Half plus half equals one

Dilhara  Lokuhettige, one time fast bowling all rounder of Sri Lanka, has accused Angelo Mathews for "not selecting him" in his retirement press conference. The evidence he gives dates back to 2013, where he found from a selector that Angelo chose a different player instead of him. "The captain wanted a batsman instead of an all rounder", says Lokuhettige.

Now this story falls apart itself. Lokuhettige is a 110k bolwer, and Angelo was correct that he does not need another player who bowls at same speeds as himself occupying a slot where a proper batsman can play. In fact Lokuhettige has been given ample chances long before Angelo  played under 19, and has never done anything special, only noteworthy is the 26 runs-an-over  humiliation in the hands of Sehwag around 2005. There is nothing needing explanation about Angelo's decision. Obviously it wasn't personal, but was based on principle, that a proper batter should play the all rounder slot.

And that principle, which Angelo seems to have forgotten today, has opened a worthy discussion, which is more relevant than Lokuhettige legacy itself.

Batsman for an all rounder, or bowler for an all rounder, would have been a nice theory to revive limited overs cricket of Sri Lanka today as the team is plagued with such players who will not be selected for their batting skills or bowling skills considered alone. But just because of their half skills in each discipline, they earn the classification of all rounder. Half and half summed to one and then they are in the playing XI.

Term "all rounder" may be misused here. Players like Angelo Mathews are by all means all rounders, just  like  how Sanath  Jayasuriya  or Kapil Dev  was. But they developed one  discipline to such an  extent  that they'd  be  selected only on that basis. In that light, their other skill becomes only an add on. 

After 2015 WC Sri Lanka has started using these "half plus half equals one" players quite often, and with no surprise, their returns in every discipline is not much different to Lokuhettige. However they keep getting selected as the captain seems to have redefined his principle as "all rounders for batters and bowlers". Even at the era of batting carnage, Sri Lanka is throwing these half bowlers and gets hammered around the park.

Dilhara Lokuhettige made a claim which is becoming laugh lot in all circles. But in the wake of that claim what Angelo should ponder is how far he has deviated from his correct call in 2013. How many Lokuhettiges he's carrying with him today where talented others wait for a chance.

In simple Angelo should follow Angelo of 2013. Perhaps that is a good nourishment to pick from the dirty can of worms served today in many press conferences.

Through the backdoor of Premadasa Stadium - 2002

SLC has restricted match ticket selling to the internet. This is very unfair as the life blood of the game in Sri Lanka was always not internet or the elite but the street and the common man. This will create chaos, and eventually this will discourage regular visitors.

There were chaos already at Dambulla. If people protest for not having tickets available, go after black market to buy them and finally storm the gates resulting 45000 people (mostly without tickets) packed into 18000 capacity ground SLC gotta be happy. Still the matches are sell outs, and cricket is very very popular.

It is YOUR people that you denounce. Karma is a bitch Sri Lanka Cricket. Do not cry for lack of crowds in ten years time.

Anyways, the last time where there was such a mess that I remember was when ICC took over tickets and sold them via super markets etc. Here is a personal experience, a bit of nosta, but all lovely memories. This was posted in many other blogs by me, so this is really a re-post.

It was during 2002 champion's Trophy, I and few others wanted to watch SL vs Aus. We were attracted more than the cricket and dancing girls, by Shane Warne - simply that we wanted to booooo him. A Big Big BOOOOOO.

Incidentally Mr Warne is the only person whom I have ever booed throughout my "disciplined" life so far; for those purists and my school teachers. Further more for any reborn purists I have to remind that indecent booing originated in Australia against Murali, and Warne was a chief architect behind that. This is a tit-for-tat. A capital TAT.

And tickets were going like, err... national flags after war victory. We called dozen places, including Food City outlets and numerous lads in Sri Lanka Cricket, but luck was not in our side. Finally, we walked in thinking of 50/- or 100/- "on-the-spot" ticket. It took one huge hurdle to get to the ticket counters to see the soldout indication - a sellout crowd as rare as it could be in SL. I never knew that it was a national task to boo the bastard.

Wandering hopelessly in the outside alley of the ground [while the cheer and beer tossed high on sky inside] we met this hawkish man. If you make Russel Arnold not taking a wash for 3 months you could caste this man out of Arny, but the sharp eyes were much the same. Before we realized who he was, he did, and spoke.

"Mahatthayala ticket gaththe ne neda?"

Firstly a very innocent voice, with a strong muslim accent.

"Hmmmm"

We were puzzled...

"Sadda nethuwa mage passen enna"

Whispered a hidden demon in him.

