Where does Vettori rank all-time as an all-rounder?

[social]

I have a huge amount of time for Dan as a cricketer.

IMO, he is certainly the best spin bowling all-rounder in test cricket history

But how does he rank against everybody?

Personally, I'd put him below guys like Sobers, Imran, Miller and Kallis but above the Flintoffs of this world

I'd have him on a par with Kapil Dev and Ian Botham - less of a matchwinner with the ball but becoming more consistent with the bat and certainly a rarer commodity

 

[Athlai]

Probably in the same category as Shaun Pollock personally.

 

[Sir Alex]

I think Richie Benaud has a better case for being the best spinner allrounder.

 

[Zinzan]

I have a huge amount of time for Dan as a cricketer.

IMO, he is certainly the best spin bowling all-rounder in test cricket history

But how does he rank against everybody?

Personally, I'd put him below guys like Sobers, Imran, Miller and Kallis but above the Flintoffs of this world

I'd have him on a par with Kapil Dev and Ian Botham - less of a matchwinner with the ball but becoming more consistent with the bat and certainly a rarer commodity

Totally depends on the context with which you wish to analyse his career.

If you take his whole career to date in it's entirety, he'd be a fair way behind all of those names mentioned above, with his overall batting ave of 30 & bowling ave of 33.

However, if you account for the fact he started playing International cricket at such a ridiculously young age and that his batting has improved out of this world in the last 4-5 years, you could make a decent argument.

His figures for the last 5 years (including this latest innings) are;

38 tests 2188 runs ave 44.65 3 100s 121 wickets ave 31.00

 

[Days of Grace]

I just don't think he wins enough games for his country with his bowling to be classed as an all-time great allrounder.

In fact, when NZ a defending a reasonable total in the 4th innings, he usually fails. See 2nd test vs. England in 2008.

 

[Zinzan]

Probably in the same category as Shaun Pollock personally.

Disagree, reckon the Pollock v Vettori Test comparison would look something like this;

Batting: Vettori >> Pollock (even though Pollock's career ave is higher) &;

Bowling: Pollock >>>> Vettori

Hence, Pollock ahead of Vettori overall

 

[Zinzan]

I just don't think he wins enough games for his country with his bowling to be classed as an all-time great allrounder.

In fact, when NZ a defending a reasonable total in the 4th innings, he usually fails. See 2nd test vs. England in 2008.

As much as I'm a fan of Vettori, find it difficult to argue with that summation

 

[aussie]

I think Richie Benaud has a better case for being the best spinner allrounder.

Not forgetting Aubrey Faulkner, Vinoo Mankad, Wilfred Rhodes as well. Dont think Vettori is a better spinner of either.

 

[aussie]

Disagree, reckon the Pollock v Vettori Test comparison would look something like this;

Batting: Vettori >> Pollock (even though Pollock's career ave is higher) &;

Bowling: Pollock >>>> Vettori

Hence, Pollock ahead of Vettori overall

Hmm cant agree with Vettori being a better batsman than Pollock.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Totally depends on the context with which you wish to analyse his career.

If you take his whole career to date in it's entirety, he'd be a fair way behind all of those names mentioned above, with his overall batting ave of 30 & bowling ave of 33.

However, if you account for the fact he started playing International cricket at such a ridiculously young age and that his batting has improved out of this world in the last 4-5 years, you could make a decent argument.

His figures for the last 5 years (including this latest innings) are;

38 tests 2188 runs ave 44.65 3 100s 121 wickets ave 31.00

You could be just as selective with Botham and Flintoff though.

Vettori's pretty much not up there because he doesn't provide enough threat with the ball and doesn't have the awesome batting of someone like Sobers or Kallis. Scoring at a decent average at number 8, then bowling some tidy overs doesn't really cut it when compared with the names mentioned so far.

 

[Zinzan]

You could be just as selective with Botham and Flintoff though.

Vettori's pretty much not up there because he doesn't provide enough threat with the ball and doesn't have the awesome batting of someone like Sobers or Kallis. Scoring at a decent average at number 8, then bowling some tidy overs doesn't really cut it when compared with the names mentioned so far.

Actually agree with that in the main. I suppose I was intending to make the point that statistically he's had a very good last 4-5 years, so Social could make a decent argument purely on that basis.

