Tag Archives: sri lanka

What Happens When Jayawardene Is Not Trying to Score Off Each Ball

Posted on by

Mahela Jayawardene talks to Daniel Brettig:

When we went to bat in the second innings we wanted to be more aggressive and try to put pressure on the Australians. We knew the wicket was going to be tough, but the only way we were going to have a chance of getting close to that target was by being positive and getting runs on the board. If you get runs on the board then they’ll be thinking as well. [...]

My focus was on how I’m going to bat and how I’m going to score runs off every ball. If it’s not there then I’ll let it go and look for the next ball to score runs off. I was taking each ball and just hoping I wouldn’t get one of those nasty ones coming my way. I had a few but I managed to fend them off. As soon as that happens you have to forget that moment and look to the next ball and say, “This is another opportunity to score.”

So far, so good. Except the actual innings: 105 off 231 balls. The fifty came off 110 balls. If you take the 4s and 6s and assume he only took singles off the remaining balls, he only scored runs off 55 balls.

Of course, later in the interview, he does talk about controlling his strokes and riding out a few overs. Which essentially means that he approached the innings like he would or should in a Test match and this time was successful. But you can make up all the stories you want after the fact to say that you did something special.

Sri Lankan Pessimists Should Not Let Facts Hold Them Back

Posted on by

First we had the Sangakkara speech. Now we have Island Cricket blog complaining about the choices that poor Sri Lankan captains have to live with. I would be more sympathetic if there were any facts that made sense. For example:

So, sanath played a 20-20 and a one day international as well. And now, when young dinesh chandimal has shown the world that what an great talent he is, with one sparkling century followed by equally enterprising half century, we can imagine what would have been the possible result, had young chandimal played those two matches, specially the 1st one day international, instead of veteran sanath.

I guess maybe Sri Lanka may have won by 10 wickets instead of the miserable 9-wicket victory in the Twenty20 match. In the first ODI, Sri Lanka were 121 all out in 27 overs, a collective failure of the entire team. So, Chandimal would have saved them? Maybe I should help out with Chandimal’s resume:

And now, when young dinesh chandimal has shown the world that what an great inconsistent talent he is, with an innings of 5 runs from 7 balls followed by one sparkling century followed by a duck from 5 balls followed by an equally enterprising half century

Wait, there is more:

selectors perfectly managed a blunder by including 29 year old thilina kadamby in the team. Whatever his age is, it’s not a matter, but concerned is that he is such an out dated player, especially for one day cricket. And, now you cant dare to imagine even, that he was the national team’s caption for lone twenty-20 match of England tour. It was an ridiculous decision and team suffered through out the one day series, because of it. He managed just 36 runs in four matches, and eventually was being dropped before final match.

Yes, you cannot imagine that he was the captain for the Twenty20 match which, to repeat, Sri Lanka made a terrible mess of by only winning by 9 wickets and not allowing Kandamby to bat and show what a miserable failure he was as a captain and one day batsman.

I also suppose the selectors forced Dilshan not to drop someone who only made 17 runs in the 5 matches. I am pretty sure that the team suffered throughout the one day series because of it. And that person was not even eventually dropped before the final match. Oh, he cannot drop himself? Oh, well.

The Sangakkara Speech

Posted on by

Unlike Ducking Beamers, I would recommend just downloading the PDF of the transcript of Sangakkara’s speech as you might be able to get through it in a few minutes than spend an entire hour. Having said that, I think it is a good speech. I was fascinating by much of the Sri Lankan history (both political and cricket) and there are some things I didn’t know about and have marked down for some Wikipedia explorations.

Now, everyone is talking about Sangakkara’s blasting the cricket authorities in his country. But to be honest, I think there is a fundamental disconnect between many parts of the speech. On the one hand, he criticizes the politics. On the other hand, he says that Sri Lanka has been successful and they have produced amazing cricketers and been successful. From a few readings, I think the point he is trying to make is that whenever the Sri Lankan team failed (as in 1999), it was the fault of politics, and whenever they succeeded, it was despite the poor administration or because the administration at that time (before 1996) was excellent.

