Abdul Qadir & NOT Shane Warne who kept the wrist spinning alive. It is a shame that the caucasians hate to admit the facts.

I think what kamran says is correct. In my opinion, Kaneria is a good prospect and has the potential to be quadir's replacement. Let us see how his career unfolds and what recognition he gets.

Its not about how many records you break or how many wickets you take. Leg spin is an art that was brought into light by Qadir. Even though he did not have the opportunity to bowl in the cureent era he mesmerized people with the magic of his fingers. I think warne will also acknowledge the fact that Qadir was the magician and warne learned his magic and used it well.

Kamran this is brilliant .. 300+ comments, half of which contain irate comments from visibly disturbed readers .. oooh the sacred warne has been desecrated by some pakistani punk who thinks Qadir is some medusa! .. most of the 300 posters played right into your hands Kamran .. this article was written to provoke and my word, has it ever! Stroke of genius my man .. the angriest comments seem to be from aussies whose God you have just bashed .. infact if you were in australia right now, you'd be lynched by the public!
All credit to you for approving even the most abusive of posts .. I'll bet these posts made you smile the most :P :)
Anyways on the topic, I think Warne for me is the greatest spinner to have played the game, but not necessarily the best. If that statement sounds contradictory, let me stress that by 'best' i'm talking variety and talent. I'm quite positive from what I recall Qadir had more of both those things though I can't state so for an absolute certainty since I only watched Qadir play for 3 years. But forget the 700 wickets, forget the deadly flipper or the viciously turning leg break .. for me what sets Warne apart, other than his statistical supremacy, is his ability to time and again take crucial wickets in pressure situations. People say Lara or Tendulkar are the best of our generation, I say it was Steve Waugh. Lara blew hot and cold, Tendulkar wilted when the stakes were high. Waugh didn't have Lara's grace or his big scoring ability nor did he have Tendulkar's average. What set him apart was that ability to come good when it mattered most, something that for me typifies true greatness. The same applies to Michael Bevan, who for me is the greatest ODI batsman ahead of Richards, Tendulkar and Jones, for the same reason. Coming back to Warne, a few of his bowling performances that exemplifies his resourcefulness under pressure: Semi final world cup 1996 against the windies, semi final WC 99 against S.Africa and again in the final against Pak (I *shudder* at that painful memory), against Sri Lanka in his first comeback test series after the drugs ban, in this ashes series 2nd test final day .. there are just so many more instances .. the monotonous regularity is quite astounding .. but is it just coincidence that Waugh, Bevan and Warne all happen to be aussie? I cheer on every team that provides even an inkling of a decent performance against ‘those’ aussies in the hope that Australia may be toppled .. I was ecstatic when India beat them in 2001, despite being a Pakistani .. but I grudgingly accept like everyone else that they are by far the best team in the world and for me the main reason for that is not the outstanding individual skill of most of their players or even the exceptional teamwork, it’s the fact that Australia is a pressure team extraordinaire` .. 2 of their finest pressure players, Warne and Langer have retired which might make them a bit vulnerable to collapse (a word not in the dicty for these aussies) but they still have Ponting who himself has played some fabulous innings on big occasions over the last few seasons. Till the rest of the world actually acquires this mental resolve and never-say-die attitude that typifies Warne, Ponting, Gilchrist and company, all the natural talent, variation and the googlies of this world won’t be enough to de-throne them as the world’s finest side. And I say this grudgingly. *sigh*

... and afridi is better batsman than Don. Also Inzimam Ul Haq is far better fielder than Jonty Rhodes. Kamran Abbasi is the best cricket Journalist. Whatever man.

I believe that numbers do tell the truth most of the time. And the fact is that Warne's 708 wickets at 25 average is far superior than Qadir's 236 wickets at 33 avg. Warne also got 5+ wicket hauls more often on average than Qadir. Warne also did better with respect to longevity at the international level. I'd simply say that Warne is better.

God. this has become deperessing. It's like "mine is bigger than yours" plus an enormous amount of national, racial. prejudice. It reminds me of when I was an under 10 kid. My team and its players were the greatest no matter now many times we lost or stuffed up. There is no real point in comparing players of different eras, despite their statistics. It only leads to judgements based on which performances have impreesed one the most, For instance, I still think of Jim Laker as the greatest off-spinner of all time, becuase of the impact his 19 wickets in the 1956 test had on me at the time - I changed from bowling very low standard leggies, to even lower standard offies.
All the bowlers mentioned are great. Let's just enjoy their skills and records without petty prejudices.

I think you can't compare these two legends. We all know that warne is a great legspiner and you cant take away anything from him, but Qadir was one of a kind also. I saw him couple of years ago playing a club match on a cemented track. If anyone of you have played on cemented wicket you should already know that ball does nothing at all. It just skids away with no movement at all and the batsman can hit you through the line all day long. I saw him destroy the other batting side by taking 6 wickets for twenty odd runs while everyone else were strugling.

Abdul Qadir and Shayne Warne did not invent, or even re-invent, the art of leg-spin, neither did Bill O'Reilly or Clarrie Grimmet. Please look up Arthur Mailey, or Bosanquet - the inventor of the googlie-, or several South African.
As for sledging, it goes back to W.G. Grace's times, if not earlier, so let's forget the hypocrisy that cricket is a gentleman's game. The Gentleman were the worst; e.g. W.G and Douglas Jardine and co.

I dont play the comparison game.

I think Kamran intended two things by throwing this.
1. He wanted people to know that Qadir was there once and he was a great bowler, nowhere less than the great Warne
2. He wanted attention, which he did aswell.

I'd like make just one more comment, some one up there said McGrath is a greater bowler than Wasim, thats something I cant take. Sorry! Nope. We were talking about how smart a cricketer is interms of winning and perorming, Wasim performed with the bat, with the ball and he lead the team very well. He stands the one of the best captins ever!

Warne was great, Wasim was the best left arm fast bowler with an awesome unrepeatable action. Lets not play the comparison game.
Cheers.

PS: We dont want to go through the controversies warne has gone through, do we, but we regard him as a great spinner of the ball nothing else. PEACE!

Qadir was a totally different bowler compared to warney!
Warney was always relying on curve, flight and turn...and Qadir usually bowled alot faster and mixed the deliveris up more!
I agree with one comment that Warne had visited Qadir's house to meet him and learn more...my Dad used to work in the Sharjah stadium and Warne has mentioned it himself that he used to watch Qadir bowl to learn from him!
However, Warne has the better record, statistically, which makes him better than Qadir.
But again...they are different bowlers with different styles and shouldnt be compared...simply because they wouldnt have wanted to...
Qadir was better than Hirwani, Gupte and all the other trash lot that bowled during the time that Qadir was playing!!

Crazy arguement, which statistically cannot be proven so can only be won with reducing an entire career to management decisions or comparing batsmen of this time versus batsmen of another time.

One can only bowl to the living of the period in which one plays and to take 700 wickets makes Warne the greatest leg spin bowler ever.

There have been a lot of leggies over the years, some good, some average and some truly awful.

I think that the word great is bandied around too easily, but Warne is undoubtedly a truly great bowler. To compare him with others is to split hairs since he wins hands down. Qadir was a fantastic bowler and for a period was the most devastating leggie in the world, but the greatest, sorry mate, cannot be proven.

That is the beauty of cricket, stats tell the stories at the end of the day.

Interesting to see how people said he was a defensive bowler. To a degree what he did was bowl leggie after leggie on a line of middle and leg. Simple simple stuff. If I could turn it 18 inches on that line, I would bowl it too because it is the hardest line to hit.

What is interesting to see is how the respect for the slog sweep has changed as a legitimate shot in cricket in the last 10 years.

It took international cricketers 10 years to work out that the highest percentage shot against that line is the slog sweep. To play it to long on is suicide and to sweep it behind square very difficult. The old agricultural cow corner slog sweep was the shot all those England players should have been playing just like Pietersen has done in the last two series. If people hadn't talked about playing in the V on TV so often, he might have been far less successful.

Neither Warne nor Qadir is truly great! A leg-spinner has to prove his worth against Indian batsmen. And how well did these 2 guys do against India? Not much to talk about, right?! As for Akram vs. McGrath, no doubt in my mind that Akram is the much superior bowler. Akram had way too many more variations in his bowling armoury and wicket-taking weapons whereas McGrath depended on patience and his patented metronomic accuracy/control. And oh, did I forget the sledging! I'd like to believe that McGrath would be remembered for his rubbish behavior more than anything else. In fact, this Aussie team will only be grudgingly respected, never liked. Every single one of them...EXCEPT that perfect gentleman Gilchrist, the best wicket-keeper batsman in the history of cricket.

Bold Comment, Kamran. But Warney has to be better in an era where Batsmen usually rule the game. Warne's intimidation was lethal and he got em out in the Mind first

The problem is, most of us never saw Qadir bowl that much so the comparison becomes very weak

For me, Greatness = Skills X 2(Attidude). I have watched Qadir in his prime and as far as skill is concerned, he was much superior than Warne. I still remember a series against Sri Lanka where he literally toyed with the batsmen. And Sri Lankans have always been good players of spin. He definitly had greater variety than warne and had many good wins against top batsman of the world. He was nowhere compared to warne in terms of personality and attidude. Warne controls the game, he is a fighter, and a leader. He had an impact on cricket that no one had. So in terms of greatness no comparison.

Wonderfully funny blog.Please follow up with why Kamran Akmal is better than Adam Gilchrist and Umar Gul is better than Glenn Mcgrath.Finally why Imran Farhat is better than Jonty Rhodes.

Ya, I agree with u KAMRAN , ABDUL QADIR is the best of all time.No one has comparision with him. He is the best of all the time. QADIR da GOOGLY

Kamran you may have a point but I can't agree with your timing. It is precious to come out and say Qadir was better than Warne especially now Warne has retired. You seem to be the trying to deflect attention from the exit of a true champion in Warne while thrusting your Pakistani compatriot into the limelight. It just reeks of poor form and you should have wrote this article a long time ago if it was what you truly felt.

Every generation has the right to proclaim it's greatest players but nobody can put the stamp of 'GREATEST OF ALL TIME' on anybody, period. Viv Richards was probably greater than Bradman on sheer ability. Sunny Gavaskar was the most stubborn batsman if you go by his hundreds against the Windies in their prime. Today Ricky Ponting demolishes just about every attack he comes by. Is Ponting greater than Richards and Gavaskar? Is Warne greater than Gupte and Qadir? Would Jesse Owens have run the 100M sprint faster if he had been chasing 9.79s instead of 10s? Does anyone want to get into an arguement with his grandpa over this?
Shane Warne is the greatest legspinner of the current era. Qadir was the best in his time. Bradman was the greatest batsman of his time, Richards of his. To be the greatest of an era is as far as any sportsman can go because A PLAYER CAN ONLY COMPETE AGAINST THE PEERS OF HIS TIME. Shane Warne will never bowl to Viv Richards and Ricky Ponting will never be pitted against Subhash Gupte. Cross-generational debate just doesn't work in sports.

