Is Daniel Vettori underachieving?

[grant28]

daniel vettori has 43 dads

 

[gwo]

Some numbers...you can't argue against this...

1997 - 9 tests - 30 wickets - 3.33/match @ 34.23
1998 - 6 tests - 24 wickets - 4/match @ 27.50
1999 - 13 tests - 37 wickets - 2.84/match @ 39.84
2000 - 3 tests - 15 wickets - 5/match @ 19.80
2001 - 5 tests - 19 wickets - 3.8/match @ 30.37
2002 - 8 tests - 14 wickets - 1.75/match @ 48.00
2003 - 6 tests - 11 wickets - 1.83/match @ 60.09
2004 - 9 tests - 38 wickets - 4.22/match @ 32.11
2005 - 6 tests - 20 wickets - 3.33/match @ 32.95
2006 - 8 tests - 21 wickets - 2.63/match @ 28.57

If you take out his poor years of 02 and 03, hes averaging about 31.93. Respectable, but not particularly.

Really, Vettori is doing well in the conditions he has been provided, but not a world class test match cricketer by ANY means of imagination

 

[silentstriker]

Interesting that he's that good against SL. I would have thought they wouldn't be too challenged by Vettori considering they've got Murali to practice with. That Pakistan, India and SA average is shocking though. Thanks for that Athlai.

Vetorri and Muralitharan are completely different types of bowlers. Doing well against one would not really prepare you for doing well against the other.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

They do that for every left arm orthodox fingerspinner and right arm orthofox spinner though.

I'll orthofox you in a minute.

 

[tooextracool]

If Vettori isn't going to bowl though, wouldn't picking another specialist batsman make more sense than carrying a non-bowling bowler based on the fact that he bats better than the other bowlers?

not sure i understand the logic of this. Vettori averages nearly 40 since 2003:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

Thats better than nearly all of their batsmen. Even on a green top, Vettori offers far more than a lot of the rest in the side, even with the ball where he rarely ever goes for runs.

 

[tooextracool]

Some numbers...you can't argue against this...

1997 - 9 tests - 30 wickets - 3.33/match @ 34.23
1998 - 6 tests - 24 wickets - 4/match @ 27.50
1999 - 13 tests - 37 wickets - 2.84/match @ 39.84
2000 - 3 tests - 15 wickets - 5/match @ 19.80
2001 - 5 tests - 19 wickets - 3.8/match @ 30.37
2002 - 8 tests - 14 wickets - 1.75/match @ 48.00
2003 - 6 tests - 11 wickets - 1.83/match @ 60.09
2004 - 9 tests - 38 wickets - 4.22/match @ 32.11
2005 - 6 tests - 20 wickets - 3.33/match @ 32.95
2006 - 8 tests - 21 wickets - 2.63/match @ 28.57

If you take out his poor years of 02 and 03, hes averaging about 31.93. Respectable, but not particularly.

Really, Vettori is doing well in the conditions he has been provided, but not a world class test match cricketer by ANY means of imagination

Vettori is easily the best finger spinner in world cricket. He had 2 poor years where he was clearly hampered by injury and his arm ball was never the same as a result, but other than that his record is merely diminished by having to play in NZ where he hasnt benefitted from the conditions. His record in most other countries that hes played more than a handful of tests in is excellent. I still maintain that there is no better user of drift, flight and loop than vettori in world cricket at the moment, and that includes the magician Muralitharan.

 

[tooextracool]

A team like this?

Papps
Vincent/Cumming
Sinclair
Fleming
Fulton
Styris
Oram
McCullum
Franklin
Bond
Gillespie/Martin/someone

That's one mighty middle order.

gillespie, like franklin is useless and NZ would be better off looking for someone else whos exactly somewhat capable of taking wickets. NZ only have one decent seamer in Bond, Oram is by and large there to stem the run flow and clean up after Franklin and Martin generally get pasted. At least Martin has some sort of potential, cant say the same about the other two.

 

[superkingdave]

Some numbers...you can't argue against this...

1997 - 9 tests - 30 wickets - 3.33/match @ 34.23
1998 - 6 tests - 24 wickets - 4/match @ 27.50
1999 - 13 tests - 37 wickets - 2.84/match @ 39.84
2000 - 3 tests - 15 wickets - 5/match @ 19.80
2001 - 5 tests - 19 wickets - 3.8/match @ 30.37
2002 - 8 tests - 14 wickets - 1.75/match @ 48.00
2003 - 6 tests - 11 wickets - 1.83/match @ 60.09
2004 - 9 tests - 38 wickets - 4.22/match @ 32.11
2005 - 6 tests - 20 wickets - 3.33/match @ 32.95
2006 - 8 tests - 21 wickets - 2.63/match @ 28.57

If you take out his poor years of 02 and 03, hes averaging about 31.93. Respectable, but not particularly.

Really, Vettori is doing well in the conditions he has been provided, but not a world class test match cricketer by ANY means of imagination

yeah but tbf 2004 & 2005 are both mid 50 averages if you exclude Bangladesh and Zimbabwe....

