6-1-4 delusion

There is a massive misinterpretation of T20I team selection that SL does, which I think as the core reason for failure. Let's try to realize this with the details of Asia cup. 

SL team is selected based on 6-1-4 combination. i.e. 4 bowlers, 6 batters and one all rounder. Many would say, that that is how every other country does. It is WRONG.

T20I teams contain 5 front-line bowlers and 6 batters. The most important part is the 5 front-line bowlers. These bowlers should be able to bowl their full quota of 4 overs most of the time. they should be attacking every over, not bowling for the sake of passing some overs. This idea of "passing some overs" is very very wrong. Even if you truly pass those overs for a very little runs, it allows the opposition to settle. Modern T20I cricket is constant attacking in every over until somewhere the opposition breaks open.

Let's take the other four top Asian teams. These are the five front-line bowlers of those teams.

India: Two of (Bumra, Arshdeep, Rana), Kuldeep, Axar, Varun (Pandya is a near perfect front-line bowler too)

Pakistan: Shaheen, Rauf, Farhim, Nawaz, Abrar (Saim is a near perfect front-line bowler too)

Afghanistan: Farooqi, Asmatullah, Nabi, Mujeeb/Noor, Rashid
Bangladesh: Three of (Tanzim, Shoriful, Taskin, Frizz), Mehedi, Rishad

Look, some are ALL ROUNDERs !!! You may say. True. But they are front-line attacking bowlers even at that point. It is the attacking front-line bowler that matters more than being an all rounder. Latter is just a bonus.

SL does NOT have any all rounders who can be called attacking front-line bowlers. Angelo was the only one. (Some even suggest that he may still come back. And he really did not retire from white ball knowing that the team has a hole fitting his size) Because we lack this kind and misinterpreting other teams' selection as 6-1-4, we always select only 4 front-line attacking bowlers and a 50% bowling all rounder. And then we have to "pass some overs" in the middle to compensate for this. And that is where the opposition looses the shackles.

A notable period of bowling is overs 11-16. This stretch is the point where many teams bowl their best attacking bowlers. This is the time when India broke SL's run chase of 202, and Pakistan's strong innings in the final. Take any game, they always bowl your best attacking bowlers and gained the control in that stretch.

Now take SL. This is the stretch where Asalanka has to "pass some overs" hence try Dassa Kamindu or himself. It helps the opposition. SL's returns of overs to 11-16 while bowling is very poor. this is the time when Bangladeshi sixth wicket pair consolidated in the very first game. A mistake in "passing the overs" in this stretch made a 50% bowler bowl the final over to Nabi in Afghan game. India lost control with Abhishek's wicket but poor 11-16 overs allowed Samson and Verma to consolidate. Even Pakistan lost 5 wickets yet consolidated in the space of overs 11-16. Why? There is no attack what so ever. We are still "passing overs" - a tactic T20 cricket has completely stopped doing. And we have to do so as we do not have five bowlers. And we still think in 6-1-4.

The key point is that SL should play five attacking bowlers. Probably three fast bowlers from (Chameera, Thushara, Matheesha, Binura, Asitha, Eshan, ... etc). We only have two T20I class spinners so Waniya and Theekshana are a must. We should not bother about their batting skills. More than that we should think how attacking they can be.

That leaves only 6 slots for batters. If Dasun Shanaka comes in as a batter I have no issue, but then someone else in the top 6 must make way for him. But he should not waste a front-line bowler slot.
This may not solve everything. Batting collapses may happen. But even in that case the batting weaknesses are quickly fixed when you have limited 6 batters. In the long run, what we should do is to improve the batting skills of those bowlers. Waniya is already doing well. Chameera shows some skills. The skill levels of Shaheen Shah is more than enough.

PS:
1. When I first said this, somebody commented that SL's coach must be knowing this well. I don't think so. He was very happy about Asia cup and I think he still lives in early 2000s in ODI cricket where SL had many 50% bowlers who "pass some overs" and won games for SL. Expect nothing like this.

