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.

Jhulan Goswami and the debate of unfair play rule

Finally finally Goswami goes !!!

India's opening fast bowler retires from international cricket with 250+ W-ODI wickets in 200+ appearances - both records pretty tough to take away from her. And also to play 20 years to retire at grandma age of 39 is a feat that only a very few fast bowlers of both genders have achieved.

Once India had a spinner, who probably has the best ODI bowling average of all time with all the chances for all records, but decided to retire at the age of 30. So for women's game where tradition, marriage, kids, and all the what not push the players out of it, Goswami's stay seems like the longest fathomable.

And I don't think there are any other current players of both genders who played the first international match in 2002. So probably the longest staying international cricketer of all.
India-W marked her departure with a classic ODI where they defended 169, and Goswami's fellow fast bowlers proved that her departure won't leave them in any sort of shortcoming.
Now to the most unwanted debate of the last wicket of England-W. The act of running out anyone who leaves the crease early as the bowler goes into the stride is valid and legal. Not just new but it has always been so. It was once called the category of "unfair play" meaning that the runner is taking an unfair advantage.

Then it was kept aside as "not fitting the spirit of the game" but some players invoke the moral debate every now and then. It was attached to the name of the Indian player Vinoo Mankad just because it was an Indian who did it against then mighty Aussies (for example they do not call putting rubber balls in the gloves "gilchristing" or under-arm bowling "chappelling").

 ICC decided finally that the act should not be in the debatable category of "unfair play" leading to debate and it should be made yet another way of running out a player. The debate should not be there anymore. But then, that rule is not active as yet, as far as I can see it will only be active on the first of October.

That does not mean it's illegal. Once again an Indian has done it against England, so there is a huge outcry and moral codes and whatnot. It is unclear what they are saying. The act was, is, and will be legal. The category only changes. The moral debate should no longer be there that is what ICC clearly shows up. The timeline of Oct 1st is for the category change, not for the moral debate. The moral debate is already invalid.

But, having said that I am looking forward to seeing more amendments just like the "flexing the arm" of a bowler, which once was regarded illegal, and then found that everyone is doing it on a minor scale, and in fact, it is really hard not to do it. This is another rule that almost everyone is breaking and hence may need amendments. T20I Wc is gonna be really interesting in the backdrop of this.

Groundsman's son against the groundsman

A young man moved to Adelaide from regional Australia and found himself a job as a groundsman in Adelaide oval. Not a very rewarding profession, but fairly enough to support his stay in the town and help him play some district level of cricket. 12 years on, the groundsman is heading towards 500 test wickets for Australia.

Another man found his job as a groundsman in a run-down cricket club that is in the margin of first class cricket. He would even play softball cricket for the club once or twice, yet it was beyond his reach. He taught all what he could, to his son, who is playing test cricket today for his country.

Pathum Nissanka playing Nathan Lyon in Galle. It is the groundsman's son against the groundsman. Cricket's palace staff claim their legacy in the palace.



3Gihan Jayawardane and 2 others