Real talk: How come Vinod Kambli never played a test after the age of 23?

[mr_mister]

23 is hella young to be cast to the wilderness for good AND he still averaged just shy of 55 at the time of his axing. With 20+ innings and 1000+ runs under his belt he makes the min requirements for many list's top 25 test batting averages of all time.

Was India's middle order that impenetrable in 1995? I know Dravid, Laxman and Ganguly all hit their prime a few years later, but in 95?


I always found this strange.

 

[Howe_zat]

I was having fake talk all this time and never knew

 

[ankitj]

One of our own writers at CW wrote a good piece on Kambli: Vinod Kambli: The Other Prodigy | Cricket Web

 

[Pratters]

Kambli did make a comeback later in his career after a string of scores in domestic cricket. However, they picked him in ODIs and he twisted his ankle badly in a game and that was the end of it. A talent wasted because of his erratic ways.

 

[Kirkut]

Kambli had more natural talent than Tendulkar and extremely high self esteem to the point being toxic. Because of this he never worked on his technique and Walsh bounced him in every test on slow wickets (West Indies tour of India 1994). If he couldn't handle Walsh on slow wickets, how would he deal with Mcgrath at MCG ?

Secondly, when Dravid did well in England in 1996 and scored 148 at Johannesburg against Donald, Pollock and Klusner, it was hard for Kambli to make a comeback.

 

[ImpatientLime]

'natural talent' is in no way shape or form quantifiable.

 

[G.I.Joe]

'natural talent' is in no way shape or form quantifiable.

Speaking comparatively.

McGrath was/is more talented with the ball than Rahul Dravid.

You can't quantify either levels of talent in absolute terms, but a valid comparison can still be made.

 

[ImpatientLime]

Speaking comparatively.

McGrath was/is more talented with the ball than Rahul Dravid.

You can't quantify either levels of talent in absolute terms, but a valid comparison can still be made.

yeah ok that's fair enough.

but to imply kambli was more 'naturally talented' a batsman than Sachin is complete nonsense imo.

 

[mr_mister]

Kambli had more natural talent than Tendulkar and extremely high self esteem to the point being toxic. Because of this he never worked on his technique and Walsh bounced him in every test on slow wickets (West Indies tour of India 1994). If he couldn't handle Walsh on slow wickets, how would he deal with Mcgrath at MCG ?

Secondly, when Dravid did well in England in 1996 and scored 148 at Johannesburg against Donald, Pollock and Klusner, it was hard for Kambli to make a comeback.

meh, Azhar Mahmood hit that exact bowling attack for 3 tons in 3 matches

 

[Kirkut]

yeah ok that's fair enough.

but to imply kambli was more 'naturally talented' a batsman than Sachin is complete nonsense imo.

Kambli certainly had better hand-eye co-ordination than Tendulkar. Tendulkar worked very hard and developed unusual maturity at a very early age, that's exactly what makes him great, Kambli on the other hand never worked as hard as Tendulkar but was on par or even better in domestic cricket. His decline was due to his self destructive behaviour.

meh, Azhar Mahmood hit that exact bowling attack for 3 tons in 3 matches

I'd see it as great batting from Azhar rather than mediocre bowling from South Africa.

 

[ImpatientLime]

hand eye coordination is no more a 'natural talent' than work ethic and the mental fortitude to lead such a long lasting, successful career.

 

[doesitmatter]

Tendulkar, obviously a complete player of all types of bowling but Kambli did have a slight edge when it came to spin bowling..He was quick on his feet and had that natural flair in playing spin when compared to Sachin..Don't get me wrong Sachin until his elbow and mainly back gave away was a superb player of spin as well..May be Kambli by a whisker..

Also apart from his self destructive attitude, the arrival of Dravid and Ganguly led to Kambli losing his spot in the Test team but he was still considered good for ODIs (Dravid was a bad ODI player in the beginning) and was given a chance against Pakistan in 97-98 ODI series (Anwar 194 series) and unfortunately ends up badly twisting his ankle and was out of cricket for 6 months which basically ended his career

 

[G.I.Joe]

Kambli did his ankle in a Sharjah series around 2000 IIRC, not '97.

 

[doesitmatter]

May not be against Pakistan but the year he had an ankle tear was 97 or 98 and not 2000..

 

[G.I.Joe]

You were right. My bad.

 

[TheJediBrah]

hand eye coordination is no more a 'natural talent' than work ethic and the mental fortitude to lead such a long lasting, successful career.

I don't really agree with that. While it is definitely possible that work ethic, mental strength etc have a genetic/natural component, I wouldn't lump it in under "natural talent"

 

[weldone]

Kambli had more natural talent than Tendulkar

Are you Kapil Dev?

 

[Migara]

Tendulkar, obviously a complete player of all types of bowling but Kambli did have a slight edge when it came to spin bowling..He was quick on his feet and had that natural flair in playing spin when compared to Sachin..Don't get me wrong Sachin until his elbow and mainly back gave away was a superb player of spin as well..May be Kambli by a whisker..

Also apart from his self destructive attitude, the arrival of Dravid and Ganguly led to Kambli losing his spot in the Test team but he was still considered good for ODIs (Dravid was a bad ODI player in the beginning) and was given a chance against Pakistan in 97-98 ODI series (Anwar 194 series) and unfortunately ends up badly twisting his ankle and was out of cricket for 6 months which basically ended his career

I am not sure about that. Neither Kambli, nor Tendulkar were best players of spin in Indian side in that era. Tendulkar did well against most spinners, and only ones to trouble him were Saqlain and Murali with the doosra.

On the other hand when Murali was at his best (post 1996), Kambli was rankly struggling against him, despite being a good players of spin. So may be a good player of spin, but when spin gets real hot, it's Tendulkar. Additionally, Kambli was taking Murali to cleaners in that 93-4 series (a very green Murali), but his experienced spin partner, Warnaweera was giving Kambli a lot of trouble. Kambli was eventually cleaned up by him few times, once with a off break that spun square, and next time, a one spun back to him like a doosra. But Tendulkar played Warnaweera like a boss.

 

[sledger]

Amol Muzumdar was better.

 

[doesitmatter]

@Migara..I don't really know what Kambli did against each spinners and also dont know when he scored against these spinners at what point in their careers but it was generally considered that he had a good footwork against spinners and was not pre-meditative and genuinely knew what was coming out of a spinners hand..I am sure a warnaweera here and a Anurasiri there might have cleaned him up but overall as i mentioned he was considered to be a good player of spin..