SL's Schrodinger's cricket XI

I want SLC to organize the following contest after this WC.

You take a player whose reception has been so divisive in social media. Let's say Dhana. You take Dhana's social media opposers, tell them to get together and put up XI people who can at best criticize Dhana. Then you take those who stand for him (yes there are some) and get an XI from them. Now we bring these two teams together and play a contest. 

Contest can be in any mode. Not necessarily to play in a cricket pitch. Open debate is one way. Or else you give them FB access and live telecast their debate in a FB post on giant screens. But if you want more excitement you can allow them to take it into hands and legs in a public stadium with packed crowds.

After that match take another. May be Kamindu's opposers vs supporters, or Asalanka's. Avishka also was a candidate until recent times. Kusal Mendis's game will be like India vs Pakistan.

You can sell tickets. Believe me there will be people to watch.

Having enough of this crap guys. SL is doing bad obviously I can see it. But that is still ok, it is cricket and we understand the situation. There are many deeprooted reasons for that from bad admin to new game rules to human physical structures that the games evolution in the past decade demanded. The gap is so much that a typical T20I game between NZ and India (271 defeating 225) looks like a typical ODI game between SL and Zimbabwe (or any other new era buddy of SL cricket) on a fine Premadasa evening.

But I am having enough seeing those who want Dhana out of the team until he is in and those others now want him in just when he is out. Some blame Shammi and Sana Kumburusuriya (is he a curator?) for bringing Dhana kicking out "the great player" Kamindu and then others blame the same ppl Shammi and Sana for dumping Dhana to bring back "this failure" called Kamindu back in. Same goes for anyone else.

And these buggers never confront each other. Instead they pour their both kinds of garbage on our head. 

There are two kinda truths here. 

The first truth is that Dhana, Kamindu, Asalnka, Wellalage Thekshana, simon, Peter, Akbar, Ramanadan, Silva Perera Siripala all these buggers are NOT proper international players. For that class only a few that we have to come even close. So you can see the positive side and the negative side of selecting or expelling any of them. 

This is SL's Schrodinger's cricket XI which is dead and alive at the same time.

The second truth is that these buggers are still the best we have. There is no depth left. The next level is even worse. So there are no proper replacements for these players in many foreseeable years.

So opposers and supporters have enough deep shit to create their campaigns and there is no end to it but shuffling the same pack of cards.

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.

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

Thisara Perera retires

Thissara Perera had a bullet train engine, with an out-of-control break in it. And he traveled with his wife as the train guard, who was accused to be the one in control of the seemingly out-of-control break secretly.

Perera was probably that unique player whom Sri Lanka never had before or after. The hard-hitting fast bowler - the gonna be Botham, gonna be Freddy, gonna be Watson, gonna be Klusener, which he never gotta be.

Of all players with 2000+ ODI runs he has the 4th best strike rate of 112+. He was a pretty good bowler as well, with the capacity to play as a permanent bowler, with pace, bounce, swing, etc. In any of these skills, he has shown immense promise and sporadic match-winning performances. But then again, it never connected to consistent performance. And when things went wrong they really went wrong. Perera stood looking stupid in the middle.

Add to that the controversy of conflicts with players, ugly social media politics for captaincy, wife involvements of infamous comments on colleagues, and whatnot.

So finally he has retired.

I think he could have been a great player for SL - that hard-hitting fast bowler - had he had a different attitude and discipline into the game.

I am in a way happy that he retired. On one side, his sporadic performances embedded in near betrayal failures were so harmful to white-ball cricket that was attempting to recover. Plus, SL would not mind one mercenary player - the Andre Russel which he can be - who plays in leagues around the world and brings a sorta sole representation for the country.

Money may clear lethargy that he seemed to bring about every now and then. And money will keep the distracting family members also out.

Long live, bat and bowl Thisara Perera in all world leagues carrying the lion under the franchise jersey.


PS: I must say I missed one such player. Athula Samarasekara. He played so long ago and we have little idea about his pace, but the look of big Sam suggests that he was faster. Sadly he played 15 years too early that the game was not intelligent to pick his natural style.

And another - Suresh Perera.

The Mercenary Era

2007 WC was a disaster for India. Lost the first level matches - even to Bangladesh - and got kicked out right there just after three games. An aging team, captained by a player who may not fit the tempo of that time, not well fitted for modern terms of the game. Not many replacements were found in India either. Yeah, no matches to what the little island below had to offer.

At the same time, T20 cricket was knocking every door. It was becoming popular every day. 

