Cricket: Why the others can't do what Vettori can

Brendon McCullum's test scores do not reflect his ability. Photo / AP

It happened again last week - a limp test match performance against Sri Lanka with face saved only by yet another piece of Daniel Vettori batting prowess; followed by a much more convincing showing at limited overs cricket. It leads us to the question, and not for the first time: Why is New Zealand so poor in test cricket? Or, put another way: Why can't the other Black Caps bat as well as Vettori? Paul Lewis investigates.

It's embarrassing. As we pointed out in these pages last week, over the past three years, skipper Daniel Vettori is the top or second-top scorer in around one out of every three tests - and that from a No 8 batsman who, by any measure, is not the most attractive nor most talented bat around. We typically see Vettori leading a fightback, face pinched with concentration, defending well and waiting for the ball to come from which he can score. He has a good eye, a small array of shots from which he can profit and is a vastly experienced cricketer with a deep well of guts and stubbornness. He averages in the 30s and 40s for his last 2000 runs in test cricket.

These are qualities this country has previously come to expect from its test cricketers. Fans were raised with few genuinely world-class players like Richard Hadlee, Glenn Turner or Martin Crowe to enjoy. Instead, many well-performed New Zealand batsmen came to the international game with solid defensive techniques and a determination not to sell their wicket cheaply; to occupy the crease, bat time, outlast and out-manoeuvre.

We're talking your Bevan Congdons, the skipper when New Zealand won its first test against Australia in the 1970s and who made a pair of centuries in successive tests against England, and a good England side at that. Congdon was a dry batsman with a droll sense of humour; who had a sound technique and a jut-jawed, they-shall-not-pass attitude. He played 61 tests and rarely, if ever, squandered his wicket.

We're talking other obstinate, gutsy fighters - usually not flashy strokemakers but compilers of runs; batsmen who built their innings with technique, patience and will. We're talking your John F Reid, Bruce Edgar, Jeremy Coney, Mark Richardson, John Wright and many more. Look at the list of test cricketers who have scored 1000 runs or more and suss out the best averages. It's full of this type of player.

Why, then, when we are watching the Black Caps batting in tests, do we have to put an involuntary hand over our faces from time to time when a batsman who isn't Vettori plays a shot that has little or no place in a test match?

It's a bit unfair to pick on Jacob Oram, as he helped Vettori fight back in the second test against Sri Lanka. But he departed in the first innings to a reverse sweep - a rank, high-risk, one-day shot that should only be played from time to time in the shortened version of the game and never in a test match.