Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Not unlike your face.Dravid was more boring than Kallis with a SR of 42 but he always escapes scrutiny.
Not unlike your face.Dravid was more boring than Kallis with a SR of 42 but he always escapes scrutiny.
Great pick. Vettori's batting was very difficult to watch. He could bat, but you know he couldn't play an impactful innings(more often than not) or bat in a way that was even remotely entertaining.Later years Dan Vettori a good shout imo. Probably from 2009 onwards he became a pretty defensive bowler, and usually looked really ungainly at the crease
???Great pick. Vettori's batting was very difficult to watch. He could bat, but you know he couldn't play an impactful innings(more often than not) or bat in a way that was even remotely entertaining.
Because he did a good job and I can't remember ever seeing him play a slow innings that took the team from a strong position to a weaker one. "Boring" is subjective but that would be why he doesn't get as much scrutiny with regard to his scoring rate.Dravid was more boring than Kallis with a SR of 42 but he always escapes scrutiny.
No, he definitely had innings that fell into the description you gave.Because he did a good job and I can't remember ever seeing him play a slow innings that took the team from a strong position to a weaker one. "Boring" is subjective but that would be why he doesn't get as much scrutiny with regard to his scoring rate.
I think looking at as "SR criticism" is not a perfect description. It should be "scoring rate in the context of matches" criticism, that just happens to be generally reflected in their strike rates.No, he definitely had innings that fell into the description you gave.
Personally think the SR criticism for both is nonsense but whatever.
I was talking more from the POV of aesthetics. He isn't that great to watch IMO, this is subjective though.???
His batting was extremely entertaining and he scored quickly.
Look at his highest scores:
140 (189)
137* (170)
134 (186)
127 (98)
118 (164)
110 (166)
99 (133)
96 (127)
94 (87)
90 (162)
...
He made 29 scores of 50 and above (6 100s & 23 50s) and only 3 were made at a strike rate below 50.
Agree about the bowling but back injuries were a major factor behind that.
I only have memories of the last few years of his career. His bowling is something I'd always enjoy but batting always seemed a bit off to me. Also, you can barely find highlights of his knocks on YT(maybe no one cares about his batting ), there might be some full match highlights where his batting footage might be there.I could be remembering wrong but I thought Vettori was a bit of a minnow-basher with his batting.
Recall him having big knocks against the likes of Zimbabwe
edit: had a look at statsguru think I'm wrong. He averaged about 30% more against Ban/Zim but that's pretty standard, and only 1 hundred against Zim which is the one I remember
Re Vettori, I tend to agree that he was far duller in the last few years of his career with the ball. His back operation meant that he had to bowl more front on and lost a lot of drift and sharp, late dip, which is what got him lots of his wickets earlier career. Still mind bogglingly accurate, with a great control of length.I only have memories of the last few years of his career. His bowling is something I'd always enjoy but batting always seemed a bit off to me. Also, you can barely find highlights of his knocks on YT(maybe no one cares about his batting ), there might be some full match highlights where his batting footage might be there.
B-but he had a 60 SR!Dravid
Graeme Smith
Jeff Crowe
He is great to watch even when he doesn't score at a brisk pace. Looks even better in the stadium, would pay to watch him bat(even in a net session). Can get it if others don't like his style though.Dravid
Graeme Smith
Jeff Crowe
Well colour us all surprised.think I'm wrong.
Don't they both deserve scrutiny?Dravid was more boring than Kallis with a SR of 42 but he always escapes scrutiny.
Dravid was so effective in tests. Wouldn't just question him without any proper reasoning..Don't they both deserve scrutiny?
Implying Kallis wasn’t…Dravid was so effective in tests. Wouldn't just question him without any proper reasoning..
Yes you’d think so.. but Kallis receives far more.Don't they both deserve scrutiny?
Than Dravid? No, I do rate Kallis higher than DravidImplying Kallis wasn’t…
Yes you’d think so.. but Kallis receives far more.
I am just talking about Dravid in isolation. He was great to watch, far from boring even when he wasn't scoring.Implying Kallis wasn’t…