And needless to say that the Indian crowd was highly unsatisfied. They expected to see better cricket. They were thirsty but nothing suited for consumption other than the poison of hatred towards the players. Nothing else was available there (we know they don't cheer the runner's up SL for sure).

It was under these circumstances that some bunch of people got together in discussion. The bureaucratic sloth bears in BCCI may never see the light for years and they thought that they should take the matters in hand. India was becoming rich so it was surely a lucrative operation worth trying. Thirst was there but lacked any supply for the demand. It was a business opportunity.

It is unclear whose idea it was. But gotta be a damn good one. But it is very likely to have got shaped pretty much in the mind of then chairman of National Cricket Academy and the biggest cricket veteran sitting there.

You must have guessed it. Play a T20 cup. Play franchises. Play foreign players. Play for money, pay good money and earn good money. In return wake up Indian cricket and make it really good for them.

It was not IPL. It was ICL, that never to be league of Zee TV. The think tank thought BCCI will be happy for their commitment for the nation at the harshest moments of history and would support their plan. What came out was threatening bans and almost certainly theft of intellectual property.

I hate mercenary cricket and I wish that meeting never took place. for it changed the world cricket, partially caused the ruin of SL cricket and really impacted all the other nations in bad ways (scheduling issues, loyalty issues, players leaving national cricket, early retirements, etc etc). But I have to admit that it is singly the biggest reason for the gap between Rahul Dravid's India and Virat Kohli's India in 13 years.

ICL died in the hands of BCCI but the format was replicated in not only IPL but zillion other cricket nations all over the solar system and milky way for that matter, well, only those have functional cricket administration. Not the few dead ones.

Today, that veteran man who pretty much certainly was behind this brilliant idea is somewhere in an Indian hospital after suffering from a heart attack. This is not the only story you can write about Kapil Dev but pretty rare this would be remembered today.

Get well soon big boy.

Kusal Perera - Should the ESPNcricinfo's best test batsman of 2019 play any more test cricket?

As he pocketed the ESPNcricinfo award for best test innings of 2019 beating Ben stokes, Kusal Perera still has not even secured his place in the test side.

He was dismissed after Pakistani tour where he never played any role but being a mere traveler, and De Mel cited several facts for his exclusion

- Kusal was nursing a minor injury

- Kusal needs to regain form

- Kusal does not occupy the crease although he can deliver a random 150

- Kusal is not in playing XI so it will be a pure waste of time for him

- Kusal should focus as the main wicket-keeper and opener of shorter form as 2020 is a WC year.

The last one combined with the first gives a fair reasoning itself. Knowing his injury history, Zimbabwe - a noticeably low key and non-accounted tour - is surely not worth risking his chances for the WC. And that may be further backed by his absence from domestic games since then, perhaps due to injury.

But the question is whether he has at least reserved the squad selection for upcoming England tests.

Here comes the need to regain form and the comment that he does not occupy the crease. His miraculous Durban test produced 51 and 153. But that is followed by 20, 1, 23, 0, 0 where the last double ducks have been in the test against NZL that SL badly wanted a middle-order batsman to save it. Looking into past before the Durban test you need to pass 10 innings to see a half-century. Among them was a match-winning 23 unbeaten in WI, but all the other innings were very short, mostly out for rash shots.



Kusal was playing no 5 in SA as Chandimal was out dropped and Angelo was injured. Both these players have come back. Chandimal not only occupies Kusal's no 5 position but also fills the extra wicket-keeper role. You cannot say that he has done amazingly well, but it is safe to say that his half-century in Pakistan and match-saving stay in Harare should at least be enough to retain the position against England.

Adding to the complexity, Roshen Silva is back playing FC cricket. Although he has done nothing exceptional yet, his impressive batting average and match-saving skills will be at high demand against England in home tests, where Roshen shows more skill to play.

If anyone else is needed to replace Lahiru Thirimanna, the little kid who hasn't stopped performing - Pathum Nissanka - has scored another century to his long list of impressive knocks that decorate his ultra-impressive FC average of 65. He is a wicket-keeper too and should have been selected ahead of Oshadha, if not for some error in De Mel maths.

Where is Kusal Perera gonna fit? And why should he play tests? Because Harsha Bhogle laughed at SL, or because Kusal really won the ESPNcricinfo award?

Only he can fix this. He has to be better than someone in the test team. At the age of 29, he will have to show it pretty quickly.

