Can Sri Lanka sustain the success (24 Jan 1998)

Saturday 24, January 1998

Can Sri Lanka sustain the success

By SA'ADI THAWFEEQ

Sri Lanka made a clean sweep of the mini two-Test series by winning at Kandy and the SSC, but the most worrying factor to emerge out of these victories is, how long can they sustain such success with their limited bowling resources.

The recall of left-arm spinner Don Anurasiri from the wilderness after a gap of four years showed how desperate the situation is for a bowler of his type and, for a right-arm leg-spinner.

There was criticism in certain quarters over Anurasiri's selection, but the question is : Was there anyone worthy of selection ? The selectors were certainly not too eager to rush any half-baked bowlers and provide them with a Test cap. It happened sometime back in the mid-eighties where Roshan Guneratne, Sanjeeva Weerasinghe, Roshan Jurangpathy were just pushed into Test cricket and then shown the door.

The situation is so grim that it calls for immediate measures to arrest the trend. It may already be too late, but a positive start need to be taken to produce quality leg-spinners and left-arm spinners.

Sri Lanka did not suffer from such a dearth of spin bowlers in the recent past. But the root cause of the problem could be attributed from the time when limited overs cricket was introduced to the schools.

By planting in the minds of the youngsters from the school-going age to bowl defensively and negatively, has eliminated the development of leg-spinners (and left-arm spinners) from the game.

What future has such type of spinners in a school side whose coach will only be keen to win matches (and tournaments) in order to safeguard his position. Everyone knows carrying a leg-spinner into a limited-over match could be a luxury, unless of course he is a Shane Warne or a Mushtaq Ahmed.

Why there is an influx of off-spinners in the country is that it is easier to develop such a bowler in school cricket than a leg-spinner.

The standard of school cricket today has altered so drastically that in the past 15 to 20 years it no longer produces cricketers who can walk into a national side.

The situation has been further compounded by the reluctance of the local umpires to call any bowler for throwing at school or club level. They only aggravate the situation by such actions, passing the buck on to the selectors.

There are already rumblings from the England 'A' management over the action of a spinner who played against them on the current tour.

One wonders whether the Sri Lanka Cricket Board administrators are aware of the gravity of the situation at hand. The disappointing aspect is that there has been no positive move from them to unearth any quality spinners. Their interest more or less lies in safeguarding their positions in the Board, rather than work towards a common goal for the betterment of Sri Lanka cricket.

Down the corridors of the Cricket Board headquarters and at ExCo meetings, the topics discussed has seldom to do with cricket. The recent World Tel hullabaloo is a case in point.

What these administrators don't realise is that they owe their positions of luxury today solely to the success of our cricketers. The more matches and tournaments they win, the more the coffers keep on expanding. The Cricket Board has never been rich at any time than they are now. But the question is, are the monies that are brought in by our cricketers through their sweat and toil on the field, been channelled properly ? If that had been done Sri Lanka cricket would not be facing a crisis like it is today.

As long as the current lot of cricketers are able to hold their own against international opposition, everyone will be happy. But for how long ?

Why Sri Lanka are such a good one-day side is because they have the bowlers to contain the opposition, which is sufficient to win matches. Why they struggle to enjoy the same success at Test level is that they don't have the bowlers to take 20 wickets.

Unless radical steps are taken to unearth quality bowlers, Sri Lanka's cricketing future looks a bleak one. It should not be allowed to follow the course of West Indies cricket.

Signs of what lies in store for Sri Lanka were noticed in the recently concluded Test series against Zimbabwe. Over an year ago, Sri Lanka beat Zimbabwe quite comfortably, winning both Tests inside four days. But on this occasion, they were made to fight all the way with both Tests spilling into the fifth day.

The conclusion one could arrive at for such a situation is that country's like Zimbabwe, who got Test status ten years after Sri Lanka are fast catching up and it won't be long before they begin to dominate us, unless the necessary steps are taken to keep our noses ahead.

Marvan Atapattu's double century at Kandy and Aravinda de Silva's unbeaten 143 at the SSC turned out to be the decisive innings for Sri Lanka clinching the series. The last two Test series against India and Zimbabwe has raised Atapattu's batting average from a mediocre 10.70 to one over 30. So swiftly has fortunes changed for him - he began his career with a pair and averaged 0.16 in his first six Test innings - that he looks established in the openers berth.

De Silva could go down as the most under-rated batsman in international cricket. Although he is held in high esteem in Asia, De Silva never gets the recognition he deserves from the other cricket-playing regions. Steve Waugh is still regarded as the best batsman in the world, but in recent times, De Silva has played some extraordinary innings in the most demanding circumstances to be ranked equal if not above the Australian. Is it because De Silva comes from an Asian country that he is not spoken of in glowing terms as some of his lesser talented contemporaries ?

The strain placed on off-spinner Muthiah Muralitharan is too great and too risky. But without him, can Sri Lanka win Test matches? Skipper Arjuna Ranatunga has no option, but to bring on his most prized bowler to produce the result he wants at the grave risk of over-bowling him.

It is no secret that almost in every Test series, that it is Muralitharan who bears the brunt of the bowling. The saddest part is that he does not get the support he deserves from the other end. For him to achieve 150 Test wickets within a time frame of under five years is a fine achievement considering the fact that Sri Lanka averages around six to eight Test matches a year, with the exception of 1997 when they went through 11.

Muralitharan's haul of 17 wickets is the highest he has taken in one series. At Kandy, he recorded the best figures by a Sri Lankan in Test cricket with 12 for 117.

For Zimbabwe, the emergence of Murray Goodwin as a solid front-line batsman was one of the plus points. Goodwin who played three seasons of Sheffield Shield cricket for Western Australia, walked straight into the Zimbabwe team to take the place of Dave Houghton (the present coach) and lost no time in establishing himself as a top-order batsman.

Skipper Alistair Campbell continued to confound his followers by failing to get a big score - he has yet to score a Test century, while his deputy Andy Flower confirmed his status as one of Zimbabwe's prime batsmen after Houghton, by scoring the only century for his country in the series.

The ease with which the Sri Lankan batsmen tackled the Zimbabwean spinners put Campbell in a spot. He was forced to fall back on Heath Streak for wickets. The rugged fast bowler did not fail his captain and gave his country an outside chance of recording their first overseas Test victory at the SSC, when he snapped up four cheap wickets in the second innings. Streak took 10 wickets (avg. 21.20) in the series while the spin trio of Paul Strang, Andy Whittall and Adam Huckle managed only 12 amongst them, averaging 46.58.

If Test cricket needs crowds, then Kandy should be the venue for it. On all five days of the first Test, the Kandyan public were present in their large numbers filling the Asgiriya Stadium to capacity. The Kandy DCA with their effervescent vice president Deva Amunugama, should be congratulated for organising the Test so successfully.

The Cricket Board should make it a point to earmark Kandy as a Test venue for all tours to this country regardless of what month of the year it is. The Test against Zimbabwe was the first to be played in Kandy after a lapse of four years. The excuse given for the delay by the Cricket Board was that between January and March are the best seasons to play cricket in the Hill capital. Kandy DCA officials have firmly denied this.

Taking Kandy as an example, the Cricket Board should develop the infrastructures at Matara, Galle and Kurunegala and make them future Test venues. After all, a tour of Sri Lanka is not just confining a visiting team to play matches in Colombo alone, as was the case with the Indians last August.

Source :: Daily News (https://www.lanka.net)