Between the sliver and the chasm: Sri Lanka’s battle with consistency against England
How big is the gap between Sri Lanka and England? The ICC puts it at four places, with England ranked third and Sri Lanka seventh. Ahead of the series – which will likely end up 3-0 – many pundits felt it was a chasm. Still, at times, it has looked more like a sliver. In moments, Sri Lanka have pushed and challenged their more battle-hardened hosts. Unfortunately, they have struggled for consistency – and at crucial moments, capitulated. It has cost them dear.
The tour has been spiced by superb individual performances. Prabath Jayasuriya, Milan Rathnayake, Asitha Fernando, Kamindu Mendis – all these men were unknown in England coming into the series; each has won his share of admirers. Angelo Mathews, Dinesh Chandimal and Dhananjaya de Silva have reaffirmed their standing on these shores. But so much of their good work has been undone by stretches of shoddy cricket; as much as they have sparked and crackled, Sri Lanka have never quite caught fire. They have mixed the sublime with the slapstick, and against good teams, that simply will not cut it. After two tough Tests, they’ll be left licking their wounds – wondering what might have been.
Asitha Fernando became the second Sri Lankan fast bowler, after Rumesh Ratnayake, to claim a five-fer
At Old Trafford, they saved their best cricket for when they were in deep trouble. For much of the first innings at Lord’s, they controlled and shackled England. Yet, just when Sri Lanka seemed to be finding a foothold in the series, they let things slip.
With England 216-6, the tourists were on top. But Joe Root and Gus Atkinson put on 92 runs in 18.3 overs; Atkinson and Matthew Potts added 85 in 16. It was especially frustrating, since the first day at Lord’s was the first time in the series that Sri Lanka’s attack has felt rounded and threatening.
At Old Trafford, the team looked overly reliant on Jayasuriya and Fernando. Rathnayake was too full and straight in the first innings; second time around, Vishwa Fernando was wayward with the new ball and impotent with the old. Combining those efforts (Rathnayake in innings 1 + Vishwa in innings 2) makes for ugly reading: 21 overs, 112 runs, 1 wicket. Such inefficacy hamstrung Sri Lanka, putting strain on the other bowlers and making it hard to build pressure.
In the second Test, it was a different story. Lahiru Kumara, a high-risk selection, proved inspired. Through the first session, he was at his best: hitting hard lengths, bowling tight lines and using the slope to seam the ball both ways. At times, his pace got up to 145 kmph: he beat the bat, kept things tight and seemed to inspire the other bowlers. Both Milan and Asitha bowled faster than they had done at Old Trafford. Jayasuriya was canny and cunning, if not particularly penetrative. By tea, Dhananjaya’s decision to bowl – baffling at the toss – seemed to have been vindicated.
But Sri Lanka’s seamers ran out of steam in the evening session. Perhaps, that was inevitable, given the short turnaround between Tests and their heavy workload. When Atkinson pumped Jayasuriya for a pair of sixes – encouraging Dhananjaya to remove him from the attack – Sri Lanka looked lost and bereft of ideas. Kamindu Mendis, bowling off-spin, eased the pressure further. The new ball brought runs rather than wickets. Still, with Root gifting Rathnayake a wicket, Sri Lanka had seven first-day scalps – on a pitch which seemed to be offering little for the bowlers.
It was a strange situation. Sri Lanka held the upper hand for much of the first day, but England would have gone to bed happier. The visitors needed quick wickets at the start of day two – but again, they bowled poorly and England’s tail wagged. It felt odd that Dhananjaya opted against starting with Asitha – who has been Sri Lanka’s best bowler all tour long, and eventually took all three wickets. Undeniably, some of the captain’s decisions throughout the series have been inscrutable.
Of course, Sri Lanka’s failures with the bat on day two overshadowed any issues in the field. Given the resilience they showed at Old Trafford, and the placid nature of the pitch, Dhananjaya’s men would have held faint hopes of surpassing England’s 427 at the start of the innings. Instead, they faltered, producing their most disappointing stretch of cricket yet.
Nishan Madushka looked unsuited to opening the batting in English conditions at Old Trafford – why Sri Lanka thought he’d benefit from the extra strain of keeping wicket is beyond explanation. Once again, he fell early – playing an ugly, tired shot to a poor ball from Chris Woakes. Karunaratne chopped on too: for all the runs he’s scored in Asia, he’s fast running out of chances to make an impression in England. After 13 innings here, he averages just 24.33.
Sri Lanka went to lunch staring down the barrel, and couldn’t turn things around after the break. Nissanka guided the ball straight to leg slip; Mathews made a good ball look better than it was – when Dhananjaya fell for 0, the tourists had batted themselves out of the match. The only question now was whether England would enforce the follow-on: it was clear, Sri Lanka needed a miracle to avoid heading to The Oval 2-0 down.
It is a shocking indictment of Sri Lanka’s top six that Prabath Jayasuriya – a shot-happy tailender, with a top score of 28 not out – hung around for more balls than any of them. There may be technical issues with Sri Lanka’s batting, but there also seems to be a serious lack of application: an impatience, which would inevitably lead to disaster in England.
As at Old Trafford, Kamindu Mendis offered a lifeline for this faulty batting lineup. He was compact in his movement and clear in his thinking – decisive in both defence and attack. Had he not run out of partners, he may well have had another hundred: it is hard to fathom that he was out of the side for almost two years after his debut; impossible to imagine a future where he isn’t batting higher than number seven. In this series, he’s looked Sri Lanka’s best player by a country mile.
Naturally, the visitors will feel that a lack of preparation has contributed to their downfall – but they also have to take a long hard look in the mirror. Test cricket is about temperament as much as technique: all too often, they been volatile and erratic. Sri Lanka have the makings of a good side, but must learn to put it together for session after session. Until they can do that, they will continue to excite and frustrate their fans in equal measure.
–Nicholas Brookes is the author of ‘An Island’s Eleven: The Story of Sri Lankan Cricket’.
He podcasts about Sri Lankan cricket for ‘The Murali End’ and tweets @brookeswrites–