Warnie was the best bowler because he was a "gamebreaker". Everytime Aust couldn't a wicket the ball would get thrown to Warne and he'd get one. Warne could bowl tidily with a new ball, and had 13 or more different deliveries. Who cares if he couldn't bowl a wrong-un, he probably just underused it just like he underused his flipper towards the end of his career.

Why hasn't anyone considered what the majority of players of the present and past say? That's what frustrates me so much about 'journalists' who watch bowlers and presume because they see them more than most that they know who is better. Appearances can be deceiving, so ask the men who face these fearsome bowlers from 22yards and take their word for it.

Firstly Kamran, stop being such a wind-up merchant with your post. Secondly, just admitting that a player other than from a sub-continental team is the best at something, is not such a bad thing. I'm Indian and over the years I've enjoyed seeing the Indians taking Warne to the woodshed, but I can tell you, I was never completely positive it would turn out that way. And that is what it comes down to, Warne was a champion bowler, regardless what team and era he played for, period. Lastly, he is to my mind the biggest turner of the cricket ball, least for a leg spinner, just as Murali is for off-spinners, is it any wonder then that the two biggest "spinners" of the cricket ball are 1 & 2 on the all time list. You can moan about pitches, batsmen, whatever, but you cant argue with stats and with the sheer will of Warne's personality in contributing to his and Australia's sucess.

those who believe that murali is better than warne should look at how the two performed vs the minnow test teams. Murali has around 170 wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe (and he will play Bangladesh this year to fill his boots again). also Warne has had Mcgrath, Gillespie, Lee, McDermott, Macgill, Kasprowicz, Clark among others who have taken wickets away from him...while Vaas is the only other Lankan to get 100 test scalps

Abdul Qadir, now he WAS a bowling legend. Watch some of his footage (as from the comments I assume many have not), and he was clearly the best of all time.

I can state, that spinner wise... Murali beats Warne hands down. Look at the stats.

i liked to Read comments of Aussies, Warne was good and Qadir was the inventor... how better you may be but Mr. Warne you are a copier not inventor... And Aussies sorry Guys .... you are lossers...since you dont have the Courage to face Criticism.... rather you start to Critisize the Aurthor.. Come on lossers..Develop Courage...!

Something from the stats guru. First Abdul's home and away record :

overall 67 Matches 236 Wickets @32.80
home 40 Matches 168 Wickets @26.82
away 27 Matches 68 Wickets @47.58

Now SKW's record :

overall 145 Matches 708 Wickets @25.41
home 69 Matches 319 Wickets @26.39
away 73 Matches 362 Wickets @25.50

Now there are many facets to what exactly makes up a champion sportsman. Clearly from the records alone you could not possibly put Qadir ahead of Warne. I am not even a Warne fan but I am one of the 'drunken boozing Aussie fans' that actually does appreciate cricketers from ALL over the planet. Even Warne has mentioned how great a thrill it was for him to meet and talk to Qadir. And we probably have Qadir to thank for keeping the leg-spinners art alive during the pace bowling era of the 80's but the hard truth is, there can be no question of who the true champion is. Qadir was a pretty average tourist, doubling his average away from his 'spin-friendly' wickets at home in Pakistan, whilst Warne had the equal, if not slightly better average for games played away from Australia. Had Warne played his home tests in Karachi, instead of the MCG and Perth, I wonder what his final tally would have been? People should forget about Warney's arrogance, his off-field shanagans and his on-field borishness. Despite these failings counting against his 'champion' tag, the hard truth is that he is the greatest spinner to play the game. Put Murili and Abdul on the pitches of Perth and Brisbane and Adelaide for half their careers and their stats would make interesting reading.

John M

Qadir was no inventor. How the hell is he an inventor? The only thing was he was chronogically ahead. There have been several leg-spinners ahead of Qadir. Australia themselves had Grimmet, Benaud, O'Reilly, and Arthur Mailey. India had Gupte and there was even Mushtaq Mohammad. How the hell is Qadir the inventor? Mr. Ahmed, you are building castles in the air if you think that Qadir invented leg-spin.

@John Beamish. With the zillion comments in this blog on the qadir-warne issue, and none on yours about McGrath being better than imran or wasim proves a point. People have views about one of them, and the one you suggest is too childish to be taken seriously. Personally I think warne and qadir comparison cant and shouldnt be made. Warne is a true great. However, in the book of spin, Qadirs name will always come first.

what does one have to do to get a comment on this blog? There are three things of interest here:

1. Is it easier to take wickets in a champion team or a struggling team? Other good bowlers will steal your wickets, but will also apply pressure making it easier for you...

2. Most of the so-called 'racist slurs' are from (apparently) sub-continental types with a chip on their shoulder about being 'Asian', rather than from arrogant Australian yobbos.

3. Warne would have 1000 test wickets if he was 'Asian':

- 100 more lbws
- 100 more from being allowed to throw two balls an over (Murali)
- 100 from not being suspended at all for drugs (Akhtar, Asif)

Look, I'm only reading this blog because of the inflamatory headline, but many posters' arguments are permeated by racism.
This is both unfortunate and illogical.
Qadir was the beneficiary of home-town umpires. Warne was not.
This paranoid belief that the non-Asian countries are running the game and influencing results is based on NOTHING. Just take a look at the power relationships within the ICC. Then take a cold shower, look at the records, and stop deluding yourselves with nostalgia.

Warne and the googly: The greatest bowler in the history of cricket was Syd Barnes. Don Bradman, however, rated O'Reilly higher because, "Barnes never bowled the googly." When he heard that, Barnes considered a moment before replying, "True, I never bowled the googly. But then, I never needed to."

What counts is not what sort of ball you bowl, but WHETHER YOU GET THE BATSMAN OUT.

As for Ahmed's comment about Warne being a copier and Qadir an inventor - I've not read such rubbish snce I picked up the Da Vinci Code. Neither Warne nor Qadir invented leg-spin. They were each influenced by Benaud and Ramadhin; who were influenced by Wright and Hollies; who were influenced by O'Reilly and Grimmett; who were influenced by Mailey and Bosanquet........

hmm well i heard somewhere in the media that warne used to have videol clippings on qadir ..and he had extensively studied qadir in the begining of his career.. but i must say warne got better with time and hence beat his master...its like one of thoese Bruce Lee fights where he beats his MASTER.. auuzyy have to admit that warne is there bcz of qadir not bcz of Ian healy lol

Dear Kamran.
I dont know about the comparison between Warne & Qadir. But one thing is for sure:
To become a great batsman one has to perform well against Australian bowling lineup.
(Ex: Inzimam or Yusuf are not considered great batsmen becoz they performed below par against Australia)
To become a great spin bowler one has to perform well against Indian Batting lineup.
And here Warne fails miserably. Is he great?
any comments.

Allan Border, Michael Bevan, Bob Holland are spinners that all took 10 wickets in an innings against the West Indies. Not great players of spin were the Windies.
Qadir was very exciting to watch, on his day was awesome, but he couldnt dry up the runs like Warne consistenly has done.
Both great bowlers. Warne's stock ball was way more consistent than Qadir's which made his variety all the more effective.

The biggest question that needs to be asked here is why do the Indians, (mainly) Pakis, and some Sri Lankan’s always play the race card? You guys try to say us "whites" are racist etc but All I have seen from here is the "non-whites" being racist and writing silly stuff if anyone disagrees with you!! If you guys want to be taken more seriously then cut that silliness out!!

And for the record I really dislike warne and was singing "nah nah nah nah nah nah nah nah hell yeah good bye" when the test was over but him and Murali are the best that ever was in the spinning dept.

"Neither Warne nor Qadir is truly great! A leg-spinner has to prove his worth against Indian batsmen. And how well did these 2 guys do against India?"
According to you logic, Shriram, are saying that Danish Kaneria was is way better than Warne and Qadir....since Danish has way better record vs India than Warne and Qadir......specially his 19 wickets in 3 tests in India during 04-05 series????

I saw both Qadir and Warne play. I'd love to have both Warne and Qadir in my team. Only thing that made Qadir better bowler than Warne was that Qadir could bowl 7 different types of deliveries in one over.....Not only he could bowl leg break, googly, flipper, top spin, etc....he could bowl different varieties of these deliveries!!!

Qadir and Kumble had to have a pitch to their liking to dominate the opposition but Warne took wickets even when pitch did not help him.

I agree with most of the points Kamran mentioned but that still does not make Qadir better bowler than Warne. If I have to pick only one of the two to watch....I'd certainly pick Qadir just because
his bag was full of tricks than Warne's ever was!

While I would not like to go into the debate as to who was better, I would like to make the point that even before Warne had bowled the "Ball of the Century", Qadir had bowled Mike Gatting in exactly similar fashion - I remember seeing this on ESPN, in a show where Sunil Gavaskar pointed this fact out. I would agree with the article on the point of Qadir's career getting not enough coverage by the media, but would it have been same for Warne had he been playing in those days is another matter.

It is perhaps easier for Mr. Abbasi to make the claim that Abdul Qadir was the better bowler based on his own nationality (as some Australians are arguing here), but he nevertheless has a point: head-to-head, and in this digital age, how would Qadir have measured up against Shane Warne? During their respective careers, both Qadir and Warne benefited from what amounts to corrupt umpiring, and their leg-spin techniques are far from dissimilar, but ultimately the demands placed on test cricketers were far fewer than they are today. Had Qadir played as many matches as Warne during his career, I firmly believe the stats would be far more in Qadir's favour.

Both bowlers are legends of the game of cricket, but Warne was never a champion. Sure, he was able to do some absolutely magical things will the ball in play, but that doesn't amount to a class act, even though most Australians will tell you that taking wickets and winning is all that matters in the end. His attitude and his ability to cheat in the face of umpires and get away with it will always scar his legend for me. If only an umpire had taken the privilege of calmly remarking, "F*** off, Shane" during one of his unnecessary appeals; it would have done the game a world of good, and possibly given Warne a much-needed reality check.

I would agree with many of Abbasi's points, and yes Qadir is decidedly the greatest leggy we have seen in our times, but one thing would go in Warne's favor, and that one thing would make him stand head and shoulder ahead of anybody in any field: mental toughness. Because, Qadir was a poor bowler had it not been for Imran's very supportive captaincy. Warne did not need a pampering captain to back him up all the times. So, I would say, both of them are the greatest bowlers of this era, not just leggies, and we can add a few more names to this list. Why take stupid sides?

Qadir couldn't buy a wicket in Australia. He lacked the imagination, variety and cunning to get wickets when conditions didn't suit him. The comparison is a joke.

Warne is the king
700+ test wickets

It's well known that Warne did not have a great googly. However, batsmen around the world commented on the fizzing sound as the ball approached. He could turn the ball square on non turning wickets. His slider, zooter, flipper, and vriations of leggy were better than Qadir. Watching Qadir bowl on Australian wickets showed his weaknesses. He couldn't get wickets in Australia. He needed turners where everything was in his favour. Warne was cunning. Qadir had nothing when conditions didn't suit him. He was a good bowler. Warne was a great bowler

Warne was the first ever bowl to bowl flippers to dismiss batsmen... other bowlers only used it effectively against Tailenders

remember back to Warnes 7/52 against the Windies at the G... bowled Richardson with a flipper.. and many others.. Cullinan etc. haha and Stewart

Warne is voted #4 in the Wisden greatest cricketers of all time .. and this extract is accurate

"Everyone wanted to be a fast man like Lillee and Thommo, Holding, Ambrose and Malcolm Marshall. Who could possibly have thought that leg-breaks would be trendy again?
Then along came a thoroughly modern youth with an earring, dyed blond hair and bussing leggies, zooters and flippers, who went by the name of Shane Warne."

