Is Daniel Vettori the best 'all-rounder' at the moment?

[bagapath]

CW is an excellent forum. I am probably one of the very few really annoying posters. most of the guys are fun.

 

[Zinzan]

Vettori with the ball in tests gets more and more disappointing as the years go on.

Totally agree. I've posted this 2000 footage before, but worth showing again. To me the key difference is the spring & bounce he had in his action back then before the stress fractures & other injuries

YouTube - Daniel Vettori bowling highlight

 

[Zinzan]

CW is an excellent forum.

Definitely amongst the most knowledgeable group of cricket fans I've ever encountered

I am probably one of the very few really annoying posters

Oh well, every forum has their share

Kidding of course Bagadath, you're all good dude

 

[Athlai]

RTD close to being the best. not sure. johnson is a second tier contender in tests. a contender nevertheless

I mean be consistent with inclusion of stats vs. minnows for players. RTD has an economy of around 8 bugger all wickets and a crap average without minnows.

 

[Zinzan]

Never seen him reverse it though.

I've seen Kallis get it reversing on a few occasions

 

[Black_Warrior]

After the retirement of Flintoff, I thought Kallis was the number 1 all rounder in the world, although I am not sure what role he is going to play in future years as a bowler..Ideally I would want him to bowl less, preserve his fitness and score truckload of runs and centuries..
After Kallis, I think its a tough call between Vettori and Shakib for me. Shakib is a fantastic batsman too, maybe a tad better than Vettori, and a very good bowler...so I am a little undecided there.

 

[bagapath]

I mean be consistent with inclusion of stats vs. minnows for players. RTD has an economy of around 8 bugger all wickets and a crap average without minnows.

u r right. i shud have checked that first.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

After the retirement of Flintoff, I thought Kallis was the number 1 all rounder in the world.

I'm no great fan of Kallis but I don't think his position as the Number 1 all rounder in world was particularly compromised by the presence of Andrew Flintoff.

 

[GIMH]

The fact that he hasn't been taking bags of five doesn't preclude him from being a bowler. The real irony is that you actually used this theory of yours to claim that Flintoff was a better allrounder than Kallis this decade, and Flintoff only took five three times in his whole career despite being a bowling allrounder.

Since the tour of England, Kallis's bowling has been awesome IMO. I'd pick him in South Africa's team right now even if he couldn't bat - he's been their second best quick in recent times.

Not really. Everyone in the world might have been aware that Flintoff was a better bowler than batsman, but he was usually picked as a batting all-rounder, hence his batting in the top six. It was only really this summer (discounting his early career) and one Test in 2008 where he was picked to bat at seven.

Not that it makes the rest of your point any less valid, and most will probably disagree with me on it, but for me a bowling all-rounder is one batting seven or below.

I'm no great fan of Kallis but I don't think his position as the Number 1 all rounder in world was particularly compromised by the presence of Andrew Flintoff.

Not by the time he retired, but 03-06 it was definitely a valid argument that could swign either away, IMO

 

[Migara]

Doesn anyone actually rate Mathews as an all-rounder?

Batting all rounder may be. Played all his tests on SC, so average of 60. But ODI bowling average of 26 tells that he can do it.

But the script is to be a #6 averaging 40-45 with the bat (if applies himself, most of his coaches say that he can average 50 with the bat) and around 35 with the ball and be the 5th bowler. That will be a great achievement. No one is asking him to be Kallis.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

After Kallis, I think its a tough call between Vettori and Shakib for me. Shakib is a fantastic batsman too, maybe a tad better than Vettori, and a very good bowler...so I am a little undecided there.

I think Vettori's a much better batsman actually. Vettori has been awesome in the last couple of years. Since Shakib's debut he's averaged over 40 against teams other than Bangladesh. Shakib will quite likely improve as a batsman, but as of right now, Vettori's much better for mine.

Ftr, Shakib against teams other than West Indies C: 26.47 batting.

Not really. Everyone in the world might have been aware that Flintoff was a better bowler than batsman, but he was usually picked as a batting all-rounder, hence his batting in the top six

While he did indeed bat higher than his sell price, I don't think he was picked as a batting allrounder. Look at how big a consideration his bowling was when deciding on the batting lineup (ie 4- or 5-man attack). If anything he was picked as a genuine allrounder, but his batting certainly was not the primary consideration, for mine.

