Three Mistakes Too Many

Three mistakes have surfaced from Sri Lanka in the past week, the most recent of which hasn't happened yet but is even more preventable than the first two.

Much has been said about the pitch for the Galle Test match. Michael Clarke commented after the first day that he thought the pitch looked more like a day five wicket. Others described it as the driest day one wicket they had ever seen. The ICC have received a report from their officials who were on site and will no doubt investigate the matter but it raises a few issues that seem to be being swept under the carpet with the dust from the Galle wicket. The most relevant of these is that the match lasted until the halfway point of the fourth day. Granted no side scored more than 300 in the Test but is this necessarily a reason to panic? Perhaps too many of our officials are ex Test batsmen who think all tracks must be shirt fronts from which 400 must be scored every day or spectators will stop walking through the turnstiles. There is no doubt that the pitch was too dry in a seaside climate which produces more 2400 millimetres a year (or twice as much as Sydney) and it was obviously at its worst on the second day when it turned faster than a nervous ewe on the Canterbury Plains. 

If you look at each day's play, it was only the second day which could raise the eye. Australia made 273 on the first day and their top eight all made starts. On the second day the muck hit the rotating cooling device with sixteen wickets falling whilst only 220 runs were added but it was during that afternoon that Michael Clarke played wonderfully well to show what could be done in the conditions. It was this day which has left a bad taste in the mouths of the ICC. On the third day Australia's tail added 95 and Sri Lanka collapsed before some very good Australian bowling that was high on skill and not on luck from an increasingly unresponsive pitch. The back end of the third day and front end of the fourth featured an outstanding partnership between Mahela Jayawadene and Angelo Matthews which really showed up the rest of the order. In the second innings, only the brute that Shane Watson produced to remove Kumar Sangakkara might be said to be from a faulty deck but those who have watched the big blondie know that he can sometimes still rip a batsmen out with the strength in those massive shoulders. Steve Waugh once sat Viv Richards on his behind with a bouncer. In the 4th innings, quicks took nine of the ten wickets.

The conclusion has to be that whilst the pitch needed more moisture, there can be no suggestion of collusion in its preparation. To suggest that the wicket was intentionally doctored to favour Sri Lanka avoids the reality that they had four spinners to chose from and only picked two. If this was a fixer, Arjantha Mendis would have played. The Galle wicket is always drier than most and likely this was too dry but it still kept the game in action until well into the fourth day, provided encouragement for the spinners as well as the quicks and it produced a result. Get over it ICC.

The second mistake was the technology calamity ... or was it? Steve Carter, the managing director of Hawkeye Innovations, has told the media they realised the fault in the reading of the Hughes dismissal immediately and reported it to the ICC after the game. His claim that there was insufficient time for the computers to successfully track the ball because the distance between landing and striking the pad was less than 40cm. Hawkeye provides no guarantee of accuracy when the landing/impact distance is less than 40cm and this is part of their agreement in applying the technology. The company provides a graphic which indicates the distance between landing and impact but the ICC currently prevents it from being displayed during lbw decisions. Further more, Carter claims that the third umpire, Tony Hill, was made aware of the tracking error in time to consider it when making his decision. Despite that and perhaps in the heat of the moment, Hill found insufficient evidence to overturn Richard Kettleborough's original decision. Its little wonder that India stands firm against the use of the DRS for lbw's when there is not only the potential for error with the technology but umpires still can't get the bleeding obvious right.

Mistake number three hasn't happened yet but looks likely to happen sometime on Thursday or Friday, depending on the toss of the coin in Pellekele. The indications from the Australian camp are that Shaun Marsh will bat at three whilst Papa Ponting is on paternal leave. This decision sits squarely in the realm of what is wrong with Australian cricket. Usman Khawaja has both the temperament, style and class to bat at three and did so in his first Test back in January when Ponting gave the side the finger. It was how he batted rather than how many he got that made it clear Australia had unwrapped part of its future. Likewise, to bat him at six is wasting his main attributes of patience and an unusual quality for a left hander, the ability to not snick to slips. Marsh is clearly a fine player and if I had my druthers and wore the selector's cap, I'd have him in the side in place of Phil Hughes but his is more flexible than KhawajaKatich? Clarke, Nielsen and Greg Chappell will make a serious goof if this plan goes ahead, regardless of performances in this match. Jack Clarke promised long term planning at the release of the Argonanuts Report. Let's not throw Khawaja on the middle order scrap heap when he has the potential to be the best leftie since Neil Harvey.

Could be the worst headline since my year 9 English teacher took a screamer in the annual staff vs students game after the students had dropped six between us. She wrote on the chalkboard the next day "Miss Takes Catch. Zing!"

Oh I hope not.