Warney changed the game, he made leg spin cool, everyone wanted to bowl leg spin BECAUSE OF HIM, did Qadir do that? No

Warne is a showman and has effected Cricket a lot, Qadir didn't as much as Warney, that is why Warne is a legend and Qadir is pretty good.

Geez, this one has created a lot of feedback. Qadir was definitely the best spinner of the 80s, but as mentioned in many posts above, his record outside of Pakistan was not good.　But let's look at pure stats.
Warne's average was 25.4 and Qadir's 32.8.
Warne took 4.9 wickets per Test and Qadir took 3.2
Warne's strike rate was 57 balls per wicket and Qadir's was 72.
And Warne bowled only 4 overs per Test more than Qadir - 47 to 43 - to get such greater results.
If Qadir had performed well overseas, then maybe there would be a comparison. But add this with the above stats, and the fact that nobody has been blowing Qadir's trumpet on the world stage for many years, suggests strongly that Mr. Kamran is only posting this type of blog to stoke controversy, or display overt patriotism. Imran was Pakistan's greatest bowler. Qadir was a great leg spinner who deserves to remembered as such.
By the way Mr. Kamran...don't forget a one Richie Benaud. He took 248 wickets in 63 Tests, averaged 27 per wicket and 3.9 wickets per Test. Those stats are still better than Qadir's.....

I am fully agree with Mr. Kamran's analysis and would like to add without being biased that Warn took his most of the LBW's by influencing the umpires with the aggresive and renowned hostile aussies behavior and attitude. I still remember once Shane warn visited Abdul Qadir personally to have a tips and by doing that Warne himself gave a great respect to the legend of leg spinner Abdul Qadir. For Mr Juggle Abdul Qadir didn't took wickets in Pakistan due to umpires and you should better to say this for Kapil Dev whose name was Apeal dev when took 90% wickets for LBW while playing in India.

Qadir didn't do as much as Warney? Are you mad? The reason why legspin is still alive is because of Abdul Qadir!!! Check out what Mr. "I look down on everyone" Warne thinks about Abdul. He was Warnes hero!

Lets be honest all real cricket fans compare great players from different era's...it's what we do for fun! and yes there is a point to it. Is the only measure of bowling greatness how many wickets you take,come the end of your career?
Qadir certainly was as at least as skillful and certainly more artful a spinner than Warne...definately more interesting to watch. Does that make him greater who knows?...but in terms of entertainment he was for me.

By Watever has been said of QADIR above....one thing is for sure...u r comparing two gr8's of two different eras...this surely unfair..but for sure warne had some of easiest wickets than QADIR.....only because they dont know how to play spin..wat ever the case might be....both produced some greatest turning deliveries stunning batsmen....they have really given gr8 entertainment to all of us who have seen watching them

Even after taking Kamran's arguments in to account. I think Warne is still a better bowler than Qadir.

The change in the interpretation of lbws is perhaps the most significant in recent years and accounts for a large percentage of wickets picked up by both Warne and Murali. I remember a series between India and West Indies in the late 90's when Jimmy Adams scored an obcene amount of runs (largely with the aid of his pads - hence the term Paddams). I can't imagine that happening these days because the umpires are more likely to give lbws if you are padding a spinner.

I do believe that it has made test cricket more exciting and helped produce more results.

The comments have made for very interesting reading, especially the points made about comparing players from different eras and how it's just impossible to make objective, qualitative determinations as to who was/is better? The game has changed so much and Ian Chappell in particular [during Chanell 9's recent Ashes commentary, has made the point that the introduction of helmets has resulted in a lot more "front foot" play from batsmen; whereas they had to 'rock back' and play on the back foot to some of the nastier quicks of days gone by.

I currently reside in Australia and having had the privilege of watching Shane Warne bowl for the first and only time last summer when South Africa toured was a real treat. There is so much that makes 'Warnie' an almost transcendental cricketer - maverick, magician of a bowler, hyper-competitor, an iron-will to win and a brilliant cricketing mind! Is he the greatest leg-spinner ever? Possibly. The arguement that Qadir's better because he had to play against better teams and batsmen with less support is flawed. There is an old adage in sports - "you can only beat what's infront of you". Warne could only ever bowl to those who were before him and the fact that the cream of the crop were on his side cannot be held against him. Ravi Shastri said that even as he was tonking Warnie around on his debut he could tell that he was going to be something special. He remarked that never once did he see Warnie's resolve wilt and that he just kept coming at him. That, to me defines Shane Keith Warne - attacking all the time, asking the batsmen questions with every ball, teasing them, taunting them, flirting with them and almost always, sending them on their way. There is romance in a Warne delivery - the 'flight' that enthralls, the 'drift' that fixates, the 'drop' that caresses and the 'kiss' that takes an edge and goes to hand. Is Warnie the greatest leg-spinner ever? In my humble opinion, it would be difficult to say otherwise.

Is Warnie the best bowler ever though? This is where Australian hubris, bordering on arrogant self-absorption and short-sightedness takes on a whole new dimension. Just as it is spurious, in the face of Warne's record against Qadir's, to say that the latter is better than the former, one Muttiah Muralitharan stands steadfastly in the way of the Aussie bandwagon.

That has always amazed me about Australians in the discussion about the best bowler of all time. They will innevitably point to the fact that Murali has collected quite a few of his wickets against weeker opponents [Warne himself has suggested as much]. As pointed out earlier, you can only beat what's infront of you and that fact should not count against you - just as it shouldn't when comparing Warne against Qadir, so it shouldn't when comparing Murali against Warne. In the face of this, the Aussie bandwagon will almost innevitably revert to the whole Murali's a 'cheater/chucker' fiasco. He has been cleared by the bio-mechanics lab at the University of Western Australia and in fact; it was research conducted during this fiasco that revealed most bowlers were bending their arms beyond the allowable limits and changes in the rules relating to allowable degrees.

When Martin Crowe dredged up the non-issue once again when Murali was putting his kiwis through the mill recently, a member of the panel that investigated and cleared Murali remarked that Crowe-y was wrong - and that the true reason for Murali's 'elastic wrist' is because he happens to have a "double-jointed wrist like you wouldn't believe!"

Whilst the purported illegality of Murali's action is constantly brought up to temper his genius and the accolades he so richly deserves; in their eagerness and hyperbole to annoit Shane Warne the greatest thing at all things cricket since 'The Don' himself, Australians conveniently 'forget' how he was banned for a year for using a banned substance. Let us not forget that the diuretic he purportedly took to reduce the puffiness of his appearance is one that is commonly used as a masking agent in connection with the use of anabolic steroids. His one year ban was pathetic at best and raises the question of whether drug-use is properly policed in cricket as it is in other sports.

Shane Keith Warne - greatest leg-spinner of all time and phenomenal cricketer. In fact, that's how I will remember Warnie - a supreme cricketer and not just a bowler. His impact on the on his team-mates, opponents, fan base and the game itself - the drama he brought and the compulsive viewing he undoubtedly was. An amazing cricketer the likes of which will be close to irreplaceable and unlikely to be seen again soon.

Best spinner and bowler of all time? In all likelihood it will be Murali by the time he finishes up. By then he would have far surpassed Warnie's number of wickets even after subtracting the wickets of supposedly 'weaker opposition' from that tally. Then, Australians will only be left with the most hollow of arguements, that the greatest bowler of all time is/was nothing but a chucker!

Hello friends

Qadir was no doubt a genius but Warne took it to new peaks...Warne is untouchable....we all know that...dudes the thing is writer wanted to trigger a huge debate and he succeeded :)

Kamran mentioned about Graham Gooch, which is correct but also he forgets to mention Salim Malik who was interviewed some years ago (bearing in mind Salim Malik is considered by many as one of the best ever Pakistani batsman to play Warne and other spinners with authority) reiterated this fact very vividly.
He was asked about his effectiveness against Warne and to respond to that question he quipped “I have played great spinners in Pakistan domestic, and one of the most prominent among them was A.Qadir. So when you have got the opportunity to play against “Master” so should face no problems to face the mortals (Here he subtly referred mortal to Warne) after that” Not very surprising when in 1994 and on wards Malik always negated Warne’s effect to perfection.
No disgrace to Warne but when it comes to the best of the best batsmen of spin then you have to heed their points, modern batsmen how good they are I think it is evident in the recent round table conferences and in last year’s Champions Trophy as well, that when the pitches becomes bouncier and conducive more seam movement how skilful the modern great batsmen are (Not to forget that in Champions Trophy 2006 in India any of the world batsman who participated in that tournament failed to register a single century) we have all seen it perfectly.
One quick jab to those who are keep murmuring that Qadir’s away record was awe full and he got the assistance from the local umpires then we should not forget the behaviour of so called competent umpires as well over the years, when Pakistan was denied for a well deserved victory over Aussies in Hobart in 1999 and later on the conduct of D.Hair of Australia, to named a few in a long list of “good neutral” non Asian umpires. Everyone should have the moral courage to admit this fact that prejudice do prevail in every Test playing nation and its not confined to Asian nations only. Long live the great legend of leg spin of Pakistan, Abdul Qadir, which I will term him (Like many philosophers do refer Aristotle in the same vein) the first master of leg spin in modern era and later on maybe Kumble and Warne can be termed as the second or third (the rankings can be shifted according to the concerned fans of relevant countries) masters following the great footsteps of A.Qadir.

I totally agree with the author.. I am a big fan of Sachin Tendulkar.. When he first came in to the India's tour to Pakistan in 1989, I thought Sachin was just too much of hype and the way he got out in the first match supported my view.. Then came an unofficial one dayer in which he hit some huge sixes of Abdul Qadir, who used to be my favorite Paki bowler at that time.. From that point on I became a fan of Sachin.. I am also a big fan of Shane; but Qadir was more special!

They will worship in the same Church but Warnie will be seated in a Pew just ahead Qadir!

The author makes several mistakes in the comparison
1. In pointing out Qadir's googlies he misses Warne's flippers

2. Warne played most of his test matches outside the subcontinent. Qadir's bowling average outside home is 47.58. Huh ?

3. Both Qadir and Warne got thrashed by India. So there is not point involving India into the comparison.

4. Qadir had one 5 wicket haul againt West Indies and played 7 of their 10 tests at home. I wouldn't call it great sucess.

5.Yes, Warne had the luxury of a great team. But that might work both ways. He had to share his spoils with good bowlers like Glenn McGrath, Gillespie etc. In our current generation we have two greats, Murali and Warne, both playing for very different teams. Murali has achieved probably more after playing a lone hand with little support from his team bowlers. Warne on the other hand has had some pressure building help from his bowlers but this also results in some wickets stolen. So it works both ways.