Mathews should not captain

I  hate to talk about individuals, but sometimes we have to breach that ethic when something looks so clearly evident and straightforward. This post is not favouring anyone or opposing the current captain as a player. To be frank, it is just to say that his captaincy looks so very dumb.

Yesterday SL lost with a heavy margin to Bangladesh. Although they were the favourites and a SL win would be a surprise at that moment, the scale of loss was too bad for even this weak team. It opens scary speculations about the team and its captaincy. It shows symptoms of chronic diseases that may not be cured in the short period before WC.

Despite the individual brilliance of Malinga, the rest looked like a flock of deer in the headlight. It wasn't the best opposition, just Bangladesh, and they were suffering from an injury and many collapses. I don't think the game was lost in any missed catches. I think they lacked a plan for the game entirely. And the captain was just hoping that something will bring the victory - something like a weather event or divine help or something.

I think the lowest point of the game was what happened after Tamim came for the second time to bat with the injury. He wouldn't have survived any delivery onto the stumps. But the only one he played was bowled to his body [WTF? injure him more?] and then SL captain never thought that other batsman should not be given the last ball single. That is street cricket, backyard cricket, or even no cricket but common sense. And that gives the best statement about SL captain.

That captaincy explains why SL loses. Have talent but no plan no thinking, just waiting for something to happen. And that also explains why SL does well in tests but fail in shorter formats. Simply because they play good strategies as evident in West Indies test series, where Mathews is not the captain. When he did last in tests we almost lost to Zimbabwe. Anyone would have been better, Chandimal, Lakmal, Tharanga, Thissara [Thissara was pretty good in captaining]. The batting failure also shows signs of lack of any plan, as they just played their shots and lost wickets.

Also, it was a crazy selection. For the lack of a batsman, they played a bowler. While having a player like Dickwella aside they played an extra bowler. Then to patch the hole they created in batting they played Dhanajaya too early and lost him. The only gain we had in SA series was the settling of no 6,7,8 with Dhananjaya Thissara and Dasun. It is very important to keep them intact, because, when Chandimal recovers they will surely be batting at those positions. If they want to fill Chandimal they should have played someone else. But keeping those 6,7,8 positions intact. For me, this tour's expectation would be how SL's 6,7,8 play in collapses [which will surely be there]. They should not have broken that just to accommodate this game.

Anyways, one more loss may kick them out in whichever stage. At least let's hope they'll do basics right. And among them, for me, is to relieve Angelo Mathews from this unnecessary burden of leading the side.

Nevertheless, I started suspecting the potential of the coach too. This cannot happen w/o his guidance.

Ball tampering and illogical laws of cricket

In the follow up to Smith-Warner-Bancroft saga, the concerns of St Lucia incident involving Chandimal was already apparent. If we recap the proceedings, Smith-Warner-Bancroft saga had one high quality in it, that it was absolutely stupid. I mean, here we have a cricket team that discussed to change the shape of the ball in the team meeting, brought a sandpaper (of all things) and took it in the middle of the ground and applied it on the ball in clear daylight. If that much was not enough they chose a sandpaper with a yellow back, whereas yellow has been a color chosen for road marks for the drivers to see at a distance.

So, as expected, they got caught, confessed, cried, daddies patted, wives walked by and finally, we all have a clear case. Despite the shame and what not, everyone must be happy to have a clear decision in the game, win or loss you may call it.

But the real thing is not that clear, many scores level and game ends in the margin of doubt. Sitting in the middle of all the mess is the game of Cricket, the champion sport of vagueness and incomplete legislation. For an example, it is perfectly legal to tamper the ball with some things whereas some other things are not allowed. The allowed things are also not clear, and there is no definite margin. You are not allowed to apply foreign objects but you can apply a handkerchief which is a foreign unregulated object itself. You are not allowed to apply any rough material, but you can use your outfit. Now how many have thought of the possibility to have a sandpaper-like logo on the outfit?

This is another vague case in cricket like pitch fixing, where the curator is allowed to "fix the pitch" for the advantage of the home team, but not for the advantage of the bookies.

Laws are more than partial, in fact, they mean nothing here. They lead us to lunatic ends.

So did they in St Lucia. Dinesh Chandimal was thought to be feeding himself a sweet and rubbing saliva on the ball. So his action is deemed as a tampering, but had he taken the sweet during the break and kept it in his mouth, it would be perfectly legal to apply saliva. I mean, it is legal to apply saliva, legal to eat sweets, legal to have sweets in the mouth and apply saliva as long as you do not put it in the mouth in front of the camera. All that for a street myth that sweets change the shine of the ball.