2. It is very unfortunate that every time when I write about it the folks reply saying, how about giving a bowler's slot for Milan R , Ramesh Mendis, Chamindu W, Dunith etc. Well you are still effing choosing that all rounder crap. I have no issue if any of these guys getting selected as a 100% attacking frontline bowler. They are not yet there (they may get there). I am just saying that having batting skills should not be considered for the selection of five bowlers. Being an attacking bowler should only be the reason. Ppl are so deep with the all rounder crap that they still suggest all rounders as the solution for the fundamental mistake of selecting all rounders.

Tale of two nations, in the past and future

Most analysts agree that SL-W team's best time is not now, not when they won Asia Cup, but it was at 2013 WC. It was a bunch of young players, almost all in 20s, who could beat England and India, got selected to super-6 and then in the play-off secured 5th place - their best ever achievement in a WC so far.

So did SA, who played that play-off against SL and settled for the sixth. SL and SA were both pretty much equals in the period leading up, starting in late 90s (SA, after being suspended in 60s) and then beating each other in the bottom side of the table quite often. From the table bottoms of 2009, they both invested in young players, SL a bunch in 20s, SA a bunch of teenagers; Marizanne Kapp, Dane van Neikirk, Cloe Tryon, Sune Luus, Shubnim Ismail etc. These were their first bunch of world level players to bring them to S6 in 2013. Later they were joined by Laura Wolvaardt, Nadin De Klerk & co, basically the core of SA today.

With their rise of 2013, and these teenagers and 20+ players who stood a level high, both teams should have developed them into maturity, progressed further and reached higher goals. Tale of SA matched that expectation for them making to the SF stage of all world cups since then. 

Tale of SL was far from similar from 2013 onward. The cricket admin of SL between 2010 to 2020 was the worst, even worse than their usual crap.There were two factions that took it to a war and politicians adding more factions into it. The resultant mess killed the men's cricket in the tele-screen, but behind the curtain women's cricket was a silent victim. There were news of lack of coaching staff for women, lack of tours for many many months or years, negligence of players and even allegations of requesting sexual favors (ref: team wiki page). Most of the 2013 players did nothing major in their careers than gradually retiring mostly prematurely. Domestic levels were even worse managed that they rarely found replacements. Team barely managed one win - against Pakistan - in 2017 WC although Chamari stated with her 178 against Australia that she has leaped a level higher - a world class player.

That did not open any eyes though. Comes 2019, the COVID era was marked with something unique. No ODI cricket for women from 2019 till 2022, only a few T20I games were played in 2020 to mark any cricket in the period. I am pretty sure domestic circles took a longer break. SL's other world class player Shashikala retired, we heard that Chamari was moving to Australia (you cannot blame them, as there was no cricket at all). The lack of cricket degraded their team rankings and they lost their qualification to play in 2023 WC where the other nation, SA, made another SF entry.

By 2022, it was lucky that these players did not give up. Hashan, a relatively senior coach got assigned in 2021, and by chance in his absence they assigned Rumesh for just one tour, which made him stay thus far. Team started from the bottom and did pretty well in past four years to get where they are now. 

But the curse of those gloomy days still remain. The senior bunch is closing retirement, having wasted their best years in the days of nothingness. There are not enough replacements, except for the little U17 girls that came through Apsari's ground work. 

With that we look at years ahead, and I see another tale of two nations forming. This time it is Bangladesh and SL. Bangladesh has a bunch of young players, some in teens others in 20s. They did their best performance in a WC, and surely can look forward in the same way as SA did in 2013. SL can hopefully retain these seniors until their U19 talents come to forefront. Like SA matched up with SL in 2013, Bangladesh matches up with SL today.

Where will this tale of two nations head from here?

Matheesha Pathirana does not do well because Kusal Mendis did not mentor him !!! Really? Let's bust the myth

Matheesha Pathirana does not do well in SL colors because Kusal Mendis did not mentor him very well as Dhoni did.

Really?

It is another common myth.

