Abdul Qadir on leg-spin, cricket and Warne

[Maranello]

A very interesting interview of Abdul Qadir published in cricinfo today (link). In particular, some insightful comments about the art of leg-spin, his use of variety, Kaneria's attitude, and the general lack of variety used by the spinners these days.

Some excerpts:

Originally Posted by Abdul Qadir on variety

This is a good question. See today, the performances of Warne and Kumble are there. Nobody can or should doubt their achievements. But there is no fun there in the bowling. Partially, I guess it is due to a decline in the quality of batsmanship today. Because it has gone down, that variety is not actually needed because you can get them out repeatedly with one or two types of balls - they are unable to cope with it. When I was playing, you used to have batsmen like Imran (Khan), Kapil (Dev) and Hadlee coming so low down the order and they were quality players. It is an indication of how strong top orders were then. Now because batting is not of the standard it used to be, you don't need to have too much variety to succeed.

Originally Posted by Abdul Qadir on English batsmen's ineptitude against leg-spin

But I would like to point out that English players play legspin so badly that at times it is inevitable bowlers will succeed against them. I would go as far as to say that several club batsmen in the subcontinent would play legspin better than some of the English batsmen today. You wouldn't have batsmen being bowled around their legs like some English players were. They can't use their pads properly against balls pitching around leg stump and find it impossible to read from the hand. Above all, sweeping a legspin bowler is one of the worst ways of playing him. You can't account for the bounce or the turn so it becomes too dangerous.

Originally Posted by Abdul Qadir on his unique bowling action

Yes, it was an artificial action. As I became more experienced, I started realising the importance of uncovering the psyche of batsmen and playing on it. The action was for show really, to create a physical aura, to give them that feeling of `wow, who and what is this coming in to bowl?' and work on their minds even before I bowled to them. My natural action was very different, quite beautiful. It was like Wasim Raja's action only right-arm. It was also designed for deception, to shield the ball from batsmen. It is important with legspin to not allow batsmen to read from your hand because those who can will play you really well. Our whole job is about deceiving batsmen and so hiding your grip is important. So the action worked in that way as well. Actually, that is one thing about Warne - he doesn't hide his hand too much and good batsmen should be able to read him fairly easily because he has such an open action. My first advice to any budding spinner: you should hide your hand as much as is possible from batsmen. Obviously though, 600 wickets later, we can't really say to Warne that he should change his action!

[Maranello]

And a cricinfo article on Abdul Qadir by Kamran Abbasi can be read here. Some excerpts below:

It was a performance against West Indies that secured his legend. Taking six wickets, he plunged a mighty batting order boasting Vivian Richards, Gordon Greenidge, Desmond Haynes, and Richie Richardson into chaos: all out for 53 on a dusty track in Faisalabad. That was not his only startling performance, for when Qadir cast his spell wickets would tumble like a landslide. His best return was nine wickets, in an innings against England in1987-8 at his home ground of Lahore, helping him to a career total of 236.

It would have been more. But at times, Imran's power of persuasion waned and Qadir was an easy scapegoat, an attacking legspinner who could be expensive. At other times Qadir's strong-headedness lead him into confrontation with colleagues and officials. None the less, ask any Pakistan player of his generation, including Imran and Javed Miandad--ask the man himself--and they will tell you that no legspinner has ever matched Qadir's mastery, not even Warne.

How, then, to explain Warne's superior record? Warne's Australia has been a stronger team than Pakistan were in the 1980s--and that must help. In addition, Warne's genius was quickly acclaimed by his own countrymen and the world, while the petty politics and myopia that engulfs Pakistan cricket meant that Qadir's career was always a struggle. And finally--Qadir, Imran, and Javed would argue this--umpires today are much more sympathetic to the legspinner's art in their decision making than their predecessors ever were.

In the end, though, these are subjective judgements and statistics matter a little but what matters most is the enjoyment that Qadir gave cricket fans. And this was not as a consequence of any flippancy or tomfoolery. Qadir was--and remains--a deeply principled, vastly talented, and intensely dedicated man. Hours of hard work and gallons of passion and devotion to his art created a whirling dervish of a spin bowler.

The love many of us have for his bowling originated with Qadir's own love for the cricket ball, its shape, movement, and possibilities. All of this pleasure from a cricketer who started out as a batsman--whose batsmanship would one day reduce Courtney Walsh to tears--with barely a paisa to rub together. Abdul Qadir was Pakistan's greatest ever legbreak bowler, and by the judgement of his teammates, the greatest ever.

