Australia v Sri Lanka, 4th ODI, Sydney

Sri Lanka to query abandonment with ICC

Daniel Brettig at the SCG

January 20, 2013

Comments: 298 | Text size: A | A

When word filtered through that the fourth ODI at the SCG had been abandoned, it was not only the crowd of 22,521 who were intent on expressing their annoyance at the outcome. Sri Lanka's captain, Mahela Jayawardene, could not hide his frustration at seeing the match fail to resume in circumstances that heavily favoured his side, having beaten far worse conditions against New Zealand in Pallekele only three months ago.

Jayawardene said his team would write formally to the ICC match referee, Javagal Srinath, seeking an explanation for an inconsistency in rulings from one series to the next. Srinath had explained that play would not resume because he and the umpires Paul Reiffel and Marais Erasmus felt conditions were unfair, whereas in Sri Lanka the match referee, Andy Pycroft, had said play would only be stopped if deemed unsafe.

This robbed Sri Lanka of an ideal chance to finish the series off, having bowled superbly to restrict Australia to 9 for 222, and Jayawardene expressed surprise that a ground as rich in history and facilities as the SCG could not get the game re-started.

Conditions for calling off play

  • 3.5.3 Suspension of play for adverse conditions of ground, weather or light
  • If at any time the umpires together agree that the conditions of ground, weather or light are so bad that there is obvious and foreseeable risk to the safety of any player or umpire, so that it would be unreasonable or dangerous for play to take place, then they shall immediately suspend play, or not allow play to commence or to restart. The decision as to whether conditions are so bad as to warrant such action is one for the umpires alone to make.
  • The fact that the grass and the ball are wet and slippery does not warrant the ground conditions being regarded as unreasonable or dangerous. If the umpires consider the ground is so wet or slippery as to deprive the bowler of a reasonable foothold, the fielders of the power of free movement, or the batsmen of the ability to play their strokes or to run between the wickets, then these conditions shall be regarded as so bad that it would be unreasonable for play to take place.

"We played New Zealand three months ago and the interpretation we got in that series was quite different to what we got today," Jayawardene said. "We played in Pallekele with a lot of rain and during the World Cup as well. I think we need to find a bit more consistency, so that's something we'll probably write and put across to them [the ICC] and see how we can go about it. At the SCG, I would assume that a ground of this magnitude you should be able to get a game in. Maybe they should do what we do back home and cover the entire ground.

"I think we can write to the match referee because the interpretation we got three months ago in the New Zealand series was something totally different. It was deemed that we'd only stop play if it was dangerous, not unfair, but today the interpretation was different. I accept that, it comes from the match referee and the umpires so I'm happy to take that on board, but it was two interpretations we got within a three-month period."

Australia's captain, Michael Clarke, had chosen to bat first upon winning the toss but Jayawardene, mindful of rain on the horizon and also the hosts' struggles against the swinging, seaming ball in the past two matches, had always set his mind on sending his opponents in.

"When we started today I was going to bowl," he said. "Purely because of the weather that was going to be around today, so we were going to bowl first thinking that if it comes to Duckworth-Lewis we would have a better idea of what we needed chasing, and our guys bowled brilliantly up front.

"With the rain coming in and the equation it would probably have been a much easier chase, but I guess we just need to put this behind us and look forward to the next game. We've played some really good cricket and it's just a little disappointment, but we can take a lot out of the last three games, how we've come back into the series and controlled things."

For his part, Clarke indicated his own surprise at the game not resuming, saying that he had seen matches played at the SCG where far more rain had drenched the ground. The curator, Tom Parker, had indicated that the delay was caused by light rain that sat on the surface rather than sinking in, while a lack of any breeze made evaporation more of a challenge.

"I think this ground is known for its drainage," Clarke said. "I've played a number of games here where it's held a lot more water than that and we've managed to get back on and play games of cricket. I think the hardest thing was the water didn't really sink in, it sat on top, there was no sun around and no wind.

"Sri Lanka would've loved to get back on there as the game got shorter. It was probably going to suit them a lot more. But we certainly wanted to play as well to give ourselves a chance to win the series. Unfortunately we can't win the series now, we can only level it."

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

RSS Feeds: Daniel Brettig

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by mark2011 on (January 23, 2013, 15:29 GMT)

I think Srinath is no good as referee, as usual typical indian showing double standard,, ruin the good ODI match, whether it SL or Aus wins, this is poor decision by Javagal Srinath and he has simply taken different ground'unfiar'.. then how about SL playing in the dark of WC final in 2007, where was this unfair condition came to play. that was alsi against Aus. and even so called Gilchrist cheated using golf ball while batting... Aus are no gentlemen in plying the game. unfortunatley boneless Srinath just scared and favoured Aussies. Poor Javagak Srinath. No profesional at all.

Posted by Moppa on (January 23, 2013, 11:36 GMT)

@sri_Lankan_cric_fan, are you really saying that Sri Lanka were ahead of the Duckworth Lewis score after 17 overs before it started raining, and it was only the appalling weather conditions that led to them being 25 runs behind the DL score 8 overs later? Your desperation to find some excuse for Sri Lanka being beaten by the better team on the day is rather lame. Don't take it from me, take it from Mahela Jayawardene: "Australia deserved to win because the way they played today, simple as that." Source: As for the ICC apology, if you follow the same link you will see that the ICC apologised for the unnecessary bowling of the last 3 overs in terrible light - the game should have been called off before those 3 overs were bowled and Australia declared the winner at that point. The apology had nothing to do with the break after 24.5 overs of Sri Lanka's innings, at which point a full abandonment would have meant an Australian win

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 23, 2013, 0:18 GMT)

Danufur - I make no sense of your response, probably because you have no idea what I was talking about. Try and work it out before having a crack. There were comments on here saying that the only reason they were playing in the rain and darkness was because of Australia. This is untrue. Duckworth/Lewis was in application at the time and when it rained Australia would have been declared the winner so Sri lanka had to get on the field to win and they tried admirably. But this isnt Australias fault. How is squash ball in the glove manipulating the rule, how do Australia manipulate the rules, excessive trash talking - well thats barely been noticeable recently and Australia arent the only country that do it. Some Sri Lankan fans need to stop thinking the world is against them. There is always whinging whether it be Johnson legally breaking the hand of Sangakkara, neutral umpires calling of the game and seems the world cup final. It's country Vs country and the cricket should be competetive

Posted by sudakumbura on (January 23, 2013, 0:10 GMT)

Well said Mahela! It's not an insult but a fact. According to ICC standards, Pallekale is so much better than "SUPER" SCG and Australia can learn from Sri Lanka the way of dealing with weather.

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 22, 2013, 22:08 GMT)

Habara - It seems Australians are excepting defeat in the first couple of games, but the Sri Lankan fans are not accepting that this is a draw. Feel sorry for us all you want, we're not delusional just realists.

Posted by Danufur on (January 22, 2013, 19:58 GMT)

@Shaggy076 - Since you want to talk about "how Australia got on with the job done in 2007"... Do you mean to say if this most recent ODI was played until the completion of about 25 overs and Sri Lanka was ahead on D/L, Australia would agree to call off the match and award the match to Sri Lanka due to "unfair" playing conditions? That statement is just bogus. Be it, squash balls in the gloves, manipulating the rules or excessive trash talking... Aussie cricket no longer has a brand worth watching.

Posted by bvnathan on (January 22, 2013, 17:35 GMT)

Aussies always figure out how to save a game when they are at the receiving end. I wonder what would have been the decision, if the Aussies were the team batting second with a chance to square the series.

Posted by Habara on (January 22, 2013, 14:27 GMT)

Feel sorry about poor Australia.simply they cannot accept a defeat.

Posted by kithsan31 on (January 22, 2013, 9:10 GMT)

The match was abandoned due to umpire error from the start. Both umpires gave 1 wrong decisions each in favor of SL and they needed to correct their mistake. both would have discussed this and rain would have been the blessing they would have been praying for. All in all every one in the ICC plays for AUS or ENG in one form or the other as every follower of cricket knows. Covering the who;e ground is not required as in most if not all the grounds have a good drainage system they boast of.

Posted by buwr on (January 22, 2013, 7:28 GMT)

Gyes think wisely it was cancelled simply because aussi number 9 batman scored a half century and if there was a match it was under D/L which is less target for sri lankans and they win it easily. Every time aussi tour comes it was with a lot of bull decisions and behaviors. They don't play any gentlemen game. and don't forget if sri lanka win tomarraw it will be only sri lanka who defeated aussies in Aussie for two times and clark and umpairs do what ever they can do to avoid this. For last game Lions have to fight against 14 (11 Playes, 2 Umpairs 1 Tv umpair)

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (January 22, 2013, 7:06 GMT)

Funny to see people blaming India for this too!!!! hilarious!

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 22, 2013, 6:16 GMT)

sri_Lankan_cric_fan - It's simply because there isnt that much rain in Australia and no ground has covers for the outfield or has ever covered the outfield. Hasnt been an issue before.

Posted by 9ST9 on (January 22, 2013, 3:37 GMT)

oh for god's sake now we are talking about the 2007 WC final... i thought this kind of banter happened only on discussions about England vs Australia and Sri Lanka vs India and India vs Pakistan. Lets just talk about the last game - Aus got a letoff it's a pity cos it would have been SL's second series win in Australia since 2010.

Posted by johnathonjosephs on (January 22, 2013, 1:52 GMT)

Its interesting some people bring up the 2007 World Cup. Even though Sri Lanka faced a mission impossible, they were still forced to play in almost complete darkness. Its interesting to note that if they followed same protocol as here, the match would have been moved to the reserve day where a completely different outcome may have taken place

Posted by sri_Lankan_cric_fan on (January 22, 2013, 0:45 GMT)

@Moppa: Do not try to twist the facts about 2007 WC. Rain started again in the 17th over of the SL inning. SL batted a few overs in the rain and lost couple of important wickets, which put SL behind the DL target.

The match officials went against the rules to apply the DL method in this extreme situation. That's history and ICC have apologized for this blunder already.

Do you have any explanation for not covering the outfield of the SCG? Most of the fans here are questioning this and the Aus supporters seem to be avoiding the question deliberately. not sure WHY? lol

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 22, 2013, 0:43 GMT)

sri_Lankan_cricekt_fan ; As for the torrential rain that occured before the game and both teams went into the game under the same conditions.

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 22, 2013, 0:02 GMT)

Sri_Lankan_cric-fan : I read your post and "Still the match officials forced the Sri Lankan players to bat under worst possible conditions." is wrong. Yes your picking me up on symantics (and you label it rubbish)- the game was reduced to 38 overs. But at the time of rain Sri Lanka were desperate to get out and bat as they would have lost under Duckworth Lewis - since 24 overs had already bowled. The umpires forced Australia out on the field Sri Lanka went out there running. Australia didnt whinge and just got on with the job of bowling. The only rubbish is from your incorrect statement. How can Sri Lankan fans be agrieved from the world cup, when at the time of rain Duckworth Lewis would have awarded the game to Australia. Its them that wanted to bat in those conditions.

Posted by sri_Lankan_cric_fan on (January 21, 2013, 22:12 GMT)

Shaggy076 :I think you need to read my post carefully in the first place and also study cricket and it rules before posting rubbish in this forum. As per the DL method one team should face minimum of 20 overs in a 50 over match. There is nothing called 38 over games in cricket. The 50 over match was reduced to 38 overs due to the torrential rain fall on that day. Not because of a drizzle like we saw at SCG.

The ground staff should be sacked for failing to prepare the ground after just 0.2mm of rain.

Posted by Moppa on (January 21, 2013, 21:08 GMT)

@aceraspire, but many of your countrymen are taking quite a lot away from Australia, saying essentially that we didn't deserve to win the 2007 World Cup. As @Shaggy076 said, Sri Lanka were always behind on Duckworth Lewis, even before the first rain delay when Sangakarra was on fire and before the weather started closing in. At the first rain delay 24.5 overs had been bowled, SL was 3/149 and the D/L par score was around 175. If play had not been resumed, Australia would have been awarded the match. Whilst the game should have been stopped earlier due to bad light (see @blackmagic9970's post), again, this would only have awarded the match to Australia. So to argue that somehow the playing conditions were manipulated to assist Australia is ridiculous and, frankly, sounds like sour grapes to me almost six years after the event.

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 21, 2013, 20:49 GMT)

The reason they continued to play in the World Cup final was because the officials deemed it wasnt fair for Australia to win under D/L so to give Sri Lanka a chance they had to continue. This game was the reverse. Yet Sri lankan fans are using both games to make there argument - yet the world cup game supports the decision the umpires made here.

Posted by JG2704 on (January 21, 2013, 20:13 GMT)

@yorkslanka on (January 21 2013, 11:05 AM GMT) Cool - Think the match was well poised and as a neutral I would not liked to have called the result from there

Posted by aceraspire on (January 21, 2013, 20:07 GMT)

@moppa come on , 2007 world cup final was the worst playing condition ever in a world cup match. but that takes nothing away fromb australia. thz z an attempt to redeem some respect they lost by their howlers ! icc rules say - unsafe or so bad!!! if your ground gets so bad after an hour f drizzle and u can't get it playable 45 mins after it stopd, am afraid, scg is not worthy to be called an intntl venue. and to those who blame lanka for first walking offk who will bat when itz startng to rain and a possibility of d/l around the corner. no one else to be blamed other than the officials

Posted by Ozcricketwriter on (January 21, 2013, 19:29 GMT)

Simple fact: Sri Lanka were not forced to go off at all and could have stayed out there to bat out the entire 50 over innings. The rain was never severe, and never forced them to go off. To quote Cricinfo's comments, "Mahela Jayawardene is asking the umpires to go off because he says he can't see due to the drizzle". Had Sri Lanka wanted to get back out there, all that they had to do was to petition the umpires. The umpires cannot call a game off if the batting side wants to get out there, nor can they force batsmen off. Many games have been played with teams batting in less than favourable conditions, such as poor light, rain, and so forth.

Posted by handyandy on (January 21, 2013, 18:29 GMT)

Sri Lanka pressured the umpires to come off. They can't complain that the umpires decided to stay off.

Posted by atheros1672 on (January 21, 2013, 17:50 GMT)

I think Sri Lanka is a very good side. It has some very intelligent players like Jaya who can out think other captain. He is a smart bloke. But having said that they need to find replacements for the giant void that is/will be created when jaya, dilshan and sanga retire. So start your home work Lankan selectors!!!!!!!!!!

All the best to SL.

Posted by Sinhaya on (January 21, 2013, 16:34 GMT)

@Eat_sleep_play_cricket, I have seen you comment before on Sri Lanka so no surprise. A fact I want to remind you ahead of the 5th ODI is that so far, Sri Lanka has played Australia twice before in Hobart and in both instances, Sri Lanka has beaten Australia. One of them was last year in the CB series and the other was back in 1999. Cricinfo please publish.

Posted by Sinhaya on (January 21, 2013, 16:12 GMT)

@matchfixerpkn, stop talking rubbish. I have seen your hateful comments towards Sri Lanka all over on cricinfo. Your spelling and grammar is a joke, so improve that first please. We managed to win the previous 2 ODIs we have played against Australia at the SCG and we had a chance last night also to win the match. It could have gone eitherway. Even if Mahela failed, we have other batsmen to play. Mahela had twin fifties at the SCG test, so he may have even scored last night.

Posted by Agila on (January 21, 2013, 14:11 GMT)

Hard luck for SL, It hurts when the weather factor denied them a possible win. They played some great cricket on this tour and would have had sealed the ODI series here at SCG. Good luck to them at Hobart on Jan23rd. I'm sure they can do it.

Posted by Munafis810 on (January 21, 2013, 14:06 GMT)

Of course you have played in worse conditions. You have always played in SL where facilities and conditions needs to improve a lot to come to standards seen in Australia.

Besides SL should be thankful that match was called off. They just about huffed and puffed to score 76 the other day and were surely saved from defeat by this decision .

