I like Vettori but come on.This is going to be really unpopular I know because of WCs, but imo Vettori was a better ODI bowler than Warne ..(runs away)... He might have struggled to take wickets at Test level, but jeez he was something with the white ball.
On Vettori. I can't remember his exact best period, but I did a random query from 2003 & this is what it came up with. Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
That is unbelievable economy for a spinner. The likes of Harby isn't even close.
Vettori may have generally played for a weak side, but he was a genuine ATG ODI bowler... his ER here is phenomenal, especially considering ODI pitches in NZ offered him nothing.
This is going to be really unpopular I know because of WCs, but imo Vettori was a better ODI bowler than Warne ..(runs away)... He might have struggled to take wickets at Test level, but jeez he was something with the white ball.
Mate, I am not denying that Guptill and Vettori are excellent ODI cricketers. But I think the same of Harbhajan and Rohit Sharma. And I actually rate Ganguly as a better opener than Nohit and Guptill. I would concede that Vettori's figures are better than I remember but even then, I dont think it means he is easily better than Harbhajan and esp. Kumble as ODI spinners. Arguably better? Sure. But it is not a cut and dry argument like Bond and Hadlee over any other Indian ODI bowler or Sachin, Virat, MSD over any other NZ ODI bat. That was my point.We'll just have to disagree with this and I like how you say Ganguly and Sharma & even Guptill I'd take Guptill in ODIs above either Sharma or Ganguly any day of the week.
Fair enough. To me, given the attacks and conditions that Ganguly faced, esp. in the 90s, he is still better for me than Rohit and Guptill but of course,t hese guys have more time left on their careers and can definitely over take him in my rating of them.All 3 are comparable. Saying one is definitely better than the other very difficult. Doesn't seem controversial to pick one.
Ganguly 98-2000 was a great peak though.
edit: @HB
The evidence is pretty overwhelming to be fair. 3rd best ER (75+ wickets) in the 13 years between 2003-2015, with only ATG's McGrath and Pollock ahead, and that was across 198 games. I don't even know if I could get a better period than 2003, but I just remember he didn't start off that well in ODIs in his first 4-5 years since debuted at 18.I like Vettori but come on.
I'll disagree respectfully about Ganguly or Sharma being quite as good as Guptil, but I could see how one may argue thatMate, I am not denying that Guptill and Vettori are excellent ODI cricketers. But I think the same of Harbhajan and Rohit Sharma. And I actually rate Ganguly as a better opener than Nohit and Guptill.
I can't even respectfully disagree about Harby being even close to Vettori as a ODI bowler (or white ball bowler ) because it's not even close, Kumble I do rate a lot more highly than Harby, but not as valuable as Vettori in ODIs , especially when you consider eras and where Vettori played most of his cricket.I would concede that Vettori's figures are better than I remember but even then, I dont think it means he is easily better than Harbhajan and esp. Kumble as ODI spinners. Arguably better? Sure. t.
Pie man Warnie gets tragically overrated in ODIs, apart from one great '99 WC.I like Vettori but come on.
More economical bowler, sure. But Warne took as manywickets as Vettori did in 100 fewer ODIs. That is a humongous difference in striking ability.The evidence is pretty overwhelming to be fair. 3rd best ER (75+ wickets) in the 13 years between 2003-2015, with only ATG's McGrath and Pollock ahead, and that was across 198 games. I don't even know if I could get a better period than 2003, but I just remember he didn't start off that well in ODIs in his first 4-5 years since debuted at 18.
The fact he plays half his cricket on NZ wickets makes his ER of 3.97 throughout that period almost freakish.
That may be true but it's irrelevant to whether he was worse than Vettori.Pie man Warnie gets tragically overrated in ODIs, apart from one great '99 WC.
Saqlain, Murali and Vettori were all superior ODI bowlers.
Yeah, difference is staggering. Plus the difference in ER between the two is minuscule. The SR difference is over the top.More economical bowler, sure. But Warne took as manywickets as Vettori did in 100 fewer ODIs. That is a humongous difference in striking ability.
Clearly I put more weighting on ODI ERs than you do.More economical bowler, sure. But Warne took as manywickets as Vettori did in 100 fewer ODIs. That is a humongous difference in striking ability.
.
SR's aren't the be all and end all either, & if they were Mitchell McClenaghan, Matt Henry & Corey Anderson are suddenly three of the greatest ODI bowlers of all timeYeah, Economy Rate isn't the be all and end all. Opposition teams generally found it pretty easy to sit on Vettori for 40-45 off his ten. And, yeah, while that 10 or so runs he might have saved via tight bowling was valuable, there were times when the extra wicket would have been more valuable.
Bowling records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
Honestly, if you're talking Australian spinners. I'd have Hogg ahead of him, let alone Warne.
Dont forget that performance of his in the 96 semi either. Else it was Windies who would have made it through and who knows, might well have won the trophy. Lara in king form, and a team full of players who can handle the spinners well... Might have been a better match up than that Aussie sideVettori was damn good in ODIs. Whole match winning vs match saving thing though again. Always going to have plenty of people backing the former much more than the latter. And they have a point too. Just like the other side do. Vettori isn't capable of what Warne did in the '99 semis and final. If you are looking for big game performance (and you presumably are while picking ATXIs supposedly playing against other ATXIs), then there is every reason to prefer Warne over Vettori.
I never said it was. It's just one part of the story.SR's aren't the be all and end all either, & if they were Mitchell McClenaghan, Matt Henry & Corey Anderson are suddenly three of the greatest ODI bowlers of all time
I think they're all in the top 10-15 of all time when it comes to SRs.