If Saqlain Mushtaq ends up playing for England, it will be an admission of failure and an act of convenience © Getty Images

When it comes to who you would play for the calculation becomes more pragmatic. Those same India and Pakistan supporters living in England, for example, would mostly jump at the chance of playing for England. It is already happening--and rightly their loyalties switch quickly and emphatically to their country of residence.

Some talented cricketers are groomed in one country and then switch loyalties to another, taking up their qualification rights at the start of their international careers. Kevin Pietersen and Andrew Symonds are two recent examples. If you have a choice at the start of your international career, then lucky you.

Other cricketers with insubstantial international careers have switched countries to improve their chances of playing regular international cricketer. Graeme Hick and Dipak Patel made moves for different reasons. This is where players' behaviour begins to verge on the mercenary.

Which leads us to the case of Saqlain Mushtaq. He is still young for a spinner with potentially many years of international cricket before him. For much of his career, he was an indispensable part of the Pakistan cricket team. He almost helped Pakistan win a World Cup. He played a hand in some memorable triumphs. He also took his share of criticism for Pakistan's unpredictable performances and was touched by the finger of accusation for some of the scandals.

Saqlain lost his place in the Pakistan team through a mixture of injury, declining form, and political machinations. He was a spinner who had it all--perhaps even a teesra--and then had nothing. I feel for his plight as an international sportsman cast into the wilderness. But I don't support his willingness to consider playing for England. It seems wrong to me that a player fails to be selected for a country and then fancies his chances with another instead of fighting for his career. It is also unfair on English spinners.

Saqlain has played hundreds of matches for Pakistan. He could play many more. The words he should be uttering are ones of determination to regain his place as Pakistan's premier spinner. These thoughts of England aren't those of a winner, which might mean that he doesn't have the right attitude to compete again at the highest level. I hope not. For Saqlain was once a spinner who held the world in his mesmeric grip. His conversion to England would be an admission of failure and an act of convenience, unworthy of the spirit of cricket.

	Danish Kaneria's failure to make things happen in helpful conditions will be a great worry to the selectors © AFP

His first innings performance on a helpful wicket hinted that he might be a genuine threat if Pakistan could muster a sufficient lead. Well, Pakistan's lead might not have been great but it was possibly sufficient. Kaneria might not have had much back up but he had Mohammad Asif. That Kaneria failed to take a single wicket in these circumstances is bewildering, an enigma. Pakistan might still not have won but Kaneria, you imagined, might make it one hell of a task. He didn't. His failure in helpful conditions leaves Pakistan's selectors with a hellish dilemma: Pakistan need Shoaib Akhtar and Umar Gul back but can they be risked? All this might spell good news for Mohammad Sami?

Whatever happens with the pace attack it will be a surprise if Kaneria is not twirling away at the other end. But leg spinners are meant to be match winners not stock bowlers--and Kaneria has some matches to win. He might work on his flipper too. Without that he can forget following in Warne's footsteps.

	Qadir had to bowl at the world's strongest batting team (West Indies), with great success too. Warne never had to © The Cricketer International

Call me a heretic, Shane Warne was a true great but Abdul Qadir was better. I say this for several reasons.

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

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. That rarely happens now and it makes the batsman's approach less sure and stay more uncomfortable.

3. Qadir had to battle the madness of Pakistan's cricket system and if Imran Khan had not supported him he might have been lost. Warne had the smartest cricket board behind him.

4. Warne played for the premier team of his age. Qadir began when Pakistan were nowhere and ended with Pakistan battling for the top spot.

5. Qadir had to bowl at the world's strongest batting team (West Indies), with great success too. Warne never had to.

6. Warne usually bowled with the luxury of a big score behind his team. Qadir was more often bowling under the pressure of a low score.

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

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

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

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

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

Once more, the build up has been impressive. You almost believe the hype--again. We have been here before: the promise of Danish, the creation of a spin bowler's paradise, and an opposition deemed unskilled at the art of reading legspin. Danish Kaneria is Pakistan's main strike bowler, says Inzamam, and I suppose in the prevailing circumstances he has a point. But this is a much weaker hand than it could be. By now, Danish should be a deadly weapon. The fact that he isn't is one of the more perplexing issues that engulfs the current team. On the face of it he has it all: legspin, googly, drift, and attitude. Then why has Kaneria failed to fly?

Danish's record looks impressive enough but as ever the statistics obscure the real story of his career. When he emerged Danish looked to be a natural successor to Abdul Qadir and Mushtaq Ahmed. Indeed, he displayed extraordinary maturity and control for a rookie. A great future was promised. But Danish's career has been one of toil rather than thunder.

The best legspinners are able to run through a batting line-up, they are, as Inzamam says, an attacking option. Danish, however, has never managed to match the threat of Qadir or even Mushtaq, and the question is why? He has become more of a stock bowler than a strike bowler, and that is the wrong mode.

The best reason I have heard is that Danish doesn't really possess a topspinner or a zooter. Shane Warne, who barely has a googly, has become the world's greatest bowler on the threat of his ball that goes straight on. It is a delivery that Qadir and Mushtaq both possessed but Danish hasn't really mastered it. If the batsman does not fear for his stumps then he will bat with little fear.

Whatever the reason, Danish must run through teams more often. Lahore, a ground with a history of great legspin performances, should be inspiration enough. A career that promised wonders has got stuck in third gear. His country's ravaged bowling attack needs him. The judgement on his career hangs in the balance. Kaneria must fly.