Sri Lanka are down but not out. Don’t be foolish enough to write them off yet. On the contrary, despite confidence being at a low ebb after disappointing tours to South Africa and Australia, I believe they have a very good chance of qualifying for the Super Six stage. After that, anything is possible.
Yes, there are serious concerns: the batsmen have so far failed to adapt to alien conditions; the bowlers have been guilty of ill-discipline; the decision-making has, at times, been muddled and the fielding sloppy. However, in my mind, many of the problems are mental and, as such, can be overcome.
Look at talent alone and you will see that man for man, Sri Lanka are very strong. The problem that I see is one of commitment. I wonder whether this side has the same deep desire to win as that of the 1996 team? Are they willing to tough it out for each other?The secret to success in 1996 was that we had a squad of quality players who were all totally committed to the cause. There were few stars but I could count on each and every one of them to give 110 per cent to the team’s cause. The result was a formidable unit.The current team has similar potential: they have a far better bowling attack than we had and an exciting middle-order capable of scoring runs in South Africa. But they have to prove their commitment to the cause and each other.
If they can, there are grounds for optimism.
First and foremost, Sri Lanka have been very fortunate to be in the weakest group. Group A contains the first, third and fifth best-rated sides in the world at the moment. By contrast, Sri Lanka will be pitted against the second, sixth and seventh best teams in Group B.
South Africa, West Indies and New Zealand will be no pushovers, but all three key opponents have weaknesses to be exploited.
South Africa have great depth in their batting with an enviable list of all-rounders. However, I believe that they are still one quality batsman short without the likes of Hansie Cronje and Darryl Cullinan anchoring the middle order.
New Zealand, if they have the services of all-rounder Chris Cairns, are my underdogs for the tournament. They are a well-drilled and tenacious unit. Moreover, they have the tall fast bowlers necessary to exploit the quick, bouncy pitches expected. But, like South Africa, I feel their batting is slightly suspect.
The West Indies had a great one-day series in India. They are starting to rebuild a once-formidable batting line-up with the likes of Chris Gayle, Ramnaresh Sarwan and Marlon Samuels complementing the more established Brian Lara, Carl Hooper and Shivnarine Chanderpaul.
But that performance was on subcontinental pitches. Can they rise to the occasion on South African soil? And question marks remain over the bowling. New quickies are emerging but they still lack experience.
Unfortunately, I feel that Sri Lanka has missed a trick. All three of its serious first-round opponents have been traditionally susceptible to spin, especially the back of the hand variety. Yet Sri Lanka’s 15-man squad contains no Upul Chandana, a fine all-round cricketer who would have also contributed in other departments.
I was also surprised to see left-arm fast bowler Nuwan Zoysa omitted from the final squad. A tall man, he was ideally suited to exploit the extra bounce of South African pitches.
Having said that, this Sri Lankan attack is fast improving. Chaminda Vaas is experienced and consistent, whilst Dilhara Fernando and Prabath Nissanka are increasingly impressive. With Murali completing the attack, I feel that Sanath Jayasuriya has plenty of ammunition at his disposal.
Murali, of course, will be the key bowler. And he should benefit from having greater support. No longer is he the sole threat to opposition batsmen. Nowadays, he has the luxury of bowling at middle- and lower-order batsmen because early inroads have been made. That is a tremendous advantage, allowing him to take more wickets.
Nevertheless, he must be used shrewdly by Sanath. It is essential that he is brought into the attack at the times when he can cause the maximum damage, for example, when the opposition are being forced to accelerate—always difficult against such a classy operator.
Sanath, apart from rotating his bowlers wisely as the captain, must also play the part with the bat. He must open the innings. Granted, opponents now bowl better at him, refusing to offer the width on which he thrives. This makes it much harder for him but he should continue to play his natural game, concentrating on his strengths rather than his weaknesses. Shot selection is the key.
Marvan Atapattu also has a crucial role to play at the top of the order. He is the natural anchor. But that does not mean he should allow himself to get bogged down—that puts too much pressure on the middle-order. He must concentrate on working the ball around and rotating the strike.
The young middle-order, with Mahela Jayawardene, Kumar Sangakkara and Russel Arnold, is a potential strength of the side if they can battle with the same determination that our 1996 line-up displayed. Aravinda de Silva’s presence is reassuring. Although perhaps not the star he was in 1996, he remains a fine player and has a key role to play. His vast experience (this will be his fifth World Cup) will be invaluable. Perhaps they also need the adhesive qualities of Hashan Tillakaratne.
Advertisement
All in all, if you are a Sri Lankan supporter, don’t despair at the team’s recent performances. The real thing starts in February and lessons have surely been learnt along the way. The basis of the side remains sound. With good leadership, clear thinking and unwavering commitment, Sri Lanka can threaten the best in the world.
