Sports

Yes, Hypothetical is a very large word. Once again hypothetically the Sri Lanka team management in England thought that they had the best combination for the second Test against England at Edgbaston and miserably failed and crashed to a six wicket defeat halfway through the fourth day of the match. I wonder how cricketing brains of the calibre of Michael Tissera, Tom Moody, Mahela Jayawardena and Kumar Sangakkara can go so much awry.

When one analyses the run of play and the final outcome one could at once point his finger and say as to which captain, or more so the team management, got the wrong ingredients in their soup. Recently former West Indian fast bowler Michael Holding in one of his columns had written about to what extent the Indians had gone wrong in their pursuit of the youth only policy and had pointed out the correct balance between the two could have brought in more positive results towards the Indian camp. However, as a matter of fact India has already lost the ODI series to the West Indies who opted for a better youth/experience policy. Mind you the next World Cup is scheduled to be played in the West Indies a few months later and the home team has been given the just needed morale booster, courtesy Indian tour management. There is no doubt that the entirety of West Indian cricket will feel a sense of euphoria and rejuvenation with this result that was in their favour.

I am sure the Sri Lankans are always very happy to read the wrong vibes. During the first Test at Lords it was the skimpy Lankan batting that failed them in the first innings while the wicket remained docile and was a batsman’s paradise during the entire game. Though the Lankans lost nineteen wickets against the five English wickets to fall for the game, they batted for a marathon 190 overs in their second innings.

Then in their next game against Sussex which was a team full of novices, Sri Lanka played eight batsmen and three bowlers. When Sri Lanka batted, they rattled up 521 for 5 declared with centuries coming off the bats of Tharanga, Samaraweera and Kapugedera and when the Sussex line up batted ,Lankans used eight bowlers that included Soyza, Lasith Malinga, Kulasekera, Kapugedera, Mubarak, Samaraweera, Sangakkara and Jayawardena. But, ironically the young English team hit an impressive 262 with a 134 ball 101 coming off the bat of O.P. Raynor. One fact is clear. We were not concerned about our bowling capabilities.

Then comes the most pertinent question of the tour. So far there has been a lot of wind about Jayasuriya being shipped to England when a team was already in place with all the not needed paraphernalia. But, what has Mr. Moody and Co. got to say about the non-inclusion of leg spinner Malinga Bandara. So far on the tour Bandara bowled two spells of 9-2-23-1 and 15-6-25-2 against the British Universities in Sri Lanka’s tour opener. Thereafter this bowler who played for Gloucestershire during the last season and became the player of the year in that county has been conveniently forgotten taking refuge under the Jayasuriya controversy. Wonder who is afraid of Bandara at that end?

When Bandara last visited England as a county player last year he finished the half season he played with a haul of 45 wickets. Besides this while playing as super-sub in 11 out of the fourteen VB matches played in Austalia, Bandara bagged seventeen wickets only behind the experienced duo Muralitharan and Vaas who finished with twenty odd wickets each. To cap it all Bandara also ended up as the man-of-the-match in one of the matches he was taken in as super-sub.

One wonders as to why he was not given a bowl in their match against Sussex in spite of the Lankans going with only three bowlers while using six others to supplement them while the match was on. Another question that people keep on asking is, had Bandara played in that match would he have become a certainty and would have upset the team management apple cart if he managed to get wickets?

Then just prior to the second Test match even we at this end knew the wicket would assist spinners, and placed our hopes on Muttiah Muralitheran who ended with a haul of ten wickets out of the fourteen England wickets to fall. Still Bandara was forced to watch this whole episode from the dressing room.

For this cricketer who was thrown out of Sri Lanka Test cricket only after one match and then brought back after the Glocestershire team management had seen his talent and offered him a contract this lost chance must have been an excruciating experience.

Then at the same time at the other end Nuwan Kulasekera – an average cricketer who is lucky to be in the national side carries on regardless. As far as we are aware Kulasekera is playing as a bowler but in the two tests played so far his bowling analysis reads as 25-3-89-0 ( first Test) and 13-2-45-0 and did not bowl ( second Test).

Could we affix that faux-pas to some serious miscalculations?
Besides Kevin Pietersens’ knock of 142 – one more run than the entire contingent of Lankan batsmen scored; there was hardly a difference between the two sides. In the first innings England lost five wickets for five runs before crashing to 294 and lost 4 wickets while scoring the needed seventy odd runs for victory. All this difference was because Muralitharan bagged ten wickets. Hypothetically may we ask one question?

Would there have been a difference and would it made a difference in Kevin Pietersen’s first innings charge if only the Lankan team management was not so pig-headed and picked Malinga Bandara?

The above is only a hypothetical scenario which may have occurred. Now it’s the third day of the third Test on at Nottingham and may be Bandara is in the side and shone or not. Still may be the Lankan team management opted to go for the age-old concept of 4-1 and not being daring enough to do something different while knowingly carrying one burden bowler whom they too had doubts of taking wickets.

I know for sure Bandara should have played in Edgbaston. Sometimes Australia are daring enough to play Magill and Warne in the same Xl in spite of both being leg spinners. Now when pause to think, one wonders if it was only Jayasuriya who has been the victim of circumstances!

Hay! The latest is that Jayasuriya is included in the side, this time more as a spinner who could also score few runs in the lower middle order. This bunch of court jesters are hilarious aren’t they.