6. Bringing the Pakistan cricket system into the comparison is a poor self-insulting idea.

6. Bringing umpires into the comparison is controversial and cannot be proven either ways.

Qadir was great, so is Warne and so is Murali and so were the likes of Bedi, Benaud, Grimmett.
Comparison across generations is foolish and a website filling tactic.

What is the point of this statement? History will still remember Warne as among the greatest ever whereas Abdul Qadir, for all his skill will only be consigned to the ranks of being decent. For that matter based on his record, Anil Kumble is also a better leg spinner than Abdul Qadir.

This has probably been mentioned more than once in the 382 comments before this one, but possessing a better googly doesn't mean being a better bowler. Venkatesh Prasad had a better slower ball than anyone else, but he isn't counted as one of even India's better bowlers. You still need to make the best use of your armory. Also, if Warne had the additional cushion of a great attack, then others would have also pouched wickets, (as did McGrath). There are only twenty wickets you can get in a test match, and it wasn't like Warney opened the bowling either. And on Warne being in a better side, I suppose there would be competition to stay there, and at times he has had to give way to MacGill, he has also had to overcome various injuries and bans to keep his place.

As for the last two arguments, I have opinions too, and they don't agree with what any Scyld Berry or Graham Gooch have to say. And I'm sure I'm not in a one-member club either.

Your post doesn't provide reasons as to why Qadir was a better bowler; it merely speculates as to why he achieved less than he could have.

Its amazing how so many people are willing to debate over something which is totally baseless. I say this because two great bowlers of different era's simply cannot be compared.

No Kamran no. I have been a stauch Pak supporter for more than 30 yrs and I do not agree with you. Qadir, for all the plaudits he won and all the skill he possessed, did not acheive half the successes Warne did. ON PAPER, he was a great bowler but did he transform that into results? The answer is no. You can count on fingers (perhaps on one hand) the number of good spells he bowled outside Pakistan. The 7-for he got at Oval in '82? Even then he failed in the 2nd innings, unable to convert a huge 1st innings lead into a victory. What else? Imran Khan, his biggest admirer had to DROP him on Indian tour of 87...on a spinner's wicket where Tauseef and Iqbal Qasim bowled Pak to a famous victory. I have always felt Qadir's talent were over-romanticised, perhaps because he was reviving a dead art. Talent and skill counts but you have to tabsfrom these into results. Enough has been said above about their respective varities. I will just add that Warne was very accurate compared to Qadir who had the tendency to bowl one or two very ordinary delivery every over.
PS: We could have done without all the childish comments posted by some Aussies and Asian fans.

I would agree on the fact but given the amount of cricket played today and Qadir being deprived of that maybe that factor has eluded him from being a great ...

Kamran fantastic comparison,but may i add few moredifferences between these 2 great bowlers of course tipping the balance in favour of Abdul Qadir-Qadir could throw 6 different bowels in an over at will than warne could-Qadir used the crease more intelligently and effectively than warne has done-Qadir had a better flight in his deliveries than warne-these are not just my own observations but statements from test playing cricketers i have met and who played qadir-Derek randall made a hundred against pakistan but confessed he did not have a clue where the ball would pitch(personal meeting at a cricket dinner).lastly-if you read the autobiography of the most famous and respected umpire of his time Mr.Harold Bird(Dickie)you will find his reasons of placing Abdul Qadir above shane warne.People probably do not realise that Abdul Qadir had a short career (Injuries +PCB)so he did not have time to mature & learn like warne did.So if you are comparing few years of spin bowling as compared to shanes almost 16 or so,then it speaks of itself.

One thing that Warne and Qadir have in common they are both immensley dislikeable, I saw both in prime,Qadir was a bad tempered prima donna and Warne a bully. That said as much as it pains me as an Englishman to say it, SK Warne is the greatest bowler to ever play the game. The debate is totally illogical as Qadir probably wouldnt scrape in top 50 cricketers of last century.Can I also reiterate what others have said Murali is a chucker and doesnt deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Quadir never mind Warne.

Kamran I agree to some extent. Although you are by no means trying to belittle Warne's achievements but this is how most of the readers would see it. Qadir did revive the dieing but Warne greatness can also be seen from the fact that the 2000's have been the time of the batsmen. Never in the history of the game have so many batsmen averaged over 50! Qadir's era was one dominated by bowlers and I can only recall Miandad, Gavasker and Border averaging over 50. Saying one was a better bowler than the other, well Qadir did have variations in his googly.

Dear Mr. Abbasi,
First and foremost anybody and everybody can write and say anything. And to me that is what you have done. Your analysis doest not hold good from any angle. You may get praises only from poor Pakis. Not even one knowledgable cricket fan would vote for Abdul Qadir. As far as the spin department is concerned there has been only one true nation and that is Great India. Being an Indian I am proud to say that. You are saying about googly. Yes, my brother in his college days was a good googly bowler. So does this make him a better bowler. If he was soooo gooood then why is he nowhere in the records. Yes, Warne bowls a lot of leg breaks. But the spin in the ball (degree) is what accounts for the dismissals. He had brains to test the batsmen. He was well rewarded for his persistence. If he was not that good you would not have heard about him for 14 years. So quit comparing your no good bowler to someone who has shown to the world what the spin can achieve. I can tell you for a fact that Murali and Kumble are equally good and these three have in a long way kept the art of spin bowling alive and not your Abdul Qadir.

I agree with you Kamran... Qadir was the best the world has ever produced. All his peers and best batsmen of his era agreed with your view. If he had played for Australia or even England, we would have heard more about him... but I guess, it is high time we give the man the tribute that he deserves....

"Sure", Qadir is much much better than Warne. Infact, thats probably why a panel of cricket experts from around the world rated "Qadir" as one of five Wisden Cricketers of the Century.

Look out for more blogs from Kamran Abbasi in the very near future:

- Kamran Akmal shadows Gilchrist in terms of glovework/explosive batting,

- Mohammad Sami is the best pace bowler of them all (far better then Lillee, McGrath, Lindwall, the lot),

- Imran Farhat should be giving fielding tips to Jonty Rhodes, Ricky Ponting, Andrew Symonds, etc

- and finally, Inzamam is the best runner between wickets the cricketing world has ever seen.

How's that Mr Abbasi? These ought to get you some more hits on your blog. Your welcome.

P.S. No disrespect to Abdul Qadir.

Sounds like a case of sour grapes. The article doesnt do justice to either of the greats. They were both stalwarts in their own respects. Comparing the two is pointless. Just forget the chest-thumping Kamran and learn to enjoy good cricket!

Dear Kmaran , You did not have to give 10 reasons to make a case of Qadir’s superiority over Warne though only ONE REASON would have sufficed………Warne was found guilty of supplying imformation to bookies and thanks to the cover up by the ACB( for over THREE YEARS the ACB hid the fact from the rest of the world) whereas Qadir did not indulge in "fixing" matches .Also Warne was found guilty of taking drugs . Talking of match fixing , I believe the excuse trotted out by ACB that Warne and Mark Waugh merely provided a pitch report is a red herring . Why would anyone pay to get a pitch report when its given FREE before the start of the match .Therefore , Warne is guilty of match fixing and should have been banned for life , which was the punishment meted out to Salim Malik , Azhar and Hansie Cronje .
If there are any aussies out there who want to confirm the above pl.refer the country site of Australia on cricinfo (http://content-sl.cricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/273491.html )
The following was copied from the above link
“ 1995-Mark Waugh and Warne were fined by the then ACB, now Cricket Australia, after admitting they supplied match information to an Indian bookmaker. The ACB covered up the scandal, but the media exposed it three years later “
Do any of the skeptics need any more proof of Warne’s guilt ?
Kamran , You are correct in saying Qadir was the better than Warne, but the best of them all is I believe our own Mutthiah Muralidaran .

Abdul qadir revived the art of leg spin bowling which is confirmed by many former international cricketing legends. Many of you don't have the intelligence to understand in the context kamran abbasi has written the article. Qadir was great and had many varieties but perhaps less control and not a too great record abroad whereas warne with less varieties ended with envious record abroad and home. But having said that people must remember that batting quality was far better back in the 80s and so was global cricket coverage. Both are great legendary bowlers but i believe had warne had better control. India never really had a great leg spinner. India had fine off spinners venkatravan,prasanna and maninder, fine left arm spinner in bedi and fine leg spinner in chandrsekhar. But if you remember hariharan pakistan's great batsmen zaheer abbas and javed miandad cut india's famous four spinners venkatravan,prasanna, bedi and chandrsekhar to ribbons.

Why don't we hear what Abdul Qadir himself has to say? Here he is talking to Voice of America after Warne took his 700th wicket.

"Shane Warne is the greatest bowler in the history of Test cricket and I fail to find words that can match or measure his success."

Qadir goes on:

"I feel honoured that Warne learnt the great skills and finer aspects of leg-break bowling from me...".

Perhaps this best describes the relationship between the two - the pupil who surpassed his master, which is always a desirable outcome for human developoment and evolution.

Personally, i do not think that Dr Abbasi is trying to belittle Warne. He may be doing it to create a little bit of sensational journalism, but i think it is needed.

Sometimes, when we are overcome with sentimentality, we tend not to see the chinks in the armours of the champion who is making his last stand.

It is necessary for everyone to know the history of legspinning art, which was perfected in South Asia.

And Subhash Gupte, B.S chandrashekhar and Abdul Qadir were the torchbearers.

No one is seeing Warne's achievements lightly, but his records will remain scarred by the doping incident.

The drug tests were able to trace only a diuretic. And Dr Abbasi, being a doctor should be aware that diuretics are used to conceal the use of actual steroids.

Need i say anything more?

Let us celebrate Warne. He was a maverick.

It would seem that Abdul Qadir begs to disagree with you! Here is what Dawn quotes him as saying to commemorate Warne's achievement in taking 700 wickets.

"Shane Warne is the greatest bowler in cricket history and I don't have the words to describe his class and success. He has proved to be a remarkably talented and incredibly effective bowler against all oppositions."

Qadir was no doubt a great leg-spinner. I still remember Qadir bowling something like six different googlies in an over. It was outstanding stuff. While its extremely easy to compare the two greats - Qadir & Warne statiscally, its purely subjective when one tries to compare just the "art" of leg spin, without taking wickets into consideration. From an "art" point of view, I too feel that Qadir was lot more a classical legspinner. The other legspinner who promised greatness but never achieved anything close to Qadir or Warne is India's Laxman Sivaramakrishnan!!

Here we are talking about the two greatest bowlers of their times.
*Abdul Qadir who came at a time when the art of leg spin had almost diminished. He used to be a treat to watch. His run up, his approach to the crease, and that anticipation with every delivery he bowled.
* Warne to me has successfully carried the becon which was ignited by Qadir and would rate him on even terns. Both had this urge of expecting a wicket of every delivery they bowled.
Apart from bowling the conventional leg breaks Abdul Qadir used his googly and the straight ball to great effect. I have witnessed him dismiss Sunil Gavasker (who to me was a master technician of the game and the best player against spin bowling), with his googlys.
Warne again to me stands on even terms in this aspect. Not until his shoulder operation he used to bowl the googly with good effect and later he developed his sliders and the flat, fast, big spinning leg break which has accounted for many of his 700+ test victims.
Both Warne and Qadir had a big heart, fearless, lots of patience when the going gets tough, wait for the batsmen to make mistakes and their ability to kill the game at the slighest opportunity they got.
Its not at all fair comparing these two greats. Both are responsible for creating a great deal of interest in the art of leg spin world wide. I have watched a lot of guys copyinge Abdul Qadir's and Warne's action. Both have contributed in their own ways a lot to the game.
One should never forget that Warne himself considered Qadir as his hero and that the next breed of leg spinners will be greatly inspired by Warne.

i have read many of the comments i agree that shane is a world class spinner but qadir is the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As an Indian I am dismayed by the bias displayed by some Indians, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans in their responses. But it it is this blog which is mainly to blame for awakening such latent prejudices with its crude zenophobia.