We followed, rather were choiceless to follow. He was our only hope. Is he the president of the cricket board in disguise? Well... even the board president couldn't put anyone in, as ICC had taken over complete ticketing rights.

As we were kept waiting for some good pacie overs which were dispatched by Aussie openers many a times to the ropes, we wandered anxiously.

Then suddenly, he came to us throwing three remains of tickets already used and torn by the gateman.

"Ara inne ape mahaththaya. Shape eke oka denna"

Demon spoke again.

"Man athenta enawa..." he showed us some unattended corner around the park.

"...mata ticket thuna aapahu oone" he commanded.

"Ekak thunsiya panahayi".

Dammit, whatever it costs.

When I looked at it, they were Rs 300 tickets. Just 50 more, and without the ticket tag. That was just the cost.

So we walked into the park, over crowding the sellout by another three [no wonder why some stadiums crash], with the kind curtsey of his "mahaththaya". We had no issues in entering Rs 300/- category.

With the noise of the game, we heard a sharp whistle from our behind to see a centimetre gap between two sheets that serve as the wall of the ground. A thin finger was calling us, rather commanding.

While Sanath Jayasuriya tossed the ball in dilemma to choose spin or fast bowling within first 15 overs, we toggled with the idea of teaching him a lesson [look who's talking ethics anyway] by not returning his precious ticket tags. But again somebody with little more grey matter suggested that we give it or else, it will be us to receive a better lesson by his lads around the park. Sanath also opted it right for Aravinda De Silva [as we gave away the ticket tags] who tossed a teaser which got Aussie opener [Hayden, wasn't he? Note that we missed the game so far] to walk down the track and miss it completely. We looked back to see stumps in rattles.

Rest was history as it always happened during the great times of SL cricket. Wickets went crumbling and brought Warnie way too early. We did indeed boo him, in an unprecedented standing ovation, just to find that it encouraged the man to top-score in the lower scoring game. Sri Lanka won the game but Warnie shone in the cacophony of "over crowded" stands.

When we walked out we saw our friend strolling down the side road perhaps for his daily dose.

End of a good day for everyone.

It is very hard not to interfere into team selection

It is very hard not to interfere into team selection for a captain. In most places, captain has a legitimate right to choose alongside with the coach and the panel of selectors. Specially on the grounds that you are the most accountable individual for the conduct of the other 10 individuals you select. 

What happens is that the fallible and at times sinful human in the captain pulls his leg. Going beyond his interest to play the best XI, some captains may choose players of preference for reasons outside of talent. Perhaps your club member, perhaps your cousin, perhaps the school buddy or a compatriot of social elites, religious groups, races or castes. Sometimes the skipper's right to pick may have saved a Sanath Jayasuriya who could not play in the V, but some captains make a horrible mess in selecting 'his team'.

It is very hard not to interfere into team selection for the bigwig of the cricket board. Unlike the captain this is not a rightful interference but having the almighty powers of the game in a country, or imagining so, his majesty the king of the game would always make an evening phone call or watch the match with the selector and his wish will come true. After all, the selectors can never be independent of the man who "selects" them.

It is very hard not to interfere into team selection for the minister in charge. Well, he cannot pick players but he can block a selection by not approving. So there is a hidden but legitimate power in him. With that and other connections and powers of lobbying half a dozen other politicians can interfere selection. Among them there is one who only could not do a gender transition in 1978, and today, with magic of medical sector, has nothing left that (s)he cannot do. Political henchmen and relatives or sons make their way to team quite often or loose their fair selections on similar grounds. Surprisingly these politicians show an unbelievable solidarity that this influence is retained for their buddies in opposition.

It is very hard not to interfere into team selection for the regional cricket powers. To start with, most regional cricket powers even interfere school teams, and simply who can play within their locality. Despite being lesser obvious this is the dirtiest part of the selection game. This is where father's booming business can cause son's expulsion as his rival leads the regional cricket entity. Coaches may go to bed with fellow cricket candidates irrespective of gender. Money may be a reason to play, where not being a slave to one's supremacy to get sacked.

Fair or not, legitimate or under the table, these actions that interfere into selection on matters irrelevant to the skill has caused many to suffer and loose their futures, perhaps burying more Sangakkaras, Aravindas and Muralis among them. Selection interference in Sri Lanka provided enough to write a thriller of a book called Chinaman by some musician called Garfield Shehan Karunasena under the pseudonym of Shehan Karunatilake, yet many feel that his book is only about sundries of the unfair selection whereas there are centuries he missed to talk about. Anyways, for the XI chosen, there are CXXI others to talk about, and that talk around the town is perhaps the only way to regulate the selection and reduce injustice.