He considered himself more of a batsman though.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I think Vettori's a much better batsman actually. Vettori has been awesome in the last couple of years. Since Shakib's debut he's averaged over 40 against teams other than Bangladesh. Shakib will quite likely improve as a batsman, but as of right now, Vettori's much better for mine.

Ftr, Shakib against teams other than West Indies C: 26.47 batting.

Shakib already had five Test 5-fers in 21 innings. For that I'd much rather have Shakib in my side, assuming that's fairly indicative of him as a player. A spinner who can do that is far more valuable than a guy who merely blocks an end up - particularly if you don't happen to have 3-4 great seam bowlers.

 

[aussie]

Kallis was awesome in England and pretty good home and away against Australia.

Since the tour of England, Kallis's bowling has been awesome IMO.

. Ha well if Kallis was awesome last summer vs ENG, what would you call Flintoff's Ashes 05 bowling performance?. Kallis's bowling very much overated ATM AFAIC.

There was one particularly impressive spell against the Aussies in the first test when South Africa were in deep ****. He manages to be a very consistent bowler while still being capable of occasionally stepping it up for a particular decisive spell. What always impresses me is the list of players he's dismissed. For someone so often thought of as a workmanlike or honest bowler, he gets a lot of seriously good batsmen out.

Thats just him doing his job is 5th bowler in th SA attack TBF, getting the odd wicket (very quality wickets indeed) here of there, very Doug Waltersish. (im not comparing his bowling to Walters just to be clear - just the ability to get high priced wickets). But overall his effectiveness as strike bowler has declined considerably this decade in tests.

The fact that he hasn't been taking bags of five doesn't preclude him from being a bowler.

It precludes him from being termed an true "all-rounder". Since all the very good/great pace-bowling all rounders at their peaks Botham, Imran, Kapil, Hadlee, Sobers, Flintoff, Bailey, where able to score 50s/1000s & take 5 wickets with some degree of consistency/regularity.

Kallis has not been able to do this in 6 1/2 againts a quality opposition. So that disqualifies him from being an "all-rounder". He for the majority of this decade has just been a batsman who bowls & chips in with very valubale wickets.

The real irony is that you actually used this theory of yours to claim that Flintoff was a better allrounder than Kallis this decade, and Flintoff only took five three times in his whole career despite being a bowling allrounder.

No irony, since you can't compare the two because you need to understand the dynamics of Freddie's career. As i always say the 2 big reason why Fred has taken more 5 wicket hauls since he became test quality in Bridgetown 04 are:

- Outside Ashes 05, Flintoff has regularly had to act not only as England main attacking option. But as the main defensive bowler, when the situation gets out of hand. Since the balance of ENGs bowling attack due to injuries & lack of quality support, hasn't allowed Freddie to be used in short sharp bursts like a Akhtar, Steyn or Lee.

- Secondly, as Ian Chappell rightlfully highlighted in Ashes 06/07. His whole career is a bit like Ambrose in AUS 92/93 before the Perth performance. Freddie natural lenght was back of lenght & just outside off, he doesn't bowl full which at times affects his ability to take big hauls in test matches.

Give me a series this decade where Kallis performed better as an all-rounder than Freddie in Ashes 05 & IND 05/06?

I'd pick him in South Africa's team right now even if he couldn't bat -

Ha yall going too far now. In a test, ODI or T20 or all three?. Since in upcoming 1st test vs ENG for example i highly doubt Mikey Arthur would pick Kallis if he could only just bowl.

he's been their second best quick in recent times.

This technically could be true. He has been slightly more effective than M Morkel yes, but Ntini has still been slightly ahead IMO although he has been in steady decline since the ENG tour last year.

 

[aussie]

Surely it's stating the obvious that the pitch played a fairly significant role in the disparity between the two Tests...

Not too sure what you mean here..

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Shakib already had five Test 5-fers in 21 innings. For that I'd much rather have Shakib in my side, assuming that's fairly indicative of him as a player. A spinner who can do that is far more valuable than a guy who merely blocks an end up - particularly if you don't happen to have 3-4 great seam bowlers.

Which has precisely nothing to do with my point, thanks.

Not too sure what you mean here..