Let's first take the technical aspects. How can a captain impact a bowler? Even in IPL, Matheesha bowled a lot of boundary balls. IPL's low quality and his bowling speed assure that they get away in IPL. This will not be the same in international cricket, and there is nothing the captain can do about it. However, the captain decides when he bowls, makes strategies and supports the bowler in field placements. That is one way the role of a captain impacts on the number of boundaries. And, when the number of boundaries increases, the bowler panics and tries to be conservative. He tries to bowl wide yorkers to build dot balls. With his lack of control and building pressure, Matheesha sprays the ball all over. So partially due to captain's weaknesses and also due to Matheesha's weaknesses that get exposed in higher quality international games, he gives away more runs, wides and becomes lesser attacking. Partial impact only.

All right. That means that Kusal Mendis DID have a part in messing up Matheesha ha?

No. Kusal Mendis has never captained a single complete game which Matheesha played. he may have been standing in when the captain is out of the ground during ODIs, but even that was not possible in T20I. Matheesha played 12 ODIs inder Dassa in 2023 including 2 in the WC and got injured in the same game that Dassa did. He played the first T20I in 2022 under Dassa and then in 2024, 3 under Waniya and 2 under Asalanka. Why do you blame Kusal Mendis? It is Kusal Mendis who should blame Matheesha for the long-term spine issues.

Ah ok. Then not Kusal Mendis, but SL captain is the reason for Matheesha's lack of performances ha?

Lack of what? Matheesha did not do well in ODI for sure and that was a wrong selection to begin with. We have not written the script for his ODI. But IPL is T20 so, in T20I in 2024, he has done significently well for SL. He has 11 wickets in 5 matches, going in-par with 13 in 6 IPL matches. Averaging 15, striking 10, only his economy of 9.21 is not in-par with IPL. So Matheesha HAS DONE WELL in SL jersy.

But Matheesha has only played Afghanistan and Bangladesh in T20I, both below IPL quality. So you can reserve your comments on Matheesha not being managed well under Waniya to post-WC.

But not Kusal Mendis. I know that Kusal Mendis is responsible for COVID, the Ukraine War, Gaza killings and the sinking of the Titanic, But at least you gotta relieve him from blaming for Matheesha matters.

Did the bowling just die in IPL 2024?

Lots of talk about what is happening in IPL this year. The way how IPL is played this season, the over-entertainment of hitting every ball to the fence can kill the enjoyment of the game and implode within itself. So what you are seeing cannot be a stability, yet a transient. The offshoot will fall within, for its own weight.

On the other hand, IPL is supposed to be so. That is the original idea behind it - behind all mercenary cricket around the globe. All this money, support and hype is not there to see a bunch of full-time and part-time bowlers defending 130 in a Premadasa dodgy dustbowl. This is why Mercenary cricket is not really cricket, but a popular festival.

We only need to worry about this if the WC will be played in the same fashion. Small pitches batting wonderlands and dominance. I highly doubt this.

Anyways, not only the boundaries and pitches, but the game rules have been changed too. Most notably the presence of the impact player. Having an impact player option, the first batting team can have an extra batter, and if everything goes wrong they can still insert another batter as the impact player (provided that they have enough all-rounders to cover for the bowling). This means, that the batters can try to target 15 runs per over, and if they fail, the team can potentially have up to two extra batters as cover-up. This makes batters entirely disposable. This is the secret behind the birth of modern power-hitting. Having Gura, Ara, Arjuna, Hashan and Roshan at numbers 3-7 made the openers Sanath and Kalu totally disposable. Hence they - who were rare natural hitters of their time - were told to go 10 runs per over and it would be perfectly all right if they got out.

This disposability allows the top order to hit 15 runs per over. Simply put, they treat every ball as a free hit. Why not? The pitch has no magic and the boundaries are moved back in even for a miss-hit to go for six. In the rare misfortune that you get out, the team have enough batters.

However, in IPL's new bowling reality, the bowlers have not come back as yet. It looks like a single is as massive as a maiden over. Anything between 125k-140k range being free lunch at hitting-end. Bowlers and management have not responded to this yet. Expect more and more of 150k bowlers. Expect more and more change of pace slow balls from other bowlers. IPL bowling evolution will be on the drawing boards of 100 pundits as of now. They will build a whole new strategy. 

Bowling is not dead, just bamboozled by the sudden attack. They will come back. It is interesting and lovely to look forward to see how they return.

