Viewing 10 comments - 1 through 10 (of 185 total)
1 2 … 19

  • Thank you for the feedback. I must acknowledge that Asantha deserves credit for picking Oshada out of nowhere. He had only played one A match and was not even in the A team picture. Yes, he also picked Vishva and Embul for Tests. But these two had been in the system as back-up and with so many injuries, they were always likely to be picked as replacements.

    My issue with De Mel is his public criticizing of Chandimal, appointment of Malinga who is a notorious divisor and then the wholesale experimenting with the ODI side on the last opportunity we had to get the team right.

    Then there is the whole issue with Lakmal too.

  • Anura, thank you for the comment and feedback. I cant agree more with you. Previous selectors, specially Sanath did more damage than any good. Sanath famously picked 40 some players in one year, didn’t he?
    My issue with De Mel is that he took over the job at a time we were on the last leg of World Cup preparations and the team struggling to show any consistency with all the injuries, suspensions and batsman continuing to struggle with building a long innings and even worse, MANY DIVISIONS within the team.
    Yet, the first thing De Mel did was to publicly criticize the captain Chandimal and say he is a weak leader and Dimuth was better. How does that help with morale? Unity? If that was what De Mel believed, he should have straight away appointed Dimuth. Or at least spoken to Chandimal in private than to thrash him in public. Just was not professional.
    Then at a time team unity was of the highest interest, he appoints a well known divider, Malinga, as captain. We all saw how this has gone. Now even De Mel acknowledges he has failed to get the team together.
    We had a great opportunity to fine tune the team ahead of a WC, by sending the WC probables to SA. Yet, De Mel sent basically an A team batting to SA and kept WC probables at home. Would either of Avishka, Priyamal, Angelo have a chance of going to the WC? NO!!!! Then why waste the opportunity to have given the likely candidates the chance in SA?

    I might be wrong. But I saw De Mel’s actions as disruptive to our WC plans. I do respect your opinion though! Thanks again for the feedback.

  • Mumtaz Yusuf – I am not
    Mumtaz Yusuf – I am not suggesting that SL results had anything to do with Mathews. Only that his removal seems not just fitness related. I agree that Mathews or not, we played poorly in the Asia Cup. Now I wouldn’t know if that was because Mathews refused to follow orders and execute management’s plans or not. Either way, no excuse for losing, agreed 100%.

    On Bangladesh winning after Hathurusinghe left. Perhaps you need to do some research 🙂 They won ALL of their bi-lateral ODI’s at home except for against England under Hathurusinghe. They reached WC semi’s? or second round as well in 2015, correct? I don’t think there is any argument of the influence he had on Bangladesh. That said, this coach now needs to prove his worth in SL and can no longer live on the Bangladesh reputation alone, agreed!

  • Stormy and Confused – I fully
    Stormy and Confused – I fully agree with and accept your points. Perhaps the point I was trying to make in this post was either misunderstood, or I did a pathetic job of making the point. Let’s assume the latter is true since you both are very intelligent individuals. My post had nothing to do with the charge against Chandimal, ball tampering. Yes, the case is done and dusted! Chandimal is guilty of tampering with the ball! The focus of my discussion was the impending hearing on Conduct Contrary to Spirit of the game. Again, here too, we can all agree THEY ARE GUILTY and have pleaded as such also!!! The here again, there is no question as to whether the trio is guilty or not. But what is left to be determined is, HOW MUCH ARE THEY GUILTY? Enough to be given a harsh penalty? Or escape with a warning? This is of little significance when it comes to the coach. He can and will still coach from next door, if not from the dressing room. But this decision has serious consequences with respect to Chandimal. Thus my interest.

    Correct me if I missed it after reading the judgment as per the link provided by confused. I thought the judge acknowledges that the umpires DID NOT FIND THE CONDITION OF THE BALL TO HAVE BEEN CHANGED, even after numerous inspections on day two. I also interpreted the rules to say that “the ball would only be changed and a five run penalty imposed, if the umpires deemed the condition of the ball had been unfairly changed”. If I am right on both, then “would not the umpires have been WRONG to change the ball on the morning of day 3”, after it was deemed fine throughout the previous afternoon, especially after the alleged incident approximately around 2:43? Assuming I am correct, my point is that the Lankans had all the right to be very upset.

    Also, I see that the judge stated that the Lankans did not take the field for 2 hours. However, the Lankan management will argue (and why shouldn’t we believe them rather than to dismiss them?) that they did not take 2 hours, but only presented the umpires and match referee a set of questions, and that it was the match referee who needed a lot of time to get back to them. The Lankans will also argue that their unwillingness to promptly accept the tampering verdict and take to the field was because, the decision that the ball was changing along with 5 penalty runs was also conveyed at the same time, which is what prompted the Lankans reaction. They will also argue that after going back and forth, an agreement was made NOT to change the ball and all parties agreed to start play, but upon taking the field, they were again hit with that charge, prompting their ‘understandable reaction’ to further delay the start.

    So in summary, based on what I hear from reliable inside sources: 1) Lananks accepted the charge of conduct contrary to spirt of game 2) Lankan’s wish to make a case that shows ICC did not apply the ball changing and fine run penalty rule in a manner consistent with how they had done it in the past, i.e. SA vs Aus sand-paper incident 3) It was the confusion and frustration that resulted from this inconsistent ICC standard that lead Lankan’s to act irrationally 4) while accepting the blame and the fact that irrespective of the circumstances, they could still have acted better, the Lankans will ask the ICC to spare the captain from harsh penalty because it was primarily the management that dictated terms that AM.

    The purpose of the blog was to highlight the above. After your educated feedback, I do see that I could have done better research and presented this differently, including the title. 🙂

  • Stormy – Perhaps Tharanga was
    Stormy – Perhaps Tharanga was preferred as the more stable option since Angie was lost and that left a huge hole in the middle.

    Another huge problem we have is ‘looking for that all-rounder who does not exist’. We cannot effort to play guys like TP or Shanaka below #7, as one of our four bowlers.

    Rather than looking for the non-existent exotic creature, we should just build a team around 7 front line batsman and 4 front line bowlers. We will always get 10 overs from the 7 batsman, specially if Angelo is playing and also from Dhananjaya and the likes of Siriwardena.

    For as long as we keep relying on bits and pieces cricketers to do the job of bowling 50 overs, we will never win!

  • I agree with your hesitance
    I agree with your hesitance in playing any of the current lot. That is the point I was also making. Which is that, given the lack of opportunities for fast bowlers to develop in SL, we have produced fast bowlers who are one dimensional and lack those soft skills like slower bowls or cutters needed to succeed on these wickets. Mahroof, Pradeep and Lakmal have proved this over and over again.

    One reason for the lack of these skills is the fact that our fast bowlers are NOT given the opportunity to play enough cricket at home where they can work on and develop these skills. In our List A tournaments, rarely do we count on a fast bowler to bowl more than a handful of overs. It is all spin from start to finish. So how can these poor chaps develop any skills?

Viewing 10 comments - 1 through 10 (of 185 total)
1 2 … 19