You really cannot have it both ways. Look, the idea behind a cricket administration is to produce results. Whatever their dysfunctional behavior, if they produce results, then they are doing something right. If they are not, then they should be replaced. I guess Sri Lanka is not perhaps the greatest cricket team on Earth right now, but their achievements are not trivial. Just to give one example, Sri Lanka reached the last two finals of the ODI World Cup. They were up against a world class Australian team in the first one and had to play a “we owe it to Tendulkar” India in Mumbai. But suppose Sri Lanka had won that single match earlier this year. They would have been World Champions. Would this Sangakkara speech make sense if that were the case? After all, it is the same board and it is the result of one match.

Also, in the Test arena, Sri Lanka has come a long way. They are extremely strong at home and, I think, haven’t been beaten by anyone other than Australia there. They have also achieved many victories abroad in recent times. Unfortunately, they haven’t quite made it to the top tier, losing some important series (versus India and England) recently.

I think that is perhaps what is behind Sangakkara’s outpouring. After their World Cup win in 1996, I think many Sri Lankans were very optimistic about their team, but their progress has been more gradual than spectacular. There have been achievements, but also setbacks, which is to be expected. Right now, no team can take a match against Sri Lanka for granted unlike in the early 1990s. Their Test team is also strong, but hasn’t become competitive yet against Australia or India abroad. Some of their star players (Murali, Jayasuriya) are retiring without worthy replacements, but they forget that both Murali and Jayasuriya took time to become legends.

Also in the long run, I think Sri Lanka will hit limits it cannot overcome, namely GDP and population. Sri Lanka is a country of population 20 million. It has a higher per capita GDP than India and Pakistan. But long-term, both those countries will develop faster and catch up and their vast population (more of whom can afford to play cricket at a younger age) will make a huge difference in terms of talent availability. This is not something that can be fixed by a better cricket board, something that a country like New Zealand is slowly discovering.

England Pull Out Another Surprise

Posted on by

I hadn’t planned to stay in on Memorial Day Weekend, but we were tired after a long day at the beach yesterday. Having nothing better to do, I tuned in on the England-Sri Lanka match. It was obviously going to be a draw. I thought that England would bat on for a few overs and then declare with 75-odd overs to be bowled. Then it seemed it was raining. I wondered what would happen if it rained the whole day and Bell missed on his century. Finally, they were going to play.

Contrary to some commentators, I didn’t think that Strauss made any mistake in letting Bell get to his century. At that point, it seemed that there were too few overs left in the match to bowl out a team that had already made 400 in the first innings on a pitch that allowed both teams to surpass 400. And England had only 3 full-time bowlers. Should Strauss have denied Bell to make a point about being a tough captain determined to win at all costs? How would that helped in having a motivated team?

In the few instances where captains have tried to make such a point, it either went nowhere or did not matter to the final result. For example, when Dravid declared and left Sachin short of a double century, India won the match against Pakistan 12 balls into the final morning (i.e., lots of time left). When an England captain last declared with someone on 98 not out, he didn’t win the match. I am also reminded of Mark Taylor’s declaration on 334 not out (that equaled, but didn’t exceed Bradman’s score) in a match against Pakistan that they didn’t even come close to winning.

As for the match itself, what to say? This once again illustrates how despite all their achievements, Sri Lanka has never truly broken into the top tier in Test cricket. Just as they are showing promise, they deny themselves a breakthrough. This was the case against India in their last tour. It was the case today after doing so well on the tour matches and in the first couple of days in this match.

I also agree with Slipstream Cricket’s take on the England team. This is a team that can beat anyone, but can also be beaten by anyone. Michael Vaughan’s side looked formidable, but Strauss’s side seems fragile. Even if they have been racking up impressive results such as the three innings victories in Australia.

