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".
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.
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.
