Players who can't be dropped in test matches

[Leslie1]

I'm trying to think of players to compare that are of similar attributes to Daniel Vettori's contributions in test matches but struggled to think of any.

IMHO he is a player who can't be dropped, but at the same time if the batsmen bat well, and the bowlers do well, he is practically a footnote in any test match. Put him in a side like SA (currently), Australia and India, I can see him performing like a Paul Harris or a Cameron White with all the more established test players around him.

Allrounders who normally can't win you test matches but invaluable to the team.

Anyone else of similar elk? Discuss.

 

[Uppercut]

I think he'd do a lot better in a better team actually.

Anyway, as for other players like that.. Paul Harris is a footnote in most SA games but never gets dropped. Any Sri Lankan pacer other than Chaminda Vaas could also be mentioned.

 

[Precambrian]

Well, any good player who wishes to get into Richard's List should ensure they don't get dropped.

 

[NUFAN]

Dwayne Bravo possibly from the Windies, talented player but doesn't do too much, that often.

 

[Richard]

Safe to say that Michael Hussey can't really be dropped (with any justification) from Australia's Test or ODI XIs.

 

[Jamee999]

KP, obv.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Panesar apparently. Awful batsman, fielder and not much of a factor with the ball most of the time either.

 

[Lambu]

I don't know if he fits your category, but Shahid Afridi..he is almost always a footnote and Pak can't really seem to drop him.

 

[Leslie1]

Maybe I should change the thread title a bit, just realized how stupid the topic sounds.

Interesting fact: when New Zealand's test stature is strong (2001-2003ish before disaster in OZ), Vettori 'suffered' his form slump.

Some results:

England 2001-02

* 1st Test (Jade Stadium, Christchurch) – England won by 98 runs
* 2nd Test (Basin Reserve, Wellington) – match drawn
* 3rd Test (Eden Park, Auckland) – New Zealand won by 78 runs

India 2002-03

* 1st Test at Basin Reserve, Wellington – New Zealand won by 10 wickets
* 2nd Test at Westpac Park, Hamilton – New Zealand won by 4 wickets

Pakistan 2003-04

* 1st Test at Westpac Park, Hamilton – match drawn
* 2nd Test at Basin Reserve, Wellington – Pakistan won by 7 wickets

South Africa 2003-04

* [ 1st Test] at Westpac Park, Hamilton – match drawn
* [ 2nd Test] at Eden Park, Auckland – New Zealand won by 9 wickets
* [ 3rd Test] at Basin Reserve, Wellington – South Africa won by 6 wickets

Seems like so long ago but those results accounted for New Zealand actually threatening to become the number 2 test nation in the world at one point in the rankings. How times' changed.

But is Daniel Vettori = Paul Harris or Dwayne Bravo in stature? Don't think so. He seems to many a much better player than any of the players named, yet it's almost as if he shouldn't be with his career contributions with the bat and ball.

I don't even think that he's been in any test match saving situations where he played a big role in saving it.

 

[NZTailender]

Before I opened this thread I thought it'd be a bit of a Vettori bash, given the poster.

What a surprise.

 

[andruid]

I don't even think that he's been in any test match saving situations where he played a big role in saving it.

What about against bangladesh recently. Or do those not count

 

[_Ed_]

Before I opened this thread I thought it'd be a bit of a Vettori bash, given the poster.

What a surprise.

Indeed.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Maybe I should change the thread title a bit, just realized how stupid the topic sounds.

.........it would be more beneficial if some people had read the opening post before putting names forward.

 

[Prince EWS]

Before I opened this thread I thought it'd be a bit of a Vettori bash, given the poster.

What a surprise.

Yeah, tried to disguise it as a meaningful thread with the first post and I honestly just would have let it slide if it was just that. Once no-one took the bait and actually started talking about other players, though, Leslie posted the anti-Vettori stuff once again to get everyone on track...

I do think Vettori the bowler the over-rated a tad but if you have a look at the lengths other countries have gone to recently to have a spinner in their team basically for the sake of it (Robin Petersen and Cameron White being the ultimate examples here), Vettori's a pretty damn useful cricketer to have. There's no actual doubt that he's the best spinner available in there? If the argument is that New Zealand would be better off without a spinner I can see the point to some extent but people don't actually think Patel or Martin are better, do they?

This whole thing ignores the fact that his statistical contributions over the last three years would almost certainly see him picked as a specialist batsman if need by anyway. If you're going say "substance over style" and argue that he isn't effective with the ball despite how he looks, you equally have to recognise the fact that while he doesn't look great with the bat, he actually has much more right to selection as a batsman alone than someone like Flynn or Ryder based on what he's achieved in the last three years.

Maybe I should change the thread title a bit, just realized how stupid the topic sounds.

"Leslie1's Anti-Vettori Propaganda" sounds a fitting title.

 

[Athlai]

Couldn't drop Bradman, or he'd be liable to go and score 100 runs against you.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, tried to disguise it as a meaningful thread with the first post and I honestly just would have let it slide if it was just that. Once no-one took the bait and actually started talking about other players, though, Leslie posted the anti-Vettori stuff once again to get everyone on track...

I do think Vettori the bowler the over-rated a tad but if you have a look at the lengths other countries have gone to recently to have a spinner in their team basically for the sake of it (Robin Petersen and Cameron White being the ultimate examples here), Vettori's a pretty damn useful cricketer to have. There's no actual doubt that he's the best spinner available in there? If the argument is that New Zealand would be better off without a spinner I can see the point to some extent but people don't actually think Patel or Martin are better, do they?

This whole thing ignores the fact that his statistical contributions over the last three years would almost certainly see him picked as a specialist batsman if need by anyway. If you're going say "substance over style" and argue that he isn't effective with the ball despite how he looks, you equally have to recognise the fact that while he doesn't look great with the bat, he actually has much more right to selection as a batsman alone than someone like Flynn or Ryder based on what he's achieved in the last three years.



"Leslie1's Anti-Vettori Propaganda" sounds a fitting title.

The problem is though, he bats at 8, even when O'Brien and Martin are at 10 and 11. While i completely agree that he's invaluable to the team for his all-round contribution, and if i were picking the team he'd be the first name on the teamsheet, if you're going to pick him on the basis of what he can do with the bat then why bat him at 8? If Vettori wasn't captain, he might well have been asked to move up the order to make room for an extra bowler, especially when Oram's out and NZ have no serviceable all-rounder.

 

[Athlai]

The problem is though, he bats at 8, even when O'Brien and Martin are at 10 and 11. While i completely agree that he's invaluable to the team for his all-round contribution, and if i were picking the team he'd be the first name on the teamsheet, if you're going to pick him on the basis of what he can do with the bat then why bat him at 8? If Vettori wasn't captain, he might well have been asked to move up the order to make room for an extra bowler, especially when Oram's out and NZ have no serviceable all-rounder.

You'd want to put an extra bowler into the weakest batting team in the world?

 

[_Ed_]

Anyone else of similar elk?

 

[bagapath]

good one

 

[pup11]

Ricky Ponting