And was it a sweet? As Chandi had sweets and almonds in the pocket and says that he does not remember which one it was. As the camera fails to find which one, he was in effect accused of "having sweets in the pocket" which any school kid can get caught when parents put their trousers to wash.

Now, this is not a face-saving for Chandi. Seriously, he may have intentionally changed the shape of the ball. Not only him, maybe most of these sweet chewing cricketers are doing the same. But it could equally be fair to say that they eat sweets totally unintentionally.

What a lunatic law is that cannot differentiate the two, define the margin. Not just here, the whole list of tampering techniques can be portrayed as totally innocent and natural actions, except for a yellow sandpaper

I don't know whether Dinesh Chandimal cheated or not, although he is hell bent insisting that he did not. But he is surely sitting on a match ban, as the same claim was upheld against Du Plessis. Punishment is going to be harsher than that due to current ICC drive against tampering (or the subset of tampering which they cannot stand). Regardless of his innocence, SLC (or whatever remains under that name) should take this the longest they can, for the sake of clarifying the law correctly, just like we managed with the flexing of the elbow.

Like I said before, we can tackle the yellow sandpaper in clear daylight. But such fools are so rare, mostly the culprits mimic the innocent and innocent get caught by mistake. Usually, a legal system should protect the innocent at the cost of the occasional culprit getting away, but here it does exactly opposite.

The rise of Bangladesh

After their back to back wins in Nidahas T20 Trophy against SL which eventuated the latter's exit, many are talking about the rise of Bangladeshi cricket. Most ppl think that it started with the tenure of Hathurusinghe. Although he was instrumental in the matter he wasn't everything.

If you want a turning point, you gotta go back to 2007 WC first round, India vs Bangladesh. See the scorecard. There are three names with 50+ scores. And those three names, youth at the time are the three colossal towers of their game in 11 years from there. India received an exit from WC after that game.

But that was only one fact. There are some other facts that Cricinfo won't report. The team management, cricket administration, school level upliftment, infrastructure development, etc. The secondary achievements like U19 dominance (most those noteworthy U19 players are now in national side), quality and effective first class (list A, T20 local included) and T20 franchise that is managed very well. Also most importantly the enthusiasm of a big nation that caused it all.

Bangladesh is a big nation, and their economy is capable of building a world-scale dominance like in India. Since the second big nation in cricket - Pakistan - has gone bonkers, they have the capacity of becoming the other cash cow after India.

There was once a time where rich nations dominated cricket whereas poor nations struggled not only in the game but also in everyday life. Finances of the game were only ripe in richer nations and players of poorer nations merely volunteered for prestige and privilege. Although the struggle of everyday life may remain somewhat the same, the poverty lines have moved inside the national borders. Of those poorer nations, some rose up above the richer nations purely for their collective purchasing power, being bigger consumers in total hence having more value in the money invested in sponsored activity such as cricket. Population instead of per capita GDP became more important. And today they throw ridiculous amounts of money into the game where the players of richer nations look more like volunteers playing for prestige and privilege. It won't be SL or West Indies ever because few millions of people mean nothing anyways. But India, Pakistan or Bangladesh have individual populations bigger or in the range of the sum of all the other smaller test nations.

I am not talking about Bangladesh winning next WC. I am talking about the center of gravity moving close to them like it did with India. Them handing out big sums to first world beggars who would tweet and facebook after each game to patch up the hurts that their Bangali sahibs got from them during the match, just like how Starc would do after Smith's actions hurt his franchise master Virat Kohli. I foresee a second India across its Bengali border.

Speaking of India, money came long before but the recent in-ground dominance of India also began in a game in 2007 WC, incidentally against Bangladesh. Yes, the defeat in that same game changed Indian think tanks a lot and we all know their response through the past 11 years after that humiliation.

ODI game is not for the hitters but diggers

Once, in recent times, India tried a young batsman who just turned 20. I think they had some opener slot free due to injury so they had him to open, against a 5 match series in SL.

The young opener was very slow for an ODI opener especially to match the legendary Indian openers. His returns were 12 (22), 37 (67), 25 (38), 54 (66), 31 (46). It was a low-scoring tour involving two Dambulla rock scaling games. But, despite the fact that he showed the potential for a long stay, his returns were characteristically too slow. He lost his position [maybe because the other guy recovered from injury].

He was dropped for one year and then he returned as a lower order player again against SL, to make 2 n.o. He got promoted to no 4 and for the first time played diff opponents, making 16(24), 79(104), 30(41), 10(16). 