Guys - just because you are Indian doesn't make Kumble or Chandrashekar or Gupte the greatest ever leg spinner and Murali cheat. Just because you are Sri Lankan does not make Murali the greatest ever spinner and Warne a cheat. And just because you are Pakistani does not make the Indian spinners crap or Qadir the best.

Learn to see beyond your national prejudices. The greatest wicket taker in history has just announced his retirement - can't we as cricket lovers simply pay homage to him and thank our lucky stars we were fortunate to see him play!

I have been reading Kamran's comments for a while now and i do appreciate his knowledge of cricket.
I have followed the careers of both Qadir and Warne and having been an ardent cricket lover for the better part of 20 years, i think i can shed a bit of light on this issue.
Being a Pakistani myself and a passionate follower of my team, it would have been easy to take the side of Kamran. However it would have been a great injustice to the supreme skills of Shane Warne. There is simply no comparison here.Shane Warne is too great a bowler to be even compared to Abdul Qadir.Possessing a googly doesnt necessarily make one a great legspinner. Even i can bowl an effective googly! This in my opinion is an absurd comment. I saw nearly all of Qadir's Test matches and the amount of support he got from home umpires was simply unbelieavable.I felt ashamed then, and i still do,at the blatant incompetence ( to put it mildly)of home umpires, most of which were not even fit to stand in club cricket.He was a good bowler but by no means great. Getting heaps of wickets at a poor average on raging home doctored wickets at home doesnt make one a great bowler.
Shane has brought such beauty to the game with his supreme skills. It was worth paying money to just see him bowl and i have been fortunate to see him live in Pakistan.
I guess it would be sheer injustice to this supremely gifted bowler to even compare him that ordinary mortal, Abdul Qadir. My countrymen might not agree with me, but then the truth is always bitter, isnt it!
Tnaks Warney for making this game so wonderful to watch and we will miss u. The game will be pooreer without u.

warne is a better bowler compare the wickets warne the only bowler to take 700 wickets (for now) shane warne has got more 5 fers and more 4 fers than qadir but warne did play more matches but even if qadir played same number of matches warnie did he still wouldnt be better than qadir

Can you post your Islamophobic and racist bile on some other website, like the Klu Klux Klan's for example? They have no place in a civilized discourse.

While I myself have reservations about the wisdom of Mr. Abbassi's piece, he has a perfect right to express his opinion regarding Qadir and Warne (or anything else for that matter) without being subjected to inanely rabid abuse.

This argument is totally uselesss. Abdul qadir was poor, todays modern greats out play these talents. Warne a man with 700+ wickets no match in comparison to Qadir. Murali 1000+ international "hardest bowler to face" says Flintoff. Qadir might have been good but Warne & Murali are on a different level

I had the fortune of witnessing both of them and must say equally mesmerised by both great bowlers. YES, I do agree Qadir had a great googly that Warne lacked but may be Warne never felt the necessity of acquiring one with all that success. No one can doubt Warne's work ethic. Also he has been a better batsman and a fielder. Well Lillee did not have a toe crushing yorker....

Shane Warne and Abdul Qadir were 2 great spinners. Shane is great b'coz he lasted more years than Abdul Qadir. In terms of skill,I find it hard to pick between the two. One measure of a spinners effectiveness is his bowling stats aganist subcontinent teams. In this area, Shane Warne has a decent record aganist Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Aganist India, Shane's record is very ordinary.

Abdul Qadir has a good record aganist all teams(Subcontinent and other teams). But he did not last as long as Shane did. Probably he has not as much desire as Shane.

In terms of skill and talent, there were probabaly better leggies than Shane. But they could not do what Shane did in terms of consistency over 17 years of test cricket. For that single reason, Shane Warne has to rank higher than any other leggie.

Talking purely in terms of talent I am sure many would agree with me that there were many leggies like Abdul Qadir, B.S. Chandrasekhar, Mushtaq Ahmed who had immense talent. They could turn the ball as much as Shane Warne did.

Have fun!!! Great topic!!!

Regan P

A difference of 7 runs between the averages of the two players and a discrepancy of almost 500 wickets should put an end to this debate. Greatness should be measured over a career, not by certain spells, where luck can be a contributing factor. Also, many of your arguments are questionable. You seem to base some of them on the fact that Warne played in a better team than Quadir, which therefore lessens his achievements (at least in comparison). This does not follow, however. One could also argue that, because Warne played in a far better team, he had fewer opportunities to take wickets, because he had Glenn McGrath and co. cleaning up at the other end too. Qadir, however, could wheel away and collect more than his fair share, because the other bowlers weren't taking wickets. Also, you argue that the West Indies team of Qadir's era were better than anything Warne has faced. Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Rahul Dravid, Jaques Kallis . . . the list of great batsmen Warne has had to battle goes on and on. Oh and finally, Warne bowled a superb googly until he decided to shelve it because of his shoulder problems. I suggest that your next player comparison is a little more realistic!

To compare the greats is a foolish endeavour to say the least, however there are some important little things to look at here.

1) The reason that Qadir could bowl the variations of the googly was his higher arm action, allowing him to bowl more off to leg deliveries.
2)Qadir did not have to my knowledge the same ability to rip a legspinner like warne, on any pitch.
3) Warne took wickets on pitches DOCTORED to neutralise his ability to spin the ball: look no further than the 05 ashes, and check out all the statements by the groundsmen. This is in contrast to pakastani dustbowls which along with rancid umpiring(which continues with Aleem Dar(just ask damien martyn) allowed Qadir to take vast bags of wickets on his home grounds, we never really saw the same returns on foreign pitches.
4)Warne took his wickets with the competition of Glenn McGrath, Stuart MacGill and Gillespie(when he was in his prime), Now these are some great bowlers, with massive hauls of wickets, and Warne often missed out on getting wickets for this reason: Qadir did not have this problem as pointed out by Kamran: Imran and Qadid then rubbish.

Finally i note the mention of Kumble as a legspinner, and i disagree throughly: To be a legspinner you need to be able to turn the ball: Kumbles arm action is nearly offspin, and the only type of spin he gets is the topspinner and the googly: hence he is an average topspinner(who once again performs on locations where the pitch is crumbling). Murali is a smart bowler, i will give him that credit. However that being said he is a cheat: Darrel Hair said it, was ignored, then the ICC confirmed it and allowed him to continue to play. They even changed the rules for him, which is dubious to say the least. Brian Lara rates warne higher than Murali: He open says that Murali you can hit off his line, but Warne, no matter if your on 1 or 100 he is always trying to work you out, containing you, mesmerising you to get you out.

Either way, I feel Qadir deserves credit for continuing a dieing art, but will never be considered equal to warnes mastery and control of legspin.

John A

One thing is common between Qadir and Warne. Both were destroyed by Tendulkar. Qadir had the ignominy of Tendulkar slapping him for 4 consecutive sixes when he was 16 years old. Qadir is a good bowler. But his record is also not exactly great against India. Infact it is worse if i recount. Topic is a futile exercise. Warne is touted as the greated bowler to ever to bowl. You are comparing Qadir to him. Let me tell you. Chandrasekar is better than Qadir.

Regan P, you are using totally wrong information. Qadir had a horrible record against India - here are his stats:
16 matches 27 wickets Best of 4/67 Avg:51.51
There is a reason Shane Warne played 145 test matches, because he was good enough to keep picking wickets and he could not be dropped even when carrying an injury or recovering from one.

And where did you get the notion that Abdul Qadir, B.S. Chadrasekhar and Mushtaq Ahmed turned the ball more than him - you seem to know nothing about these bowlers. Chandra was like Kumble and Oreilly, fast fast legspinners. He was as fast as Kumble and turned it about the same as him. Mushtaq's videos are on youtube, and he turns his googly more than his legspinner, which means he barely turns the legspinner unless he is bowling on a dustbowl. The only occasion where I saw him turn it big was on a dustbowl against Zimbabwe agaist Andy Flower. But then Shane could turn it a mile even on decent wickets. Qadir once again was famous for the loop, and the nous, and variety, not big turn. There is only McGill who trumps Warne on turn but to claim they turned it even anywhere close to Shane shows extreme ignorance of the what the they are talking about.

For the nth time, stop believing that we perfected the art of legspinning. There were several more legspinners from Australia before Qadir like Grimmett, Mailey, and Benaud.

Had Warne played against the Pakistani batting lineup of Zaheer, Miandad and Malik of the eighties, they would have chewed him up and spit him out for fun...Warne is lucky to had the likes of Basit Ali, Ijaz Ahmed, Aamir Sohail, Moin Khan and rest of the tailenders to contend with, rather then the classical and more skillful batsmen of the seventies and eighties...

Qadir better than warne -lol you must be joking. The West Indies have always been poor players against spin. It was warne that changed spin bowling, especially wrist-spin, it was him who inspired bowlers to take up spin. He gave spin a reputation. Remember in those days the pitches were most suited to bowlers compared pitches today. Where batsman play on virtually flat decks. Warne was a genius - he played against the batsman in the world on various pitches and conditions. He played against the ICCXI. The Indians have always been excellent against spin, but warner poor average their, is only cause the Indians are pathetic against pace bowling, which meant if they were to score runs they had to come from the spinners. I mean after England, the Pakistanis are the worst to play against spin - it just doesnt make any sense for them to produce a decent spinner? I mean Kaneria come on?

Some Warne fans are suggesting that he was better because he lasted longer (15 years) and because he had 500 more wickets than Qadir. May be if Qadir also knew how to take diuretics, he could still be bowling today.

As far as the argument of Qadir having the advantage of home umpires goes, who says the aussie umpires are not biased. The disgraced Darryl Hair having the distinction to be the first and only umpire to be kicked out of the elite panel is a living example of biased aussie umpires. It was not until 2002 that ICC started appointing both neutral umpires for tests. Before that australian players got plenty of help from their home umpires.

Qadir was an oustanding bowler but I vididly remember him securing lbw decisions from Pakistani umpires to balls that pitched well outside leg stump meaning that batsmen had to play at everything or risk being shafted.

I cant believe this article has even been written! Warne has had to compete with arguably the best fast bowler ever (Mc Grath) for all his wickets, not to mention the other fantastic bowlers Australia have had in their arsenal over the years warnie has been playing! not only that but he has had to play most of his cricket in Australia etc, and not on the sub-continent which is obviously alot more spin friendly. Murali in my mind is second best spinner, but again has played 75% of his cricket on turning pitches and has always been Sri Lankas dominate bowler, making it easier for him to take wickets. he will finish above warnie on the record books, but is no where near the quality of shane warne.. i dont think anyone ever will be. the batsmen today may not look as classic technique wise but have a look at ricky Ponting and Rahul Dravid. they play these days, and have near the second and third best average ever in the history of the game after playing more than 30 tests. so to say warnie has had to bowl at worse batsmen is a silly thing to say. Warnie is the greatest ever, fullstop.

