• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Is Vettori's ineffectiveness a problem for NZ?

Blaze 18

Banned
Suggesting Vettori should be dropped is madness given he averages 40+ with the bat over the last five years. He's definitely amongst New Zealand's best four Test batsmen at the moment - he'd make the side even if he never bowled again .
Very true.


The question though is over whether he should be given such an integral role with the ball when it's clear that it's not working very well. Personally I wouldn't change much with the way he's used but I would wake up and face facts - that he's not a very good Test bowler.
What I hold against Daniel Vettori is that he struggles to make an impact even on days four and five of a test match. A world class spinner should have no trouble running through a side on days four and five. Even Harbhajan Singh, who is only a slightly above average test bowler in my opinion, time and again runs through the opposition on a day four-day five track.

To be fair, though, we should not be too harsh on him for his performance in this series considering the opposition and the conditions.
 
Last edited:

Woodster

International Captain
Vettori is clearly not a very penetrative bowler, but with the clever little chanhes he uses, he is difficult for a batsman to get after him for any length of time. He does get little spin on the ball, I believe due to the stress fractures in his back which now doesn't allow him to put everything he can into spinning the ball. But he still does a very important job for NZ in giving his side control from one end, and with the other bowlers around in NZ, it is a vital role.

The problem is there are few bowlers that can attack from the other end, so batting sides can remain patient against Vettori, as indeed they do, and gather runs from the other end, fairly risk free batting.

You wonder, as someone alluded to earlier, if he was surrounded by bowlers such as Bond, to what degree his figures would inevitably improve by.
 

Blocky

Banned
For me, this stat says it all about his ineptitude as a spin bowler in test cricket

In the third innings of games, he averages 35.29 at a strike rate of 81.1
In the fourth innings of games, he averages 38.46 at a srike rate of 86.8

On the days that you expect your spin bowler to be participating and bowling you to victory, he's rarely done it and whats more, has bowling figures that are complete tosh - he's bowling near 15 overs per wicket in the 4th innings.

Take Bangladesh and Zimbabwe out of Vettori's stats and they're even worse reading.

This notion that we absolutely need a spin bowler bowling 25 overs a day isn't right, I've no problem if we say Vettori is there to tie an end down and will bowl 10-15 overs a day but when he's our main bowler, bowling the most overs and that's the production we get from him? It won't matter if our batting is good or bad - in this series, we've seen good batting performances go to waste because we couldn't remove Harbhajan Singh.

Vettori bowled the most balls at Harbhajan Singh.

As for "What would NZ cricket have been like without Vettori?" - in ODI? Dire. In Tests? I believe Bruce Martin would have established himself as a better spin bowler (while fit) than Dan Vettori. Bruce Martin when in form and still motivated to try and make the black caps was taking wickets at Sub 30 on NZ Greentops while Vettori wasn't.

My theory is that due to our belief that Vettori is our best bowler and the fact that he bowls the most overs, we're very rarely, if ever truly in a test match despite what our batsmen do.

At least with Ashley Giles, he was never seen as a match winner and solely used in spells while the true wicket takers rested.
 

Blocky

Banned
The problem is there are few bowlers that can attack from the other end, so batting sides can remain patient against Vettori, as indeed they do, and gather runs from the other end, fairly risk free batting.
Often an argument but I believe it's wrong.

As a spin bowler, you want the batsmen to be tentative about attacking you because it allows you to toss the ball up more and look for more spin - Vettori simply doesn't have this ability, everything he bowls seems to be about restricting the batsman from scoring rather than attacking the batsman.

Batting sides know they can tick Vettori along at 3 an over and be at very little risk of losing more than a wicket per fifteen overs to him. Sure, he dominates sides like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and the West Indies but how long has it been since he put a true performance of note on the board against a top tier nation? Like his seven for against the Aussies when the guy still actually attacked.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Vettori post-injury is the opposite of many spinners. He wants the batsman to attack him.

If Martin, Southee and co. were more consistent then the opposition would have to take more risks against him. He's never going to be fantastic post action remaking, but he's a banker for a few wickets each innings.

Martin, Southee and co. are more likely to take big destructive hauls than him, but they're also more likely to get smashed.

In domestic cricket there are possibly better attacking spinners than him (though I would be pleasantly surprised if they possessed Vettori's all round bowling cleverness) in leggie Todd Astle and developing SLA Nick Beard, because they're taking some nice hauls and the word is they do like to attack, but I've never seen Astle play and I last saw Beard in 20/20, so can't say for sure whats what.

But Vettori would make the NZ test side on batting alone as an allrounder. Hell, he would make Australia atm and bat 6/7 and take the spin duties off whoever they've picked this time.
 

Woodster

International Captain
Often an argument but I believe it's wrong.

As a spin bowler, you want the batsmen to be tentative about attacking you because it allows you to toss the ball up more and look for more spin - Vettori simply doesn't have this ability, everything he bowls seems to be about restricting the batsman from scoring rather than attacking the batsman.

Batting sides know they can tick Vettori along at 3 an over and be at very little risk of losing more than a wicket per fifteen overs to him. Sure, he dominates sides like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and the West Indies but how long has it been since he put a true performance of note on the board against a top tier nation? Like his seven for against the Aussies when the guy still actually attacked.
Vettori is undoubtedly a better bowler when batsmen attack him because of his subtleties, changes in pace, flight etc. He will rarely run through a side, jagging it square, even on the most helpful pitches. He is more of a restrictive bowler, could be due to his ODI cricket, or because someone has to tie an end up, invariably this duty falls on him as the others lack the control.
 