Posted by FunDMental on (January 21, 2013, 13:34 GMT)

It was a great atmosphere at SCG. The best crowd turnaround I have ever seen for SL vs Aus match, particularly the Aussie numbers. It was a total party with Papare and DJ music, dress-ups, you name it , it all were there. The crowd was well tuned in for a good contest. It all were ruined by the shocking decision to abandon the match. You could not call it as a rain as it was a drizzle.Ground staffs were never in a hurry to remove the covers and dry the outfield. Also water on the covers was poured to the outfield! I saw Clarke was having a chat to umpires for about 15 and then a hand shake. I knew it was all over at that point. In 2011 there was heavy rain in SL vs Aus game at SCG. We had 40+ over contest despite tones of water poured in. The match finished late and had to walk to the station as shuttle bus service was already ended at 11pm. So there was about two hours of time left, that would have allowed at least 20 overs. Only difference in that game was SL team fielded second

Posted by Viraj_Hewage on (January 21, 2013, 13:13 GMT)

It will be a 3/1 series win for SL. by the way 2007 WC final was a joke. SL has reached 3 world cup finals since and including 2007 , conversion rate hasnt been good though.

Posted by Moppa on (January 21, 2013, 12:38 GMT)

I can see why Sri Lankan fans are drawing comparisons with the 2007 World Cup final, when the Lions were clearly robbed by a pro-Australia conspiracy consisting of Pakistani Aleem Dar and West Indian Steve Bucknor, assisted by that cunning Antipodean plant, match referee Jeff Crowe. In this case, the multi-national "Coalition of those willing to assist Australia" included an Indian, Javagal Srinath, and a South African, Marais Erasmus. Clearly, the tentacles of Cricket Australia and Michael Clarke extend deep into all nations of the cricketing world. I think the only sensible solution is to ban Australia from international matches for a decade... or just whinge incoherently for a similar length of time.

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 21, 2013, 12:33 GMT)

sri_Lankan_cric_fan ; think you need to check your facts that is completely wrong. It was set to a 38 over game - Australia made 282 and when rain started it was 23 overs for Sri Lanka 3/140. Australia was well ahead on D/L and Sri Lanka had to go back out on the field to win.

Posted by Shaggy076 on (January 21, 2013, 12:30 GMT)

Mahanaama - That is completely wrong with regards to the 2007 world cup. Australia would have won if they didnt return to the field.

Posted by abhiyog on (January 21, 2013, 12:08 GMT)

@concerned_cricketer Javagal Srinath hails from Javagal in Hassan district and Agumbe is in Shimoga District, which is not his native anyways Hard Luck for Sri Lanka who desreved to win Best of Luck for Hobart.....

Posted by cricfan100 on (January 21, 2013, 11:52 GMT)

@Chris_P, going by your'e comments it seems you are an experienced domestic cricketer. but yet, I am not clear why i should accept you're explanation ("D/L was useless last nigtht for the simple fact that it was constantly raining & a return to playing was never an option." ) over the interpritation given by the on field umpires saying play was called off because it was "UNFAIR", which is clearly against the law. Either side could have won the match given the unpredictable nature of the game, that is not the point, how can umpires call a game off declaring it's " UNFAIR" to one side which is clearly against the law which they should abide by. At the same time if you can remember 2007 world cup final, the game wasn't called off saying it was unfair for sri lankans despite constant drizzling and bad light, they kept on playing till the game finshed . So why is this double-faced nature? Where has this word "UNFAIR" come from instead of "UNSAFE" which could have been a better explanation .

Posted by Mahaanama on (January 21, 2013, 11:46 GMT)

Jayawardane wanted to go off the ground first because the drizzling was distracting his sight at the time. Then suddenly it became heavier and umpires called for the covers but it doesn't mean the match shouldn't continue even after the drizzle stopped. In 2007 WC final umpires wanted to continue playing even the conditions were not good enough to play. Possible reason for that could be they wanted to give the world cup to Australia. This time umpires didn't want to resume playing when there was a big chance that SL could still bat 20+ overs. Possible reason for that could be umpires wanted Australia to escape from a series defeat.

Posted by Ozcricketwriter on (January 21, 2013, 11:41 GMT)

The laws of the game state that if the batting side wish to play, they are permitted to play even against umpire advice - but the onus is on the batting side. Thus, if Mahela Jayawardene and the Sri Lankan side genuinely wanted to play, they could have. The only issue is if the umpires incorrectly ignored the opinion of Sri Lanka's batsmen and called it off against their wishes. Or, in other words, Sri Lanka have no cause for complaint, and this article is entirely bogus. Australia are 1-2 down and needed to win this match to stay in the series - now the best that they can hope for is a drawn series. Australia had fought hard to put on 222, which, given that Sri Lanka were 6/76 last match, looked like a winning score to me. This article, and the very idea that Sri Lanka have any genuine cause for concern is 100% nonsense.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2013, 11:35 GMT)

To all the Sri Lankan's Crying foul that the SCG wasn't completely covered. No one other than Sri Lanka covers the entire ground.

Posted by yorkslanka on (January 21, 2013, 11:05 GMT)

@JG2704- fair play mate , my comments were really aimed at those who are claiming that Mahela deliberately came off to change the score to chase. I truly believe that he came off due to the conditions to bat in rather than to change the dynamics of the game..I did also say that I felt we were not guaranteed to win from there but would have liked e chance- again I take ur points mate and glad we can have a sensible debate and look forward to many more..

Posted by concerned_cricketer on (January 21, 2013, 11:04 GMT)

It is quite unfair to Sri Lanka because they will feel that this one was in the bag. About matters such as assessing whether the match should be called off, it can be so subjective that it becomes hilarious. I remember a world cup final in West Indies where Sri Lanka and Aus had to fight it out in darkness and that day the match wasn't called off.

Agumbe in Javagal Srinath's native karnataka regularly records the world's heaviest rainfall. So I am a bit surprised he erred on the side of caution. Anything subjective is exactly that ie subjective. So the consistency that Jayawardene is hoping for is unlikely to happen. So like all other goof ups, we will have to put this into the bag titled 'glorious uncertainties of cricket' :)

Posted by Rajselva007 on (January 21, 2013, 11:00 GMT)

why they did not covered the whole ground? They covered only the pitch, which was also getting wet. Thats mean they don't want to play the game..Lol...Everybody (Aus) know the game abandonment is a big escape to lose the game (umpires helped Aus and not rain). if the Aussies were on the same stage, they would go for the D/L and win the game. It is unfair, the Aus_sprit of the game is dead. ICC should take an action against the Umpires's decision. We know, they will not go for it ( v's. poor countries poor law, v's. rich countries rich law). SL will come much harder and win the next game and win the series. If not, no problem, they will the sprit of the game.Well done guys. We will wait for the next their tour to SL. Then we will make also own cricket rules. We know the cricket is just a game. Lossing or winning. But, do not violate the sprit of the sport. Thanks

Posted by Sinhabahu on (January 21, 2013, 10:58 GMT)

@Chris_P, let me just correct you there. Just like you, I was also at the SCG last night, in the Sri Lankan fan zone to be precise. I know exactly what happened because I too saw it with my own eyes. What happened was simply a disgrace. The differences between drizzle and torrential rain apart, the fact that a stadium with supposedly world-class facilities like the SCG lacks the resources to cover the entire ground is a joke. Sri Lanka's cash-strapped cricket grounds can get even a domestic match started quite quickly after a rain break because (and I repeat myself) they cover the WHOLE ground instead of just the square. Cricket Australia, we want our money back.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2013, 10:53 GMT)

I thought Sri Lanka had equal chance of not scoring the runs and falling also. Only one unsuccessful challenge is now allowed in 50-over cricket. Clarke (20) used that challenge unsuccessfully after just 10 overs when given out lbw. Dave Warner (60 in 73 balls) and Moises Henriques (3) were crucified with worst umpiring decisions when ball was touching the bat in a big way and then the pad,the decisions were LBW, the third umpire has seen this and couldnot correct the field umpire.Can the video umpire be able to overrule the central umpire on such blatant mistakes? Anyway if Srilanka restricted Australia,Umpire decisions helped them to an extent.

Posted by Rajselva007 on (January 21, 2013, 10:50 GMT)

why they did not covered the whole ground? They covered only the pitch, which was also getting wet. Thats mean they don't want to play the game..Lol...Everybody (Aus) know the game abandonment is a big escape to lose the game (umpires helped Aus and not rain). if the Aussies were on the same stage, they would go for the D/L and win the game. It is unfair, the Aus_sprit of the game is dead. ICC should take an action against the Umpires's decision. We know, they will not go for it ( v's. poor countries poor law, v's. rich countries rich law). SL will come much harder and win the next game and win the series. If not, no problem, they will the sprit of the game.Well done guys. We will wait for the next their tour to SL. Then we will make also own cricket rules. We know the cricket is just a game. Lossing or winning. But, do not violate the sprit of the sport. Thanks

Posted by JG2704 on (January 21, 2013, 10:34 GMT)

@yorkslanka on (January 20 2013, 21:39 PM GMT) 2 things bud 1 - re "I don't understand all these fans saying that Mahela was wrong to come off when it started raining? Why should he bat through the rain when none of the Aus batsmen had to?" - I agree that MJ should come off if he feels his side is disadvantaged but by the same token if the umpires feels one side is hugely disadvantaged by the weather they also have the right to call it off ie why should Aus have to field in conditions SL didn't have to?. I didn't see the game but if MJ chose to come off he was taking a gamble about play restarting. As for who would have won TBH it's anyone's guess. I've seen SL chase 200+ scores with no problems whatsoever but I've also seen them fold

Posted by Baundele on (January 21, 2013, 10:24 GMT)

When some team (except England) is playing in Australia, such things are quite normal. I am not surprised by the umpire's decision.

Posted by SL_Fan_1985 on (January 21, 2013, 10:21 GMT)

So far, SL perform well in ODI series despite 3-0 defeat in test series. Anyway SL will not lost the ODI series and rotation policy costs Aussies. They(aussies) could have give chance to new players once they win win the series, i mean full team (so called genuine A team) could have played first games.. Good lesson to under estimate our team... Weldone SL.....

Posted by ham1990 on (January 21, 2013, 10:05 GMT)

The main issue is robbing the paying public of the entertainment which they paid for. Also, nowhere in the actual law could anyone interpret that as 'unfair', it quite clearly talks about the field being dangerous or unfit for play. Jayawardene and SL deserve and answer as to the inconsistency between the NZ series and this. It would be fair enough if the umpires has stated something to the 'unfit' effect, but this needs to be cleared up ASAP for future games.

Posted by matchfixerpkn on (January 21, 2013, 10:00 GMT)

sorry friends ..out of 4 matches jayawardanes total score is run is 5 .and avarage is 5 .now imagine is he not lucky to escaped and making the avarage much worse i mean below 3runs in 4 mathces ....

Posted by Selassie-I on (January 21, 2013, 9:41 GMT)

Bad luck fro Sri-Lanka here. Amazing luck for the Aussies escaping a sure defeat, think there should eb all neutral referees and umps in the future - Clear advantage given to Australia here, we shoudl be playing in everything bar the most dangerous conditions. Aussies probably complained that even more of their players would get injured or something.

Posted by SherjilIslam on (January 21, 2013, 9:31 GMT)

@Sachin_vvsfan: Absolutely spot on. These crucial matches could have an extra day and match could have resumed from the same position.

Posted by sri_Lankan_cric_fan on (January 21, 2013, 9:30 GMT)

If the ground staff knew that the outfield was going to be wet, why did not they cover the outfield?

As per the weather details, it rained only 0.2mm to Sydney yesterday? Seriously, how many of you think SCG cannot handle 0.2mm of rain?

The 2007 world cup final was played in Bridgetown WI and it rained 14mm on that day. Still the match officials forced the Sri Lankan players to bat under worst possible conditions. Finally they declared Aus as winners after allowing only 17 overs to ball. As per the ICC regulation one side should face minimum 20 overs in a 50 over match.The ICC later apologized for that fiasco and we want the ICC to explain the rationale behind yesterday's decision and tender an apology to millions of cricket fans around the world.

Posted by Mahaanama on (January 21, 2013, 9:20 GMT)

During 2007 worldcup final the weather conditions were worse than this. When Jayasuriya and Sangakkara were batting there was a big drizzle. Some pictures taken during the match clearly showed it even later. But umpires wanted to continue the match until the end. If Australias were batting out there at that time umpires might have stopped the match much earlier. I really don't know why umpires didn't want to continue the match yesterday even the conditions were good enough to continue the match.

Posted by matchfixerpkn on (January 21, 2013, 9:19 GMT)

haha..lucky that jayavardane escaped from anohter humiliating run fest of less than 10 in series... and to all srilnakna fans ..still srilnakna not crossed 200+ in 90% austrail have oppurtunityt win match... dnt make a habit to show some excuses ..likes of balltemering,no swithc hit allowed etc etc when team are are losing..

Posted by sachin_vvsfan on (January 21, 2013, 8:46 GMT)

If it was 'unfair' why not resume the game the next day when the sun is bright? There is 3 days time for the next game. Logistics should not be a problem. Infact i bet many fans would prefer resuming the game rather than having the D/L method that most of the times unfairly favors one of the teams.

That said it would have been 50-50 for both teams .SL could have chased the target but Aussies could also have won given that SL has not surpassed 200 in this series. All in all it was the spectators who are robbed of witnessing a close match.

Posted by yorkslanka on (January 21, 2013, 8:18 GMT)

@discobob- pls read my comment again, I said that I fancied we had a good chance of getting the score- not we were reason was that if the match was reduced due to rain we would have been chasing a reduced target due to D/L.. @dunger.bob- I can't speak for others but personally my annoyance is with the match officials NOT the Aussie team as its clear its not either teams I have said in previous posts I really respect Clarke as a captain for the way he plays the game and he has brought this attitude to the team again...

Posted by Tal_Botvinnik on (January 21, 2013, 8:17 GMT)

Mahela could have used the DRS and reveiwed it. It was a bad decision by the umpires. LOL

Posted by Faircricket70 on (January 21, 2013, 8:10 GMT)

Everybody says one or the other about stopped playing. Whatever the case is stopping a play without a very good reason I believe is unfair to the crowd who visited to the ground to enjoy the match.You must give first preference to the customers. Othethan that SL could have win the match even if it does not rain.The reason was on this match SL bat deep into number 10.And the small start we got from openers we could have go all the way.

Posted by TrueLankan on (January 21, 2013, 8:07 GMT)

There were no two neutral umpires people. Paul Rieffel is an Aussie the last time I checked.

Posted by woolee on (January 21, 2013, 8:06 GMT)

@Thumping Win

Mahela's team is performing.. From what I saw they were dominating Australia yet again in the more exciting form of the game and on Australian soil.. So when you say he has a bad attitude when his team is losing or in a bad condition it sounds a lot like you are the generic bitter Australian cricket supporter who is frustrated by the fact that his countries team used to be no.1... and now sadly is not. Bias Australian umpires cost Sri Lanka big time.

Posted by Chris_P on (January 21, 2013, 7:37 GMT)

@x-sl-boy. Actually longer as I have lived on a beach all my life (except for a few years spent in Asia & Europe). Having played high grades in the Sydney comp, & still playing (still opening & scoring runs) I think I can qualify a little to state facts. Just for you I will repeat it, D/L was useless last nigth for the simple fact that it was constantly raining & a return to playing was never an option. Understand? The decision was made by umpires & the referee. Can I spell it any more simpler than that? I was there & got thoroughly saturated, as is the usual result of standing outside when it rains.

Posted by   on (January 21, 2013, 7:26 GMT)

I agree- the Srilankan community who lives here know better about the cricketing Aussie fairness, its the "fair go" where some are fairer than others.. Good Luck Boys at Hobart-make curry out of 'em.

Posted by dunger.bob on (January 21, 2013, 7:21 GMT)

I think the Featured Comment pretty much says it. .. it was a travesty against Sri Lanka, the crowd and the TV viewers (not to mention the sponsors and their money). .. I'm as proud an Aussie as it's possible to be, but I strongly agree that this was a big mistake. .. it makes we Aussies look like quitters and sleazy ones at that. .. I don't think this can go unpunished. .. for the sake of the fair dinkum Aussies out there, some heads should roll for this.