Those who say that Qadir could not be a better bowler than Warne as his bowling average is seven runs higher should be prepared to concede for the same reason that Warne is not as good a bowler as Muralitharan.

i think this comparison is totally irrelevent....Warney is,in my opinion, the greatest ever crickter to have walked the planet...The author of article has come up with really crap comparison and has twisted the facts and figures..probably he doesnt have a cricketing sense so let him alone

Keshav

You may add 4 more consecutive sixes in Tendulkar's innings from your side, but that is not the truth. In my post above, I did mention about Tendulkar hitting 2 sixes to Qadir he remained 53 not out, and the two sixes hit Qadir were in the death overs, BUT Pakistan still WON that match by 4 runs. It was a 20 over EXHIBITION match which is not an ODI.

If you are impressed only by SIXES then we have Shahid Afridi. Remember Kanpur Massacre 45/100? Kumble (6x3), Balaji(6x3), Powar(6x3), Zaheer Khan (6x1). Remember how Harbhajan Singh lost his bowling skills after Afridi smashed him for 4 consecutive sixes (6x6, 20x4, 156 in 128 balls) in the 2nd test match in Faislabad on January 21, 2006?

NOW TAKE A CHILL PILL AND RELAX. :-)

Vinod Kambli hit 3 consecutive sixes and a 4, total 23 runs in Shane Warne's one over in Sharjah and that was an ODI.

When Murali will break Shane Warne's record, Australians will not accept him and they will call him a CHUCKER. But they will ignore the fact that WARNEY was banned for DRUG TAKING. In any case Qadir was definitely a better bowler than Shane Warne.

I quite agree with almost all the 10 points of you, Mr.Abbasi.

well ok lets be honest,yes he was a better bowler infact he was the one who invented legspin or googly.nd ya u got good reasons to call him better.shane warn has taken most of his wickets against the weak team of england where as abdul qadir had to face the best english and most feared westindies team ever.take a look at this http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/38973.html

Very recently, I read in an article in Cricinfo that Jimmy Amarnath once joked that gavaskar and he would always shout out 'googles' whenever Qadir bowled a googly. Having a googly that is as readable loses its effect. Anyway, few would disagree that Warne has more variation and CONTROL than Qadir. In other words, Warne is more complete as a bowler than Qadir.

As an Englishman who has suffered both Warne and Qadir taking us to pieces I think I can put forward a reasonably unbiased view. Simply although Qadir was a very good bowler, he was never anyway near Warne's level. Warne has a case for being the best bowler ever.

First the stats..

Qadir
Tests 67 Wks 236 Best 9/56 Av 32.80 SR 72.56

Warne
Tests 145 Wks 708 Best 8/71 Av 25.41 SR 57.49

In addition if you look at Qadirs stats outside Pakistan, where the unpiring could be a little shall we say favourable (Shakoor Rana anyone.., you could say he didn't travel well.

Ability

Qadir was wonderfully talented, and yes he probably did have the better googly. Warne however can bowl one, and all his other delivery's are probably superior.

Environment

I think the stuff about umpires being more favourable to legspinners nowadays is rubbish. There is no evidence for it and Qadir certainly had favourable umpires at home, see above. Warne certainly played for a strong team with good selectors but at the start of his career a case could be made that he was the player that put them over the top and made them the force they are today. Qadir never came close to making Pakistan a really top side.

All in all I think you have to say the Warne was clearly the better bowler over his career.

I think some of you guys need to Get the FACTS right and look at things in a unbias point of view, I havnt seen Qadir bowel so I cant comment about him, but what I am very frustrated with is the Murali bashing on here by ignorant and bias cricket fans. Lets address some of these points

1) Murali gets a lot of wickets vs Bang and Zim. Yes he does, but how can you hold this against him? You can only play against the opponents who you are given. Its not Murali’s fault Sri lanka play Bangladesh more then Australia, maybe if the ACB give Sri Lanka more games in Australia in REAL pitches not in cairns etc, it might help. One can also argue that English batsmen in the late 90’s was no better then Bang players against spin, where warney takes a LOT of his wickets.

2) Muralis action: Lets start with who called Murali for the first time, Mr Darrel Hair. Who is if not the, one of the most controversial umpires of all time and lets face it after the whole email fiasco, he is a disgraced man with his own agendas. Moving on from that Murali has taken test after test and it is PROVEN that murali DOES NOT throw, maybe some of you should see him bowel with a hand brace on where it is IMPOSSIBLE to throw with a brace on. Murali can dislocate his shoulder when bowling and has rubber like wrists, one cannot crucify a man for that?

3) Some of you guys want to call Murali a ‘cheat’ and say how great warney is, well for your information, if 15 degrees of flex is ‘so wrong’ (in ref to the doosara) what about taking banned substances. Does most of you know what diuretics do? They MASK the use of steroids. If you got caught with a diuretic, would you say you took it to cover steroids or that ‘your mum gave it to you’? and what about the whole information about giving ‘pitch and weather’ reports. Which is pretty hilarious (and well coverd up by the ACB might I had). If Big shot Indian bookies wanted pitch and weather reports, let me tell you they don’t need Warne and mark Waughs help to get them. And speaking of cheating, I’m sure Simone Warne might have a thing or two to say about cheating too.

3) Someone said Murali is a one man team, not true, and some people have said “vass is prob the only other guy to sometimes chip in with wickets” when you take over 300 wickets in both forms of the game (vass – 313 test and 370 ODI wickets) you don’t just ‘chip in with wickets’. Then there is Jayasuriya (who has 284 ODI wickets) who also being a spinner takes wickets away from Murali one can argue.

4) Murali has taken plenty of test wickets vs India and Pakistan who are the best players of spin in the world.

At the end of the day, I am not a shane warne basher, im just stating the facts, Warney will always be the greatest LEG SPIN bowler in the world, and one of the best cricketers the world has ever seen. And Murali will also be one of the best bowelers the worlds ever seen. One cant compare which one is better because they both are magicians in their own art. Even if murali gets a 1000 wickets, that will not make him a ‘better’ bowler then Warne, but lets not have cheap pot shots at another super star of the game because of your bias and ignorance.

Richie Benaud is arguably a better bowler than Abdul Qadir never mind Warney.

And Warne had his 1 year ban, so theres no point of bringing in drugs.

Warne is a great spin bowler. Make no bones about it, but I think the purpose of this blog is raise an issue: we forget the past so quickly. Yes, Warne took 700+ wickets and retired - great feat in the 15 years that he bowled. The accolades that were sent his way mention him as the greatest spin bowler of all time. I don't believe that this is an accolade that he deserves. He is one of the greats. Numbers don't tell the whole story. Warne never achieved success against the one nation that truly plays spin well - India. He never succeeded against the true test of spin. South African batsmen were piss poor at playing spin, so too were the English, the Kiwis, the Windies. The Pakis and the Lankans had moderate to fair success against Warne.

But in recent years, I cannot believe that this era has lacked the quality batsmen of past eras - the mighty Viv Richards, the great Graeme Pollock, Len Hutton etc, etc; except for Sachin and Lara. The Aussies have had good batsmen - but not greats like the aforementioned and for that reason I think that we need to weigh up the 700+ wickets of Warne. This era has been known for big totals, quick run making - a batsmen's paradise. Bowlers are at a disadvantage. Also, the sheer number of tests a year give bowlers the chance to get bigger career totals than ever.

My personal opinion of Warne - great on the field, poor off it. And his attitude left a lot to be desired. This Aussie team leaves me cold when it comes to affection, but I admire them.

Comarisions are interesting. But let's please give Shane the credit that's due to him.

Well, if that is the case Bhagawat Chandrashekar was the much better leg spin bowler as he prduced more match winning bowling performances against the then mighty WI and Eng in their own back yard.

Just another couple of points -

1. Please mention something regarding Qadir's flippers. Do they stack up against Warne's?

2. Please mention Qadir's performance outside Pakistan. Say in England. Do they stack up with Warne. Qadir had a big advantage in bowling on helpful tracks, while Warne had to fight on bouncier pitches, which were much less of a turner.

3. Regarding umpiring: Pakistani umpiring of 1980s is best forgotten. With such partisan umpiring, please dont say Qadir was "disadvantaged" by umpires.

4. "Most of his(Qadir) performances were never seen in England and Australia..." Why? He played lots of matches there. Whose fault is it if he couldnt deliver the goods on English and Aussie pitches? Certainly not the media's.

5. Qadir bowled against strong West Indies lineup. How did he fare? (I am asking because I am not too aware of Qadir's record against Windies). Warne too bowled against a lineup which was equally good (if not better) against spinners (though the same lineup was always found wanting against spinners). Honestly, you dont call a lineup consisting of Tendulkar, Azhar, Sidhu, Dravid and Ganguly (and in later years Laxman and Sehwag) as bunnies, esp against spinners. If I remember correctly, the great Windies lineup were troubled by Chandra, Bedi and Prasanna and Venkat.

6. Agree with you on points 3 to 7 though

Seems to me there are too many free variables for comparing bowlers in different eras.

Well, what i think is this - the difference lies in whether you are comparing spinners or bowlers. Qadir was a better spinner than Warne - no doubt about it. Only the most dim-witted or most ignorant of people will disagree with this. However, if you are comparing bowlers, now there is a difference, i think Warne is a better overall bowler than Qadir - smarter, better trained and then backed up by one of the best managements and teams. Qadir had a richer arsenal than Warne, he could turn the ball on dead pitches and almost at will bowl googlys. Warne, on the other hand is quicker and understands the pitch very fast. I have seen him bowl where he could not even turn the ball an inch and still performing by his accuracy, flight and field placement.

why are we debating about something thats completely out of this world...both Warne and Qadir must be sipping some beer and the master must be very happy of his pupil warney.lol
hey people vote for me in the next coming election in america...lov hillay

If you look Qadir's record against India his avg is more then Warney and he never get 5 wickets against India.

As some1 said b4 me, comparing 2 bowlers from different eras dont make that much sense but U can compare Warne and Murali. Close competition but Murali is better than Warne. And 706 Test Wickets won't stay long as the world record! Murali is also great in ODI's where Warne quit ODI's coz he wasn't that good in ODI's....Simply Murali is better than Warne!

The Warne worshippers need to answer the question would Warne - a leg spinner, who could also bowl a straight ball, calling it zooter/slider/abracadabra etc - get wickets if the batsman were not under any threat of being given lbw on the front foot.

Every ball Warne bowled on a good length would have been played as a straight ball with the bat tucked in behind the pad, as was the way in Qadir's time, if it turned out to be a leg break it would harmlessly end up in the keepers glove. Any error in length by Warne, would be smashed away.

I doubt he would have, under the old method of umpiring, which was the norm in Qadir's time, have been a regular selection for Australia and even if he was would have got 200 not 700 wickets at the end of his career.