[workkey]

no doubt about this that he was a great spinner and was very effective against england.

i have seen him getting graham gooch on numerous occasions just with his flipper and about that spell against the w.indies..although i was a kid at that time but it was a treat to watch the great windies batting line up getting out for 53 at faislabad..

we have to see this that on those days there were only about 6-7 test matches in a year as compared to now a days where 12-14 test matches are bieng played in a year otherwise i am sure that Qadir would have broken all the records.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Kamran Abbasi

an attacking legspinner who could be expensive [...] Abdul Qadir was Pakistan's greatest ever legbreak bowler, and by the judgement of his teammates, the greatest ever

There, in one throw away remark and one piece of unadulterated worship, you have the contradition and curiosity that seem to characterise so many attitudes to cricket in Pakistan.

You could re-write the above for Waqar Younis: "an attacking fast bowler who could be expensive [...] Waqar Younis was Pakistan's greatest ever fast bowler, and by the judgement of his teammates, the greatest ever". Now.. there would be some in Pakistan who would quibble in the name of Imran Khan or Wasim Akram... but it's a view we're all familiar with.

I'd love to think that in their more sober moments, commentators like Kamran Abbasi do actually recognise that true greatness comes with being able to do something for your team no matter what the situation... that it comes, for instance, in being able to come on as a legspinner in the opening session of a match, on an unhelpful pitch, and just tie one end up whilst your seamers toil away the other end.. that it comes, for instance, in being able to conjure enough wickets for a victory when the opposition are chasing something of the order of 130, where you've no runs to play with.

Warne's greatness has never really been based on his ability to bamboozle (though there were clearly times, when he started out, when he got as carried away with variations as anyone): like a rapidly maturing fast bowler he rapidly learned to look less for the "wonder ball"... and to concentrate on building pressure. It's often overlooked that he's managed to be as metronomic as McGrath for most of his career. He's a leg spinner that can land 6 leg-breaks and over in an area the size of a paper hankerchief and not let the pressure off by managing 5 balls that build pressure and then feel compelled to risk blowing it by doing something different.

I fear, however, that Kamran Abbasi is as besotted as anyone by attacking cricket: Warne's usefulness in conditions in which out and out attack is not called for is not something that seems to figure in his valuation of the player. It's overlooked when considering Anil Kumble (to the point where one suspects he prefers Harbhajan Singh).

ps. Warne DID use the variation in this series.. and infact... he hardly bowled the same in any two innings: we saw everything from an unremitting diet of fast and flat legbreaks to a mix of very slow deliveries given lots of air.. and from sliders from over the wicket and pitching in line to get lbw shouts to balls that turned square from 2' outside of the left hander's off stump looking to clean them up behind their legs - and even, in one innings, a handful of wrong-uns. His 39 wickets suggest he used all the wrong-uns he needed!

[Maranello]

Not sure if its only most Pakistanis who prefer attacking cricket; I would suspect it is a more general phenomenon. Most followers of the game, if forced to choose, would prefer Viv Richards to Sunil Gavaskar, Imran Khan to Richard Hadlee and Abdul Qadir to Anil Kumble. Of course all have their respective merits, and I always thought that Gavaskar, in his own way, could be just as mesmeric and beautiful as Richards, but if I had to choose one to watch, it would be Richards.

In terms of the examples you cite, there are numerous instances, of which you seem to be unaware, where attacking bowlers such as Qadir or Harbhajan or Saqlain have indeed "come on as spinners in the opening session of a match, on an unhelpful pitch, and just tied one end up whilst their seamers toiled away the other end"..etc.

In addition, if I had to select an attack which needed to conjure enough wickets for a victory when the opposition are chasing something of the order of 130, I would go for the likes of Waqar, Saqlain and Harbhajan every time over Pollock, Kumble and Kaneria*. The former have the ability to take wickets very quickly by bowling unplayable deliveries; the latter rely on building pressure, drying up the runs and bowling long spells, a luxury one cannot afford when defending 100 or 130. There are numerous examples where attacking bowlers have successfully defended sub-130 scores; hardly any where defensive options, or 'economical' bowlers have done so on their own.

Originally Posted by RdT

It's often overlooked that he's managed to be as metronomic as McGrath for most of his career.

When and by whom? I don't think anyone watching Warne over fifteen years could have overlooked what has been his principle asset! If you read Qadir's effusive comments about Warne in the interview, the one aspect that comes in for special praise is the control, allied with the thinking that goes into Warne's bowling.

* though not in the same attack perhaps, as it would be somewhat imbalanced!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Maranello

When and by whom? I don't think anyone watching Warne over fifteen years could have overlooked what has been his principle asset!