For that matter, as cricket fans it is very hard not to 'interfere' into team selection for folks like us. It may raise a shout such as "oh another selection pundit" or "which backyard team have you played to select a team". Agree, helmet off, but IT IS SOOO EFFING HARD NOT TO WRITE SOMETHING ON SELECTION when you saw the XI at Dambulla on last day of August 2016. Apologies before the chest-high beamer.

Sri Lanka should consider followings for ODI.

- To play a minimum of two genuine fast bowlers no matter what (test cricket may be different) because most part of ODI cricket is not spinner's game any more. If some are injured fetch others. I can name few such as Kasun Rajitha, Asitha Fernando, Vishwa Fernando, Dasun Shanaka etc who may perhaps be choices if the ones in squad are not.

- To reduce the number of all rounders in the squad. Accept the truth that we have only one complete all rounder (or very close to it) in captain. So others are all half/half players. In S Prasanna and likes even the half is questionable. Name only about two of them and that is enough. Currently we have Milinda, Sachith, Prasanna, Thissara and Dasun in round robin, none allowed to establish.

- Try to establish on at least one opener. Well the only set opener in past six seven years is chased even before his partner settled. Last thing you want is a musical chair for openers in post-Dilshan era.

- Have experience in no 6 and no 7. If possible have your best players like Angelo. Angelo's promotion in batting is not justified in ODI as he is not the most elegant in middle part. I believe SL can train a better no 5 if Angie plays no 6. Pls think of the WC Angelo, we cannot entertain individual ego, just like you may have spoken to T M Dilshan.

- Selectors should not consider cricket game plans as runaway marriages. Plan of sending Tharanga at no 7 worked so well in England. So please do not divorce your sweetly working game plan for the next bimbo who walks past you. 

I know that the interference cannot be avoided and favouring happens always. But at minimum there should be some sanity in the XI and squad. If we allow today's nonsense to continue we may play an XI of all batters all bowlers or all so called whatever percentage all rounders. Or all sons of politicians or all from one school. 

Favour you may, but don't harm the balance.

Gemstones surface in flushing flood erosion

SL squad for Australia Tests:
Angelo Mathews (capt), Dinesh Chandimal (vice-capt), Dimuth Karunaratne, Kaushal Silva, Kusal Janith Perera, Kusal Mendis, Dhananjaya de Silva, Roshen Silva, Nuwan Pradeep, Vishwa Fernando, Asitha Fernando, Rangana Herath, Dilruwan Perera, Lakshan Sandakan, Suranga Lakmal
[cricinfo]

If the word mismatch needs an example, look forward for the test series of Sri Lanka vs Australia. When we were at peak with experience and numbers in our ranks and they were at the rock bottom with juveniles, they still outplayed us in tests. When both seesaws changed its sides the gap may rise to a mount Everest. If that gap is not enough, SL sinks further with injuries to Prasad, Chameera, Vandersay and omission of Shaminda Eranga due to health and legalities.

The squad comes with many new faces and some surprises in non-selection. Noticeably, the top seven batters are pretty much predictable except for one lower order slot. Without the recent trials of Thiri, Mili and Shanaka either of the new players Roshen Silva or Dhananjaya De Silva is set to play in that. Kusal Mendis and Dinesh Chandimal have potential for some surprises. If Angelo regains his form, and openers do their defending bit at their best, you can hope for something. Kusal Perera can single-handedly win games, but he may need some time to find the game after ICC chased him to Siberia.

Roshen Silva averages 50.8 after 87 first class matches and that first class average is surpassed by only Angelo of all the SL players I can think of. Averaging more than Sanga, Mahela, Aravinda, or Thilan in first class after a reasonable period is seriously a bright factor, but you have this difficulty in interpreting what is meant by Sri Lankan first class which is played in below par conditions. Nevertheless it is unique, and if you consider that nearly a third of his first class innings are 50+ and he bats mostly in middle or lower middle, you may think he is an year-overdue solution for the problem.

In bowling there is a high likelihood that two Fernandos may sit back leaving regular pacemen to lead bowling.I personally think that the bowling in England was too conventional and there was no real attacking fast bowler. 18 year old Asitha Fernando may not be as fast as the grown ups but he may add that difference. However chances are high that they'd stick to the conservative solution.

Rangana's partner would be an interesting debate as Dilruwan is itching for a chance and Lakshan Sandakan looks equally competitive with his chinaman magic. Dilruwan is the third player with 30- average (take 40 wickets as minimum condition) behind the big two, hence deserving the slot. But a chinaman is as rare as that.