Posted by durgesh11 on (January 21, 2013, 7:18 GMT)

SL bad luck u r chance of taking the series away from Aus is washed away in rain..

Posted by Chris_P on (January 21, 2013, 7:10 GMT)

@dsklokuge. Mate, you are actually backing up my call. Cricket is so unpredictable from one day to the next so who can acurately predict what could have happened. Take it from me, sport, Aussies do not fear losing 2 series to S, well not ODI's at least, & especially if we get outplayed by better team on the day. One thing they do is they come back, they never roll over, it is in our makeup, hence the wide range of sporting success over so many sports (even gold medals at the winter Olympics from the driest continent on the planet). @Sinhaya. agreed but 3.2 overs is far, far too early to call a game one way or the other.

Posted by Big-Dog on (January 21, 2013, 7:10 GMT)

Sri Lanka have been caught out here. It was their players that approached the umpires to go off (knowing that a reduction in overs would favour them under Duckworth Lewis). The Australians clearly wanted to stay. Sri Lanka's attempt to manipulate the game in their favour cost them a chance to take the series. Serves them right.

Posted by Sisira on (January 21, 2013, 6:45 GMT)

Lots of talk but when it comes to the reality the great western way isn't it? They could play the 2007 world cup finals in pitch dark so that they could win but not this one. We are always right is that so? some here mentioned that Clarke wanted to play I heard him saying to Ian Healy that the conditions were favoring the Sri Lankans. All the spins in Aussie media too ABC radio a woman reporter said Sri lankans decline to bat on of course they decilne to bat in the rain and it does not mean they did not want to start. Well the Srilankan community who lives here know better about the Aussie fairness. Good Luck Boys at Hobart give the chickens what they deserve.

Posted by ThumpingWin on (January 21, 2013, 6:44 GMT)

This is one cricketer i always hate and only because of his attitude..When his team is performing well everything is fair be it anything and when they are losing or in a bad condition he will blame everybody except his team..Grow up mahela u are on international stage this is not gully cricket..

Posted by Vandrian on (January 21, 2013, 6:40 GMT)

@ygkd , which is neutral umpire you are talking about? Erasmus? come on!!

Posted by siri12345 on (January 21, 2013, 6:25 GMT)

It is laughable to hear to those who feels we wouldnot have chased 223.well actually my point is not whether we could have chased 223 or feeling is that we were 60-40 favourites to chase 223.but with loss of time and reduced over our target would have reduced to 110 something in 20 overs with all our wickets intact and in this case i am 100 percent sure we would have chased this target and win the series.cricinfo plz publish

Posted by SherjilIslam on (January 21, 2013, 6:17 GMT)

It's a Shame for Australian Cricket after having such an excellent facilities, the groundsmen couldn't prepare the ground for the match that too when one inning was already completed and the rest of the match was to be played under floodlits. Also going by the importance of the match, they could have put some more effort and had taken umpires into their confidence for providing a safe playing conditions. Actually the match was much more important to Australia and there is no question of Clarke's commitment about playing in that conditions.I am surprised that Sri Lanka are complaining for the abandonment bcoz going by their on-field reactions, they were happy to keep themselves indoor.

Posted by Badgerofdoom on (January 21, 2013, 6:00 GMT)

Its poor umpiring as they appear to have misinterpreted the rules but blaming the Aussie team is not right. The mistake was made by the neutral umpires not the Australian players, and that's coming from an England fan. Also the second inning had barely started but people are talking like SL needed 1 run to win, SL were in the lead but the game was aborted far to early to call the result with such confidence.

Posted by WillyRic10 on (January 21, 2013, 5:43 GMT)

@ endianuwagona Hey mate i don't really understand why you're talking about Ind Vs SL here, rather talk about the issue that's on. BTW i'll let you know a fact as a cricket lover who follows all the teams, be it SA, Pak, Aus, SL, Ind, Eng.., So i agree to the fact that India isn't able to defend against Aus or Eng but SL is able to defeat Aus in their own backyard...., Wow beaut mate but SL is beaten up again and again by Ind, check the record LOL. As a matter of fact Sl bowled really well to restrict OZ to 222, They thought that they would win the match, No way! the reasons behind it is they lost 6 wickets trying to win against OZ for just 74 runs, think if OZ had 150 on the 3rd ODI things would have been different. But overall well played SL.

Posted by Dhishan_Dhammearatchi on (January 21, 2013, 5:36 GMT)

Despite who would have won the match the question which remains unanswered is the the insufficient ground work being done by the ground staff at the SCG. Ground staff needs to be more efficient and be vigilant about the weather. With proper examination about the ground staff it does indicate that they did an unsatisfied job. If subcontinent is being taken as an example where there is an unpredicted rainfall, the manager in charge of the ground staff does make prior arrangements in covering the whole ground. On this occasion the ground staff did move in quite slow which result the playing area damped and the pitch being spoiled. In a game between Sri-Lanka vs South Africa which was held in Sri-Lanka in the year of 2012 at the T20 world cup there was a massive rainfall which continued round 4-5 hours. The game was reduced to 7 overs and but was resumed. I was there at the point and I saw how the Sri Lankan ground staff handled the unexpected rain. I do not believe that SCG could not h

Posted by x-sl-boy on (January 21, 2013, 5:33 GMT)

@Chris_P, do you have 30 years of experience in beach cricket or tennis ball cricket or your backyard cricket. Obviously Duckworth-Lewis doesn't apply those form of cricket.

Posted by TheBigBoodha on (January 21, 2013, 5:28 GMT)

There is a huge difference between debating whether the game should have been called off or not, & alleging that it was called off to stop SL winning. Notably, there is not one shred of evidence for the latter, but overwhelming evidence to show that Australia wanted to keep playing. It was SL that wanted to come off the field, not Australia. The Australian team kept warming up the whole evening during the stoppage. Clarke says the team wanted to go out to win. The entire ethos of his captaincy has been about taking risks to win, making early declarations etc. Now people are alleging he didn't want to have a go, and conspired with the same umpires who falsely gave 2 AUS bats out !? It goes against the entire spirit of Australian cricket! It is disturbing that some posters come here and spew hate with no evidence. Much of that attitude screams deep prejudice. And its not the 1st time we've seen this around here. The maturity level of many cricket fans is little better than infantile.

Posted by dinumeister on (January 21, 2013, 5:13 GMT)

Having this all said, Id wish SL team all the best for the Hobart match. Build up on their fear and win the match and the series 3-1. A SWEET REVENGE that will be for all of us...

Posted by DilumSL on (January 21, 2013, 4:54 GMT)

@Chris_P You are correct sir. may be if the game goes on SL could have lost the game. But they were the favorites. If you are having doubts about that then may be you should rethink about your cricket knowledge. If you can remember the 2007 world cup final, most of the second inning overs were bowled in rain and dark. If the match was stopped and played in the next day may be SL could have become the 2007 WC champs(this is not an excuse I'm just thinking in your own theory). Also this is a shame for ground staff there is no argue about that and I can proudly say that SL have the best ground staff. Coz we were able to play most of the matches during the last NZ tour which was affected by heavy rains. Really feel sorry for the fans who were there in the ground. It doesn't matter who win the game but the game should have played for the sake of cricket.

Posted by anver777 on (January 21, 2013, 4:48 GMT)

Very unfair decision taken by match officials in SCG.......... SL team & fans all over very correctly disappointed the way things were handled there. May be Aus doesn't want to loose the series in the 4th match itself & make the 5th one a "Dead Rubber"

Posted by MrKricket on (January 21, 2013, 4:40 GMT)

As if Australia wanted the game called off! Get real guys. It meant that Aus couldn't win the series - Aus doesn't turn up to draw series - win or die. D/L did put it in SL's favour but if Aus had taken wickets then it was all on. 223 could have been a winning total - it's never easy chasing at the SCG. So a great match was lost to the fans. I would have preferred Aus to go down fighting than for it to be abandoned.

Well done to Mitch Starc too. Should go up the order!

Posted by dsklokuge on (January 21, 2013, 4:34 GMT)

@Chris_P u r talking about SL lost 6 wickets to chasing 73 runs . u don't forget Aus lost 9 wickets for 40 runs on that match . SL last batsman also can bat like that way . SL is on winning moment .I don't know why they break SL winning consistency . Aus fear to lost 2 one day series against sri lanka . we are expecting SL wins on next match or rain helps like this way to win the series .

Posted by dmqi on (January 21, 2013, 4:29 GMT)

I do not know all the rules and regulations but my feeling is the officials did not do the right thing. SL should have got the chance to bat, as most spectators also wanted to see the match. How many ODI in similar situations have been called off?

Posted by TheBlackMonk on (January 21, 2013, 4:22 GMT)

If this is Unfair (considering one team will get advantage of some unprecedented situation), then the whole point of game is unfair since starting! As,home team will prepare pitches suited to their strength, the "Toss" to leave the winning one an advantage of taking weather or other conditions, "D/L method" in certain condition and many more. I know ICC is trying to address such unfair advantages in recent times like in disallowing runners on for an injured batsmen but this decision is way above line!

Posted by Mitcher on (January 21, 2013, 4:03 GMT)

Utter disgrace. Was at the game. Crowd waits around for 2hrs. Then this inexplicable decision not to play. Next time cricket officials wonder why nobody can be bothered showing up anymore. Show them a tape of this rubbish. Sickening.

Posted by Sugath on (January 21, 2013, 3:57 GMT)

It now appears that for Sri Lanka their is a strange strategy to select the playing 11. In this ODI series Lanka was thrashed in the first and in came Kusal. He took 4 catches and was there when the wining runs were scored in 2nd ODI. In the the third ODI he took some great catches and if not for his innings of unbeaten 22 Lanka would have lost the game. This was while Tharanga and Jeevan were failing badly game after game. Come the 4th ODI Kusal is dropped instead of Tharanga or Jeevan and we have no result. To me it looks that Kusal brought luck and by dropping him in a very unreasonable way we lost that luck and in comes rain to deprive a win for Lanka. It now seems the right to get selected to the Lanka team is not to succeed, but to fail not once but repeatedly. Whoever selected the final 11 for the 4th match has absolutely no wisdom. It may also be pertinent to note the the best performing batsmen are those who were either not selected in the first round or was 12th man in tests.

Posted by Udendra on (January 21, 2013, 3:30 GMT)

This is such a shame. although SL grounds have no great technology or the best drainage systems, they still make the ground PLAYABLE!

Posted by landl47 on (January 21, 2013, 3:30 GMT)

Actually, both sides are guilty of wanting rulings to go their way. SL were far from confident of making 220 on that wicket and would have liked, with all their wickets in hand, a shorter chase, so they wanted to come off and go back on again later.. Aus thought they had a good chance in a full match but didn't want a shortened game so they wanted to stay out there, but if they did come off they didn't want to go out for a quick thrash. In fact, of the two sides, SL got the better deal as before the game was called off either side could have won the series, but now only SL can win it.

My concern is for the fans who paid to watch the game. They paid to see cricket and as long as the conditions weren't dangerous the match officials and the two sides had a duty to continue play. If the people involved in the game forget the spectators, cricket will die. It's a professional sport kept alive by the fans' money and the fans should always be the top priority.

Posted by Min2000 on (January 21, 2013, 3:25 GMT)

This was a massive gaffe by the umpires. The ICC needs to put pressure on captains and umpires to make sure that games with marginal weather go ahead at all costs.

The rain was well gone, the crowd had waited patiently. The wicket block itself was bone dry and surface moisture on the outfield didn't appear much worse than normal conditions when the grass gets tacky under lights.

Channel 9 commentator Michael Slater seemed flabbergasted by the call.

Clarke said in an interview afterwards that it was 100% the umpire's decision to abandon the match. That might be true but he sure had a lot to say leading up to their decision. As a neutral it appeared that Clarke didn't want to play and Jayewardene did.

Posted by Aussasinator on (January 21, 2013, 3:08 GMT)

Teams should stop touring Ozland for some time.

Posted by disco_bob on (January 21, 2013, 2:51 GMT)

@yorkslanka on (January 20 2013, 21:47 PM GMT) "To all those saying we struggled to chase 75...WE DID case closed..." Yup, you chased 75 (badly) therefore you can chase anything. How does that work?

Posted by satish619chandar on (January 21, 2013, 2:42 GMT)

Mahela is right as they have played in worse conditions. The only wrong i see is he wasted time and ran away immediately when the play was about to be stopped. If he is a player whop wants to play at any cost, why he argued with umpire and wasted time good enough to bowl two balls? Had the play resumed and SL lost, the same Mahela might have had different views on the playing conditions as it is not in perfect conditions. In the inconsistency argument Mahela put, i would blame it on the other referee for playing in bad conditions than the current one who rightly decided on safety grounds. And of all, there was no security that the game would have gone till 20th over even if the game was started right then in those conditions.

Posted by Eat_Sleep_Play_Cricket on (January 21, 2013, 2:28 GMT)

Hard luck for Aussies because they would have easily leveled the series. Its so unfortunate that now OZ can only draw the series. I dont know why few fans are blaming on the match referee when rules clearly states the reason for calling off the match. Its should be OZ's who must be crying unlike Lankans who are already 2-1 up. Hobart is a favorite ground for Clarke and i'm sure OZ will level the series in style. Go OZ GO.

Posted by spirit_cric on (January 21, 2013, 2:26 GMT)

It's really funny some AUS fans are saying that SL lost 6 wickets in chasing 74 and trying to comparing it with 220.But they have really forgotten AUS lost 40/9 in their inings.Really impressed with mahela who tells the truth bravely. And people who are saying dis dicision is correct, please look at the match 2007 WC final again.You will realise how that game was condocted.

Posted by Loku_sixes on (January 21, 2013, 2:18 GMT)

It was anybody's game. But, unfortunate thing is, this decision to stop the game with the reason "unfair" might lead to a bad presidence unfavorable to the game as a whole..

Posted by siri12345 on (January 21, 2013, 2:16 GMT)

All those australian fans who are telling that sl got lucky with 2 bad decisions where were u during the test the 1st test 1st innings when herath was given lbw of an inside edge who knows if he could have batted for 15 more minutes match could have ended in a draw .we have also seen in the test series how ed cowan and clarke were not given plumb lbw and mahela didnt use drs.that time according to commentators sl got this because of bad use of drs which is part of the game.then why r u guys whining now.u need to teach michael clarke that drs is there to overturn a howler and not for michael clarke to save his wicket when given out.cricinfo plz publish

Posted by SinhaKapuru on (January 21, 2013, 2:14 GMT)

I say the match could have gone either way as we don't know whether it would have been hard to bat after the rain (also with Sydney recording over 45c heat the previous day) However for those of you, who think that SL could not have chased down the target yesterday just because we lost 6 wickets chasing down 74 at the Gabba, don't forget that AUS was 74-10 and at Adelaide AUS was 170-10 and SL won 172-2!!!

Posted by hirolovecric on (January 21, 2013, 1:55 GMT)

writers seem to justify the calling off status even when the both captains disagree that by reminding NZ series.

Posted by chthr.desilva on (January 21, 2013, 1:48 GMT)

Its really a good point to take up... . This obviously recall memories to the WC final in 2007 held in WI. When, Sri Lankan team was batting, they were forced to play under bad light and gloomy weather conditions. That really had an impact on the result. There should be a review on these decisions!

Posted by MinusZero on (January 21, 2013, 1:43 GMT)

Is there a rule about not continuing because it is unfair? Surely the captains tactics if there is rain on the horizon on whether to bat or bowl could be deemed unfair too. Clarke made a bad call about batting first and should have to suffer defeat because of it.

Posted by Nathan74 on (January 21, 2013, 1:35 GMT)

I have a question. The DL method of calculation is supposed to be a fair method of determining the result of a game in case of disruption. The match did not resume because conditions were unfair. This can only mean the Aussies have a shoddy drainage system or probably the impairs and the match referee did not feel that DL method is fair. I think the three don't agree with DL method which some believe favours team batting second.

