This basically sums it upTo answer simply, none of them are that penetrative in the test arena. Vettori has improved over time, Monty usually goes through a quiet patch and then he pulls out a good performance (6 wickets at OT against NZ) and Giles average truly reflects his quality as a bowler IMO.
I think they have better averages than right arm finger spinners.why do famous left arm spinners like Daniel Vettori, Monty Panesar, Ashley Giles etc... have bowling averages that are so high? all of them have bowling averages over 30 in test cricket.
Purely as a bowler, I'm not sure that is necessarily the case. He may have appeared penetrative of late against the clueless Englishman, but a split of his stats over time between the first and second half of his career suggests any apparent improvement is nothing but a myth.Vettori has improved over time,
Interesting use if the word 'improvement'.As somebody who has only seen the last few years of Vettori's career I'm not qualified to comment on how good his bowling was when first selected for New Zealand. But, from what I've read and heard from commentators etc, he has improved markedly. His bowling has become smarter over time and he's added more weapons to his arsenal also, but this improvement in his bowling ability hasn't translated into improvements with his results.
They're deeply average is the simple answerwhy do famous left arm spinners like Daniel Vettori, Monty Panesar, Ashley Giles etc... have bowling averages that are so high? all of them have bowling averages over 30 in test cricket.
Exactly.I think they have better averages than right arm finger spinners.
Did you know statistics are always right 73% of the time?In his first 41 Tests Vettori took 138 wickets at 33.13, and in his last 42 Tests he has taken just 119 at a profligate 35.94. If you take Bangladesh out of the equation the decline is far more significant.
I think the best way to sum-up Vettori's Test career is thus. Bangladesh and the series in Zimbabwe in 2005/06 are excluded, obviously, as is the Super Test:In his first 41 Tests Vettori took 138 wickets at 33.13, and in his last 42 Tests he has taken just 119 at a profligate 35.94. If you take Bangladesh out of the equation the decline is far more significant.
Funnily enough, that period includes New Zealand's 2004 tour of England, where iirc Vettori bowled extremely well for little reward before injuring himself midway through the second Test.the second abysmal (there are actually 18 poor games and 1 excellent one in there - in the 18 his average is even worse).
Debatable, I vaguely remember him lacking penetration, and he was definitely already on a run of some ridiculous amount of overs without a Test wicket before that series even started - one bit of Simon Hughes analysis I can randomly remember.Funnily enough, that period includes New Zealand's 2004 tour of England, where iirc Vettori bowled extremely well for little reward before injuring himself midway through the second Test.
Nah. He bowled as he usually does, never looked like taking a wicket because the wickets in the First and Second Tests didn't turn, missed Third Test with injury (which unfortunately for him was the one Test that was played on a turner) and went home with people criticising him for negative bowling (he'd adopted the over-the-wicket line often enough) that people had wanted to believe was exclusive to Giles.Funnily enough, that period includes New Zealand's 2004 tour of England, where iirc Vettori bowled extremely well for little reward before injuring himself midway through the second Test.