Of the non-selection, there will be debate over the drop of Milinda and Dasun Shanaka. Milinda misses selection with innings of 1, 68, 42, 35, 29, 62, 26, 0 and 35 and pretty effective bowling. Shanaka didn't get a fair chance for batting but his bowling created perhaps the only moment that SL was in control in England. Lack of their part-time bowling means that injury-prone Angelo is the only option other than the main bowlers. Nevertheless Thirimanne's name will get an standing ovation for getting dropped from the list.

Aussies are likely to play the the star of the practice game Steve O'Keefe instead of Marsh for their fifth bowler/all-rounder. They have five players averaging 49+ with bat, and bowlers of all variations. Lyon's offbreak combined with O'Keefe left arm orthodox may be like poison for spin-allergic SL batsmen. If that is not enough Starc shoots canon balls of150+.

Sri Lanka has beaten Australia only once in a test, and that win came with injuries to Steve Waugh and Gillespie which left them two men less in the second innings. A win this time is hardly an expectation but a national celebration. Hence any matches drawn can be considered equal to victory. Even in the case of total whitewash by them, I'd like to focus on individual performances as at this time what really matters is where we will be in 2-3 years time, not now. Let's pick gem stones as the flood gates open in Kandy on the 26th.

Seekkuge Prasanna should not listen to commentary pundits

Cricket pundits have always put Sri Lanka into the Appendix of their best practices manual. If the game is a conventional warfare, Sri Lanka is the biological and chemical versions of it. A passion for unorthodox styles, debate and controversy over regulations, Sri Lankan cricket is the do-not-try-at-home style cricket that no coach would like to teach the juveniles with. Seekkuge Prasanna did not add to any controversy but he masters another brand of power hitting and unorthodox style of his own.

His style is exactly against what David Lloyd, Shane Warne and other grandpas of the game advice behind the microphone - settle down, look at the total, plan for fifty overs, build your innings, build partnerships.

To the heck of it. The spinner turned pinch hitter who will turn don’t-know-what-to-call is only concerned about one thing. Hit every bloody ball thrown at him, try to clear the rope every time you hit it. For his brand of cricket a Four is a mere byproduct. Scoreboard does not exist as well as the rest of the surroundings but the ball. So much about cricket being a game of bat and ball, for Prasanna it is all that much.

I enjoyed his 59 as well as 94 in previous game. I wouldn’t expect it everyday, for he is full of weaknesses to take such a dangerous ride successfully often, but many failures will be justified by one such knock. Despite calls for ceasefire from commentary box, Prasanna should do what he can do best. If you cannot settle down, just make the most of it until you last. Sri Lanka has realised this as he wasn’t given a permanent slot. Instead he would sit in the auxiliary weapons pile and apply his menace whenever he is called in.

His selection was not well justified going by stats. However Prasanna has proved his point about his batting more than his bowling. In the past Prasanna’s bowling has been so good at the early stage of the innings, but always fell apart at the end. At Trent Bridge he walks away as the best bowler of the side and hopefully the confidence gained in power hitting raised his bowling talents.

Yet, what Sri Lanka lacked at Trent Bridge was another spinner - a permanent full time one. With Herath retiring, Senanayake destroyed in remedial action, and as per some news, Jeffery Vandersay being injured, the only option they brought was Randiv (Dilruwan seems to be banished into a Siberia of Test cricket). No matter who, it is just what they lacked, in a game of a sea-saw where fortune changed sides every ten overs. England’s last four wickets amassed nearly 200 runs as Sri Lanka had no variation but so many wicket to wicket pace bowlers who only differed in speed. England had packed a team where all can bat with one time opener Plunkett was their no 10. Sri Lanka is a long way from learning death bowling from the scratch. So the control and attack should be done in the middle overs.

The other debate of team selection is Upul Tharanga. Let me wear a pair of gloves as I am gonna open a can of worms of Sri Lanka Cricket. There had been three big controversies in ODI cricket in recent past, by three human names. They are called UpulTharanga, Ajantha Mendis and Ferveez Maharoof. The similarity they shared was that all three players are exceptionally talented and they can win games almost single handed. However among the ones they win, they show unbelievable weaknesses that they destroy the games single handed again.

Tharanga has 13 ODI centuries where the entire rest of the team has a sum of 7, and both Ajantha and Maharoof average  21+ and 27+ in bowling, but that does not justify the odd mistakes they make and loss they register for Sri Lanka. I am not supporting or against their selection. It has always been a touch and go decision, and I suppose it will remain so for the remaining few years of their career. And so will the controversy be.