In the meantime, let that be mercenary cricket - what you get for what you paid. I will only be seriously worried if I see these pitches these kinda grounds and these lunatic rule changes appearing in cricket proper, that is country vs country such as the upcoming WC.

Let's see.

Sri Lanka is a victim of consequences that changed in ODI cricket

When it comes to the downfall of SL ODI cricket there are a few things people forget...

- Some fast bowlers may do unbelievable things when the swing is on offer. But just bowl boundary balls when not. So the conditions really matter for most fast bowlers.

- SL's glory days had a hidden strength that was more important than all. They had a bunch of slow bowlers - spinners predominantly - in the middle overs. Most of them are batters who can spin. These folks controlled the game in the middle overs so that the opposition rarely had a walk in the park.

- With the coming of two cricket balls in two ends, and the field restrictions leading to the intro of second power play, cricket killed all those middle-overs spinner all-rounders. And THAT has been a silent killer for SL than anything else. Not that SL did so good in the past 10 years, but on top of SL's mistakes, they lost one of their main strengths.

- Today, the pitches are made for 300+, and hence ODI is really a batter's game, and relatively boring. However, SL does not agree with this trend. This is the very reason why games in SL are 250 games and still, you need a lot of good health to survive as a spectator. This is the best of ODI and how it should be. But the world has different opinions. This disparity would add more to SL's agony as they are playing in different wickets at home and their slow bowlers are not accustomed to 300+ wickets.

- Regardless of what the world did after the Sanath-Kalu style, SL always batted their best batters in no 3, 4, and 5. They made sure that the team made stable progress in the middle overs. What SL lost in the recent past is the lack of similar quality in the middle order. After the days of Mahela, Sanga, and in form Angie (not the Angie after 2015) we do not have that level of quality there, the slots were mostly given to beginners who never got established so far.

- The ODI game had a high impact from T20 the power hitting in the first and last powerplay makes more impact than the consolidation. Although we invented this style and had a few names at the world's best level, SL always lacked power hitters. In modern games, it is a major lack compared to when stylish Sanga and Mahela could still win the game 10 years ago.

- In the pitches that favor batting there is so little early swing, so what made Vass and Kulasekara nightmares to others is no longer there. And the ball can at most become 25 overs old as there are two of them. So Malinga's latter over reverse swing is also hardly possible. These are the main fast bowling skills SL possessed in the past.

- These facts changed the game so much that many of SL's strengths became obsolete. Although the messes in SL cricket cannot be justified, it is equally possible that those messes came up since SL did not have the qualities that the game evolved in the last 10 years, hence desperately trying to find make-shift solutions.

The Galle Delusion

Many people are stunned by SL's loss at the hands of Pakistan. We all understand how they missed a possible win in Galle to bad fielding and most of us are ok to dissolve that as life. But in SSC they looked like helpless.

The surprise may have been because - as per many - we were doing so well in test cricket. Why not? We almost challenged India and Australia to take their places in the championship final. So we were going well, anyone would say.

Were we? I wish to raise this question based on one fact - the venue. No this is not a "home and away" analysis like we all know everyone has a home advantage. This is a "Galle and away" analysis.

Were SL's good test returns of the last championship cycle brought by playing in Galle?

In this analysis I wish to mark two teams as relatively weak in test cricket, those are WI and Bangladesh (Ireland played outside of the championship cycle and I would pretty much ignore it entirely). So my analysis splits again into better teams and weaker teams where the weaker label is strictly for WI and Bangladesh

2021-23 cycle, Better opponents: Galle-WWLL, Away-LLLL

2019-21 cycle, Better opponents: Galle-WLL, Other_home-L, Away-DLLL

So they just won three tests against better opponents in 16 attempts and they all have been at Galle. They could just even draw one hence losing a hefty seven games outside Galle.

Also, I must say that the two they lost in Galle, in 2021-23 cycle, could have been won easily had it not been for multiple fielding mistakes. So they were games that could have been won. At Galle, SL has comprehensively got beaten only once by England among better opponents.

2021-23 cycle, Weaker opponents: Galle-WW, Away-WD

2019-21 cycle, Weaker opponents: Other_home-WD, Away-DD

They won three, two being in Galle and never lost anywhere.