As for England’s proclivity for matches in recent years that end with the last pair at the crease trying to save a match: 3 of them with England saving the match, 2 with their opponents:

Also technically, not a last pair, but England were 2 wickets away from a win (and series draw) against West Indies in that same series in the final match.

India Needs Bowlers Who Take 20 Wickets

Posted on by

What was the difference between the India of the 1st Test against Sri Lanka and the India of the 2nd Test?

OK, I will wait while you compare the two scorecards.

The only difference was Mishra and Sharma went out, and Ojha and Sreesanth came in.

The batting pretty much clicked in both matches, but the main difference was the bowling.

It bears repeating. Batsmen do not win matches. Bowlers do.

From 1990 to 2000, recall how many matches did India win when Kumble (or Harbhajan) were on fire. How many did they win when neither clicked?

As a nation, we are too obsessed with the big-hitters and ton-makers. Spare a thought for the hard workers who convert the zero in a Test series to natural numbers.

Is India Going Down to Sri Lanka in this Test?

Posted on by

What in the world has happened to the Indian cricket team? Before the series, I thought an Indian whitewash was a slam dunk. Instead, I look at a 165-run deficit with Sri Lanka still having 5 wickets in hand, and I cannot see how India is going to perform a rescue act.

But for Dravid’s huge ton on the first day, India would have already been sunk. Amazing!

I plead guilty to mocking Sri Lanka throughout this year for their meaningless triumphs against Bangladesh. But this year has really been a turnaround year for them. Beating Pakistan and New Zealand at home and before that, a good performance in a truncated series in Pakistan. And no single person responsible. A true team effort.

I still hope India can save this match. But Sri Lanka has all the cards. A hundred runs more and India will have to work really hard to avoid losing by an innings.

South Africa Out, Sri Lanka on Verge

Posted on by

A few days back, Purna pointed out that 5% believed that England would win the Champions Trophy and she decided to cast her lot with Bangladesh! Well, believe it or not, England are just two victories away from being crowned the Champions (the next match against the Kiwis does not matter and they only need to win the semis and finals).

This competition is turning out to be a classic. Two consecutive victories for England. South Africa crashing out in the group stage. The second string West Indies creating major scares for Pakistan and Australia, and probably nightmares for the Indian team. Big favorites Sri Lanka just a few Net Run Rate decimal points away from elimination.

Today’s matches were spectacular. The Sri Lankan team’s batting performance against New Zealand was absolutely stunning despite their loss. Every time you thought that New Zealand had finished them off, another Lankan player would come out and bash a few sixes. Kulasekara hit his best ever ODI score (57 not out) and No. 10 Malinga equaled his. Thanks to their effort, the SL NRR stayed ahead just enough to keep them in the running. Take away 13 runs and South Africa would still be in the tournament and Sri Lanka would be flying back.

And England. Wow! After they had sunk to the absolute depths, losing to Australia 6-1, they are the first team to qualify for the semis. South Africa, yet again, fail to go past the first hurdle as hosts, despite that magnificent 141 by Graeme Smith. No choking this time. Just outplayed.

Tuesday will decide Group B. England are already through and the only effect of a loss is their position in the group (No. 1 or No. 2). But unless they lose by a huge margin, they will remain No. 1. New Zealand will go through if they win. If they lose, it will depend on Net Run Rate.

A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that a low scoring match (less than 237 or so) that goes to the wire may allow New Zealand to overtake Sri Lanka’s net run rate even though they lose. I will post a graph with more details in my next post.

England Throws Group B Into a Spin

Posted on by

So much for conventional wisdom. The only team I had given England a chance against was New Zealand, but England really outdid themselves today, beating one of the tournament favorites Sri Lanka. And that too comfortably without the usual collapse dramatics along the way.

