Daniel Vettori

[tooextracool]

I watched the game, let me assure you. There would be no point whatsoever in saying I did if I didn't.
Of course I can make mistakes, and maybe I have here, but it's not like The WACA doesn't produce turning pitches every now and then.
I am in little doubt as to what I saw in that match.

where have i denied that the WACA doesnt produce turners?
but i can assure you that on this occasion it wasnt a turner, it was the flattest WACA pitch in a very long time. what vettori did was bowl extremely brilliantly in unhelpful conditions. and now that there is one more person who has watched this game and agrees with my assesment of the wicket(and not one person backs up your assessment) perhaps now you'll finally agree that it wasnt a turner?

 

[bryce]

haha i passed daniel vettori in outer-city hamilton today on my way home from cricket practice, lol it was so weird seeing him driving on the road, not something you exactly expect

 

[Richard]

no im simply pointing out how looking at patterns doesnt really say anything, just like it doesnt in ramprakash's case.
as far as that particular period is concened, its fairly obvious that vettori has never been anywhere near as effective after that back injury. so theres really no point in looking at what he did after that.

I'm still pretty certain he bowled better in Australia than he did at any time in between his last Test in Australia - no, I didn't see all the games.
Of course the back-injury has had some effect, but I don't see that he can't come back from it.
As for Ramprakash, it does say something - it's just I think it says one thing, you think it says another.
Most people don't even notice it exists.

 

[Richard]

where have i denied that the WACA doesnt produce turners?
but i can assure you that on this occasion it wasnt a turner, it was the flattest WACA pitch in a very long time. what vettori did was bowl extremely brilliantly in unhelpful conditions. and now that there is one more person who has watched this game and agrees with my assesment of the wicket(and not one person backs up your assessment) perhaps now you'll finally agree that it wasnt a turner?

I'll agree that it's a bit more likely I might misrecall but I do find it just a bit odd that nzidol's description was so similar to the CricInfo reporter's one.
I also haven't had my memory of all the balls I remember turning wiped clean.

 

[tooextracool]

I'll agree that it's a bit more likely I might misrecall but I do find it just a bit odd that nzidol's description was so similar to the CricInfo reporter's one.
I also haven't had my memory of all the balls I remember turning wiped clean.

cricinfo's description was that vettori bowled well in unhelpful conditions. the flight, guile etc was something that i brought up and unless you suspect that nzidol's ripped off my description i cant see any reason why you arent mistaken.
i do remember that game extremely well, and im extremely certain about the conditions in that game

 

[Richard]

Yes, and so am I - this sounds rather familiar.
I seem to remember the CricInfo guy's description being something along the lines of "using flight and guile in conditions that were not especially helpful"... correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[tooextracool]

perhaps so, but i dont remember cricinfo saying anything along the lines of "and a lot of overspin and bounce. There wasn't significant sidespin for either spinner."

 

[Richard]

No, they didn't.
I should have made it quite clear what I meant.

 

[tooextracool]

well regardless its just another excuse IMO, i think theres enough proof to suggest that you obviously didnt watch that game closely enough.

 

[Richard]

I shall have to invest in some footage, I think I need to decide this once and for all.

 

[tooextracool]

dont let me stop you.

 

[Richard]

I won't, but I can't do it here and now, it's not easy to just find yourself some footage of a game that happened more than 3 years ago. Especially when it wasn't a game involving your country.