***Official*** England in Sri Lanka 2012

[theegyptian]

Can't believe Jayawardene doesn't come into this conversation more. If ever there was somone who was absolutely brilliant at home and average away it's Jayawardene. 64 @ home, 40 @ away.

Against England the contrast is most obvious. Home avg = 94. Away avg = 34


To be fair to Samaraweera he has a better record away than Jaya (although he has played less tests) away from home and a similar record to Sangakarra

Samaraweera wins no elegance competitions but looking briefly at the stats alone I'd say he was no more of a flat track bully than Jayawardene.

 

[Cricketismylife]

I just think it's difficult to take SL seriously while they have opening bowlers averaging 60. When you compare that to England it's just a joke, and it's made worse by the Randiv Swann comparison. Swann got drift and turn, Randiv got nothing, he virtually put the ball on the spot with limited turn and no drift.

But I think SL's weak bowling makes their batting underrated. I'm surprised how many on sky expected them to be bundled out...now England are clearly favourites but SL should take inspiration from the Lord's test of 2006. England had a lead of 360 on first innings, but SL recovered so well they took it into the final day effectively 20-6, and from that point managed to draw it.

The positive point for SL is that in that match the 5 wickets left were Dilshan, Kapugedera, Vaas, Kulasekera and Murali compared to Jayawardene, Mathews, Prasanna, Herath and Lakmal. Also they did this away from home in conditions more pace friendly and this wicket is much slower.

The negative for SL is that this England bowling attack is far superior to that one, and that pitch and attack was the kind where runs could leak easily, whereas on this pitch runs are much harder to come by. Also England dropped many catches on that day.

SL still have a chance, they have 2 opportunities for a big partnership, first with the 2 batsman at the wicket and then with Prasanna and whoever stays in from the 2 at the wicket. I think that once Herath comes in whoever is still in should play aggressively. Also the ball isnt completely new so the pair at the wicket wont have to wait so long for the ball to go soft. It's a cliche but the first 45 mins are crucial. Should this pair survive that against Anderson/Swann then England will get a bit twitchy.

I dont believe SL can win the game though. Their attack isnt strong enough and most of England's batsman are starting to look decent at the crease.

 

[Jacknife]

Can't believe Jayawardene doesn't come into this conversation more. If ever there was somone who was absolutely brilliant at home and average away it's Jayawardene. 64 @ home, 40 @ away.

Against England the contrast is most obvious. Home avg = 94. Away avg = 34


To be fair to Samaraweera he has a better record away than Jaya (although he has played less tests) away from home and a similar record to Sangakarra

Samaraweera wins no elegance competitions but looking briefly at the stats alone I'd say he was no more of a flat track bully than Jayawardene.

This, one thing hasn't changed is Sanga's been piss poor against us recently.

Set up for a brilliant days cricket tomorrow, surprised the pitch hasn't deteriorated more than it has done though, it's looked a decent pitch for the past couple of days, hard to score on but no demons in it.
Swann has been excellent today, he's really found his form while in SL.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Can't believe Jayawardene doesn't come into this conversation more. If ever there was somone who was absolutely brilliant at home and average away it's Jayawardene. 64 @ home, 40 @ away.

Against England the contrast is most obvious. Home avg = 94. Away avg = 34


To be fair to Samaraweera he has a better record away than Jaya (although he has played less tests) away from home and a similar record to Sangakarra

Samaraweera wins no elegance competitions but looking briefly at the stats alone I'd say he was no more of a flat track bully than Jayawardene.

Samaraweera hasnt had that many games outside the subcontinent and as mentioned has done ok in those especially since he noticeably changed his game in 2008.

Jayawardene is an interesting case. One of my favourite players but his home-away differential made me rate him under the very top tier. However there are some interesting questions to be asked. Lets take Rahul Dravid for example; most people including me would put him higher than Jayawardene due to performances away from home. Off the top of my head and for convenience sake lets say Dravid roughly averages the same home and away. Jayawardene obviously has a massive difference and we are all quick to point out that he averages roughly 15 runs less than Dravid away from home. That is fair enough. But shouldnt we give him credit him for making 15 runs (roughly) more than Dravid at home? After all home tests are just as important as away tests. So a player who averages 75 at home and 25 away shouldnt necessarily be seen as worse than a player who averages 50 at home and 50 away?

As I said, I fell into this trap a bit too much. For example, it seems ridiculous to obsess about Samaraweera's below par record in 5 tests in England to show hes not a good player, but ignore 40 or so games at home when he has done well, dismissing them as flat tracks. It's more important for him to be good in a place where he plays half his games than in a place where he plays a couple of tests every 4 years.