With this loss, Sri Lanka’s semifinal chances have become tenuous. If they lose the next match against New Zealand, they are out of the tournament. And even if they win, they have to depend on net run rate. Unfortunately, the problem is that South Africa and England will know exactly what they need to do to overtake Sri Lanka in the run rate because the Lankans finish their matches on Sunday.

Sri Lanka do deserve some credit from coming back from a terrible collapse. Their middle order had received criticism earlier for not stepping up to the job when the chips were down. But 212 was nowhere near enough. And that coupled with Murali’s lack of form today (1/60 off 10 overs) provided England an easy path to victory.

England could have made it even worse for Sri Lanka, but they are still suffering from lack of confidence in punishing their opposition. A win by the 40th over or more penetrative bowling could have put England way ahead on NRR. But a win in hand is better than an ignominious collapse when trying to accelerate. Losing only one wicket to the spinners was commendable.

What next? It is an elimination match for both Sri Lanka and New Zealand. Whoever loses is out. If Sri Lanka wins, then South Africa has to beat England, and hope England loses to the Kiwis. If New Zealand wins, and South Africa beat England, the England v NZ match will determine the second semifinalist from the group.

What a delicious result to make this all very interesting.

Rainy Start to the Champions Trophy

Posted on by

The first match of the Champions Trophy between Sri Lanka and South Africa did not turn out to be a great advertisement for the beleaguered ODI format. It started off well, though, with Sri Lanka making 181/2 after 29 overs, only to end up with 319/8 after the full 50 overs. South Africa were well positioned at 90/1 after 14 overs, but kept losing wickets and then rain ended their misery.

This is a good win for Sri Lanka whose recent home victories have been tainted by the skewed results of the Premadasa Stadium. This was also their toughest match in the group and should be good enough to get them into the semifinals. Of course, they still have to beat New Zealand and England, but I don’t think either team poses a threat.

Also hats off to Dilshan. I am amazed at his transition. He made his ODI debut in December 1999 and this was only his third century. And his second of the year. While his career average is at a pitiful 31.56, his average for this year is a remarkable 54.90. Now, if he can make amends for his silly shot in the World Twenty20 final and lead Sri Lanka to the Trophy, this would definitely be his year.

South Africa shouldn’t panic yet. I felt that they lost the game in the first quarter when the Sri Lankan batsmen were going at an incredible pace. They pulled it back a bit, but it was not enough. 30-40 fewer runs to chase, they may have achieved the target. They should get to the semis, but given South Africa’s track record at these competitions, nothing can be taken for granted.

Be an Indian Fan, Not Indian Fanatic

Posted on by

I was happy to see India beat Sri Lanka yesterday. But two things are indisputable. One is that Sri Lanka did a good job of the chase, but just ran out of gas. They started explosively and if they had wickets in the hand, they may very well have won it. Second is that India did not do well on the field, missing catches, run-outs and stumpings. And they knew it too.

So imagine my surprise when I look up the reactions to the final and see some people write about “sweet revenge”.

Do people seriously believe that if Sri Lanka had batted first, India would have won? I don’t think India would have even chased down 273 (the score that the Sri Lankans made) or even 200 for that matter. The third match is proof enough.

The whole Cup has been a losing proposition, like the Bangladesh vs Gutted West Indies Test series. The only thing that could be proved from that series was if Bangladesh were even worse than we thought. But since Bangladesh beat the unofficial West Indies, nothing was resolved. We know that they are better than second-and-third-stringers, but are they capable of beating a Test nation? Don’t even ask.

In the same way, the only way India or Sri Lanka could have established themselves as the real champs were if they chased down the total. In this case, Sri Lanka failed. So we don’t really have an answer as to who the better team is. Each team won batting first. So the only difference was the toss.

Let’s wait till the Champions Trophy to figure out who the better ODI nation is. Until then, people really ought to quit screaming, “India is No. 1″ until we have more evidence, else there is no credibility left when India actually wins something.