So it is fair to say that SL's relatively high position in test cricket has been primarily thanks to Galle and playing weaker teams. Outside of Galle, they won only one game and that was against the weaker.

This was allowed by them being able to play both tests of each tour in Galle due to the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. They overdid this beyond the pandemic until a few months ago and finally gave up that plan after 2021-23 cycle.

Hence here we are, dawning on the reality outside Galle, at SSC, helpless like I stated at the beginning. Outside of Galle, this team is as weak as its ODI and T20I counterparts and perhaps they maybe even worse than the other two formats.

If you wonder why Sri Lanka does so well in Galle, the following guys are the main components of success in Galle for the periods of the last two test cycles.

Prabhath Jayasuriya:
Galle - 6 matches, 53 wickets, averaging 21.92
Other_Home - 1 match, 2 wickets, averaging 91.5
Away - 2 matches, 4 wickets, averaging 56.0

Ramesh Mendis:
Galle - 10 matches, 56 wickets, averaging 25.19
Other_Home - 2 matches, 6 wickets, averaging 54.67
Away - 2 matches, 1 wicket, averaging 192.0

Lasith Embuldeniya:
Galle - 6 matches, 32 wickets, averaging 28.42
Other_Home -1 match, 2 wickets, averaging 78.0
Away - 8 matches, 31 wickets, averaging 45.22

Galle has been SL's fortress, literally and metaphorically. Within it they would beat anyone, hence look so strong. Outside it, even on other home venues, SL look like mere peasants as vulnerable as the other weaker test-playing nations, and even worse than their ODI and T20I outfits.

By playing all home tests in Galle SLC has created a grand delusion. In fact, we can call it the Galle Delusion !!!

Tale of Pakistani women's cricket

Asia cup of women's cricket went back home. It is specifically significant as it was not home for a few years and Bangladesh stole it last time. If not for that anomaly, it was always with India.

Bangladesh's success in 2018 is like magic. They defeated India and Pakistan in the league, and SL's loss to Thailand boosted them to second in the league. Then they defeated India in the final unbelievably, taking home the only cricket glory of the tiger nation. But it was as good as a fluke. They never displayed anything to match it in the game.

The actual up-and-coming team in the context of women's Asian cricket is - no not SL but - Pakistan.

Pakistan women never had cricket, In fact, it was illegal that the very first team they created in the 1990s was taken to the court and got banned. By that time only SL and India had women's cricket in Asia. They were both bad - India was just bad, SL very. But they were international cricket teams of the time. In fact, Pakistani women were granted test status by SL.

And then in the 2000s in the Asia cup, it was just two-sided. India and SL may play only within themselves, or with Pakistan or Bangladesh at times. They both would defeat the minnows Pakistan and Bangladesh easily and India would beat SL in the final. Pakistani women looked like the Malaysian women of today. Despite playing on invitation in the nineties, Pakistani women were not good enough to play in the world cup and hence were never qualified before 2009.

Two things changed after 2010. Asia cup changed the format to T20I. And Pakistan women changed the tables... like really really changed tables, in fact, they made the table into a table mountain.

SL women had a deficiency for power-hitting for the longer we knew them. They do even now, Just one or two like Eshani or Chamari may stand against this inevitable truth. So SL women were weakest in T20. In fact, SL never took part in the T20 format finals until this year. They last played in the Asia cup finals in 2008.

IDK how this change and the relative weakness of the second-best team boosted Pakistan. But Pakistani ladies started appearing in the Asia cup finals in both 2012 and 2016. At the same time, they started playing in the WC.

Looking at the team strength today, Pakistan women are a team of international capacity, a team far ahead of SL and of course Bangladesh. They are not as good as India which is in the highest tier of women's game. But they are no longer in the woods even in a WC.

I really dunno what jetted Pakistani ladies around 2010. SL should study it. SL women show some great spirit. But talents are not there to match it. They need to make the most of the remaining Chamari years to do what Pakistan did.

Meanwhile, Pakistan shows glory day by day, and perhaps will convert their success to the WC level.