Comparing cricketers from different eras is almost as futile and silly as trying to pick which is the best football code. Nevertheless, people like to give it a go. Every great batsman is compared, unfavourably, to Don Bradman and although no-one will ever be his equal, the comparison is regularly trotted out.

Bradman aside, players from different eras are regularly compared; Glenn McGrath and Dennis Lillee, Brian Lara and Viv Richards, Ashley Giles and Phil Edmonds (actually this is a good one – in both cases, their bowling was c**p). The comparisons are endless.

I recently read an article that claimed Abdul Qadir was a better bowler than Shane Warne. It was written, not surprisingly, by a Pakistani gentleman by the name of Kamran Abbasi. While the automatic response is to write it off as a bit of silliness, it was written the day after Warne’s retirement, so it does warrant some scrutiny. It was designed to be controversial and, with all of the interest in  Warne’s retirement, was bound to draw attention for its contrarian view.

Silly or not, it is worth examining both careers to see if there is any merit in the points that Mr Abbasi makes. The points are (in abbreviated format):

1. Warne can’t bowl googlies; Qadir had several different ones.
2. Umpires are more sympathetic to modern leg-spinners.
3. Qadir had to battle the Pakistan Cricket Board.
4. Warne played for the best team; Qadir started when Pakistan were at the bottom.
5. Qadir bowled against the (then) best batting team (West Indies). Warne has never had to.
6. Warne usually bowled with the benefit of a big score for Australia.
7. Warne was part of a much better bowling attack.
8. The world didn’t get to see Qadir’s best work because Australia and England dominate the cricket media.
9. Scyld Berry (editor of Wisden Almanac) said Qadir bowled better than he had ever seen wrist spin bowled in one match where he took 9/56 against England.
10. Scyld Berry also quoted Graham Gooch saying that Qadir was better than Warne.

It is certainly true that Warne never really mastered the wrong 'un or googly. That is not to say that he can’t bowl them (just ask Matthew Hoggard about the one he received from Warne in the second innings in Adelaide in the recent Ashes series); it’s more that he never really trusted himself to bowl them. Qadir had many different googlies and indeed had a greater range of deliveries than Warne, but that is beside the point. One of Qadir’s greatest problems is that in bowling such a huge variety of deliveries he too often bowled a loose delivery, taking the pressure off the batsmen.

The suggestion that modern umpires are more sympathetic to giving lbw decisions to spinners is not without merit. The last few years has seen a marked change in attitude of umpires to front-foot lbw decisions; however, it must be mentioned that Qadir bowled in an era when home umpires handled Test matches. Qadir did surprisingly well with lbws  at home and while I would stop short of suggesting he benefited from home umpiring decisions, others would not.

The point about the PCB is odd, but no matter how weird the PCB is, it doesn’t make Qadir a better bowler. Warne playing for a better team is also meaningless. Muttiah Muralitharan plays for a weaker team and yet he’s done reasonably well. In fact, playing for a weaker team should make it easier for a good bowler -- there’s no-one else to take the wickets! This also takes care of point 7.

Warne may never have had to bowl to the West Indies at their peak, but he has played against some phenomenal line-ups in his time. Very few batsmen have ever dominated Warne. Similarly, there can be little doubt that having a big score allows bowlers to be more attacking, but again makes little real difference to who is the best bowler and can’t really be used to mount an argument for Qadir being a better bowler.

There is certainly truth to the fact that the rest of the world didn’t get to see Qadir’s best work. He did that work on the sub-continent and didn’t do many overseas tours, which may be the fault of the wacky old PCB or may be more due to the fact that he didn’t really have much success outside South Asia. Qadir took about 4.2 wickets per match at home and only 2.5 away. (Warne gets 4.6 at home and 5.2 on his travels). Nevertheless, it may well be true that Qadir bowled the finest-ever innings of wrist spin bowling in 1987, but no-one is judged by one performance alone, regardless of how many people see it.

And, finally, Graham Gooch saying that Qadir was a better bowler – does that really help his case or not? Surely he could have found a more credible witness!

Abdul Qadir was a magnificent bowler who was brilliant to watch when in full flight. It was he, not  Warne, who started the leg-spin revival. Qadir was a showman, his bouncy run-up, his incredible range of deliveries, his theatrics when he had an appeal turned down. He had a tendency to sulk when taken out of the attack and was indeed a mediocre fieldsman, but when he was bowling and on song, he could mesmerise batsmen, spectators and commentators alike.

Qadir also had a hand in Warne’s development and took time to help a young Warne in 1988 during a tour of Pakistan. Warne has stated that he studied Qadir when learning to bowl, hoping to emulate his mesmerising style. Here is a case of the student surpassing the teacher.

Warne’s success was based on control and consistency, coupled with nuanced variation in line and length, pace and use of the bowling crease. Warne controlled the batsmen, forcing them to play the way he wanted and often had them to bring about their own downfall. In stark contrast to every other facet of his personality, it was subtlety that was Warne’s greatest weapon. He was master of his trade.

The final word in this argument should be left to Abdul Qadir himself. When asked to comment on Warne taking his 700th wicket, he is quoted as saying: ''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.'' It doesn’t come any clearer than that.

Kamran Abbasi’s original piece can be found here http://blogs.cricinfo.com/pakspin/archives/2007/01/qadir_was_the_best_of_the_lot.php#more.

Well, was Abdul Qadir a better leg-spinner than Shane Warne? What do you think? Let us have your thoughts and comments.