What you seam to hear / read in discussions of cricket is so often talk of Warne's ability to turn the ball square off the pitch.. as if that's what makes him great and makes him so effective. The fact that the batsman only has to get in straight line from where it pitches to the stumps is conveniently overlooked... as is the fact that it doesn't matter how much it seeks to turn if you get to where it pitches... and as is the fact that a ball pitched short and turning square is an easy picking for a class batsman.

The calls (last year) for Giles' head were almost always couched in terms of "a spinner that actually turns the ball": I'm sure the players and coaches know better... but that's what we heard, incessantly. It's as if turning the ball square is the answer to everything... which is a curious notion as any two-bit bowler can turn a ball square if they stop worrying about where it lands!

I guess Kamran Abbasi is far more familiar with all the above than I am... but it strikes me that his piece on Abdul Qadir is typical in that it is so cursory in it's treatment of accuracy. The off-hand, casually dismissive note that Abdul Quadir "could be expensive" is exemplary: it's as if that were a minor failing on the past of such a great artist... something for which he should not be marked down!

Saying a bowler "could be expensive" is damning: it should disqualify ANY player from comparison with a great like Warne!!!!!

.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Saying a bowler "could be expensive" is damning

I agree, but depends on the context and the actual results. For instance, Qadir's career economy rate of 2.7 rpo is certainly not expensive in my book, and actually compares well with most current and recent spinners (Warne 2.6, Kumble 2.6, Saqlain 2.6, Harbhajan 2.7, Giles 2.8, Mushtaq Ahmed 2.9, Kaneria 3.0, MacGill 3.2 - only Muralitharan at 2.3 seems to be significantly lower). I wouldn't say any of these bowlers (with the possible exception of Stuart MacGill) were expensive.

[Rachael]

I guess it's variations in economy rate that matter most: what marks Warne out is the fact that he's generally able to keep a lid on things anywhere in the world.... and even, as we've recently seen, ona day one pitch that offers him absolutly nothing.

As far as I'm aware Warne has hardly EVER been taken to the cleaners: the one case of batsmen having the better of him would presumably be early in his career in India... where he bowled on pitches with no pace and bounce.... and didn't adjust by bowling faster and flatter (as he would now).

Stats wise.. what complicates matters is always going to be the instances in which a player is hit out of an attack: because they bowl fewer overs when getting carted their career figures tend to take less of a hammering. Even so.. the following (>3.75 / over) ain't great:

  O bpo  M   R  W Econ I R Match
 32   6  4 121  3 3.78 1 L 1st Test  v Aus in Aus 1983/84 at Perth [966]
 24   6  2  91  1 3.79 1 W 1st Test  v WI  in WI  1987/88 at Georgetown [1095]
 12.3 6  1  48  1 3.84 1 W 3rd Test  v Ind in Pak 1982/83 at Faisalabad [945]
 15   6  1  58  1 3.87 2 W 1st Test  v WI  in Pak 1986/87 at Faisalabad [1055]
 16   6  1  63  1 3.94 2 D 5th Test  v Ind in Pak 1982/83 at Lahore [947]
 25.5 6  4 102  1 3.95 3 W 3rd Test  v SL  in Pak 1985/86 at Karachi [1028]
 22   6  5  87  1 3.95 2 L 3rd Test  v Eng in Eng 1982    at Leeds [933]
  2   6  0   8  0 4.00 3 D 2nd Test  v Ind in Ind 1986/87 at Kolkata [1067]
 25   6  1 100  1 4.00 1 D 2nd Test  v Eng in Eng 1987    at Lord's [1076]
 13   6  1  53  1 4.08 2 D 4th Test  v Ind in Ind 1986/87 at Ahmedabad [1071]
 18   6  1  75  1 4.17 1 D 3rd Test  v WI  in Pak 1990/91 at Lahore [1158]
 28   6  3 119  1 4.25 4 D 1st Test  v Ind in Pak 1989/90 at Karachi [1127]
 19   6  2  83  4 4.37 1 D 2nd Test  v WI  in WI  1987/88 at Port of Spain [1096]
 15   6  3  67  4 4.47 1 W 2nd Test  v Ind in Pak 1982/83 at Karachi [942]
  7   6  1  32  0 4.57 1 W 1st Test  v NZ  in Pak 1990/91 at Karachi [1151]
  4   6  0  19  0 4.75 3 D 3rd Test  v WI  in Pak 1990/91 at Lahore [1158]
 20   6  1  96  1 4.80 1 D 3rd Test  v Aus in Aus 1983/84 at Adelaide [970]
  3   6  1  16  0 5.33 1 L 3rd Test  v Ind in Ind 1979/80 at Mumbai [865]
  4   6  1  26  0 6.50 3 D 3rd Test  v Aus in Pak 1988/89 at Lahore [1106]

Warne played twice as many Tests.. mostly on unforgiving Aussie wickets... and his horror stories are probably to be found in this lot....