 

[Migara]

TBF to Sam, averaged 50+ in last tour to England. Against same attack, MJ, Sanga and Tendulkar averaged less than 35.

 

[Jacknife]

TBF to Sam, averaged 50+ in last tour to England. Against same attack, MJ, Sanga and Tendulkar averaged less than 35.

Looked all kinds of horrible in England though even taking into account he got starts, I will say though his performance in SA has made me see him in a different light and I personally wouldn't put him the FTB corner anymore.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think the issue I have with Samaraweera is that he looks like a lazy caricaturist's idea of the subcontinental flat track bully. So confident against spin he dispenses with his helmet when facing it, but unable to play short pitched quick stuff at all and so mistrusting of his technique against it he wears one of those awful trampolinesque body guards. Fine if one's a #11, less acceptable if one's a test batsman with a 50+ average.

Must play and miss about three times an over too.

 

[Jacknife]

I think the issue I have with Samaraweera is that he looks like a lazy caricaturist's idea of the subcontinental flat track bully. So confident against spin he dispenses with his helmet when facing it, but unable to play short pitched quick stuff at all and so mistrusting of his technique against it he wears one of those awful trampolinesque body guards. Fine if one's a #11, less acceptable if one's a test batsman with a 50+ average.

Must play and miss about three times an over too.

 

[Jacknife]

Just caught up on the full highlights and it's got to be said Jimmy bowled brilliantly all day, that spell of reverse swing he bowled really deserved a wicket.

I'd start with Jimmy and Swann tomorrow morning, Swann was getting serious rip with that new ball and plenty of bounce.
England have the advantage tomorrow of still having relatively new ball, so Jimmy will fancy maybe getting one or two early doors. England must back themselves to keeping the lead under 100 and then it's over to the batsmen.

 

[Cabinet96]

It's really set up well. We have the ability to bowl them out for another 30 tomorrow morning, but on the contrary, they could easily get another 200+. The pitch is playing a lot better than I thought it was though, so chasing 200 in 40 overs might be doable.

 

[Stapel]

Just caught up on the full highlights and it's got to be said Jimmy bowled brilliantly all day, that spell of reverse swing he bowled really deserved a wicket.

I'd start with Jimmy and Swann tomorrow morning, Swann was getting serious rip with that new ball and plenty of bounce.
England have the advantage tomorrow of still having relatively new ball, so Jimmy will fancy maybe getting one or two early doors. England must back themselves to keeping the lead under 100 and then it's over to the batsmen.

Fair enough.


But they England batsmen should be able to make 200 (given time), right?

 

[MW1304]

Fair enough.


But they England batsmen should be able to make 200 (given time), right?

No.

And if Sri Lanka get to a 200 run lead, I seriously doubt we'd even be left with enough time.

 

[theegyptian]

Fair enough.


But they England batsmen should be able to make 200 (given time), right?

If England have to chase 200 I don't think there is any chance they get them.

Pietersen apart everybody has found it hard to score runs quickly this match. If Sri Lanka continue at their current match rate of 2.44 rpo and score the 166 to make england chase the 200, then they will use up ~ 68 overs( -2 for changeover), which leaves england with 20 to chase 200.

Even if Sri Lanka score at 3 rpo they use up ~ 55 overs(+2 for changeover) leaving england chasing 200 in 33 overs.

3.5 rpo leaves england chasing 200 in 41 overs(ie. 5rpo)

Now I don't see England being able to chase any of these scores given the winter they've had and the fact it's a fifth day pitch



Did some further calculations

Sri Lanka bat 30 overs - England win( at least the scoring rate should be well within normal standards, who knows whether england can chase 120!)

Sri Lanka bat 40 overs - score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 134 in 48 overs
score at 3 rpo. England chase 154 in 48 overs.

Within bounds. Second one is nervous.

Sri Lanka bat 45 overs - Score at 2 rpo. England chase 124 in 43
score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 147 in 43
score at 3 rpo. England chase 169 in 43

First two feasible and should do. Third I'd be worried about because Pietersen apart no-one has scored at more than 3 rpo consistently

Sri Lanka bat 50 overs - Score at 2 rpo. England chase 134 in 38 overs
score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 159 in 38
score at 3 rpo. England chase 184 in 38

I'd have serious misgivings about the last two and we should do the first but would be nervous

Sri Lanka bat 55 overs - Score at 2rpo. England chase 144 in 33 overs
score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 172 in 33 overs
score at 3 rpo. England chase 199 in 33 overs

They might do the first one( but it's unlikely that Sri Lanka score quite as slowly as that) but I can't see them getting the other two


Basically I think if Sri Lanka bat anything more than 45 overs England winning becomes very unlikely

Sri Lanka actually still have a good outside chance of winning because England will probably have to go for all of these chases because they would want to maintain their number 1 test spot. If England need 169 in 43 overs they would have to go for it but given the wearing nature of the wicket, the nervous batting of the team and the difficulty of scoring runs quickly on the wicket I could see England collapsing. (and sri lanka can put the fielders where they want- so probably go in/out early. i.e sweepers and close men.)

