| Sports |
||||
| Work
and play for the right reasons They pick even the selection panel. The chairman is contracted on a long-term programme and paid by the UCBSA. He has to go in search of talent and has to give his findings regularly to the UCBSA. He is answerable only to the governing body and nobody else. He could be removed only by the controlling body, nor could he be dismissed unless for misconduct. He has to complete his contractual period. The present Chairman is Henry Omar. Players are picked on form and on merit. But in Sri Lanka ministerial interference at every given turn has caused a rumpus. The panel is regularly changed at the Minister's behest. As a result the whole process is in a state of disarray due to politics in sports. In recent times, a team was ratified by the Minister, but later revoked by him on a request made by the Captain. This resulted with a selector resigning. He had the guts to throw in the towel. There are quite a number of knowledgeable people, who have played the game. They have the experience and know-how to put the game on course. The likes of Channa Gunasekera, S.Skandakumar, Ranjit Fernando, Sidat Wettimuny etc. would be ideal to serve in the selection panel. They have coaching experience, too. Despite exigencies of duty, they are prepared to sacrifice their precious time. They would like to serve in any panel (selection) or otherwise but without outside interference. Politics in sport is the bane for most of the ongoing problems here. If there is indiscipline apparently among some players - it attributes to weak management, due to outside interference. Men of integrity shudder to enter the mainstream - a setback for its development. Without
fear If this happened here the panel would have been dissolved and a new panel would have appointed instead. If it happened here it could have stirred a hornets' nest. A player here who couldn't find a place in the club team (NCC) was picked to the national team. The talk of the town apparently is it nepotism or kissing goes by favour at the expense of the game. Take the S.African coach Eric Simmons, who has turned out to be a level headed coach. I met Simmons at Wanderers nets. He is a glutton for work. He had all the credentials - a national player and a competent coach - to produce quality players, as senior national coach. He really worked on his charges. How many of our players are idling at the nets. As a result some are found wanting. A good example is Ruchira Perera, who has been banned from bowling after two cautions in an overs game. Dilhara Fernando's wayward bowling is a sore eye. This is where an experienced and levelheaded selection panel is essential even to assist the coach to spotlight any shortcomings. In the Lankan squad there are plenty of shortcomings. Fresh
Blood From
the World Cup to the Kiwis Sharjah 2003 was, if anything, worse. This is not in hindsight, but taking an unwilling horse to water was not a good thing. Team-bonding could have been better done under a new captain when the players were thrown together on foreign soil. Sri Lanka's efforts at the desert venue looked flat, devoid of fizz. Vaas would surely have improved matters but it was not to be. One of the positives of the Sharjah tour was the return to eminence of Sangakkara. The wickets may have been flat and the opposing attacks not all that testing, getting back-to-back hundreds are not everyday occurrences. Sangakkara, in fact, should never have been dropped from the team for Sharjah. He did not exactly set alight grounds from the Wonderers to Nairobi. Yet, in a limited way, he did make contributions with the bat. His lapses behind the stumps were another matter, and they obviously weighed a lot with the selectors. This seems a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water. Performance in South Africa/Kenya and Sharjah make it imperative that the Sri Lankans should lord it over the Kiwis. laying at home should certainly make our task that much easier. The absence of Cairus and Astle should be capitalised on as this takes away a lot of the glamour and quality from the New Zealand batting line-up. The batsmen Vincent, Styris - could well find Muralitharan near unplayable on slow, spinning tracks. There is also the Chaminda Vaas factor. As a bowler, he can be put alongside the very best. The impressive Shane Bond and the almost-as-quck Ian Butler will have to strive hard on unresponsive tracks. Bond, in particular, will have to (and could) beat batsman in the air. Vettori could well be the key bowler for New Zealand but partner Wiseman is no Saqlain or Harbhajan. With the expected return of Jayawardena and Arnold, the Sri Lankan batting line up picks itself. However I would incline to the view that a batsman in his early twenties should be given his head now. This is especially important given the fact that Jayasuriya, Atapattu and Tillekeratne are all in their thirties. Vaas and Muralitharan excepted, what can Sri Lanka offer by way of bowlers. Dilhara was off colour (and over the line!) more often than not yet he could come back. Nissanka obviously needs a lot more exposure but he can be quite impressive at times. What sort of improvement, (and how soon) can be expected of Nissanka and the crop of paceman if they are condemned to bowling on unresponsive wickets? Or if it is their lot to appear in a few ODI's and bowl a few overs? With Samaraweera injured, Lokuarachchi has the front running if another spinner is needed. A leggie, who turns the ball, Kaushal should be thrown in at the deep end. He could be a good foil to Muralitharan. Further, spinners, like paceman, bowl well in pairs (or in threes and faces for that matter). One's mind goes back to the era of Fuard, Chanmugam and Sahabandu. Or more recently, to that of the de Silvas and Kaluperuma. Saqulain and Mushtaz, the Indian foursome in the late sixties and seventies and later and Laker and Lock, even earlier, sping to mind. In Stephen Fleming the New Zealanders have a captain who ranks alongside Stephen Waugh. The latter would of course be the first to admit that he has always had a better attack at his disposal. By contrast, consequent on the abdication of Jayasuriya at the time of writing, a captain has yet to be named. It would appear that Atapattu has the inside running for the job, having been a loyal deputy for so long. His stature as batsman of quality and his generally quiet demeanour on the field are obvious plus points. I confess that I don't know how good he'll be at reading the Riot Act. Vaas, having led Colts well - and to honours is another contender. He may have history going against him. Sri Lanka in their Test history of 21 years has never been led by a bowler. Further, it is generally believed that bowlers don't make good captains because they fall between, two stools either underbowling or overbowling themselves. Both should be avoided. Richie Benaud and Imran Khan were two bowlers (were they really all rounders?) who excelled in the role of captains. However they had a lot going for them and the circumstances were different. The short reigns of Bob Willis and Courtney Walsh could be looked upon as fairly disastrous ones. |
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