They dropped him to lower order at times they made good runs as he was the slower cog of the wheel. Remember these are the days of great Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag, Dhoni and establishing heroes like Gambir, Raina, UV. They had every damn reason to drop him. They'd have found a "better hitter" by just waiting at the picket fence of a mercenary IPL dressing room, any one of them.

But they retained him. It was for the quality of his. The temperament of his. That they wanted the digger in him more than a wonton hitter they may find at every gate they knock. And moreover he was given a massive IPL deal and a permanent club to play for.

The lucky bastard is Virat Kohli. and this one is for those who still think ODI game is a hitter's game. I agree that his first many outings were too slow, but that is not the most important aspect. A good digger will turn a great hitter with much ease compared to vice versa.

I do not look at any particular SL player, but note that we need stable quality strong-minded young diggers, not six hitting broiler chicken. We may loose few games but the stability will be forever. Look next door for the little master if you doubt.

Gemstones surface in flushing flood erosion - I repeat

I wrote this article slightly more than a year ago, expecting a rank show against world number one Australia. I posted it with a different picture, never expecting to be proven picture perfect and totally wrong otherwise. Well, that was history but in a year the anomalies have disappeared and normalcy has taken its place. And here we are facing the much-expected humiliation in the hands of a different world number one.

What went wrong with my prediction last time, and went right for Sri Lanka then, can be summed up in three points.

• In form Rangana Herath against Australia. But he did not show the same skills against India. If that is due to aging, well that would be a bigger hole than Sanga Mahela combined
• Australia had no good spinners so we had the freedom to set pitches with as most spinning as possible. Sadly India has the two spinners who fight for world top rank and we had no idea how we should set the pitches.
• Graham Ford had just started as the coach. The system was fully functioning and board sounded sensible. Neither is the case today, at best it is a cacophony for that symphony. Too many cooks poison the meal, and Ford jumped the boat before sinking.

Gemstones surface in flushing flood erosion. But whether we will pick them up is an entirely different question. In the agony of ongoing Indian tour, we encountered followings which are yet noteworthy. I hope whatever functioning administration would not miss them and try to enhance them.

1. In Niroshan Dickwella, we have an attacking ODI opener, a fighting test middle order player, a good wicket keeper and a good brain with potential for future leadership

2. In Akhila Dhananjaya we have a complete spinner with every trick in the book, well, almost [drift seem to be missing, depends on conditions too much]

3. In Vishwa Fernando we have a potential Vaas

4. Milinda Siriwardhana is a quality tail ender, and it was so unfair to drop him just for failing in one gloomy icy cold England tour.

Having said that let me copy paste my previous article with a whole new picture.





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.

Let the order re-emerge within the chaos itself

I see that many people are talking about cricket. Some in jest some in despair some still having hopes. Some who did not like SL, cricket or cricket of SL are taking this opportunity too. Some even ask me why I did not write anything. Why should I? I mean has there been any unexpected event that should not have happened taken place suddenly?

I expected this and found it as a good research opportunity. I am glad they played 6-5 and found some answers regarding spin bowling and fast bowling questions.

Or do you want me to select a choice XI now and show my depth in team selection just because the XI failed? Any XI will fail, did you not know that?

It was pathetic and sad. Worrying and concerning. But not a surprise for hysterical or euphoric behavior. I am not surprised about the results of the three matches. But I am surprised about those who have suddenly found that SL is losing and got themselves surprised about it. Did you really expect to see a different result?

It has been a decades long period of mishandling, in which SL cricket beat the levels of Pakistan and West Indies boards to be the worst governing body, and was once crowned as the most corrupt institute within the corrupt nation, which may have been saved by the central bank now. It is run by a man with family connections to betting industry. It has been conducting musical chairs for team selection and coach selection. And 23 first class teams are accepted and select the board by means of their votes, hence creating a vicious cycle.

None of these are information to many, we all knew them well. But everyone seems to have woken up from a rosy dream and screaming in cold and anger. WTF is wrong?

If you still think that SL cricket died in Galle SSC and Pallekale and still wanna keep throwing stones at the unfortunate XI in the middle see the actual funeral proceedings that happened in front of your own eyes in past year or so.

You were there, you paid your final rites, so now let things calm down. If you believe in reincarnation, let the new being be revived one day, if you believe in God leave it in his hand. If you believe neither you know that there is nothing called fate and all is randomness, so let the order re-emerge within the chaos itself.

