Sri Lanka will be facing Zimbabwe in the series decider today (18) at the R. Premadasa Stadium. After disappointing defeat in the second game, they will look to finish off the series on a high and have a better idea of their team combination going forward to the next series against Afghanistan next month.
It was a disappointing start and end to the second game against Zimbabwe. The top order collapsed which saw the host in big trouble at 27 for 4. If not for a steady partnership between Angelo Mathews and Charith Asalanka, Sri Lanka would have been easily bundled out to a below par total.
To begin with, the pitch was probably the best pitch produced in this whole series. It needed a score around the 200-run mark, but our volatile top order once again struggled with the bounce and swing of the Zimbabwean attack.
The same Zimbabwean team was defeated by Namibia, Tanzania, and Uganda a month back, which questions Sri Lanka’s position in the world stage. However, the innings needed saving and it was that man Charith Asalanka who took the game from the scruff of its neck and scored a blinder of an innings. The supporting act was from the veteran, making a heroic return, amidst criticisms from many cricket pundits in social media and other platforms.
The fact of the matter is, the two players complimented each other and helped Sri Lanka get to a decent enough total.
With the ball, they started brightly with a quiet powerplay and in the middle overs, Sri Lanka managed to chip away with wickets to keep the visitors in check. However, needing 20 off the final over, Wanindu turned to Mathews, and we all know how that ended.
Should have Wanindu given the ball to Mathews? Should have Mathews used his experience to get the job done? Is Mathews a death bowling option or did Wanindu mess up the bowling changes?
It could be a combination of all of the above decisions that led to the defeat. But few things are for sure, Sri Lanka need to identify their death bowling options and continue to back them at least until this upcoming World Cup. Likewise, if they are playing Mathews and Shanaka both in the side as the fifth bowling options, they must come up with a better plan to utilise them without exposing them to big hitters.
Given modern-day cricket, medium pacers like Mathews and Shanaka are preferred by lower middle-order big hitters to clear the boundaries. So why give them luxury? Also, should Sri Lanka stick to using all-rounders as the fifth bowling option?
Since the youth policy came to the fore, Sri Lanka have continued to use all-rounders as the fifth bowling option, and in most times it has backfired. The likes of Dasun Shanaka, who is at most times reluctant to take the ball, have been impressive sometimes in the middle overs or with the new ball. Chamika Karunaratne has played the same role with not much success.
With Wanindu Hasaranga, Maheesh Theekshana, Dushmantha Chameera, and Dilshan Madushanka, Sri Lanka do possess a versatile, skilled bowling attack. But if the fifth bowler fails to compliment the four main bowlers, all their effort will be wasted. However, it then means Sri Lankas should go for a proper fifth bowling option which then compromises the batting depth. Given our fragile batting lineup, is it worth the risk?
So many questions with so little time. With just over five months remaining for the World Cup, can Sri Lanka sort out everything on time? We wait and see.
PHOTO Krishan Kariyawasam