So basically in summation, I'm going to get really worried if Sri Lanka are still batting after lunch and if they set England anything over 140, England maybe getting a winter whitewash.

 

[Jacknife]

I actually think England would perform better if they had a number of runs to get in say 50 overs. I think England run into most problems when they have 140 to get with a day to do it in.

I personally think we'll get the wickets and I've got a feeling we'll be batting by lunch, we just need one wicket and then all they've only got is the wicket keeper then that's pretty much it. Matthews looked really dodgy against Jimmy so hopefully he can pick him up sharpish.

 

[Howe_zat]

Question - how soon ought Swann come on in the morning?

 

[grecian]

Question - how soon ought Swann come on in the morning?

Well, Anderson will bowl for a while at one end, I'd give Finn about 3 at the other, just tell him to put everything into it, then put Swanneh on.

 

[Cabinet96]

Would probably open with Swanny myself.

 

[Jacknife]

Question - how soon ought Swann come on in the morning?

Open with him and Jimmy, I wouldn't give them chance to settle with pace from both ends even if it is a newish ball.

 

[Furball]

Question - how soon ought Swann come on in the morning?

Straight away. Jimmeh and Swann should open.

 

[Stapel]

No.

And if Sri Lanka get to a 200 run lead, I seriously doubt we'd even be left with enough time.

If England have to chase 200 I don't think there is any chance they get them.

Pietersen apart everybody has found it hard to score runs quickly this match. If Sri Lanka continue at their current match rate of 2.44 rpo and score the 166 to make england chase the 200, then they will use up ~ 68 overs( -2 for changeover), which leaves england with 20 to chase 200.

Even if Sri Lanka score at 3 rpo they use up ~ 55 overs(+2 for changeover) leaving england chasing 200 in 33 overs.

3.5 rpo leaves england chasing 200 in 41 overs(ie. 5rpo)

Now I don't see England being able to chase any of these scores given the winter they've had and the fact it's a fifth day pitch



Did some further calculations

Sri Lanka bat 30 overs - England win( at least the scoring rate should be well within normal standards, who knows whether england can chase 120!)

Sri Lanka bat 40 overs - score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 134 in 48 overs
score at 3 rpo. England chase 154 in 48 overs.

Within bounds. Second one is nervous.

Sri Lanka bat 45 overs - Score at 2 rpo. England chase 124 in 43
score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 147 in 43
score at 3 rpo. England chase 169 in 43

First two feasible and should do. Third I'd be worried about because Pietersen apart no-one has scored at more than 3 rpo consistently

Sri Lanka bat 50 overs - Score at 2 rpo. England chase 134 in 38 overs
score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 159 in 38
score at 3 rpo. England chase 184 in 38

I'd have serious misgivings about the last two and we should do the first but would be nervous

Sri Lanka bat 55 overs - Score at 2rpo. England chase 144 in 33 overs
score at 2.5 rpo. England chase 172 in 33 overs
score at 3 rpo. England chase 199 in 33 overs

They might do the first one( but it's unlikely that Sri Lanka score quite as slowly as that) but I can't see them getting the other two


Basically I think if Sri Lanka bat anything more than 45 overs England winning becomes very unlikely

Sri Lanka actually still have a good outside chance of winning because England will probably have to go for all of these chases because they would want to maintain their number 1 test spot. If England need 169 in 43 overs they would have to go for it but given the wearing nature of the wicket, the nervous batting of the team and the difficulty of scoring runs quickly on the wicket I could see England collapsing. (and sri lanka can put the fielders where they want- so probably go in/out early. i.e sweepers and close men.)

So basically in summation, I'm going to get really worried if Sri Lanka are still batting after lunch and if they set England anything over 140, England maybe getting a winter whitewash.

Good analysis!

My point was merely about England's ability to collect 200 runs on a fifth day GIVEN TIME. Despite England's crap performances with the bat in the SC this year, this pitch with this SL-attack could absolutely be negotiated by the likes of Ian Bell & co.