Warne was a great leg spinner who - given the lack of variety in his bowling repertoire - was lucky to be playing when he did.

Qadir was much greater and Murali greater still.

well Mr Abbasi i agree with you.Qadir had more colors in his bowling than shane but i would say shane is also a smart and clever bowler.

I think Warne is the Greatest Bowler of this era.
Only debate in my mind remains whether it is Murali or Warne that is the greatest. Though Murali looks statistically superior how ever facts are Warne bowled with another great bowler who took over 550 wickets. You must admit that if not for Mcgrath Warne would have had atleast another 250-300 of those wickets. (imagine that tally). When Warne came on to bowl it was usually 4 or 5 down so he where as Murali almost had all ten stading which explains his consistent big
hauls. Despite all this Warne manages a strike rate of 57 compared to Murali's 54. Also Murali has bowled almost the same number of balls as Warne despite playin in fewer matches More than anythin else there hasnt been any other bowler who has changed the course of games regularly like warne has.
So Qadir would have been really good and so too Murali and the rest but Warne is the true great

Well this comparison is absurd... there may be some points that the author mentioned in the comparison that are true, but warne will have 10 times more points that will prove he's better...so its just looking at it from one angle...

anyhow i think im a better lep spinning bowler than both warne and qadir (as i can spin the ball more)....only if i got the chance to play for Pakistan, sigh!

I'd like to address all the folks who claim that Warnie got his wickets on tracks not tailor made for spin. If that's the case he should have a bagful of wickets in India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, which is not the case. Also, having a other great bowlers in the team puts pressure on the batsman and helps other bowlers in the team get wickets. They feed off each other. One last point. Nobody has brought to attention the fact that Warnie got a lot of wickets due to some excellent slip fielding and general all round fielding skills of his team. Asian teams even now dont have the luxury of converting half chances. Also, Warnie got a lot wickets with his theatrics and by pressuring the umpire which for some reason or the other he always seems to get away with, while other bowlers need to be careful lest they get fined or banned or both. However, all said and done, I'd pay to watch Warnie bowl over all others...We will miss you Warnie...

Well, there are a few hits and few points. Lets aswk Sachin Tenbdulkar whos better? He has smacked bothe of these Gentlemen out of the boundary.

No comments over partisan and a very ordinary biased Pakistani umpiries?

One thing is for sure, this post is certainly very courageous!!

Some points are nice and some aren’t too nice. Especially the topic of the essay is indeed just a bit too incorrect. Whom do we call a better bowler? One who can bowl one variety of the art to perfection? Or the one who bowls his regulation deliveries to perfection? I agree, Warne hardly ever bowled googlies. But, this is no shame!! Qadir had a bad bad flipper, almost every time he tried to bowl one, it ended as a long hop and he went for runs!! Alright, Qadir’s Googly was indeed the best!! He deceived a lot of batsmen with this delivery, but his l leg spinner was quite manageable. He could turn the bowl both ways and bi time, but there was definitely one thing lacking, that he used to bowl a bit too many loose deliveries at test match level. His stats speak for that.

If all of us remember Mushtaq Ahmed the leggy from Pakistan only, he wasn’t a bad leg spinner either Rather, I personally believe that he had a batter disguised Googly than Qadir!! Ask Kristen, Hick, Nasser, Ganguly or Cullinan!! Even Sachin the great player of spin, failed to read his wrong un most of the times!! But, this ability of his doesn’t make him a batter bowler than Warne or even Qadir for that matter.

Making Googly as abase to judge two leg spinners is indeed not the best of choices. Does anybody ever say that DAMIEN FLEMING was better than McGrath, Wasim Waqar or any great fast bowler? Just coz he had an outstanding away swinger. I bet no body could swing the ball like he did, when he was out swinging it!! But, it never mad him the best of all times, he wasn’t even the best of his times!! Excelling in one category of art is not the right measure to judge the better of the lot.

Alright, you are right that the media hype has made players a bit bigger than they actually are. And there is no doubt on that.

Moreover, Qadir’s record was even worse against India!! Warne is normally accused of having a poor record against India, but Qadir’s was even poorer. So now, can we make this a point to compare? We certainly can!!! Qadir averages 51 against India and could manage only 27 wickets in as many as 16 test matches!! Qadir’s strike rate is as bad as 72 balls per wkt against warnes 57!! This also tells a hell lot about the class of the two!! Even Mushi has almost the same average as Qadir’s and a better strike rate than him. And sdont forget he could bowl the Googly to perfection!! But nobody says, that Mushy was better than Qadir!!!

Although, I do believe that many ( almost 150) of Warne’s wickets have been earned by unfair appealing and undue pressure on umpires. And it has been seen over the years, that umpires were becoming generous towards Warne!!

I must say, that is even bigger an achievement considering the class of bowlers playing around Warne that he took so many wickets. With lees good bowlers in the team, one is expected to take more wickets, as in Muralitharan’s case, who takes the bulk of wickets for the srilankans!! But Warne has always had few good bowlers bowling around him, and among them, coming out with such a record is some achievement!!

Warne was the best spinner ever, if not the best bowler.

P.S. A comparison of Saqlain with Murali might be a better practice and more realistic

Thanks Kamran for atleast mentioning Qadir, when everyone is writing as Warne is the only le spinner in last 30 years.
I beleive both were truely great. Qadir for its bowling skills, while Warne for its psycological touhness.
People who mind this artice, please enjoy it---- We all appreciate Warne, but do not underestimate Qadir---"Qadir was a Warne---20 years ago---actucally above Warne, There was no Kumble, Mustaq or Murali to rival Qadir"! thanks again kamran.

I would disagree given that the true testaments would be facts and figures - 700 vs 200 wickets should always give Warney the edge over who is a better leg spinner! Further, Shane Warne has learnt the art of leg spin in a country where the pitches barely support spin. And Abdul Qadir had pitches tailor made for him to learn how to spin!

I do agree that Abdul Qudir was great spinner but when it comes to his comparision with Shane warne he is no where,he might not have bowled to best team like westindies of 1980's but he has bowled to many great batsman and had managed to get them out,his spinning ability is without parallel,his googly,flippers were just awsome.And someone has mentioned that Quadir had to fight with many other difficulties then i would say Shane warne has faced more than him he got involved in many controvarsies many scnadals yet he managed to keep his focussed on the cricket.It's ridiculous to compare Quadir with Warne,he is the best spinner this world could ever witness.

Dear fellows,
I think all of you are wasting your time here. I am a cricket statistician and I have links in PCB, therefore I hope that you all will accept the following.
The difference between Warne and Abdul Qadir is same that is between Gilchrist and Afridi.
We all know that Adam Gilchrist is very attacking batsman. If Adam Gilchrist stays on the wicket for an hour then we can expect that his team will win the match very easily. Moreover, he is also very consistent. He stays on the wicket for at least an hour in every third or fourth match. In other words, he bulldozes his opponents in every third or fourth match.
On the other hand, Shahid Afridi is a very explosive batsman on his day but his record shows that he is very inconsistent. I analysed Shahid Afridi’s ODI innings with the help of a statistical tool and I found that Pakistan need almost sixty runs from him for a certain victory.
In addition, all we know that he plays an inning of sixty runs after sixteen or seventeen innings. We can expect many sixes in his entertaining innings of sixty runs but we cannot say that he is better then Adam Gilchrist.
Similarly, Abdul Qadir still possesses many verities in his bowling as I watch him on T.V playing against Indian seniors recently in Pakistan. His googly is still very difficult to understand. He is still a very entertaining leg spin bowler with his wonderful googly. However, I do not think that he could pressurise his opponents consistently during his international career.
Although Warne do not have, verities like Abdul Qadir but he took wickets at the right time during most of his career. On the other hand, Abdul Qadir did this occasionally.
In short, Abdul Qadir was skilful and entertaining bowler but we cannot say that he was a real match winner. On the other hand, Shane Warne was a match winner and world record holder as leg spinner and he helped Australia very much to win matches during most of his international career.

I wish Kamran Abbasi had lent an air of romanticism to his article and ended it with a hypothetical question – If Abdul Qadir had played as many numbers of tests as Warne, would the world regard him as the best ever leg spinner?

Instead he first makes a statement of fact (Qadir IS better than Warne because..) and goes on to list 10 most ludicrous reasons, that makes Kamran Abbasi look nothing short of a joker.

I wonder whether the calendar on Kamran’s Laptop was set to 1st April the day he wrote this article – I wouldn’t be surprised if it was!

Most of the comments seem to suggest that Qadir re-invented the dying art of leg spin. Qadir’s career started towards the end of Chandra’s. So this art wasn’t exactly dormant, was it? Yes Qadir was the lone torchbearer of this art in the 80s, but then so were Clarrie Grimmet, Bill O’Reily, Subhash Gupte, Richie Benaud and BS Chandrashekar during their respective eras.

Forget Warne, take a look a Chandra’s career vis a vis Qadir’s:

BS Chandrasekhar 58 15963 584 7199 242 29.74 8-79 16 2 65.9 2.70 IND
Abdul Qadir 67 17126 608 7742 236 32.80 9-56 15 5 72.5 2.71 PAK

Better wickets/match, better strike rate, better average, less matches, more wickets and know what stats don’t lie.

Chandra played much before Qadir, so all the points that Abbasi makes to forward his case for Qadir, should stand against him while comparing Qadir with Chandra. (Mind you Chandra starred in many overseas victories for India too)

And I haven’t talked about Subhash Gupte yet. Gary Sobers called him the greatest ever leg spinner (Read Sober’s autobiography). Sobers’ testimony would carry more credibility than Graham Gooch, don’t you think so?

This is not to put down Qadir’s achievements - he was wonderful bowler and all respects to him. But to compare him with Warne seems going a bit over the top – even with the most myopic of patriotic vision.

I...... dunt really dig this comparison. Its not fair to compare a player of the past with a player of today -not even batsmen and with that Ive had enuf with the comparisons everyone makes with batsmen of today with the bradmans and the Richards. If there were deadly pitches yesterday, there’s more pressure to perform today. I think there are players with exceptional qualities. I mean consider this. Is Lara better than Inzi? Yes but if u look at stats… on who’s team won more matches coz of the either of them.. Inzi will come up with bright numbers. Here is how I look at it.. Qadir was probably a pioneer of leg spin.. the guy who brought the art back in the early 80ies after it had silently faded away. But Warna made more use of it then Qadir. If you compare Warne with Murali.. Ive always said one thing ‘Murali is a better spinner than warne.. but warne is a spinner with a fast bowler’s attitude’.. he always has the hunger to take wickets.. In the end.. warne is the first player to take 700 wickets !! can Qadir or anyone else challenge that ???

I have seen both Abdul qadir and Shoaib bowl and both were exceptionally good bowler. I think that its extremely difficult to chose whos better of the two. Both were superb.

You got to be kidding me, Warney was the greatest ever, Look what indian batsman did to Qadir, Qadir was effective against those team that were not known for playing against spin, while shane warne is successful against every team, you might be right about the variety qadir posessed but Kaneria has a lot of variety but it doesnt make him better then warne, shane was a pure genious he played with batsmen's minds, Sheer masterclass.