Posted by samincolumbia on (January 21, 2013, 1:30 GMT)

"the umpires Paul Reiffel and Marais Erasmus felt conditions were unfair".

Yeah...the conditions were unfair since Sri Lanka was all set to win the game and series. We need a DRS for this situation as well, since the umpires can not only be incompetent, but blatantly prejudiced and biased!!

Posted by sydneysider1 on (January 21, 2013, 1:27 GMT)

What a shame !! it took them hour to decide that conditions is "unfair". that is the first time that I heard that. And it was a just a drizzle only !! Big thank you - for all the ground staff that did an excellent job. Another disappointing performance by Australian A Team !! Feel sorry for all the fane purchase expensive tickets.

Posted by TengaZool on (January 21, 2013, 1:26 GMT)

I had my bets on Sri Lanka being all out for 150 odd. In the end, it might have suited the Lankans that the game got called off.

Posted by Green_Team on (January 21, 2013, 1:26 GMT)

Bravo Captain with Justified Demand . Dont know What is ICC doing and ICC have any role or not or ICC is just for making rules . .

Posted by Aussie__Boy on (January 21, 2013, 1:23 GMT)

Totally unfair for the Sri Lankans!

Australia can't refuse to play because they were going to lose! The D/L revised target would have been around 90 runs off 20 overs with 10 wickets in hand... it give SL the advantage, but you can't say it's "unfair" and abandon the game!

Why wasn't the 2007 world cup final between SL and Aus abandoned, instead of asking SL to play in the dark and rain, in order to complete the game.

This should definitely be investigated because i was at the game, and it was only a light drizzle, which stopped more than 1 hour before the game was abandoned.

I thought the SCG was an internation venue, so why couldn't the super-soakers which was used for more than 1 hour, not mop up the light rain?

There's something very wrong here!

Posted by x-sl-boy on (January 21, 2013, 1:22 GMT)

hay CA! if you need some advise about wet grounds please contact SLCB....LOL

Posted by CricketZoysa on (January 21, 2013, 1:22 GMT)

Gus Frazer mentioned on the Sky commentary team in his experience that under the cicumstances, if both tream ms wanted to play then the umps would have agreed to carry on. Clearly Sri Lanka wanted to carry on presumably Aussies did not. So th ereason for the abandonment looks claer to me.

Posted by ygkd on (January 21, 2013, 1:18 GMT)

For cricket to truly win the hearts of minds of new supporters, greater consideration must be given to keeping the game going. A short interruption for rain is one thing, but having paying customers waiting around for a resumption that never comes, despite what appeared to be not totally unfavourable conditions, is surely bad for business; for it is a business maxim that keeping existing customers is generally more cost-effective and efficient than attracting new ones. I have said before that relying on the BBL to swell crowds runs the risk of resulting in an all-the-eggs-in-one-basket strategy. Surely last night was an example of the ODI basket being left empty. Although the decision to cancel was clearly not in any way the responsibility of CA but that of the umpires, it is clearly in the best interests of the cricket boards for them to stress to the umpiring body the importance of the game going on, if at all it can. The boards' customers are the ones being put out, after all.

Posted by trav696 on (January 21, 2013, 0:50 GMT)

Is this a joke. Aus were so lucky because SL would have given them a beat down if they got back on the field. Not sure if anyone noticed, but when SL went off the field, Mitch Starc called Mahela and Dilshan 'weak.' How exactly is SL weak if they wanted to get back on the field and chase down Aus' total. Aus are the weak ones because they didn't want to go down 3-1 in the series, so they go for the option of trying to draw the series in the last game... pathetic. Aus looked pretty happy about the fact that the match was abandoned because they knew that they had no chance defending their total. SL have played games against NZ only a few months ago and play resumed in much worse conditions. Aus robbed SL of a win in Sydney. Maybe SL should lend Aus some ground covers to makes sure games like this don't get abandoned. I also feel so sorry for those fans who were watching the game at the SCG, they waited for play to resume and Aus called it quits. Hope Aus get served in Hobart. 3-1 to SL!

Posted by nellaiseemai on (January 21, 2013, 0:45 GMT)

I strongly believe that the game can have neutral umpires but it is not fair to have a former player. For example I dont like Paul Reifel umpiring a game for australia. He is the one who people have seen playing for Aus for not long ago. The same way I dont like Kumar Dharmasena umpiring matches for Srilanka. Who played for Srilanka even recently. This always bring a wrong sense of feeling to the spectators that they are supporting their respective teams. I also do not like Srinath doing match refree job for the games involving India. If one team wants to continue the match then the match officials have to discuss with the captains and not discuss among themselves to decide the outcome. If this discussion was made after discussing with the captains then it is fair. But if Mahela is upset with this decision then the match officials have to prove with out any doubt that the decision they made is fair.

Posted by Sinhaya on (January 21, 2013, 0:43 GMT)

@Chris_P, yes our recent ODI record in Australia against Aussies is 9 wins out of 15 with 1 no result which was yesterday. And coincidently, the last 3 ODIs Sri Lanka played at the SCG starting from Nov 2010 to yesterday have seen the heavens open up hahahaha! I heard about the Sydney heat indeed. But you must understand that we were batting better yesterday in the 3.2 overs than how we batted at the Gabba.

Regarding the impact on the pitch after rain, recall how the Colombo RPS became a batting paradise in the world T20 Super 8 between Aussies and India? If you feel that rain would have added juice, was the pitch used yesterday different to the one used for the last year's CB series game between SL and Aust which was rain hit and where we won by 8 wickets?

Good luck to Australia in the next series against West Indies, tour of India and of course the Ashes. Australia's main strength has been tests since the 2010 Ashes debacle.

Posted by Sinhaya on (January 21, 2013, 0:34 GMT)

@Narbavi, approach of teams change depending on the size of the target. Often when small targets are set, the chasers are in a hurry to win and end up losing more wickets. Just look at how England crashed to 72 in Abu Dhabi last year chasing 150 in to win in 4 sessions. Conditions at the Gabba that day were far more bowler friendly than yesterday. Regarding the umpiring howlers, dont forget it was Clarke who made the mistake when he was plumb. Also, dont forget that KP's controversial dismissal at Ranchi changed the course of the 3rd ODI.

Posted by the_blue_android on (January 21, 2013, 0:27 GMT)

Chris P - It's unfortunate that you have played the game for 30 years without basic understanding of the game. It's you who has missed complete logic. The rain stopped play for about 2 hours. SL would have been set a very reasonable target in 20 overs based on D/L. So logic( and history) should tell you that there was a 99 % chance of SL winning the game. They were robbed by the umpires in an attempt to cover their own mistakes.

Posted by Mr.niceguy on (January 21, 2013, 0:24 GMT)

play is unfair ?? cast your memory back to 2007 world cup final ? recall your memory when Sri Lanka was batting raining and bad light. Even the ball wasn't bouncing on the wicket ?? That's unfair but did they abandon the game ? did the ICC at least tried to postpone the game to the next day thinking its the WORLD CUP FINAL ? NOoooo.

I can imagine the frustration MJ is having. Critics, Aussie commentators media....etc evyone was giving excuses and riding SL off. But we bounced back really well and had the chance th wrap up the ODI series yet again in Aussie. But I do think we will win the last ODI or it should rain catz and dogs :)

Posted by Badgerofdoom on (January 21, 2013, 0:09 GMT)

The rules seem fairly clear that the match should only be abandoned if the conditions are dangerous. This just seems to be a case of the umpires not knowing the rules. I'll be interested to see the match referees explanation.

Posted by Prema1948 on (January 21, 2013, 0:06 GMT)

The Match Report of Australia is more valuable for officials than that of SL.

Posted by DanialM on (January 20, 2013, 23:45 GMT)

In the first place, it was not the umpires who called off the match. It was Jayawardane, who wanted to stop even though umpires felt it was okay to play. Even it surprised Clarke. If Srilanka has played in such situation before and respect umpires decisions, why would he stop playing at 4th over? Come on, dont start blaming game...

Posted by PFEL on (January 20, 2013, 23:25 GMT)

I don't know why Sri Lanka are complaining so much. I would have definitely had my money on Australia knocking Sri Lanka off for a low score. Especially after the umpiring this game . . . Sri Lanka being the ones to complain is a bit rich.

Posted by CaptainCricket77 on (January 20, 2013, 23:23 GMT)

The Umpires failed the players and the spectators. They made too many mistakes for the Australian batsmen, then let down the crowd. Why would anyone pay to go to the cricket now? Brisbane was over before 6 o'clock local time. Sydney no better. There has to be a better way.

So it was ok for the Australians to be on the field practicing after the light showers... but too dangerous to play? Seriously? what a joke...

Posted by blackmagic9970 on (January 20, 2013, 23:17 GMT)

No one is saying Sri Lanka would not have chased the target. They certainly would have started favourites under D/L. But that's precisely it - since when have favourites (even overwhelming favourites) always won? If you are 2/140 chasing 150 then fair enough but 0/14 chasing (say) 150?

Australia had enough reason to complain about 2 shockers. Clarke's review is irrelevant - if it was Mahela and Angelo instead of Warner and Henriques, I guarantee you that every single SL supporter here would be saying that SL would have made 300 instead of 225!

FYI - 2007 World Cup - the match should have been over after 33 overs with Australia the winners by about 30 runs on D/L - the umpires made a mistake asking the players to return and were all suspended from the T20 world cup as a result! Plus, Mahela offered to bat and Ponting agreed to bowl spinners to avoid coming back the next day! How come 6 years later, SL fans are still claiming some great injustice occurred?

Posted by Cricket_theBestGame on (January 20, 2013, 23:07 GMT)

i think at the end of the day it suited both sides. SL could've lost quick wickets after the break and lost the match. on the other hand aus could've struggled to ball with a swinging ball and gave easy runs away. we'll never know. the big smile micky arthur had when shaking hands with SL clearly showed his approval of the decision !

Posted by peeeeet on (January 20, 2013, 22:46 GMT)

Mahela can't have it both ways. He was complaining about the drizzle while he was batting, yet he then says that he was disappointed the game couldn't continue on. He knew that the earlier he could get the team off without any wickets lost, the better the DL target would be. So he wasted time with the light drizzle. I know everything he did was within the rules of the game, but imagine if Clarke did the same thing and how much everyone would be jumping up and down about the "cheating Aussies".

Posted by Trioboy on (January 20, 2013, 22:45 GMT)

Aussies clearly used the rain as an excuse to save themselves. Sri Lanka was clearly on top and they were robbed. I have been to SCG ODI games last year and year before. Both games had rain delays, which the rainfall was far worse than last night. SCG ground staff was also painfully slow to cover the pitch last night. They were nowhere to be seen when the drizzle started. And it took almost 5 minutes for them to come out and cover the pitch area, after the batsmen left the ground. Only the pitch and immediate area was covered. And when they finally took the cover off, they spilled all that water on the ground right inside the circle. Not sure if that was the normal procedure, but it looked bit weird.

Posted by ex-Srilankan on (January 20, 2013, 22:43 GMT)

Sri Lanka would have struggled to chase 222. So, although SL would have been favourites chasing a reduced total based on DL, not having to chase 222 saved SL, that is, rain gave SL an advantage that the umpires and match referee took away.

Posted by Chris_P on (January 20, 2013, 22:36 GMT)

@Sinhaya . Hello again & good work by your lads in the ODI's to date. You know, I have played & still playing this game after 30 odd years & how anyone can say the game was set up for a win after 3.2 overs of an innings defies logic. Seriously, my friend, it was a real shame the rains came, (& this just 2 days after a record 46 degree celius was recorded on Friday). As someone pointed out, anything could have happened, SL lost 6 wickets a couple of days ago & who knows what demons the pitch could have unearthed with the extra juice in it? I have read so many posts from guys who probably have never set foot on a cricket field or played a serious game, but always appreciate the thoughtful posts you place. Good luck to your (& the serious cricket lovers of your wonderful Isle) team for the future.

Posted by RaadQ on (January 20, 2013, 22:28 GMT)

@ClueGeek, you wouldn't say that if you were a fan for either of the sides at the ground, first having been told to wait in rain, and then told to go home because for the first time in cricket a game had been called of as the conditions were deemed "unfair conditions". If this was the case, games ought to be called of every time there is a need for D/L, or damp fields, or dew, or unfavourable crowds! Absolutely appalling decision by the referee and the umpires, who I believe were making up for the 2 LBW mistakes they made earlier, if only clarke wasn't so selfish in using up the DRS, we might have had a game in our hands!

Posted by threeheadedmonkey on (January 20, 2013, 22:28 GMT)

The commentators complaining about the LBW calls annoyed me and I'm Australian. When Sri Lanka had the same thing in the tests they all said too bad their top order took all the calls and that their too in experienced with the referral system as they don't like using it. Clarke used our referral and that's too bad for us, don't knock the system you supported recently. With regards to the weather it's a bit stupid to claim it was done to stop Sri Lanka winning. We see varied responses from match to match all the time with regards to weather and lighting conditions. I was also confused as to why the Sri Lankans walked off in the first place in a light drizzle? You could see Starc yelling weak at them and the aussies and umpires wanting to play on in conditions that would hurt the fielding side more with a slippery ball and a low score to defend.

Posted by wazza85 on (January 20, 2013, 22:26 GMT)

@ ClueGeek were you there at the game yesterday to make such a comment, Mahela was absolutely right. SL has been put in to play and has played in worst conditions. if you can recall in the 2007 WC final, what did the Australians and the umpires do? they sent in SL to bat in bad light and rain. so do u call that fair? its rubbish. the pitch looked perfect after the machines at the SCG did their great job. and i am happy that Mahela is taking this up with the ICC which he should do. and i am a Australian supporter. you have to look at both sides to a story. the umpires made bad decisions yesterday.

Posted by leave_it_to_the_umps on (January 20, 2013, 21:56 GMT)

Its frustrating to everyone that the game was a called off and I dont really understand whether the right decision was made but to all the people blaming the aussies the decision was made by the umpires not the australian team so they need to be ones held accountably for this decision (right or wrong)

But for all those saying SL or AUS would have easily won this game are delusional. Cricket is a game that is full of suprises... a hostile spell of bowling on resumption could have seen SL collapse and be all out for 50 but equally one strong partnership could have seen SL chase the runs down easily. If the result was predictable then we wouldnt need to play the game at all!!!!!

Posted by yorkslanka on (January 20, 2013, 21:47 GMT)

To all those saying we struggled to chase 75 in the last game, you forget one thing: WE DID case closed...move on...all the garbage about how we can't score 220 because we hadn't in the series, yes the first game we didn't but the next two, its pretty difficult to Score hugely more than the totals you are set?

Posted by JG2704 on (January 20, 2013, 21:47 GMT)

I didn't see the game but I will take the word of one of my Australian friends/commentors who was there about how it worsened. Fair play to the SL players for showling the passion and confidence that they wanted to carry on but re Aus bottling out - as already pointed out

1 - It was not made by the Australian players or Australian officials 2 - The game was hardly hugely tilted SL's way as they were still 200 off the total and are not hugely consisten these days 3 - Aus are 2-1 down in the series so now the best they can do is tie it which is surely less than their pre series ambitions

Posted by yorkslanka on (January 20, 2013, 21:39 GMT)

I don't understand all these fans saying that Mahela was wrong to come off when it started raining? Why should he bat through the rain when none of the Aus batsmen had to?if it rained during the first innings and the Aus batsmen p,aged through it THEN Mahela is at fault but they DID people really believe that Mahela should disadvantage himself by carrying on?i see absolutely wrong with coming off in the expectation at it would stop soon(which it did) and then face the resumption of the match..the point a lot of people have missed is that do you really think that with all the drainage systems at the SCG,this ground was not playable after such a short period of rain?maybe we can lend them our "highly technological" plastic sheeting which seems to do the job! I am not saying that we would definitely have won the match but it would have been nice to have had the chance..