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
For me, this stat says it all about his ineptitude as a spin bowler in test cricket

In the third innings of games, he averages 35.29 at a strike rate of 81.1
In the fourth innings of games, he averages 38.46 at a srike rate of 86.8

On the days that you expect your spin bowler to be participating and bowling you to victory, he's rarely done it and whats more, has bowling figures that are complete tosh - he's bowling near 15 overs per wicket in the 4th innings.
Yep, Vettori's never bowled New Zealand to a victory in the last innings of a test match, its one of the great black marks on his career as a bowler

Take Bangladesh and Zimbabwe out of Vettori's stats and they're even worse reading.
You can say that about pretty much anyone, you realise...

This notion that we absolutely need a spin bowler bowling 25 overs a day isn't right, I've no problem if we say Vettori is there to tie an end down and will bowl 10-15 overs a day but when he's our main bowler, bowling the most overs and that's the production we get from him? It won't matter if our batting is good or bad - in this series, we've seen good batting performances go to waste because we couldn't remove Harbhajan Singh.
Vettori's hardly alone when it comes to aportioning blame for Habhajan's runfest in this series. However, his captaincy, particularly at Hyderabad was probably more responsible for Harby gettting away than his bowling was.

And Vettori doesn't usually bowl 25+ overs a day. The only times he does is when we're on a deck so placid that our mediocre quicks have virtually no chance of penetrating the opposition batting lineup. In these cases Vettori pretty much has to bowl, as the only alternative is Tim Southee or Daryl Tuffey going at 4 an over without looking remotely like taking a wicket. You could probably make a fairly good argument that Vettori's figures have been hurt by this, as he's had to spend a huge chunk of his career bowling in unhelpful conditions because either the batsmen got skittled on day one and he was forced to bowl in the best batting conditions or the other bowlers have been leaking runs so rapidly that Vettori needed to be brought on to apply the breaks. Or both, in the case of this match.

As for "What would NZ cricket have been like without Vettori?" - in ODI? Dire. In Tests? I believe Bruce Martin would have established himself as a better spin bowler (while fit) than Dan Vettori. Bruce Martin when in form and still motivated to try and make the black caps was taking wickets at Sub 30 on NZ Greentops while Vettori wasn't.
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

OK, now you're just being silly. You realise you're referring to a guy who has been comfortably out bowled by Kane Williamson over the last couple of seasons. Martin might've been a promisingish talent once upon a time, but he hasn't been any thing close to a success in domestic cricket for the better part of 8 or 9 years.

My theory is that due to our belief that Vettori is our best bowler and the fact that he bowls the most overs, we're very rarely, if ever truly in a test match despite what our batsmen do.

At least with Ashley Giles, he was never seen as a match winner and solely used in spells while the true wicket takers rested.
Yeah well, you're entitled to your opinions, but I can't really say I agree. Vettori isn't holding the entire side back. The idea that our bowlers are packed with raw wicket-taking ability, and that Vettori bowling 20+ overs and going for 2.5 an over whilst picking up a couple of wickets is holding them back seems a little far fetched to me.

New Zealand doesn't have a battery of quality quicks, like we did in the 90's. With Bond absent through most of Vettori's career, and other quality quicks like O'Brien and Franklin only briefly available due to reason's beyond his control, Vettori's generally had to bowl with very mediocre partners operating from the other end. He's not a match winner, and he never will be. But he's also not the reason for the side struggling as they have. The other players have that one covered.
 

irottev

U19 Cricketer
Vettori's role isn't to be a destroyer. His job is to tie up and end and get wickets through pure accuracy and slight variation. He needs strike bowlers at the other end and he doesn't have them. He'd be infinitely better if he had Shane Bond or Dale Steyns or the like bowling at the other end. He ends up having to bowl too many overs to "in" batsmen.

In saying all this, considering the pitch conditions, his bowling has been very good. He's the highest wicket taker in the series (14) and has a better average than Ojha and Harbhajan. In these conditions, against some of the world's best batsman at home - a 36 average and 85 strike rate is pretty damned good stats.
 

Blocky

Banned
People keep bringing up other spin bowlers, like I said - I don't feel you always need a spin bowler and if you don't have one suitable, you don't pick one. It's only really been since Shane Warne and Muralitharan that outside of the sub continent, teams pick spinners regularly.
 

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
People keep bringing up other spin bowlers, like I said - I don't feel you always need a spin bowler and if you don't have one suitable, you don't pick one. It's only really been since Shane Warne and Muralitharan that outside of the sub continent, teams pick spinners regularly.
Prior to the 90's, pitches were generally a lot harder, greener and deteriorated a lot quicker. 4 quicks was a perfectly acceptable line of attack. Nowadays, pitches aren't offering as much for the quick bowlers (at least in most parts of the world, though South Africa and England still appear to be producing seamer friendly tracks), rendering an extra spinner an important part of the attack in most situations.

In any case I find it difficult to think of any fast bowling all rounders in New Zealand who could make a significant impact on test cricket.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
What teams would Vettori make as an allrounder?

What teams would Vettori make if he was just a bowler, as his batting was, say, Ojha or Randiv level.
 

Top