However for me, it's his lack of penetration with the ball at Test level that counts against him more than anything else when comparing him with the other great bowling all-rounders.

That said, his batting performances in the last few years probably deserves a better mention that yours of him merely having a 'decent average at number 8'

 

[social]

I think Richie Benaud has a better case for being the best spinner allrounder.

Not IMO

For a large chunk of his career, he nowhere near as good a bowler as say Stuart MacGill and was pretty much an inconsistent hitter with the bat

Vettori has taken over 300 wickets and averaged nearly 45 with the bat for the past 5 years - that's a great and underrated achievement

 

[social]

You could be just as selective with Botham and Flintoff though.

Vettori's pretty much not up there because he doesn't provide enough threat with the ball and doesn't have the awesome batting of someone like Sobers or Kallis. Scoring at a decent average at number 8, then bowling some tidy overs doesn't really cut it when compared with the names mentioned so far.

Agree on Botham (despite his consistent failure against the best of his time) but Flintoff doesnt compare to Vettori as he was only excellent in BOTH disciplines for a relatively short period of time

Vettori's only weakness is that he is not a real match-winner (plus he doesnt have a media machine behind him) but, as a package, it's really only the select few geniuses that rank above him IMO

 

[Uppercut]

You could be just as selective with Botham and Flintoff though.

Vettori's pretty much not up there because he doesn't provide enough threat with the ball and doesn't have the awesome batting of someone like Sobers or Kallis. Scoring at a decent average at number 8, then bowling some tidy overs doesn't really cut it when compared with the names mentioned so far.

This is what I think.

Also, his bowling record is shocking without Bangladesh, and his batting takes a bit of a hit too. I've got a lot more time for his batting these days than I do for his bowling. Even in the past five years, pinpointed by zinzan as a period in which he's improved out of sight, he averages 36.7 without Bangladesh included.

 

[Athlai]

Disagree, reckon the Pollock v Vettori Test comparison would look something like this;

Batting: Vettori >> Pollock (even though Pollock's career ave is higher) &;

Bowling: Pollock >>>> Vettori

Hence, Pollock ahead of Vettori overall

In Tests I'd say Vettori (in recent years) is the superior batsman by a bit further than that, but Pollock is easily better with the ball. I love Pollock, and he is highly underrated I think he is better than Vettori but certainly in the same ball park.

 

[Uppercut]

Pollock makes Vettori look like a donkey for mine.

 

[aussie]

Not IMO

For a large chunk of his career, he nowhere near as good a bowler as say Stuart MacGill and was pretty much an inconsistent hitter with the bat

Vettori has taken over 300 wickets and averaged nearly 45 with the bat for the past 5 years - that's a great and underrated achievement

Thats not a fair generalization of Benaud career tbh. Yes Beanud for the first few years of his career with the ball was nothing special, barely showing glimpses of ability. But when he peaked in SA 57/58 to end of career he averaged 27 with the bat, 26 with the ball

MacGill was never a better spinner than Benaud at any point of his career thats for sure. Plus although Vettori may have a very high average with the bat in the few years, i tend to think given NZs weak top order, Vettori may have had more oppurtunities to build an innings & have more not outs (not 100% sure about this specific point) than Benaud. Who would have played with a very strong AUS top order during his career, thus in most cases his batting was more a luxury rather key facet in AUS batting lineup.

 

[Cruxdude]

Vettori is a good player. To be rated a great all-rounder he needs to bowl much much better.

 

[Zinzan]

In Tests I'd say Vettori (in recent years) is the superior batsman by a bit further than that, but Pollock is easily better with the ball. I love Pollock, and he is highly underrated I think he is better than Vettori but certainly in the same ball park.

Nah,.not in the same ball park at all, University Oval, Dunedin Vs Melbourne Cricket Ground for mine

 

[popepouri]

My estimate:

Pollock in ODI batting >>>>> Vettori in ODI batting

Pollock in ODI bowling >> Vettori in ODI bowling

Pollock in Test bowling >>> Vettori in Test bowling

Pollock in Test batting over career >>> Vettori in Test batting before 2006

Pollock in Test batting over career <<< Vettori in Test batting after 2006