Posted by couchcoach on (January 20, 2013, 21:28 GMT)

.... Looks a little suspicious... if it was surface moisture, why not bring out the super-sopper, which absorbs surface moisture with its massive sponge instead of using the ropes and broom on tractor which only displaces the moisture?.. Perhaps umpires felt responsible for 2 bad game influencing decisions and thought it would be 'unfair to continue'?

Posted by Longroom on (January 20, 2013, 21:08 GMT)

"Clarke indicated his own surprise {and relief} at the game not resuming". That is what everyone who is not an Aussie supporter is thinking about this home town decision by the match officials. Come on Aussies, learn to lose the odd game gracefully for crying out aloud and show some good sportsmanship. Winning is not everything and when you have lost don't try put a spin on things - I have Aussie colleagues working with me who still maintain Australia "had a moral victory" over SA despite the toweling they got when they lost the last series in Perth.

Posted by johnal on (January 20, 2013, 21:02 GMT)

hi i cant see whats all the fuss and furore is all about.if in the opinion of the match officials the playing conditions was not right .the match had to be stopped.the correct decision was made. the players safety is most important.

Posted by __PK on (January 20, 2013, 21:00 GMT)

Sri Lanka lost six wickets chasing just over 70 a few days ago and could have lost a couple more, if all catches were held. I wonder why they think they could have knocked off 223. And I think it's hillarious that they wanted to bat second to take advantage of a likely rain reduction, but now they're whinging because the rain spoiled the match. Sounds to me like a side who know they got lucky in games 2 and 3, and were hoping to get lucky again.

Posted by Bob_j1001 on (January 20, 2013, 20:59 GMT)

With regard to the comment about the wrong LBW decisions, perhaps if MC hadn't wasted the review on himself with a decision they got correct, we would have a better idea of what would have happened if the later decisions were reviewed

Posted by ClueGeek on (January 20, 2013, 20:34 GMT)

This is ridiculous even to suggest that it was done to deny Sri Lankans a win .. just can't believe that some people will drop their morals so low even to think on those lines. Australians are in their right to call off games when conditions are not right. It's a game end of the day and you don't want people hurt or injured. I fully back up umpires and the decision to call off game. If anything it is Australia's loss who could have easily defended the score in less than optimal conditions. However, great decision by Cricket Australia and their umpires to put player safety ahead of chance to win the series. Some respect please!!

Posted by hhillbumper on (January 20, 2013, 20:32 GMT)

i would say the Aussies got very lucky and the momentum is still with Sri lanka.

Posted by ChanaL on (January 20, 2013, 20:13 GMT)

@KC69: please read the article again "Srinath had explained that play would not resume because he and the umpires Paul Reiffel and Marais Erasmus felt conditions were unfair, whereas in Sri Lanka the match referee, Andy Pycroft, had said play would only be stopped if deemed unsafe." I hope you know the difference between "UNSAFE" vs "UNFAIR"' or sorry, are you also from the same area as the match ref.

Posted by disco_bob on (January 20, 2013, 20:08 GMT)

The match was called off, get over it or the next match will also be called off for torrential whinging.

Posted by NP_NY on (January 20, 2013, 20:08 GMT)

It is funny to see SL fans complain about the umpires being biased after they gave two clearly wrong LBW decisions against Aus. If those two decisions weren't given, who knows, Aus would have made 250 plus and then SL would have been praying for the match being abandoned.

Posted by Philip_Gnana on (January 20, 2013, 19:53 GMT)

The Aussies should consider themselves very lucky here. Sri Lanka did not appeal for bad light at the Previous World Cup Finals, as that could have been construed as dangerous and unfit for play. Why cannot these big name grounds have adequate facilities in place? You cannot be blaming the drainage after such a delay. Philip Gnana, Surrey

Posted by Polkadey-mudalali on (January 20, 2013, 19:52 GMT)

Is it not hilarious to hear that a cricket match was abandoned due to 30 mins of rain....SL can lend a hand to CA and SCG by giving some of its ground staff on a daily basis to avoid embarrassment....

Posted by Digimont on (January 20, 2013, 19:36 GMT)

Rules don't change from one series to another - the rules make it quite clear that it is the umpires opinion and nobody elses. Quoting what an umpire might have said in another series is meaningless - it doesn't set precedent and if what Jayawardene says is true, it is the umpire in the NZ series that got it wrong.

Who was it that wanted to leave the field in the first place? Who refused to bat when the umpires said "play on"? Ok, that only cost the match one delivery, but the point is that it is evidence that Jayawardene likes things his way and has a jolly good cry everytime something doesn't go his way. Where is hios complaints about a DRS system that does not allow the 2 howlers that went his way to be reviewed? He would be screaming from the rooftops if they had been Sri Lankan batsmen. I used to have a lot of respect for Mr Jayawardene, but it has all gone this tour through a combination of no guts and his childish "that's not fair" tantrums.

Posted by GeoffreysMother on (January 20, 2013, 19:21 GMT)

Looks like the Aussies are developing a bit of a 'chook' mentality again. First they hide Hughes from the S.African quicks, now this. Who knows, they'll be pulling out of test series in the West Indies next.

Posted by the_blue_android on (January 20, 2013, 19:19 GMT)

The umpires obviously did this to cover up their mistakes earlier in the day.And we all know how nice Srinath is. He would never say no to anyone.

Posted by kc69 on (January 20, 2013, 19:15 GMT)

I see a lot of Lankans complain about the match referee:Javagal Srinath.Please read the article carefully its the on field umpires call(thats the ICC rule)so the match referree has to follow their

Posted by gnanzcupid on (January 20, 2013, 19:12 GMT)

I do understand the calling off a match hurts both the teams. Would have loved to see cricket being played. It would have also been interesting to see if lankans could chase 222. But i think @narbavi has a point. The match could have gone either way. Lanka was not some 221 for no loss in 19.5 overs when the match was called off. @lankan fans should try to speak logic here.everyone will Accept that match could have good either way. The issue does here.

Posted by kc69 on (January 20, 2013, 19:11 GMT)

All Lankan fans try to be sensible,bringing up previous statistics that becasue of last 2 matches the same would have happened here in this match.Take a break,in cricket everyday is different.If Malinga gets smashed by Virat Kohli in one match doesn't mean he(Malinga) will be hit for runs every match by the same player.Instead of complaining its better if Sri Lanka can try to win next match.

Posted by sharidas on (January 20, 2013, 19:11 GMT)

I am with Sri Lanka....a pity, they could have finished it off in style !

Posted by tennakoon63 on (January 20, 2013, 19:11 GMT)

what is "Behind_the_bowlers_arm" talking about? Yeah every team will feel them same. What would the Aussie do if they were in SL shoes? Won't they gripe as to why the play was not resumed?

Posted by RohanMarkJay on (January 20, 2013, 19:11 GMT)

Isn't it the two Batsman's call and team captain's call whether to play on if they are ok with conditions. A bit funny that Umpires called the game off. SL should have been given the opportunity to play on, because conditions favored the Aussie bowlers more than the Sri lankan batsman. If SL Batsman were fine with continuing they should completed the match, also it wouldn't have short changed the paying public who wants to see a completed match.

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 18:38 GMT)

Clarke's talking about "series win" etc.... Doesn't he realize that if SL were given a D/L score to chase, likely they'd have won?

Posted by Behind_the_bowlers_arm on (January 20, 2013, 18:34 GMT)

Am always bemused by the Sri Lankan intensity and passion in regards to these run of the mill ODI's. Surely they and their fans should move on from these small baubles and lift their pitiful Test performances. They fight like tigers for these meaningless games and frankly batted like cowards at Melbourne in the Test i saw. 7 out all out and a batsman with a hamstring injury not bothering to come out and face some bouncers? Probably for most Australians the last game that mattered was Test 3 at the SCG & the next is Feb 22 for Day 1 of the First Test in India. What is in between with 10 ODI's & a smattering of t20's is coffer filling contractual obligations.

Posted by SriUSA on (January 20, 2013, 18:34 GMT)

Pretty bad decision. It looked ok to play. Yes..I too have seen teams play in worse conditions. In this case the situation was not favoring the Aussies and hence the abandonment. Sorry..Lankans our Srinath was also involved. I guess he had to go with the rest.

Posted by lukecannon on (January 20, 2013, 18:24 GMT)

@Narbavi- Please read the article again and tell me this. Is "unfair" a good reason to call off a game? also answer this. Why does rules differ from one series to another? {NZ vs SL same situation but game commenced after heavy shovers and it was just before this series} You are only here to bash us. You don't want to listen to reason. I d love to see how you react if a down under series victory was take away from you wrongfully. You bring in stats to an article which clearly doesn't involve India. You are just angry with us because you don't like a tiny island nation beating continents and it would make you look bad. lol. i d rather talk to some sensible indian out of the 1.2 billion people you have in your enourmous country.

Posted by Mushtanda on (January 20, 2013, 18:20 GMT)

" If the umpires consider the ground is so wet or slippery as to deprive the bowler of a reasonable foothold, the fielders of the power of free movement, or the batsmen of the ability to play their strokes or to run between the wickets, then these conditions shall be regarded as so bad that it would be unreasonable for play to take place."

End of discussion!

Posted by Kamal84 on (January 20, 2013, 18:17 GMT)

This is really shameful incident for cricket...Sydney Cricket Ground should be banned for international cricket for some time(at least for 1 year). Construct huge pavilions aren't enough to held international cricket match..The ground must have proper drainage system too... If they can't manage playing area 1/2hour little drizzle I don't know how Australian ground staff will manage this kind of situation during the 2015 world cup..

Posted by CrICkeeet on (January 20, 2013, 17:59 GMT)

Wow....there is MINNOW all around! ENG says IND minnow, SL says AUS minnow, PAK says BAN minnow, AUS says SL, IND minnow, and IND claims all r minnow xcept them!! SO FUNNY!

Posted by nafzak on (January 20, 2013, 17:58 GMT)

"unfair" is not a reason to stop play. Day/night matches in some parts of the world are almost always unfair to the team batting 2nd. We all know batting under lights at night is more difficult, but unfair as it is, they don't abandon the match. Again, ruling in favor big guys.

Posted by tententen on (January 20, 2013, 17:57 GMT)

pretty unfair decision against SL mahela would have gone to bed unsatisfied with the ground staff than clarke. a 3-1 lead would have given lanka a chance to play the likes of dananjaya and lakmal

Posted by sirviv on (January 20, 2013, 17:51 GMT)

"Unfortunately we can't win the series now, we can only level it." Really Cap? SL is just going to give you a win to level it. Id rather see a 3-1 win by the touring side after today's mean forfeit.

Posted by Back-Foot-Bulge on (January 20, 2013, 17:31 GMT)

Whao.. whats happening to cricket.Is there any proper team left out there?? All i see is a bunch of mediocre team calling each other minnows. As a matter of fact ICC should be renamed as ICC for Minnows (ICCM) as there is hardly any team left which cannot be called a minnow.

P.S: RSA might qualify for not being a minnow at times.

Posted by seantells on (January 20, 2013, 17:29 GMT)

thats's unsporty end, Aus were going to lose series no doubt. should be same

Posted by ChiefSelector_SL on (January 20, 2013, 17:25 GMT)

@Narbavi - Hey friend !!! cant u remember? We are the team who dismissed so called AUS A team for 74. and we won the match by 4 wickets. If Aus can score 222 against the same attack, why SL cant chase that? easily we would do it. Talk to the logic my friend !!!

Posted by Htc-Android on (January 20, 2013, 17:24 GMT)

@ Narbavi. The same Aussie team who scored 75 in the last game scored 220 in todays game. So why do you think we cant chase this total. It was really tough conditions to bat in the gabba wicket. We have never done well on that wicket. But today it was perfect conditions for batting.

Posted by sonu77 on (January 20, 2013, 17:24 GMT)

@maf17: yes, this is pure 'karma' bcoz same thing happened to Herath during the tests.Siddle & co. appealed successfully for a big big inside edge in the crunch time.Don't u remember it??? Henriques was lucky to got out for a poor decision otherwise he'll be in danger to become a non starter in Hobart. & Reifel is not our man.still remember his poor decision against chandimal in perth t20 two years ago.

Posted by Rahulbose on (January 20, 2013, 17:11 GMT)

Its called unfair home advantage, the curator obviously gave Aus an assist by not doing his job. I hope such things don't happen in the next world cup to be played in Aus.

Posted by Narbavi on (January 20, 2013, 17:09 GMT)

I think people need to understand something here, the lankan batsmen haven't been in the best of form, so to come out and chase 220 against the same set of bowlers against whom u lost 6 wickets to score 75 just a couple of days ago isn't easy at all, the match could have gone either way, so coming out and saying we would have won etc etc is just a bit overboard, also remember the two crucial howlers which changed the course of this innings!!

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 17:01 GMT)

Hey everyone look at the bright side, now Sri Lanka cannot lose the series! Cheers and Australias only in-form batsman has been Mitchell Starc! Real downfall!!!

Posted by smbhayi on (January 20, 2013, 16:53 GMT)

I'm an Indian.. and I know current Australian team weakest ever in their history.. only Warner is good (if he click).. this target Sri Lanka easily chase down.. Australia don't want to loss series... That's all...

Posted by Sinhaya on (January 20, 2013, 16:45 GMT)

@TheBigBoodha, surely dont you know that when it starts raining, it is hard for the batsman to see the ball and Mahela was well within his rights to walk off. What ODI are you talking about Starc running through us at the SCG? Remember Starc did not play in the ODI at the SCG in our tour to Australia in Nov 2010. Last year in the CB series, we comfortably chased 154 and won by 8 wickets and Starc got hammered by Dilshan in style. Want evidence?

Stop being a psychic. We were trouble free for the 3.2 overs we batted in this match. We could not cross 200 so far this series because Aussies failed to post 170 plus runs in Adealaide. Just because your batting failed in Brisbane you cant say we cant cross the 200 run mark.

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 16:36 GMT)

@Sandrew dont talk about grounds if you dont know anything about them. Sri Lanka has the worlds Largest cricket ground in Sooriyaweva. And the best thing is ground staff managed to cover the full ground when raining. Heres proof

So you say AU has most advanced technology. And I agree with you. But the thing is SCG staff couldnt cover the ground for very small rain like that. I dont think something like that has happened there before. So I have to correct this.

In SL: Match abandoned after 120 minutes of massive rain, In AU : After 30 hours of rain, game over LOL

Posted by Rebel_Who_Follows_All_The_Rules on (January 20, 2013, 16:33 GMT)

Honestly, I don't really feel bad for Sri Lanka. As already mentioned in this thread, why was M.J so eager to run off the park when the OZ players didn't want to??? Also, I cannot understand why Clarke is being blamed for this.He was not the one who stopped the game now was he. Mahela was trying to act smart knowing fully well that D/L would make their job easier but unfortunately it blew up in his face. It is obvious that the officials got it wrong, but to say that SL were denied a SURE SHOT victory is absolute B.S, on a side not, SL have indulged in a fair share of gamesmanship themselves. Bowling a wide to Ganguly intentionally leading to an IND win when he was on 98, Randiv bowling a no ball intentionally to Sehwag denying him a century, sending an injured Kulasekra to bat hoping to extend the game so that M.S.D gets banned for the over rate. Today again they tried to be smart or ''tactical'' but it didn't work. Anyway,best of luck for the next game.

Posted by warneneverchuck on (January 20, 2013, 16:29 GMT)

@endian. SL is handling AUS so much that they have never won a test in AUS or India. I think SL shud discover new kind of pitches as they r not good on flat tracks or green tracks and FYI India is number 1 in. ODI

Posted by ChiefSelector_SL on (January 20, 2013, 16:20 GMT)

In ICC WC Finals in 2007 at Barbados where SL played against AUS, play resumes after the rain. It was hugely unfair since the ball didnt came to the bat since the lack of bounce of the pitch due to rain. SL lost both their fighting batsmen SANATH and SANGA due to lack of bounce. IS THAT NOT AN UNFAIR ??? Shame on these people !!!

