I've heard that Qadir was quite good, but his average of 32, and the fact that he took only 3.5 wickets per match (not great for a leggie) suggests to me that he can't be considered the greatest.

If Keith Miller can be considered in a shortlist of "great spinners" then so can Viv Richards and Kevin Pietersen.

Yep his record against England sides completely inept against wrist spin has given him a slightly inflated reputation (didn't average under 30 against any other test nation) but he was still a pretty decent bowler prone to moments of brilliance (most notably his 6-16 that routed a great West Indian batting lineup for 53 at Faisalabad in 87) and his role of keeping the art of leg spin alive throughout the pace dominated 80's shouldn't be forgotten. He possessed all the variations and if you were building the perfect leg spinner you'd probably go with Qadir's googly. Aside from the internal politics of Pakistani cricket it was his volitile temperament more akin to that of a fast bowler that really held him back and led to him impatiently going through the variations in search for wickets rather than fall back on the stock leg break which wasn't in the same league as the true leg spinning greats.

A good bowler and Pakistan's finest ever spin bowler but personally I'd be putting him alongside the likes of Chandrasekhar and Gibbs rather than in the illustrious company of Warne, Grimmett, O'Reilly, Wardle e.t.c.

I accidently wrote Miller instead of Benaud, brain malfunction

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

Although I've never seen Qadir in his prime, I think that surely Saqlain Mushtaq should be ahead of him as Pakistan's greatest. His record is better in every respect, and his ODI record is sensational. That doesn't even take into account the ways in which he changed the off-spinner's art.

I think there are some other great spinners who should get a look-in on this list- Hedley Verity, the "Bradman-slayer," South Africa's Hugh Tayfield, rarely mentioned but his record's up there with the best, and Prasanna, who earned the respect of the greatest batsmen of his time. Engssmoothcriminal mentioned Chandrasekhar and Wardle, and she also mentioned Bill "Tiger" O'Reilly, greatest spinner Bradman ever saw and possibly the only one on the list who might be recognisable to the Americans.

Well firstly the last time I checked Aurelius I was very much a he . Hopefully a change to a more manly avater will avoid any more confusion .

In terms of Saqlain he definitely was a cricketing pioneer (given my views on the legality of the doosra I personally wouldn't say neccessarily for the better) but to be honest I've never really rated him that highly as a bowler. Once batsmen got over the shock of the doosra (something that admitedly took several years for batsmen to get used to) and began to pick it he was a pretty limited bowler and he didn't really have the guile or the weapons of a conventional off spinner to fall back on. When he got taken on (particularly by left handers) he would resort to bowling flatter, straighter and the variation would become the stock ball which whilst fine in ODI's proved pretty infective in tests. The knee injury that effectively killed his international career probably did him a favour as he was able to get out with reputation firmly intact rather than continue to struggle against batsmen who had finally worked out that he didn't really have a plan B once people had mastered Plan A.

In a toss up between Saqlain and Harbajan I'd probably have to go with Harbajan because on his day he was the better all round bowler. He turned his off break far more, bowled with good variations of pace and flight and could extract surprising bounce from even the deadest of tracks.

Yes, sorry about that Engssmoothcriminal.

Maybe you're right about Saqlain being over-reliant on the doosra, but when I checked he'd taken 43 wickets in his last ten tests at 33- not his best, but not inneffective, either. That includes his final haul of 1-204 against India, and this'll probably sound controversial, but I'm sure that if that bowling had come against any other team he'd have been given another chance. As it is, he's only 30 now, and his recent county form suggests that he still could be quite a handy bowler for Pakistan.

Regarding the best spinner- well, I don't know that I can say that Warne's automatically better than Grimmett or O'Reilly, never having seen them play. So to break it down- Warne's the purest spinner I've seen, Murali's definitely the most effective, and MacGill's my favourite to watch, and for me the most entertaining. He spins it like it's made of rubber, bowls the best googly in the world and is fearless about giving it some air, and if he's prepared to buy a wicket occasionally at the expense of his economy rate, well I don't really see that as a fault.

No worries

Hmm slightly better stats than I thought. Are you sure there's not a 10 fer against a Zimbabwe or Bangladesh in there massaging the figures (would check myself but cricinfo keeps crashing my computer ) somewhat? In terms of this seasons exploits I'd like to see how he does for his new county without Mushy at the other end (and in less helpful conditions for spin bowling than Hove in August) for an entire county season before I buy completely into the whole Saqlain renaissance.

(Sadly I do suspect you are right on the whole mammoth failure being against India conspiracy theory)

Pretty well sums up my views on the whole topic. MacGill is easily the most compelling spinner of the last 20 years as there is an element of human weakness and fallibility in his bowling that comes from his willingness to experiment and take risks. As you say he's willing to buy a wicket something that for all Murali and Warne's greatness they are simply not prepared to do and he goes through his full range of variation something Warne post shoulder ops has been less inclined to do. They play the percentages cut out the dross that comes from over experimenting and impatience and as such have reaped the rewards.

In terms of the head to head between Warne and Murali it's a tough call but aside from the purity of their respective actions Warne's mental game gets him the edge. Warne out thinks the batsmen, bluffs, sets traps gets inside the batsmens head (most notably Daryl Cullinan) whereas Murali simply bowls in an identical manner (whether he ends up with 1-100 or 6-45 depends mainly on the aptitude of the batting side and state of the pitch IMHO) for hours on end leaving the majority of the tactical thinking and field settings to the captain. In a toss up between two evenly matched players I always have to go for the thinking cricketer.

Honourable mention must go to the criminally unsung Anil Kumble who I'd put alongside someone like Underwood as a very good spinner who became virtually unplayable in certain tailor made conditions. And as far as the "conventional" "orthodox" finger spinners go Vettori prior to his back injury was a really fine bowler with a lovely action. Tuffers had similar natural talent but unfortunately none of the mental steel to back it up .

I have voted Murali. not because i really think he's better than warne but i certainly wouldn't say warne is better than him. As they are not even similar spinners how does one compare? they are used in different roles, they bowl in very different teams. though when it comes to taking wickets they're pretty close. The best way i can think of comparing them is to compare their away averages against the same compitition (bar the two "minnows" of their hayday - BD amd Zim, which is crap but to quiet the moaners i'd do it).

So that's away averages vs Eng, NZ, Ind, WI and PAK. they're very close - warne wins here Murali wins there and they draw (or pretty much so) elsewhere.

i generally sway in Muralis favour anyway as he's had a much harder time of it all round.

Warne gets 65% of the vote while Murali 15% - gimme a break!!!

that is the saddest summary of a bowler one would ever read (although the same sentence refers to him as evenly matched with another considered in some quarters to be an alltime great).

Of course if you check the away-stats against the teams i suggested above you'll find the summary barren of truth (well i guess what's written in brackets is literally true of every bowler - i was inferring given the nature of the leading sentence) - thank goodness.

when your team is light-years ahead of everyone it is not difficult to win mental games - most mental games rely on the probable outcome. When your team wins most of it's matches and almost all of its series it is not difficult to win mental games. You are walking the walk so you have no fear of talking - i have no respect for it.

if it is individuals, it is slightly better. ie Ali/Forman - but even then, with a whole nation behind you at ringside gotta be helpful -i could really only pity forman.