However, you cannot blame Tharanga for the timid dismissal considering that veteran opener who takes some time to settle down was sent in as a no 7. Only way I can rationalise Tharanga’s selection as a spare opener, only useful in case top order collapses. If we lost many wickets in first few overs he’d go in as a new “opener” and do his bit. Otherwise he’d just be a spare wheel hanging on the backdoor, which made the team only a 10 players "eleven".

I think they should play a lower order batsman in his place. Tharanga should only play in top four if he is better than any of them. The only remaining batsman is Lahiru Thirimanne, whose ODI track record in lower order is not as bad as his current outlook. But whom Sri Lanka missed yesterday was Milinda Siriwardena. If we had Miliinda for Tharanga he could have done the both bits when they were 188/5 in 33rd over and also when England was 82/6 in 19th over. If anyone should be sent in as replacement for Shaminda Eranga it should be Milinda. Sure we don’t need another paceman as the squad has an extra paceman and we were one paceman too many yesterday too.

I notice the need for another spinner and a proper lower order batsman making way for Tharanga and one of the pacemen. Leaving that as the critic point, I wish to admit that England played to their glory last night among a dumbstruck eleven Sri Lankans, who had no control of the game at critical stages. The game was a tie, but the victory was for England.

Should Chandi bat at no 6?

The test that pre-maturely ended in Chester-le-Street yesterday was a pretty good start for Sri Lanka. It was the first time the young team put together a fight against a major team with their bats. Loss was already decided on second day, and there is no need to lament on that - it was England in England [like New Zealand in New Zealand]. Death was written all over when we lagged 397 runs as we followed on. But the fact that they made England bat again, and gave them some target to bat for, is amazing. Brilliant Chandimal knock with contributions from few others, especially from Herath

However I've gotta say that if not for fielding mishaps both sides won't get that far. So we've gotta wait and see whether it was a fluke or not. 

In the past I thought Chandimal should be batting at no 4, even when he made his debute as a no 7 wicket keeper batsman. He had every feature of a no 4. But... after few years now, I think he lacks one such feature. That is his average as a no 4. 

Chandi blossoms well at No 6, especially when everything is going wrong. I think he helped SL many times to get out of the pits we jumped into at that lower middle order position. Both his 126 yesterday and 162 against India (shifted due to a night watchman, mind you) came at no 6. He averages 35 at no 4 compared to 45 overall. His no 6 position average is staggering 85 with four out of six centuries. 

More importantly his absence in lower order has seen the team collapsing often, since no recovery player has been groomed thus far.

So I think he should be given what he does best at no 6. No 4 should be given to another stylish batter perhaps fresh out of school. Or perhaps Angelo Mathews.

In the meantime Shaminda Eranga is reported. So does that mean that we're playing Dasun Shanaka in the next test? Eranga didn't bowl that well either.

Also another selection question. Kusal Perera is available, so who will sit out? Obviously it should be Thirimanne, but it seems that SL cricket pundits have given him a slot no matter what he does.

Bored in the sorrow of defeat here are some stats to read (even statistics are more interesting than cricket nowadays). 

Test Batting:

	# Total Matches	# Players with 10000+ test runs	# Players with 5000+ test runs	# Players with 50+  averages (min of 20 innings)	# Players with 40+ averages (min of 20 innings)	Years taken to produce 10000+ player **
ENG	969	1	21	9	49	139
AUS	788	3	18	11	48	116
WI	513	2	12	8	26	76
IND	495	3	10	5	20	55
NZL	408	-	5	-	11	-
SA	400	1	7	5	18	120
PAK	395	-	6	4	16	-
SL	245	2	8	1	9	29
ZIM	97	-	-	1	3	-
BAN	93	-	-	1	1	-

** First player crossed 10000 in 1980s. Test cricket was not this frequent, and transport has not been this quick in distant past

Test Bowling:

	# Total Test Matches	# Players with 500+ test wickets	# Players with 300+ test wickets	# Players with 25- averages (min of 10 matches 40 wkts)	# Players with 30-    averages (min of 10 matches 40 wkts)
ENG	969	-	5	19 **	> 50 **
AUS	788	2	4	19 **	> 50 **
WI	513	1	4	7	19
IND	495	1	4	1	8
NZL	408	-	2	2	7
SA	400	-	4	8 **	19 **
PAK	395	-	3	9	17
SL	245	1	3	1	2
ZIM	97	-	-	-	1
BAN	93	-	-	-	-

** In early days with under arm bowling in non-standard pitch conditions bowlers averaged very low.

Sources Wiki and Cricinfo.