Posted by Htc-Android on (January 20, 2013, 16:15 GMT)

we were unlucky today. We would have defenentely chased that total. Anyways we should focus on winning the next game. We should replace perera with eranga. Because after watching the last 2 games, Aussies have some weakness agianst swing bowling. It would be ideal to open the bowling with eranga and kula. Eranga can bowls a bit quicker than kula and he swings it both ways. Aussies will have tough time facing both these bowlers.

Posted by Sinhaya on (January 20, 2013, 16:14 GMT)

@Chris_P, I understand your point. I am afraid for the first time I am in for a bit of an emotional argument with you after all chats here on cricinfo with you have been warm and pleasent. I honestly feel that SCG has drainage which is light years better than that of ALL Sri Lankan grounds. In Sri Lanka, we cover the whole ground and had it rained for say 45 minutes, we would have started play somehow on a day like today and given 30 overs to chase. I feel that if it rained only for 45 minutes, 1 hour would have been more than enough to get the outfield dry using super soppers at the SCG.

Mahela would somehow had gone even 5 minutes later as rain got heavier indeed. Though Aussies were surprised at Mahela walking off, he would have still had to go very soon after. Anyway, buddy it is just today that I am like this. Hope our dialogues in other articles will be warm as usual.

Posted by endianuwagona on (January 20, 2013, 16:13 GMT)

To all the Indians assuming that SL would have lost the match on the basis if losing 6 wickets in chasing 75, let me put it this way: They would have lost 8 or 9, but would have still won the match. Quite unlike how India lose to England on Spin Friendly Flat Pitches. Also India's record against Australia is a nightmare. Just check the records. They could not beat Australia in the last CB series and thier only hope was with SL. So SL at this moment are handling Australia better than India could handle them. I also hope that Alistar Cook and Kevin P combine to put the chappathi mongers in thier true place in world cricket. Flat Track Bullies who can win only at home with a partisan crowd and third class umpires. India are a very mediocre very overated side that needs to be punished by Australia and SA so they no that they are losers. Go England Go!!!!!!

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 16:04 GMT)

Aussies didn't purposely cover the outfield and so, just 45 minutes rain helped them save another embarrassment with the help of the match referee and umpires. If these three officials called off the match presuming that the DL method will give more advantages to Sri Lankans, then they haven't performed their duties to the spirits of the game and the rules of cricket. A certain Aussie commentator boasted that they have the best curators and the supporting staff in the world. But their actions last night of course proved the world the vise versa. Cricket fans around the globe must have seen how quickly the Sri Lankan ground staff could cover the entire ground in a much worse situation.

Posted by sanjaycrickfan on (January 20, 2013, 16:03 GMT)

The problem was the wet outfield and it was night, so there was no sun to dry the ground and the umpires and groundsmen think the conditions are not right for play to resume. The whole ground should have been covered but they dont do it that way in Australia. Hope they make the changes from now on.

Posted by K.H.Dushmantha on (January 20, 2013, 15:54 GMT)

Very unexpected news from the SCG, the game has been called off. Loud boos from an enthusiastic SCG crowd as they hear the news over the PA system. There's been no rain for 45 minutes, and it didn't rain for very long and it wasn't very heavy either. So I'm quite surprised by this decision.

Posted by Sir.Ivor on (January 20, 2013, 15:50 GMT)

Mahela should have realised by now that this is par for the course in Australia. They hate to lose and since defeat was staring them in the face, they resorted to this method of saving face. In 1965 in the Melbourne Test India needed 120 to win the game They were 59 for 2 when play was stopped for bad light and the drizzle that stopped this gane. In the 3rd Test at Sydney, they were helped from losing the game because of dubious umpiring. That is the second weapon they used to use in the days when there were no neutral umpires. Then in 92, at Sydney, they were 8 wickets down when they were saved by the two factors. Rain and Umpires. Australians do not like to lose. To this end they do not mind using anything. Sledging is one such. How can one call another, 'mate' after ones mother and sister were abused earlier on the field of play by the other I cannot understand.

Posted by DownThePitch on (January 20, 2013, 15:49 GMT)

Finally the article is complete. Rule is given above. Just because a shortened game favored SL doesn't mean it should be abandoned. Poor umpiring can be forgiven for the millisecond decision making of the two LBWs(Some fault lies with Clarke's poor DRS use) but calling the game off was unacceptable. Double standards and rules are ignored to favor the so called "best in the world" Australians when things aren't going there way.

Posted by PlayerStu on (January 20, 2013, 15:47 GMT)

You make me laugh all of you carrying on like porkchops. The only chance the Aussies had of winning the series was to win todays game. It did them no favours not to have the chance to finish the game. The series is now lost to sri lanka & your all moaning about it. Theres only one thing worse than a sore loser & thats a sore winner.......... If you think its up to the players if they are allowed back on or not then you need to wakeup. The sri lankan batsmen couldnt wait to run off the ground & now they are moaning about it, as I said sore winners.....

Posted by bumsonseats on (January 20, 2013, 15:41 GMT)

just looking at the highlights in the uk. if the aussie captain had not used the 1 referral which was very frivolous and no doubt out decision. then warner may still have 1 to use on his very much, not out decisions on the lbw ,a big inside edge.

Posted by dinumeister on (January 20, 2013, 15:39 GMT)

Its as like they didn't want this match to continue in first place. Seriously the Ground keeping was below poor... I mean considering sub-continent ground staff, what happened at SCG is just ridiculous. Only two men came on to field with covers and that was just for the pitch... if it was a rain in here (Sri Lanka) you can see our boyz running in with massive covers that can cover up the entire ground within minutes...

Posted by Sandrew on (January 20, 2013, 15:36 GMT)

Massive grounds, In SL : There are large grounds, but they aren't massive, In AUS : Massive pavilions, In SL : Large pavilions, but not massive, In AUS : Technology very advanced, In SL : technology somewhat advanced, but not that advanced, In AUS : Match abandoned after 30 minutes of rain, In SL : After 2 hours of rain, play can be commenced.

Posted by PlayerStu on (January 20, 2013, 15:34 GMT)

Lol. The sri lankan batsman couldnt wait to get off the ground coz they thought the d/l would make it easier for them. Now they bitch & moan coz they didnt get back on. Sucked in i

Posted by lansiya on (January 20, 2013, 15:31 GMT)

What a farce took place at the SCG. Tom Parker should take note how S/L cover their grounds in the monsoons. Maybe ask SLC to make a donation of covers. No doubt Sri Lanka would have won the match easily. I notice lots of comments about S/L losing 6 wkts in making 75 - but how do you account for such a strong cricketing nation as Australia being bundled out for 74. Lets face facts you could not play your strongest team because most of them were injured. S/L have only a nucleus of players to choose from but they managed to bundle the Aussies for for only 74 and that is because of Starc. Maybe he should pushed up quite a bit in the batting order seeing that Hughes, Hussey and some of the so-called bats failed dismally. As for the commentary - I have found the best way to avoid listening to biased comments - turn the volume off. I heard Tubby calling for a double hatrick in the last match. I wonder whether Slats, Tubby and the old man Richie listen to their comments. They Should.

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 15:31 GMT)

Its truly funny when some jealous Indians and few oz thinks that SL would have gone to lose the match If the play had begun, LOOK SL when they toured SA in the 1st match they were bowled out for 43 and in the last 2 matches they chased down 300+ totals in their own backyard against more fearful bowlers like Steyn,Morkel etc......

Posted by lukecannon on (January 20, 2013, 15:25 GMT)

Just unbelievable from Australia. I saw the umpires having a good friendly chat with Clarke and they only talked with mahela to tell him that play cannot restart. Austrlian Cricket as disgraceful as usual. fans know what i m talking about they bowled a ball along the ground against NZ to stop a tie, they shamelessly took advantage of a situation similar to today in 2007 WC final , they called Murali for throwing,they picked the seam uring the tests and now this. denying us a lolipop victory and the series. the target would have been about 140 to chase from 35-40 of overs. SL won a similar game chasing 170 odd runs during the CB series last year in rain reduced game. They would have walked home here. ICC cant atleast deny this one. They'v clearly broken the law. Its clear as light because the grass been wet doesnt count as the ground conditions being regarded as unreasonable or dangerous. CA and the umpires are in trouble now. Some justice please.. we are frustrated.

Posted by Rick777 on (January 20, 2013, 15:22 GMT)

We all knew who would have won this game rained or not. I remember the 2007 WC final when Sana & Sanga were batting in pouring rain. The umpires didn't stop the game neither did the Oz's complaint. That game should have been stopped & with bad light the game should have been abandoned. It wasn't done as we all knew why.

The SL's were denied of the series win. Clerk can say he was disappointed, but in his heart he was glad that it happened. The Oz commentators continuously keep on giving one sided commentary. They kept on blaming the umpires for the LBW decisions. They should be glad that the umpires saved them today.

Before neutral umpiring came I can remember how the Oz umpires did mistakes after mistake when touring sides came down under, was those mistakes or not they know the best. Randal, Hair, Emerson would have been menace for modern day cricket. Seems like Slater, Healey & Taylor from the ICC Committee have forgotten those.

On the 23rd the Oz's will get the real beating.

Posted by arvija on (January 20, 2013, 15:22 GMT)

How many macth referees are there around the world who could make a decision which may not favour Aus??? [or against the will of Aussies while playing in Australia!]

Posted by rickyvoncanterbury on (January 20, 2013, 15:21 GMT)

@TommytuckerSaffa on (January 20 2013, 14:46 PM GMT) Tommy this is one time when I think you may be on the money, i can picture willy weather dot com in your hand....... so you would know the weather ......

Posted by Ika7 on (January 20, 2013, 15:16 GMT)

It's clear what would have happened... if Australia were going to continue after the drizzle (I am saying drizzle, because it was nothing more than drizzle from the TV, and the impression from sky commentator and the crowd at the SCG), Sri Lankan would have won the game without a fuss. You could see the confident from both Mahela and Dilshan when they came to bat. It was ridiculous!! Credit should go to the Sri Lankan bowlers, spectators at the ground and the viewers at home for wake up to watch the game. Umpires and Ground staff very much seem to had day off at SCG. Very ordinarily umpiring when Australian was bated, and even more ordinary decision making by calling off the game. Ground staff seem didn't exist!! It frustrated us all whether you are Australian or Sri Lankan supporter as long as you love the game genuinely. Perhaps, this is a payback from match official to Australian team for two poor LBW decisions. Well, they paid the price from Sri Lankan's pocket!! Otherwise, it

Posted by gsamiru on (January 20, 2013, 15:16 GMT)

Thanks to drizzle in SCG, Aus can at least level the series ........... ! WoW, What an achievement for Clarke ......... !

Posted by damith91 on (January 20, 2013, 15:15 GMT)

I think we must send some of our groundsman from SL to Australia.Bcoz they cant prepare a ground after a light rain.Even in SCG.Our groundsmen can make a ground to play after a 1 or 2 hour heavy rain.Is this really SCG or is it a school ground.

@cric_roch- you are taing about our chase in last did you forget that AUS best team(they said that they used their B team in first 2 games) bowled out for just 74...

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 15:11 GMT)

SanSL: It was never raining heavily. It never got above a drizzle. Also that previous 170 was at Adelaide, on a pitch that favoured seam bowling while the Aussie's seam bowling options were as bad as the Sri Lankans ones in the last two Tests.

Jayawardene can cry all he wants, the rain wouldn't have come up as an issue if Mahela hadn't been so quick to go sprinting off at the slightest amount.

Posted by Rohit... on (January 20, 2013, 15:08 GMT)

Ok... Lets not make a battle field for Ind V SL in Australia now.... First, SL cannot lose this series now. So, Congrats ! Also Australia would have won this match... And I am saying this as a neutral person. Australian bowlers are really great. and it is expected from them to defend it even on flat pitches. And SL just don't have any batsman in form who can see them through. Sad Result , and bad for Australia

Posted by Sudarshan_lk on (January 20, 2013, 15:04 GMT)

@cric_roch, what a joke. we'll put this way. A team which scored only 75 two days ago can score 200+ why cant a team who chased with Success cannot do that!

Posted by Biggus on (January 20, 2013, 14:59 GMT)

@shanepe2003-The umpires called the game off and you're saying "shame on CA". Do you understand ANYTHING about this game? CA has NO power to call a game off when it's in progress, that's up to the umpires, who are NOT employees of CA. Can you please explain how it is that you hold CA responsible for this? I'm really interested to hear your answer.

Posted by derpherp on (January 20, 2013, 14:57 GMT)

Sri lanka complaining AGAIN. Sure it would have been better to play for the spectators, but the umpires decision is final. Sri lanka always play the victim.

Posted by Cricketfan25 on (January 20, 2013, 14:56 GMT)

@sanSL5 exactly the same reason why the game was abandoned. Mahela wanted to leave the field as it was raining heavily, and that is why the umpire abandoned the game because they thought the conditions were not suitable for further play.

Posted by wakaPAK on (January 20, 2013, 14:54 GMT)

As much as I'd have loved Srilanka to win this series I want to say just one thing, Australians would never back away from a match even if there was little opportunity for them to win; this is what I've always appreciated about Aussies in both formats of the game. at most you could call it an ''umpiring error''. I want Srilanka to focus on the next game and forget about this one. seeking comfort in if's and buts might result in a loss in the next one.

Posted by Royal_Thora on (January 20, 2013, 14:54 GMT)

It is funny when some people say that SL would struggle to chase 222, because they lost 6 wickets in their previous chase. Don't you guys remember that Aus were all out for 74 in that match. So if I apply that very same theory to this match I can say SL would still win the match by 4 wickets. LOL. And keep in mind that we did not see any swing what so ever for Aus bowlers in first 3 overs.

Posted by Lahori92 on (January 20, 2013, 14:53 GMT)

well actually this game could have gone either way given the conditions at the ground, as my lankan friends struggled to chase down 74 the other day.

These match referees seems to have different guidelines from ICC for different series.

Posted by Aussie_nrz on (January 20, 2013, 14:52 GMT)

Why are we trying to play allrounders Please 4 next squad: Warner Hughes Khawaja Clarke Bailey Wade Johnson Starc Bird McKay Doherty/Cutting

Posted by bearface on (January 20, 2013, 14:51 GMT)

Its unfortunate that the rain robbed us of a great game but i suspect that the Aussies would have been happier with the result I backed SL to chase this down though yes we struggled a bit to chase down 75 but dont forget the same Aussie side were 40-9 on that wicket and things could have been a whole lot uglier had Mitchell Starc not saved them from humiliation once again it was Starc today.. simply put SriLanka have outplayed Aus so far in the series and i expect them to win in Hobart.. you clearly have a problem when tailenders are your best players. good luck to both teams.

Posted by RandyOZ on (January 20, 2013, 14:47 GMT)

Sri Lanka got lucky, it wouldve been a huge win for the Aussies.

Posted by TommytuckerSaffa on (January 20, 2013, 14:46 GMT)

Sri Lanka, you haver been robbed. Simple as that. Australia has done this in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Shameful.

Posted by deepmidwicket88 on (January 20, 2013, 14:45 GMT)

oh now aus at least can tie..

Posted by doubtingthomas on (January 20, 2013, 14:45 GMT)

Same old story. I think all teams apart from Australia, England and SA should break away from the ICC and have a league of their own. I can't recall an instance of any of these three teams being at the receiving end of a controversy. Could it be just coincidence?

Posted by deepmidwicket88 on (January 20, 2013, 14:39 GMT)

@cric_roch Typical of Aussies. We know how they got all out for 74. Now they walked out happily and whining later. lol... lame.. just see the better side..

Posted by cricfan100 on (January 20, 2013, 14:38 GMT)

There are lot of cricket fans here blaming sri lanka wanted to get out of there when it started raining. no doubt of that and that is what most of the other teams would have done as well, given the fact that it is hard to concentrate on the ball when it is drizzling infront of your eyes. But was it just because that mahela wanted to go out, that umpires halted the game. then how easy would this game be. It was only after carefully scrutinizing the prevailing conditions that umpires decided to walk off and mahela had nothing to do with it. It was umpires decision all the way. And if umpires succumbed to the pressure put on them by mahela, then at the first place they should be stripped of their umpiring duties.