 

[Richard]

gillespie, like franklin is useless

Franklin is certainly not useless on seaming pitches with a swinging ball, he's got the potential to end-up a far better seamer than most of those NZ have ever had.

 

[Richard]

So you're saying we should be using Patel? Or is there someone else you have in mind?

On pitches that don't turn, there's no need for a fingerspinner IMO - you might as well go in with an all-seam attack, and even more so if there's seam and cloud cover.

 

[tooextracool]

Franklin is certainly not useless on seaming pitches with a swinging ball, he's got the potential to end-up a far better seamer than most of those NZ have ever had.

anyone who relies upon seaming wickets and a swinging ball isnt going to end up with a very successful career. Franklin for me is nothing more than an Irfan Pathan, and he is certainly nowhere near the same class of even a Shayne O'Connor.

 

[Richard]

Why shouldn't he if NZ prepare home pitches to suit him (and Bond... and Oram... and any of their other seamers)? He's not going to be any use in Australia, the subcontinent etc. but isn't that better than Chris Martin who's useless almost all the time regardless of destination?

Who do you see currently who is better? I'm not saying Franklin's a World-beater, I'm saying he's a better seamer than most others New Zealand have currently and still young enough to play for another 7 or 8 years.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Bit harsh on Martin there IMO. He's another bowler like Frankin who thrives on seaming and swinging conditions.His test record ain't that bad and I'd still rather see him in the test team ahead of the likes of Mason and Gillespie.An attack of Bond,Martin,Franklin,Oram is a pretty good seam attack IMO in helpful conditions.

 

[Richard]

Martin is a seam-reliant bowler, and even then we've seen him waste helpful conditions more than a few times.

Franklin is both seam and swing bowler and has done so less often.

 

[Prince EWS]

not sure i understand the logic of this. Vettori averages nearly 40 since 2003:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

Thats better than nearly all of their batsmen. Even on a green top, Vettori offers far more than a lot of the rest in the side, even with the ball where he rarely ever goes for runs.

His bowling is irrelevent if he isn't going to bowl - which he didn't do at all during the India series. If the selectors think he has a role to play with the ball on a greentop then by all means they should pick him, but when he's not bowling at all then he clearly does not. And you're seriously dreaming if you think he'd make the side as a specialist batsman, regardless of what he's averaged since 2003.

 

[Prince EWS]

Martin is a seam-reliant bowler, and even then we've seen him waste helpful conditions more than a few times.

Franklin is both seam and swing bowler and has done so less often.

I'm not about to sit here and argue Martin > Franklin because it couldn't be further from the truth IMO, but if you don't think Martin swings the ball then you've got another thing coming. He does struggle with the duke ball for whatever reason, but when conditions suit in home conditions, he swings the ball as much if not more than Franklin. On occassion I've seen him bowl brilliant spells of massive great inswingers at around 140km/h - it just happens so rarely and typically only at one ground that he's not worth selecting the rest of the time.

 

[Richard]

Like Chris Harris, a bowler who can only swing it on one or two grounds is not really a swing-bowler IMO. I've never seen Harris swing a single ball... except at McLean Park, Napier, where I've on 2 totally separate occasions, 5 years apart, seen him bowl some massive inswingers.

Franklin, generally, if you give him a ball in decent condition, will bowl and find it will swing. Martin will do so occasionally, and when those occasions happen the results will often be remarkable. But for me, Franklin is the more equipped swing-bowler.

 

[Prince EWS]

Franklin, generally, if you give him a ball in decent condition, will bowl and find it will swing. Martin will do so occasionally, and when those occasions happen the results will often be remarkable. But for me, Franklin is the more equipped swing-bowler.

Oh, I agree completely. Personally I think Franklin is a massively under-rated test bowler and that Martin is extremely lucky to be in the team at this point. My only gripe is this:

Martin is a seam-reliant bowler
Franklin is both seam and swing bowler.

Martin is every bit as much a swing bowler as Franklin - he just doens't get it right very often. Basically, he relies on swing to get most of his wickets, which explains why he has such a poor record.

Like Chris Harris, a bowler who can only swing it on one or two grounds is not really a swing-bowler IMO. I've never seen Harris swing a single ball... except at McLean Park, Napier, where I've twice seen him bowl some massive inswingers.

Martin generally swings the kookaburra ball early if conditions are right - his performances are absolutely remarkable at one ground (I'm not sure which one though, unfortunately. Wellington perhaps?) where he swings the ball wildly at good pace with great control - but that doesn't mean he doesn't swing the ball less-so with less control on other grounds. His away-from-home problem stems with different types of cricket balls IMO - he couldn't get the duke ball off the straight if his life depended on it.

 

[Richard]

Perhaps it's just a not-unusual case of me not phrasing things well, then...

Franklin is a bowler who is far, far more capable of achieving and putting to use swing than Martin.

Might be a rather better thing to say.

 

[Prince EWS]

Perhaps it's just a not-unusual case of me not phrasing things well, then...

Franklin is a bowler who is far, far more capable of achieving and putting to use swing than Martin.

Might be a rather better thing to say.

Agreed.