View Full Version : Why doesn't Vettori get more credit as an all-rounder?
Drummond
27 Mar 2009, 13:08
Just notced up his 19th half century to go with 3 centuries.
Batting average of 28.48.
Those are extremely good numbers, to go with his 288 wickets at 33.
I'm not a huge fan of the bloke, I know he's not up there with some other all-rounders, but those numbers are hard to ignore and his batting is getting better every year.
Offsider
27 Mar 2009, 13:38
I rate him highly as an allrounder although I think that both his batting and bowling are just good NOT great. Apparently over the last five years he averages 40 as a batsman, yet is bowling average has gotten steadily worse.
I rate him highly as an allrounder although I think that both his batting and bowling are just good NOT great. Apparently over the last five years he averages 40 as a batsman, yet is bowling average has gotten steadily worse.
I think that comes as he's having to bowl a lot more, even pitches that aren't spin friendly he has to bowl more than perhaps a spinner would in another team.
legend166
27 Mar 2009, 14:37
The problem with Vettori's bowling is that he has no back up. He's a great bowler, but one that can be defended. He'll rarely spin one past the bat unless he has quite a bit of assistance from the pitch. So batsman are able to just bide their time, knowing they'll be able to take runs at the other end.
He's a better bolwer than Paul Harris, for example, but because he's got quality pace at the other end, he gets wickets. I guarantee if Vettori had a bowler the quality of Steyn the other end, he'd be taking a lot more wickets.
DoubleO7
27 Mar 2009, 15:02
He gets plenty of credit as an all-rounder. When New Zealand were playing Australia didn't you listen to the commentators. They acknowledge his achievements all the time.
He is not underrated nor is he overrated. I think his lack of spin is why his bowling figures are the way they are and as has been mentioned before he has next to no back up to support him. Accuracy will only get you so far...
Ricketts
27 Mar 2009, 15:22
Yeah he gets plenty of credit for his batting these days.
He used to be a hopeless batsman for probably the first half of his career.
I rate him highly as an allrounder although I think that both his batting and bowling are just good NOT great. Apparently over the last five years he averages 40 as a batsman, yet is bowling average has gotten steadily worse.
The Kiwi commentators mentioned in the last Test how his bowling had dropped off.As you say,his batting average in recent years is 40 but so is his bowling average.
legend166
27 Mar 2009, 17:31
Let's be serious though, we'd kill to have him in our side. Would dominate.
Got to feel for the bloke being under so much pressure each time he goes out there. He is expected to take a bag of wickets and make a stack of runs each innings. If only New Zealand had someone who could bowl tight at the other end I think he would have a much lower bowling average. Kiwi's batting is starting to come together nice however, Taylor, Ryder, Guptil, McCullum can all bat.
Blue Dimension
27 Mar 2009, 21:48
Got to feel for the bloke being under so much pressure each time he goes out there. He is expected to take a bag of wickets and make a stack of runs each innings. If only New Zealand had someone who could bowl tight at the other end I think he would have a much lower bowling average. Kiwi's batting is starting to come together nice however, Taylor, Ryder, Guptil, McCullum can all bat.
Yep, with Oram to come back.
James Franklin has remodelled himself in a Noffke like way and is a bowling all rounder who can slot in at 6. They just need another opener with Guptill...I guess Flynn is rated too but didn't see the best of him in Aus.
I think he does get credit as a bowling all rounder. He is a star player.
His bowling is vastly overrated, and his batting underrated.
Because he's not an all rounder, if he bats further up the order and takes the pressure of batting rather than down the order when he's just batting with the tail.
Dan is a gun, although read on Cricinfo that since his batting average has been going up, his bowling average is going up as well. But still I do rate him as a allrounder, pity he has no backup at the other end when he bowls.
Bond,ShaneBond
31 Mar 2009, 22:05
Like most of the posters on this thread, I think he is struggling because he is the number one bowler in the attack. Because the opposition respect him but nobody else in the New Zealand attack, they blunt his influence by limiting their risk against him. They know they will get opportunities at the other end.
The best indicator of this is Vetorri's record with and without Shane Bond, New Zealand's only other really elite bowler during Vettori's career.
And the number's are...
WITH Bond: 17 matches, 58 wickets@24.46
WITHOUT Bond: 74 matches, 233 wickets@35.43
The lesson learnt? Chuck Vettori into an Australian, South African, Indian or English team and he would be pretty damn good. As it is, he can't carry an attack on his own.
Bananayard
6 Apr 2009, 15:02
Just notced up his 19th half century to go with 3 centuries.
Batting average of 28.48.
Those are extremely good numbers, to go with his 288 wickets at 33.
I'm not a huge fan of the bloke, I know he's not up there with some other all-rounders, but those numbers are hard to ignore and his batting is getting better every year.
Because he isnt very good at either bowling or batting. Why is Vettori's bowling held in such high regard? Bowling average of mid 40s in the past 4 years. Thats utterly disgraceful and yet nobody seems to pick up on this.
Belnakor
7 Apr 2009, 12:18
Because the rest of his attack are also averaging about that.
Because he isnt very good at either bowling or batting. Why is Vettori's bowling held in such high regard? Bowling average of mid 40s in the past 4 years. Thats utterly disgraceful and yet nobody seems to pick up on this.
Because they have no decent fast bowlers. He can't take wickets when the batsman block his six balls then smashing the bloke charging in from the other end. Repeat.
Give him somebody like Bond, Steyn etc from the other end and he is 100x more dangerous becuase there is pressure from both ends.
crowsarethebest
7 Apr 2009, 13:36
He is a brilliant bowler and as many people have said in this thread, needs more support. He's been regularly having to bowl 50 overs in one innings + batting as well. If he was in the Aussie team he'd average about 25 with the ball easy. He's an absolute GUN.
Would be amongst the first picked if he was an Aussie.
courtjester
10 Apr 2009, 08:43
Would be amongst the first picked if he was an Aussie.
Hughes
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
North
Haddin
Vettori
Johnson
Siddle
Clark
Looks an alright line-up for the first Ashes test doesn't it? We should steal him like we stole Crowded House and Phar Lap.