Tale of two tests

Sri Lanka, playing a world number one team, is expected to lose. Some may recall an Australian tour a year ago, yet, that was played in our conditions. Just like India claims entire Sri Lanka being within their naval military domain, so can they for our grounds - almost Indian territories. So what happened in Galle and SSC should not be a concern. Yet it is.

The issue is not in the fact that we lost, but how we did. How our key players performed and how we took up the challenges. Even more importantly how we selected the teams.

Having played the world number one team in pitches where a coin toss wins games most, we lost both tosses. That gave India a chance to deliver another knockout punch on already bleeding SL who'd fall anyway. Both times they amassed 600 or more. If not for their own demons two years ago in Galle, we'd have lost twice by innings, all told, done and dusted, just in the first innings, just after the toss precisely. 

Clearly, SL batsmen did their best, and if not for the 600 deficit that looms in the back of their head, they'd have done better. Other than the first innings of the second test, the batting was all right. Those are the kinda scores that win games in SL usually.  Most batsmen did something or the other in the four outings.

The key culprit is Rangana Herath. It is true that he did not do so well against India except for that Galle test, and hence would deliver same bowling figures anyway, but his bowling was all over the place. It is not the lack of wickets that scares me but the lack of beating batsmen so often as he was used to doing. Being a player with lesser armory - little turn more often than not - his weapons were strategies, placement, and guise. Neither of it was on display in either of the games. He'd bowl unusually batting friendly stuff, half pitch to full toss or leg side lollies. The worrying issue is whether it is age. 

The impact of ageing is sudden at times, as shown by Sanath Jayasuriya in the latter stage of his career. For a player who depends on the utmost subtlety in accuracy, Rangana Herath may have passed a point of no return to his previous skill level. If so, the accountant of SL Cricket can start his final ritual, the declaration of bankruptcy.

In both games, Lahiru and Malinda respectively played blunders on the first days. Their lack of anything in the bowling other than just tossing it up, gave away a necessary advantage. Shikar Dhawan capitalised on Lahiru where at 3/133 India regained valuable advantage off Malinda's 75k non-turning bouncers. Having said that both players played commendably well since then that they both deserve selection for next game. Malinda bowled turning and bouncing deliveries that beat opposition often and gave two wickets. He proved that his style drastically differs to Rangana, although they both turn the ball in the same direction using the same hand. I think SL should no longer look at him as next Rangana, for he is a different player, hence let him play even when Rangana is around.

So the question pops up about the selection. Fast or spin, India had the capacity to out bowl us. Yet we had more chance for fast bowlers to grab their wickets. Sadly it is a time that we had not many such players. Prasad and Chameera have never recovered or regained form after injury more than a year ago. Lakmal got injured and Eranga's state is unknown other than he was cleared [he left the game with a health issue on top of bowling action being reported]. The next level players of Vishwa Fernando, Kasun Rajitha, Lahiru Gamage, Vikum Sanjaya et al never impressed recently. So only Nuwan Pradeep and Lahiru Kumara were all we had.

Even on that grounds, we should have played at minimum two pace bowlers in the second test. Having only Pradeep as the sole fast bowler, knowing that he always shows a fitness issue of dropping his pace at the end of the day, selectors were calling for trouble. He just delivered what was expected from him - an injury.

With that comes the debate of how the composition should be. Notably with Asela Gunaratne being absent should Sri Lanka play 6-5 leaving the lower order in the risky hands of Niroshan Dickwella and the bowlers. But in comparison, Dilruwan playing as a fifth bowler may well be a better option than an all rounder with nothing in every department. We can postpone this debate for next tour when Asela is fit, but for now, it was proven that our best all rounder, for the time being, is Dilruwan.

Last but not least is Dinesh Chandimal. He's done bad even by his own standards in this year. His highest against anyone but Zimbabwe or Bangladesh is 30 for 2017. And then he was named the captain. Having a history of lack of form taking him away from the automatic selection as the captain, Chandimal may well be going in the same cycle.

My suggestion for Pallekale is that we should not play Rangana. He deserves a break as there are five more tests for the year. He wasn't effective so far, although that does not tell that he cannot win the game, it is a worthy risk to take. We should leave the game in the hands of other three spinners - Malinda, Sandakan, and Dilruwan. And we should play the best two fast bowlers that we have - Lahiru Kumara and the fastest available another player. And of course 6-5.

That game may be lost, but we can use the challenge and conditions to best in order to select the team for the Pakistan tour. A dead rubber is worthy that experiment. A game that Thilanga's family business may list as all odds on India, can be risked with no hesitation.