  O    M   R  W Econ I R Match
 24.3  7  94  7 3.84 2 W 1st Test  v Pak in SL  2002/03 at Colombo (PSS) [1615]
 14.3  2  56  2 3.86 4 W 3rd Test  v Ind in Ind 2004/05 at Nagpur [1718]
 20.3  5  80  2 3.90 4 W 1st Test  v NZ  in NZ  1999/00 at Auckland [1488]
 30    7 122  1 4.07 3 L 1st Test  v Ind in Ind 1997/98 at Chennai [1405]
  3.2  0  14  0 4.20 3 D 2nd Test  v NZ  in NZ  2004/05 at Wellington [1742]
 12    0  51  0 4.25 2 L 5th Test  v WI  in Aus 1992/93 at Perth [1212]
 21.1  2  90  5 4.25 4 W 2nd Test  v SL  in SL  2003/04 at Kandy [1688]
 26    2 111  4 4.27 3 W 3rd Test  v Pak in Aus 2004/05 at Sydney [1731]
 13    1  56  1 4.31 3 W 3rd Test  v Pak in Aus 1999/00 at Perth [1472]
 15.5  2  70  1 4.42 2 L 3rd Test  v WI  in WI  1998/99 at Bridgetown [1453]
 34    3 152  1 4.47 3 L 2nd Test  v Ind in Ind 2000/01 at Kolkata [1535]
  2    0   9  0 4.50 1 D 2nd Test  v Eng in Eng 1997    at Lord's [1370]
 25.2  4 116  4 4.58 1 L 2nd Test  v Eng in Eng 2005    at Birmingham [1758]
 14.5  1  68  4 4.58 1 W 2nd Test  v NZ  in NZ  1999/00 at Wellington [1491]
 13    1  60  0 4.62 3 W 3rd Test  v Ind in Aus 1999/00 at Sydney [1481]
 12    2  57  2 4.75 1 W 1st Test  v WI  in WI  1994/95 at Bridgetown [1294]
 22    2 107  0 4.86 2 W 1st Test  v SL  in SL  1992    at Colombo (SSC) [1194]
 18    2  89  3 4.94 4 D 1st Test  v NZ  in Aus 2001/02 at Brisbane [1565]
  2    0  11  0 5.50 1 L 4th Test  v WI  in Aus 1992/93 at Adelaide [1210]
  3    0  17  0 5.67 4 L 3rd Test  v WI  in Aus 1996/97 at Melbourne [1346]
  3.5  0  26  0 6.78 4 L 3rd Test  v WI  in WI  1994/95 at Port of Spain [1296]
  6    0  41  0 6.83 4 L 3rd Test  v Ind in Ind 2000/01 at Chennai [1539]

I don't suppose every innings in either list represents a horror story: sometimes high economy rates reflect, for instance, 10 men around the bat.. and there are a few on each list where the bowler only sent down 2/3/4 overs! That said... 17% of Abdul Qadir's 111 innings returns figure and just 9% of Warne's 239 innings returns figure - that's a huge difference!

[Orchid]

A certain Salim Malik too got on top up Warne in 1994/95 series in Pakistan. He has mentioned that having grown up playing the bowling of Qadir, playing against Warne was not that hard for him.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Orchid

A certain Salim Malik too got on top up Warne in 1994/95 series in Pakistan. He has mentioned that having grown up playing the bowling of Qadir, playing against Warne was not that hard for him.

Hmmm... that would be this series...

Series         Win   Mat    O       R   W   BBI    BBM     Ave  Econ    SR 5w 10
Australia in Pakistan, 1994/95 [Series]
               Pak     3  181.4   504  18  6/136  9/240  28.00  2.77  60.5  2  0

  O    M   R  W Econ I R Match

 27   10  61  3 2.26 2 L 1st Test  v Pak in Pak 1994/95 at Karachi [1268]
 36.1 12  89  5 2.46 4 
 21.4  8  58  1 2.68 2 D 2nd Test  v Pak in Pak 1994/95 at Rawalpindi [1269]
 25    6  56  0 2.24 3 
 41.5 12 136  6 3.25 1 D 3rd Test  v Pak in Pak 1994/95 at Lahore [1273]
 30    2 104  3 3.47 3