Posted by hamathite on (January 20, 2013, 14:38 GMT)

I believe that the result swayed in austrlia's favor because of two poor decisions that were made earlier by the onfield umpires when- warner and henriques were given out. to save the embarrassment that would follow coupled with immense criticism, the umpires gave a no resulter

Posted by SanSL5 on (January 20, 2013, 14:35 GMT)

@TheBigBoodha "SL had more to lose in this game playing out than Australia"?? If SL lost this match they still would have had a chance to beat Aus in the next match to win the series. If Aus lost they would have lost the series! Mahela wanted to leave the field because it was raining heavily. If you didn't know, you can't play cricket when it's raining heavily because it affects the pitch as well as the batsmen's eye sight. And yes we were 75-6, but don't forget that Aus we 74-10. SL have never played well at The Gabba. Also, Aus were 170-10 in the previous match while SL were 172-2!

Posted by Dashgar on (January 20, 2013, 14:34 GMT)

The pitch was doing a bit and Sri Lanka have struggled consistently when that has been the case. Nobody is mentioning how Australia have been denied any chance to win this series now. SL couldn't get off soon enough when rain started to fall. They stopped the game, pulling out as Starc was running in to ask the umpires to let them leave for the rain. We know of course this was to get a D/L target, Mahela has said as much in his interview cos there's little chance they would have made it to 220. (Also Clarke batted at 3 and has never batted 6 as captain. Who's the real clown)

Posted by shanepe2003 on (January 20, 2013, 14:30 GMT)

Shame on u CA it's unfair to play in this conditions & it's perfect to play that horrible conditions of WC 2007 final. BTW if u don't have covers to coverup the ground we can lend u some so u can cover up u r faces as well we have plenty. What a sportsman ship u r rich tradition continues congrats!

Posted by RameshSubramaniam on (January 20, 2013, 14:30 GMT)

I think it is a simple language issue rather than anything else. Srinath would have meant it is "Unfair" for players to play in these conditions which is sloppy. But knowing Australia in the past, they might have slowed down the things to make sure match will not restart. Srilanks also should be happy as it puts more pressure on Aus because they know they should win the next game.

Posted by Baundele on (January 20, 2013, 14:29 GMT)

Australian conditions (match officials, weather and pitch) should favor the Aussies. No surprise in that.

Posted by Herath-UK on (January 20, 2013, 14:29 GMT)

Some have clearly not got brains complaining it was Mahela who wants to come off;that's true as a reduction in overs will help Lanka to go for a short target which is easier;these are tactics any captain will apply just like putting the oppositionin on a seaming wicket.However he DID NOT want to CANCEL the game as it was a clear win for Sri Lanka.Srinath is an inefficient matych referee as another one would not have given such stupid decision. Ranil Herath - Kent

Posted by warneneverchuck on (January 20, 2013, 14:29 GMT)

Mahela should be thankful to raingods as he was saved from another failure on Australian soil

Posted by Cricinbest on (January 20, 2013, 14:25 GMT)

@TheBigBoodha| You have completely missed the point my friend. It is clear that you have a strong dislikeness towards the SL team. Here everyone talks about the match did not start after rain and you point out Mahela did not want to play. Mahela only ask to leave when it started to rain and it was getting heavier, because a Cricket match cannot play in a rainy situation, it damages the pitch (I am not sure, that you are aware of these).

Posted by bumsonseats on (January 20, 2013, 14:24 GMT)

to say it was unfair on one side in these conditions seems farcical . as winning the toss is unfair on a side were dew is an aide on the bowling side were spinners cannot grip the bowl/ or in the longer 5 day game the side batting last. thats not to say the aussies would not have won.

Posted by Perera32 on (January 20, 2013, 14:24 GMT)

@cric_roch: Yes Sri lanka lost 6 wickets in Brisbane on a completley different pitch, The SCG pitch was different. For example India were 130 allout vs SL last year in Hambantota but scored over 300 the next match on the same pitch. So be realistic, if you think Sri lanka would've lost 10 wickets for 80-90 runs in 17.4 overs then you shouldn't watch cricket mate.

Posted by dogbert on (January 20, 2013, 14:20 GMT)

@JohnKJ - "Shreenath has never been a professional either as a player or as a match referee" Would you be kind enough to elaborate on the "unprofessional" comment? You would never find more gentleman and honest a cricketer than Javagal Srinath. I'm sure he interpreted the rules conscientiously. There's no need for unwanted name calling just because you didn't get a result that you wanted. Who knows, in all probability, SL would have lost as many of the others have pointed out.

Posted by spirit_cric on (January 20, 2013, 14:20 GMT)

This is the reality of australian cricket.They dont want to lose their A team to the sri lanka.But in 2007 WC final even though its raining, dark SL the match was nt abondaned even though threr was an extra day. shame on u AUS.But world understood how they freared to lose to SL.

Posted by Master_Mihil on (January 20, 2013, 14:17 GMT)

@tflojones28- may be aussies should have used large cheap labour from large refugee containment camps instead of their highly skilled and paid cover! it is just common sense..

Posted by TrueLankan on (January 20, 2013, 14:17 GMT)

@Chris_P : That is the point mate. It is wrong to cancel a match if its unfair to one side. It is only right if its dangerous. The umpires knew it wasn't dangerous and said they cancelled it since it was unfair for the fielding side. In that case we should not have a coin toss since it is unfair to the team that loses it. In that case we should not have home matches since its unfair to the away side. Absolutely ridiculous. SHame on Australia.

Posted by PrasadGunawardane on (January 20, 2013, 14:13 GMT)

@shahswar: Keep ur mind alert on the game and it's rules..If the match was resumed, SL would not have to chase 224.. It would have been a small target in 20 overs; mainly because of the fell of early wickets of Aus...So it would have been an easy chase for SL with 10 wickets in hand..You can't compare with Brisbane chase of 74 since Gabba pitch was producing full of bounce and Aus bowlers are always hitting the dec hard. In SCG, there was no such bounce and it was full of swing bowling once more by Kulasekara; whereas Aus bowlers are not that good in swing bowling. Aus bowlers are sheer pace bowlers with trying to get bounce of the pitch!

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 14:12 GMT)

I was at the was dry enough to play for an hour before they called it off, and it stopped raining half an hour before was the third bad call that the umpires had made this evening.

Posted by shanepe2003 on (January 20, 2013, 14:10 GMT)

@bigboodha mate u forgot some thing when SL were 75for 6 Australians 74 for 10. Just don't try show how brainy & logical Australian thinking process is cos world is watching u r comments.

Posted by priceless1 on (January 20, 2013, 14:09 GMT)

@TheBigBoodha if the question was about the out field then the batting side has no say in that , its between the fielding side and the umpires and the match referee

Posted by Ruchiralk on (January 20, 2013, 14:08 GMT)

@brendon_edward: Yes, you're right Australia have some of the best pitches in the world with curators that know how to make good and fair pitches like Brisbane but I still think it's odd Tom Parker couldn't just cover the outfield. They covered most the pitch back in 2010 when SL played Australia in a rain affected match.

Posted by Aussie_Cricket on (January 20, 2013, 14:08 GMT)

222 wasn't necessarily an easy score to chase, yes swing wasn't going to be there but the outfield was going to be very wet and slow as well as the ball softening up quickly so boundaries would've been harder to come by. I do have to laugh at the emotional buggers who make out like it's some kind of conspiracy. Guess the same "puppet" umpires/referee were pressured by the Australians into giving Warner and Henriques 2 massive inside edge LBW's, particularly Warner who was looking very comfortable. There's an old saying "It's a funny old game cricket"... weird decisions happen and saying "the conditions weren't fair" was very, very weird. A shame though for the fans who went to the game and braved the weather only for it to be called off.

Posted by landl47 on (January 20, 2013, 14:06 GMT)

First, let's be clear- the Australians didn't stop the game. The Sri Lankans claiming that the Aussies were chickening out are simply wrong. The decision was made by three neutrals.

However, if in fact the decision was to stop the game because the conditions were unfair, that's the first time I have ever heard unfairness given as a reason. The conditions ALWAYS favour one side over the other. That's why the toss is so important in many games. The rule should be, and I thought was, that the game is played as long as the conditions are not unsafe. The umpires have to remember that this is entertainment and people have paid a lot of money to see the players play. As long as it's possible to do so without danger to the players, they should be out there.

This requires sorting out and quickly. Perhaps the umpires and match referee didn't make themselves clear. If this game was stopped because of unfairness, then in my view they have completely overstepped the line.

Posted by cric_roch on (January 20, 2013, 14:02 GMT)

Typical of lankans. We know how they chased 75. Now they walked out happily and whining later.

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 14:02 GMT)

Shame on you Australia. You like the world to think you are the b and end of cricket in the world. How countries like Sri Lanka have the capacity and the resources to cover up the whole ground it makes us wonder why you all chose not to do that. Is it because you POMEs were going to loose and loose the series? To make matters worse we had an Indian match referee who has been behind a lot of controversy in the past. If he does not not know how to understand the rules of the game then he should get out of the scene.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (January 20, 2013, 14:02 GMT)

And Clarke the Clown, the long-established worst captain in world cricket (who likes hiding down at 6 so he doesn't have to face the new ball, don't forget) has come up with another gem. In his words, 'Australia played some really good cricket'. Doesn't that just say it all: It's clear that Australia just have lower cricketing standards than the teams at the top. England, South Africa and India should have their own league, to decide on the number 1 slot, and all the rest should have a Minnow league. Australia would fit in just great.

Posted by Ksn_SL on (January 20, 2013, 14:02 GMT)

Shame on you Australia Cricket !!! Those "highly facilitated ground staff" were unable to cover the ground. Pathetic..

Posted by Ruchiralk on (January 20, 2013, 14:01 GMT)

@ TheBigBoodha: These are the last 2 times Sri lanka played Australia at the SCG, this shows that you have no knowledge of Sri lankan cricket and your just an Indian troll. Last time Starc played at the SCG vs SL, he got smashed for 8 runs per over. @Aussie Fans: Not trying to show off here with these last results, just trying to prove TheBigBoodha is wrong.

Posted by cricfan100 on (January 20, 2013, 13:59 GMT)

@TheBigBoodha, How can you compare 75/6 , to a chase of 222. they occured under totally different conditions and in totally diferrent circumstances. That comparison itself talks volumes about your cricketing knowledge. So keep up the good work.

Posted by PrasadGunawardane on (January 20, 2013, 13:58 GMT)

This was one of the funniest decisions ever taken by a match referee. I have seen loads of games have resumed under more damp conditions that that in SCG today. This is a sheer ridiculous decisions by one of the unpleasant and poorly acted former players in the world and he continues to show his lack of intelligence as a match referee too by acting as a Muppet. There is nothing called 'unfair' from environment in Cricket once you win the toss and either bat/ball. You have to face it. Otherwise, if the sun is out when first inning goes and if its over-cast when the 2nd team is batting, then the game should be stopped due to the unfairness of the environment.These foolish and low level mach officials should be sacked by ICC, if the good spirit of the game needs to be continued for next generations by keeping it as a game of gentlemen.

Posted by Malin_Godahewa on (January 20, 2013, 13:54 GMT)

The decision to called off the match is a huge disadvantage to Sri Lankans.223 runs in 50 overs is a target that can be achieved with ease.It might be 3-1 instead of 2-1.The work of the groundstaff can be never appreciated by the spectators also.They came to watch a cricket match of the worth of their tickets.In my point of view if the groundstaff covered the whole ground it will be good.They can learn of Sri Lankans how they held the NZ series in rainy climate.

Posted by Perera32 on (January 20, 2013, 13:52 GMT)

@TheBigBoodha: You're missing the point mate, Sri lanka wanted to come off because it was raining and it was hard to see the ball when it's drizzling. The batting conditions were fine, if you saw the 3.2 overs bowled, the batsmen were very comfortable. After the rain ended Clarke wanted to play and he took the players out to show the conditions were fine. The reason the batsmen didn't come out was because there would be no point of coming onto the field and standing there for 30 mins while the umpires were making the decision. SL would've only needed about 80-90 runs in the 17.4 overs remaining if DRS was used.

Posted by ManintheWhiteCoat on (January 20, 2013, 13:52 GMT)

Aragoth - well said ; 2007 world cup final was not only unsafe but also unfair for the SL batsmen to play in dark. And it was such a big match, a world cup final!!. May by ICC couldn't see it , because it was too dark. Lol

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 13:51 GMT)

@ChanaL Can understand ur miserable contempt towards Indians must have been really hard when u sensed a series victory which is not possible for Srilanka in their own home thesedays,but do spare a thought,If someone as incompetent as kumara Dharmasena can become an Umpire then why Srinath cannot be a match referee.Heights of insolence!!A srilankan commenting on an Indian English accent as if these good for nothing minnows are Oxford graduates. Grow up

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (January 20, 2013, 13:51 GMT)

Australia again saved by the rain, like they have been so many times, especially in the last five years. As the 6th best Test team in the world and the 7th best ODI team, Australia have been lucky again and should spend the next few days reflecting on where it all went wrong for them.

Posted by cricfan100 on (January 20, 2013, 13:49 GMT)

@maf17, you sounds like a typical indian, I hope that you can remember how dhoni was given not out when he was caught behind of chris woakes even before he scored 10 runs and went on to get that 72* match winning knock in the second odi. And in the 3rd odi how kevin petersen was given out for caught behind when his bat hit the pad. These two decisions could have made the difference of those two matches given the circumstances they occured. So where was your wheel of justice there. wheel of justice is always on your side if you have money like BCCI or Cricket austrailia. that is the bottom line.

Posted by Chris_P on (January 20, 2013, 13:47 GMT)

Ahem Mahela, you were the one waving your arms about saying it was too wet when you were batting! And it got worse later & you now say you should have played it! You can't have it both ways, & for those of you posting without any thougth processes, let me assutre, I was there, and believe me I got thorooughly drenched afterwards standing outside. @TheBigBoodha, spot on, the Aussies actually stayed out there a little while & trudged off well after the fleet footed Sri Lankan batsmen!

Posted by Mighty_Hawk on (January 20, 2013, 13:46 GMT)

@maf17 how ridiculous of you to insinuate sri lanka are/were cheating. Is it their job to umpire the game? No. They appeal and the umpire makes the decision. Why don't you get on your high horse when batsmen don't walk? When they know they have hit it......same difference, all part and parcel of the game. Sure Warner might have made a big score, Henriques less likely though. You want to talk about gifted wickets? How about the last time Sri Lanka played a test in Hobart? I recall Sangakarra been given out of his shoulder (on 196), I'm sure the Australians appealed. Obviously haven't played much cricket if any with those comments. @JohnKJ I think its a little far fetched to assume the Australians had anything to do with it. If anything Australia go for wins unlike other countries who are happy to accept draws. That is what has always set them apart. They play hard, yes with arrogance but you can afford some arrogance when you are that good.

Posted by first_slip on (January 20, 2013, 13:40 GMT)

@ChanaL, spot on Brother,

Posted by Dashgar on (January 20, 2013, 13:39 GMT)

@Thebigboodha you're absolutely right. SL were trying to get off when the rain started cos they knew the chase would be made simple by D/L. They don't have a leg to stand on now. If Aus had their way play would never have stopped.

Posted by BravoBravo on (January 20, 2013, 13:39 GMT)

Something fishy for sure. Match refree is Javagal Srinath, that further arouse the suspicion about the decision of abandonement. Does Mr. Srinath has the right credentials for being a refree? This is a sad day for the spirit of the game. SL had a better chance to win the match and seal the series.