One pitch offered a lot more assistance than the other.

 

[Prince EWS]

- Outside Ashes 05, Flintoff has regularly had to act not only as England main attacking option. But as the main defensive bowler, when the situation gets out of hand. Since the balance of ENGs bowling attack due to injuries & lack of quality support, hasn't allowed Freddie to be used in short sharp bursts like a Akhtar, Steyn or Lee.

Lol. So it's okay for Flintoff to have a set role within the bowling attack that generally precludes him for taking five wicket hauls, but when Kallis has one it's because he's not an allrounder.

- Secondly, as Ian Chappell rightlfully highlighted in Ashes 06/07. His whole career is a bit like Ambrose in AUS 92/93 before the Perth performance. Freddie natural lenght was back of lenght & just outside off, he doesn't bowl full which at times affects his ability to take big hauls in test matches.

That's just a flaw of his bowling though. He bowled too short and didn't take enough wickets as a result. It's like saying the only reason Daren Powell didn't take lots of five wicket hauls was because he bowled with very little accuracy, consistency or thought in his bowling - sure it's true but it doesn't mean we should look past his record because of it; it just contributed to him being crap. Now I'm not saying Flintoff was crap by any stretch of the imagination, but you can't suggest that a bowling flaw is a mitigating circumstance.

 

[GIMH]

While he did indeed bat higher than his sell price, I don't think he was picked as a batting allrounder. Look at how big a consideration his bowling was when deciding on the batting lineup (ie 4- or 5-man attack). If anything he was picked as a genuine allrounder, but his batting certainly was not the primary consideration, for mine.

He considered himself more of a batsman though.

Yeah he was probably picked as a genuine all-rounder actually, but tbh whenever he missed Tests prior to this year, he was generally replaced by a batsman. It was only in the Ashes this year (off the top of my head) where we replaced him with a bowler. Ironically enough, everyone felt we should have replaced him with a batsman.

 

[aussie]

One pitch offered a lot more assistance than the other.

I only mentioned one test though, the 2001 Barbados test.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I only mentioned one test though, the 2001 Barbados test.

You were comparing Kallis' effectiveness in that Test to other performances. It's implicit that you were referencing other Tests and other pitches.

 

[aussie]

Lol. So it's okay for Flintoff to have a set role within the bowling attack that generally precludes him for taking five wicket hauls, but when Kallis has one it's because he's not an allrounder.

No no. Dont confuse this thing uncle. Kallis has a set role as 5th bowler not because he is forced into that role by Smith or the coach & they are preventing him from reaching another gear or something. But rather thats only the role where he is effective.

Plus that effectiveness also depends on the conditions. Given that he is natural swing bowler he would be a decent 4th seamer in ENG, SA, NZ or wherever else it swings. But on flat decks as was the case in IND 08, he is nothing more than a fill in option/stock bowler.

edit: The only recent times i can remember Kallis playing as 3rd seamer/4th seamer in the Super test & 3rd test Capetown 2009 vs AUS. He was very average.

Flintoff had a set role of being ENG main defensive bowler instead of being the main attacking bowler, since with the lack of support around him. He was the only bowler ENG could depend on to keep things under control. BIG difference.

That's just a flaw of his bowling though. He bowled too short and didn't take enough wickets as a result. It's like saying the only reason Daren Powell didn't take lots of five wicket hauls was because he bowled with very little accuracy, consistency or thought in his bowling - sure it's true but it doesn't mean we should look past his record because of it; it just contributed to him being crap. Now I'm not saying Flintoff was crap by any stretch of the imagination, but you can't suggest that a bowling flaw is a mitigating circumstance.

It wasn't a technical fault though. It was more of mental/tactical thing. As aforementioned:

"Flintoff had a set role of being ENG main defensive bowler instead of being the main attacking bowler, since with the lack of support around him. He was the only bowler ENG could depend on to keep things under control."

He had bowl like that for ENGs sake. In the Ashes 05 when he allowed to really be strike bowler we all know how fantastic he was.

Another factor that prevented Freddie from improving on his back of a length style bowling after Ashes 05, was obviously his injuries. Flintoff's bowling definately had another gear to go to IMO, but he had to keep stop starting & although his bowling reamined ENGs only test quality option it wasn't able to reach that next level.