Well eventhough being an asian i completely disagree with you.I think leg spin is the toughest art of bowling that there is and the kind of control that Shane Warne had amazing...while playing Abdul Qadir you were bound to get a loosner anytime,but that was not the case with Warne...and about saying warne not having enough variety,I think u should do a reality check.I think you didnt need a google if u have a lethal top spinner and a leg break that turns a mile

Qadir was a very good bowler but Warne is an exceptional bowler. The arguments put forward by Kamran Abbasi, and in many of the posts, in Qadir's defence about batsmen being better in the 80's is pure rubbish. Cricket is a full time occupation for test cricketers now and so batsmen spend day after day refining their technique in the nets. This would logically make them better than their predecessors. A quick look at batsman averages shows that on stats alone the current era batsman is about 10% better than he was 20 years ago. Having said that I think they both bowled to batsman of comparitive ability so it's a moot point anyway.

Warne never had a googly - he did but who cares anyway. If you get a wicket with a leg spinner, top spinner, off spinner or no spinner it's still a wicket.

Raj, you've posted many times but your first post calling Australians Yobos (I think you mean yobbos) is below the belt - unless you would like me to call you a curry muncher which I assume is similarly derogatory to your nationality.

At the end of the day I think every bowler has his day - a spell of bowling, an innings, a match or even a series where things just click. No doubt Qadir had his moments of brilliance but I suggest that Warne's prolonged moments of brilliance gives him undisputed claim to be a better bowler than Qadir.

10 Reasons why Kamran is a better writer than Shakespeare!

1)Shakespeare was not a doctor, Kamran is.

2)Shakespeare only wrote with a quill and ink. Kamran writes on a computer.

3)Shakespeare only wrote in that boring, scrawled handwriting. Kamran had so many fonts to choose from, always showing versatility.

4) Shakespeare's plays were only heard and seen in England. He became famous only after eh died. Kamran is read all over the world, even when he is still alive!!

5)Shakespeare was ill educated and had no knowledge of computers. Kamran does all his writing on the computer and knows how to use email as well.

6)Shakespeare's vocab was so poor that he had to invent words and phrases. Kamran's superior vocab allows to to use his vast trove of cliches and words to construct brilliant articles.

7)Even his fellow Englishmen sometimes damned Shakespeare's plays, causing them to flop. Kamran, on the other hand has a loyan band of Pakistani suppporters who always support him, be it defending drug cheats or elevating Qadir to numero uno position.

8)Shakespeare's works too too long to write because of excessive intellectual inputs and thought. Kamran's articles are short, pithy and sweet, without the burden of excessive and superfluous thought or intellectuality.

9)Shakespeare was bald. Kamran is not (I think).

10)Kamran is better than Shakespeare because I say to! So there!

i hve never seen Abdul bowl and cant really comment on his bowling. but the fact of comparing two players from different eras does not make sense. just like the fact that Don Bradman cannot be compared with players of this era as he had not faced the likes of modern bowlers with different bowls, better technique thus quicker pace and better accuracy. All i can say is that Shane Warne is a great great leg spinner. it does not matter wat his record was and who will break it. but the fact that he did his job for Australia and won them many matches and one of the main reasons for Australia's success.

Matthew Jacob your statistical interpretation, whilst well researched, is flawed. You can't say Qadir fared better than Warne against a particular opposition by simply looking at the number of tests played against an opposition and the number of 5 for's taken. How do you know Qadir didn't bowl 60 overs in each innings versus Warne's 15? If you bowl 60 overs you have a greater chance of taking more wickets. That's why strike rates would have been a more logical measure.

Qadir needed to bowl more than Warne because Australia had more options than Pakistan did. It's the same reason why Murali takes so many wickets for Sri Lanka - because he bowls so many overs.

To say that Qadir terrorised England more than Warne ever did shows a lack of cricketing knowledge. Warne beat the Poms in their own backyard like no one in history. He has more wickets in England than any other non Englishman - Id say that's pretty terrifying for the Brits.

Sudakhar G - you say that Qadir was great because he once bowled 6 different googly's in an over....that makes him an offspin bowler doesn't it? :)

Which is better - chocolate ice-cream or strawberry? We can argue over this until the cows come home. Same with who is better out of Qadir and Warne. Both champions. Fullstop.
It is impossible to compare their skills and successes directly, however, if you compare the feats of both against their peers that played at the same time as them, you can see just how good each of them were.
Compare Qadir to leg-spinners like Jimmy Higgs, "Dutchy" Holland, Peter Sleep, Tevor Hohns, Somachandra de Silva: Abdul was miles ahead of these guys in terms of skill.
Compare Warne with some of his peers in legspin; Peter McIntyre, Ian Salisbury, Danish Kaneria, (chinamen Michael Bevan) - Shane is just as many miles ahead of these guys. The only difference is Stuart McGill. Qadir was streets ahead of the next best leg break bowler of his era - the difference between Warne and McGill is less pronounced.
Therefore I would have to say that Qadir comes out in front of Warne - just!
Also, it is BS that the cricket media keep saying that "Warne stopped the death of leg spin" What garbage. Leg spin bowling was closer to death when Qadir arrived than it was before Warne arrived.

Dear Abbasji,

I quite agree with you that Abdul Qadir was one of the all time greats and master in the exponent of spin bowling. His artistry and originality is amazing. Shane Warne had the advantage of drawing on the precedence laid down by Abdul qadir. In his era Abdul Qadir was one of the best bowlers.
But this should not discount Shane Warne's performance given his awful debut. He has come back strongly and raised to the occassions most of the time for Australia. He will go down in history as one of the greatest spinners of his era.
In a nutshell both are great spinners in their own way and a comparison looks to be meaningless.

What a joke to say Qadir suffered because umpires were less sympathetic to leg spinners! Generally that may have been true, but Pakistan's umpires were exceptionally sympathetic to leg spinners provided, of course, they were Pakistani (to whit Qadir's 9-56 in the infamous 1987-88 series).

Unlike Bradmans batting, I dont believe there is anyone who can claim to be the "best ever bowler". Every era produced its "best ever". Aussies would like to take this title for themselves by repeatedly proclaiming it, but that alas, is self deluding. Even 700 wickets is not enough, given the amount of cricket played these days against weaker opposition. On that scale Murali would soon be the "greatest ever". I have watched the game for 40 years and enjoyed them all. Underwood, Sobers, Bedi, Warne, Qadir, Murali the lot. Spinners are what makes cricket interesting. Otherwise its like watching a variation of major league baseball, one of the most boring games ever invented.

JAVED A. KHAN: I am still baffled how the Aleem Dar incident was let go? I have seen Warney intimidate umpires umpteenth time to forcefully get decision but this was horrific... in his last test match! I will remember him as a bully more than a great bowler. Yuck.

Altamush, even Stuey McGill spins more than Shane Warne. Could we have a comparison there? Had Warney not be a selector's favorite and McGill gotten his fair share, who knows....

I totally agree with you. I have seen Qadir and Shane bowling, i remember Qadir could bowl six different types of deliveries in an over. He used to 'bamboozle' the batsmen as the word was used by BBC and Australian commentators to describe the fate of batsmen struggling to read his deliveries. I think Qadir was the best right arm leg spinner ever in the cricket history. I remember he was solely responsible for giving australia a whitewash in a series in Pakistan, and almost won a series 3-0 in west indies (with players like Haynes, Greenidge, Richards, Richardson, Logie etc) in 1987-88, but for some atrocious decisions by the west indian umpires.

i agree with most of the points, but its true that we cant compare people from 2 different era, unless people like gooch, richards, n many famous players have voted qadir as a greatest spinner than shane warne, but he was not from england or australia like murali, who has better average than shane warne to get more wickets per match, n this year he gonna break shane warne record as well playing less matches than him, but end of the day he is also not from Eng or Aus, how come imran khan, viv richards, lara or tendulker can't be a cricketer of a century but shane warne can, only because he is white, dont think so.....

I don't disagree with Kamran.May be he is a little bit in the side of Qadir.But what Andrew Johnson said is just rubbish and he is ignoring everybody else than Warne. You are not a good man to ignore the predisissors of legspin. Please show some respect to Qadir and of course to Kamran.

Warney is one of the five cricketers of the century. He is the only specialist bowler too. I rest my case

one of Kamran Abbasi's points was that qadir bowled at the fearsome WI team of the 70's/80s and did very well. Richards avg against Qadir was 31..Greenidge's was 31 and Richardsons 26. many people have mailed in saying that tendulkar murdered both warne and qadir. Tendukars avg against warne is 39!!!! and slightly better against qadir 41! hardly murder. Check this against the master of spin Lara...Avg 54.57 against warne!!!!and 44 against qadir. Oh and one more thing 'Bandu' suggested that lara was McGraths bunny!!true he dissmissed lara 15 times but lara's avg is still 41.50 against McGrath unlike tendulkers 22.16!!!

I have to question the wisdom behind starting such debates. There can never be comparisons between players from different eras. Secondly, these discussions turn into sledging matches. Mr Abbasi is a Qair fan, fine. But he has ended up with people ridiculing Qadir on his blog. It is no comfort that some Qadir fans have retaliated at Warne and his fans.

hey, I got one word for you "Murali". By the time he is finished playing test cricket he may have 1000 test wickets. Cut this guy some slack fellas, i mean he plays for Sri Lanka (with all due respect) not exectly a cricketing power house. I say wait couple of years and then base your judgements on who is the greatest.

I truly agree that qadir was better than warne. His googly was lethal. Whatever the supporting facts kamran has posted are very true. yes Qadir was a better spinner than warne. Look at warne records against india. Remember .." i have sachin nightmare ""......

This article by Mr Abbassi should be read with a pinch of salt. I am proud of the achievements of my asian counterparts Indian, Pakistani or Sri Lankan. However, that does not mean that as an observer of the game, I am biased enough to put my blinkers on and accept this article. The article is not based on cricketing facts, just myths. #1 Shane Warne can't bowl a googly - so cant Kumble bowl genuine legspin - any more tales to tell? - so what? #2 Remember all those wickets that went Quadir's way due to benevolent home umpires in Pakistan? #3 Let us stick to on field issues - not excuses in the guise of alleged off field intrigues #5 There are two sides to this coin. Batsmen today are better equipped than the earlier generation. That said, the batsmen today have forgotten how to play test cricket given the deterioration in batting brought about by the one dayers. Fielding has improved tremendously in support of the modern day bowler. These things balance out. #6 One's ability to face psychological pressure matters in the cricket field. You must perform - period. This is more like an excuse. #4, #7 Imran Khan and who? What about Safraz Nawaz, Iqbal Quasim, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis or are they not great bowlers?
Ofcourse, some truth is there for a couple of years in early-mid eighties when Imran didnt have a partner at the other end and yes, Quadir did the responsibility well in that time. #8 On the flip side, world has seen Warne throughout his career, ball by ball and analysed his effectiveness throughout against top batsmen of his era. He has come out trumps against almost all of them. #9 #10 Ok. That is an opinion not an indictment.

All these said, I do not like Warne for his drugs, bookie connections, lying and sledging. These make him the greatest spinner who tarnished the gentlemans game. Unfortunately, that does not make him any less great.