Posted by Mangeshlim on (January 20, 2013, 13:39 GMT)

Its really ridiculous but is very according to "White" style of refusing rights to "Others". Umpires have kept their tradition to be bias towards visting teams. Its shameful !! We support yoy Team Sri Lanka. Its additionally amazng that Australian supporters write that " I was present their & Lankan team would have cried etc" this shows the mindset of that country which is "Avoidance" & not accepting defeats, Australian side is going throgh horrifying low form & rather Lankan side has "went through their batting -Ripped off them" in last matches. !!!! Clarke & team are very sad to see & performance is worst. Aussie Team has this "ability" & still call self as "world class" Pls check records for their touring recods & against Sub continet play. Come on Aussies be minding of others!!!

Posted by MR.CRICKETFAN on (January 20, 2013, 13:34 GMT)

nd keeps his focus on next game.

Posted by Sugath on (January 20, 2013, 13:32 GMT)

After reading what Aussie and Lanka captains have said I think the whole thin becomes very dirty and smelly. Groundsmen who are supposed to be the best in the world as per very people who are well versed in the game cannot manage a small rainfall and to add to insult keeps the outfield open. This really is a shame for Aussie Cricket. Also sad day for the pundits at ICC who cannot maintain consistency in decision making and makes a morass of a decision. The end result is Australia escape from a 3-1 rub in. Is this the gentlemen's game that they talk so much about and that too not of the players but those who are supposed to make intelligent decisions. Where has wisdom gone?

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (January 20, 2013, 13:32 GMT)

@Chris_P Well i think the majority of the crowd, cricinfo & both teams might disagree with you there. Or was that an attempt as some comic relief?

Posted by stunnerbond27 on (January 20, 2013, 13:30 GMT)

Wait a min. Why everyone thinks that SL would have easily win this match bcoz the score was only 200 something!!! Aus could have bowled out SL less than 200.

Posted by rustyryan on (January 20, 2013, 13:30 GMT)

Cry babies. SL struggled to chase 74. They cant even come close to 150 this time. Actually its the other way. Referee saved the embarrassment for Sri Lanka. Look who is talking. 37 all out and 74 /6. These ppl must have some sort of common sense. Does SL have better facility? C'mon you must be joking. All SL have got was 1000 runs flat roads which dont get affected by any rains.I would say its a loss for Aussies. They could have easily won the series. Its time Mahela stop crying and at least try to play outside SL.

Posted by maddy20 on (January 20, 2013, 13:29 GMT)

If the outfield is wet, then it is obviously very difficult for the fielding side to handle. I was watching the game one could nearly see water splashing around in the outfield when the fielders are moving. Jayawardene whinging about the refrees call is ridiculous and makes him look like.. well I'm sure you can imagine. If there's anyone to blame for this, its the ground staff. Its CA's responsibility to ensure that such a thing does not happen again in Hobart, and that the deserving side wins. For sure they cannot play such tricks again as SL will win the series so I expect things to return to normal. SL should pull themselves together and concentrate on winning the series.

Posted by TheBigBoodha on (January 20, 2013, 13:29 GMT)

Incredible. That photo at top right totally misrepresents what was happening - the captions says "Sri Lanka captain Mahela Jayawardene was frustrated after being denied the chance to wrap up the series". It makes it look as if the SL players are complaining about being asked to go off. In fact the opposite was happening - they were pleading with the umpires to go off! It was SL who wanted to stop the game, not Australia! The Australians were angry that the game was being stopped. Why the deliberate distortion?

Posted by King_Ravanaa on (January 20, 2013, 13:29 GMT)

Australia has done these kind of acts before as well., this should be stopped for the sake of the gentleman's game.. shame on CA and Australia

Posted by bootlicker on (January 20, 2013, 13:28 GMT)

I thought the second match was a freak which SL won. I apologize, it was not so. They proved it in the third match and they confirmed it today. We were totally outplayed all three occasions. Wake up Aussies, restructure your game, thinking and approach rather than manipulating officials to abandon the match. It is disgrace to the game

Posted by ashguru123 on (January 20, 2013, 13:22 GMT)

HOrrible ans worst decision we got everyday in Australia...why is that???don't worry guys kick them again to next match..we can take the series!come on lions

Posted by bootlicker on (January 20, 2013, 13:22 GMT)

I think we should accept the truth, we just can't face Malinga and Kulasekara. We were everywhere against them last three outings. SL is a better team when it comes to limited over cricket today. Be humble and accept the truth.

Posted by maddy20 on (January 20, 2013, 13:21 GMT)

Very strange indeed. Yes play cannot be resumed be resumed until the outfield is dry but what were the ground staff doing about it? I guess they just wanted to slow down things as much as possible to force an abandonment. Even though I do not like the SL team that much, one has to feel sorry for them. However Mahela pinning the blame on the refree(for the abndonment) for the delay caused by caused by ground staff is utter nonsense!

Posted by Chris_P on (January 20, 2013, 13:20 GMT)

Sinhabahu . Unlike you, I was at the game, and it was a constant drizzle. You know what happens when there is constant dirzzle don't you? The field stays wet and the ball becomes soggy, even known not to swing! (sic) The conditions were totally unfair. In fact had it dried quickly (it didn't as the rain persisted), who knows how the ball would have reacted, perhaps made the pitch into a mienfield, then we would have heard screaming all the way back to Columbo! Srinath, a highly respected referee made the final call by agreeing, understand the full facts before planting your foot in your mouth.

Posted by Anjana_nd on (January 20, 2013, 13:19 GMT)

The grounds in Sri Lanka might not have world-class drainage, but at least out curators and ground staff are smart enough to know to cover the entire ground when it rains. The fact that the SCG which has "superior" drainage cannot get a match restarted after a light shower of 45 mins is laughable. Dear CA next time please apply to SLC for some much needed covers. We have plenty.

Posted by tfjones1978 on (January 20, 2013, 13:16 GMT)

Comparisons to srilanka is a bit off centre. The Australian grounds would require a large number of people on stand by to be able to do these sorts of things. Unlike Srilanka, Australians gets paid a very high amount, which means each match would cost a fortune to attend. Its just basic maths!

Posted by cricfan100 on (January 20, 2013, 13:16 GMT)

There are rules and regulations that you have to be abide by, in an international cricket match. How can the most responsible person on the field(Umpire) make decisions based on his sentiments and emotins ignoring the rules and regulations where the entire game is dependent on. There should be a proper investigation regarding this incident. If found guilty umpires should be peanalised. If not this would be a wrong example to the entire cricketing world, that you can do what ever you feel right even if the rule says something else. If that is to be the case then why are we so much concerned about these mind boggling rules and regulatoins of the ICC. let's do what we feel right and continue playing cricket and see where we'll end up.

Posted by Edwards_Anderson on (January 20, 2013, 13:13 GMT)

@Ruchiralk our curators are the best in the world, our pitches give everyone a chance. I like you was dissapointed the game didn't go on but you can't blame the curators for that.

Posted by TheBigBoodha on (January 20, 2013, 13:13 GMT)

Incredible. That photo at top right totally misrepresents what was happening - the captions says "Sri Lanka captain Mahela Jayawardene was frustrated after being denied the chance to wrap up the series". It makes it look as if the SL players are complaining about being asked to go off. In fact the opposite was happening - they were pleading with the umpires to go off! It was SL who wanted to stop the game, not Australia! The Australians were angry that the game was being stopped. Why the deliberate distortion?

Posted by Prabhash1985 on (January 20, 2013, 13:09 GMT)

Australians want to play. Sri Lankans want to play. Fans want to play. All want to play. Why did you stop the match? ICC talk a lot about making the game alive, and they bring on new rules such as the four fielder rule. But, why don't they interfere in this sort of actions by the umpires and match referees? People came up with D/L method to keep the game alive. It's really disappointing. And even I feel it's rather biased.

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 13:06 GMT)

Poor show this; hope the fans get a full refund. Two bad LBW decisions from Erasmus and Reiffel as well; probably need to increase the number of DRS options to three per innings in ODI's, as in tests.

Posted by dilscoop_uk on (January 20, 2013, 13:05 GMT)

I m not an Aussie but S L should be grateful to Umpires for saving SL because of the way they struggled to chase the 74 runs in Brisbane . 222 would've been a huge task especially batting in Sydney in overcast conditions. So Mahela ! Just relax !

Posted by TheBigBoodha on (January 20, 2013, 13:04 GMT)

Short memories. I remember Starc running through much stronger SL batting line-up in an ODI two years ago at the SCG, for just 100 odd when there was a bit of moisture around. And weren't SL 6/75 in the last game? This was not the Adelaide oval. SL were the lucky ones here, and Australia were in with a VERY strong chance here of winning and then taking out the series next game. It was Australia who had most to lose here, not SL. So instead of whinging, the SLs should say a prayer of thanks.

Posted by   on (January 20, 2013, 13:04 GMT)

I say, scrap one of the T20s and use that day to replay 4th ODI. Besides, most likely the 2 T20 games going to split between the 2 and what are we going to have, 2 tied series?????

Posted by JohnKJ on (January 20, 2013, 12:57 GMT)

Why are Richie Benaud and Dennis Lilly not commenting now? When Murali refused to play in Australia (as a result of Australian harassment and racism), Dennis Lilly called it a cop-out. What do they call this one 'chicken-out'? Shame on Australians and shame on the unprofessionalism of mediocre backboneless umpires and match referee. Shreenath has never been a professional either as a player or as a match referee. ICC should be cautious in selecting puppets as match referees (unless they deliberately do this so that they can be manipulated such as appointing Ranjan Madugalle for Australian matches who is known to side by the Aussies). Imagine this has happened in the sub-continent when the Aussies were chasing…!

Posted by ChanaL on (January 20, 2013, 12:56 GMT)

Guessed correct, there is always an Indian to spoil the fun and party. And this guy was an ordinary cricketer and now a match referee. How did he become a match referee, don't think he knows the value of cricket. If the governing body is run by these guys, How can they expect to promote cricket. Bad looses.

Posted by maf17 on (January 20, 2013, 12:55 GMT)

The washout was pure karma, brought about by the Sri lankans being gifted two possibly crucial wickets through the most appalling umpiring and which in all probability they knew werent out (Herath needs to learn not to wink at his teamates in full view of TV cameras if he wants to preserve the illusion that the Sri Lankans acually believed those wickets were genuinely out). If Sri Lanka doesnt want the wheel of justice to come around and bite them fair in the butt, they'll thank their lucky stars and move on.

Posted by TheBigBoodha on (January 20, 2013, 12:53 GMT)

It was the SLs who wanted to leave the field, not Australia! The Australians wanted to play on, and at first refused to leave. Now the SLs are whining! SL had more to lose in this game playing out than Australia, and that's why they were so keen to get off. And now they are pretending that they wanted to play! You mean "We wanted to play with a reduced target but with all ten wickets in hand - but not if we had to get 220 runs in dicey conditions!" LOL. Give it a rest.

Posted by inswing on (January 20, 2013, 12:51 GMT)

Unsportsman like conduct, by players or grondstaff, is a strong Australian tradition.

Posted by Charith99 on (January 20, 2013, 12:48 GMT)

Richie Benaud must be joking when he praised the groundsmen . Our poor cricket board manages grounds even better than this. The SCG must be the most pathetic cricket ground in the world.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (January 20, 2013, 12:47 GMT)

I don't think that there was any deliberate attempt to disadvantage SL but it does seem a strange decision. Of course different people will have different interpretations of certain guidelines but it seems that the two match referees were working to two quite different guidelines. Presumably the match referee decided that Australia would be disadvantaged by the ground being wet but surely that is always the case when conditions change during a match. Given the amount of rain that fell, the amount of time since it fell and the drainage at the ground, would it really have been that different to various places when dew settles on the ground during the second innings? I wouldn't say that SL were robbed because there's no guarantee that they would have scored the runs but they would be favourite I think. It doesn't sound like SL are protesting this decision specifically but it's best for cricket in general that the ICC address such variation in application of the rules.

Posted by Aragoth on (January 20, 2013, 12:46 GMT)

What a shame on CA. I just cannot believe that the match was stopped - I have never seen this happen before. What happened to the DW system? I remember Sri Lanka having to play Australia at 2007 World Cup in the dark, which was a lot unfairer than this. CA just doesn't have the balls to take defeat gracefully. Aussies are pussies!

Posted by DownThePitch on (January 20, 2013, 12:31 GMT)

Unfair playing conditions, absolutely ridiculous, why don't we stop the game at toss itself. It's unfair most of the time for the team losing the toss. Aussis got away this time. There bowlers didn't get any swing the 3.2 overs they bowled. Like old times I'd say.

Posted by ChanaL on (January 20, 2013, 12:26 GMT)

The call was made by Srinath saying that it's 'UNFAIR'. Is there any report to analyse the perforamce of this so called match referee. Is it because, this guys's English is bad or he doesnt understand the rules of the game. any case poor public was at the receiving end.

Posted by Viraj_Hewage on (January 20, 2013, 12:24 GMT)

Well done Mahela for expressing your views on what was a very unusual decision apparently by the match referee. Yes SCG should cover the entire ground. It is an inexensive common sense practice which I thought AUS was good at. At a time cricket is struggling to attract crowds world wide , officials must make efforts to play/complete the game. 22,521 people, players and millions of fans are utterly dissapointed.

Posted by Chris_P on (January 20, 2013, 12:23 GMT)

I was there & if they think it was suitable to play, they are kidding. It actually got worse as the night wore on. He would have cried more had they resumed & the bowlers had run through his side with the wicket playing odd tricks. It is almost impossible to believe that 2 days prior, the temperature was nearly 47 degree Celsius in the hottest ever recorded temperature in Sydney.

Posted by softnuwan on (January 20, 2013, 12:22 GMT)

Why The officials favor the Aussie everyone knows Sri Lanka gonna win the match but everyone who loves cricket this is pure pullback for Sri Lanka by ICC

Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (January 20, 2013, 12:14 GMT)

Very strange decision indeed. Aus. administrators must have handed the umpires a very large cheque when they realised they couldn't defend a low target with only two bowlers and no wicket-keeper in their team. A potential drawn series will look slightly better than a series loss to SL.

Posted by Sinhabahu on (January 20, 2013, 12:07 GMT)

This should be an embarrassment to CA and the SCG groundstaff. Sri Lankan grounds have far superior ground coverage and drainage systems, and it beggars belief that a country like Australia can't get a game re-started. SLC should donate some covers to CA to spare future embarrassments like this.

Posted by Ruchiralk on (January 20, 2013, 12:05 GMT)

Richie Benaud said that the Australian Groundsmen and Curators are the best in the world, but they lack the knowledge to cover the outfield when it rains. It only rained for 45 minutes and I just feel sorry for all the fans who will probably never go to a cricket match again after this. I just don't see why "the best groundsmen and curators in the world" couldn't just cover the whole outfield like in Sri lanka, where even in a domestic match, the whole pitch is covered when it rains. Really Dissapointing for fans who payed money and those who woke up early to watch what should've been a great match.

Posted by Mary_786 on (January 20, 2013, 11:55 GMT)

Lucky break for us, I will take it, bring on Hobart

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Daniel BrettigClose
Daniel Brettig Assistant editor Daniel Brettig had been a journalist for eight years when he joined ESPNcricinfo, but his fascination with cricket dates back to the early 1990s, when his dad helped him sneak into the family lounge room to watch the end of day-night World Series matches well past bedtime. Unapologetically passionate about indie music and the South Australian Redbacks, Daniel's chief cricketing achievement was to dismiss Wisden Almanack editor Lawrence Booth in the 2010 Ashes press match in Perth - a rare Australian victory that summer.
Tour Results
Australia v Sri Lanka at Melbourne - Jan 28, 2013
Sri Lanka won by 2 runs (D/L method)
Australia v Sri Lanka at Sydney - Jan 26, 2013
Sri Lanka won by 5 wickets (with 7 balls remaining)
Australia v Sri Lanka at Hobart - Jan 23, 2013
Australia won by 32 runs
Australia v Sri Lanka at Sydney - Jan 20, 2013
No result
Australia v Sri Lanka at Brisbane - Jan 18, 2013
Sri Lanka won by 4 wickets (with 180 balls remaining)
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!