by Rex Clementine
The curtain raiser of the tri-nation series in Pakistan went down to the wire and although Sri Lanka were into their tail, hopes of pulling off an unlikely victory remained alive as Dasun Shanaka threatened to produce something special on his return to ODI cricket.
Finding the boundary with remarkable ease, Shanaka had raced to 28 off just 18 balls when he gave charge to Pakistan captain Shaheen Afridi, only to perish in his attempt to clear the ropes. As the wicket fell, Head Coach Gary Kirsten made no attempt to conceal his frustration. His disappointment was there for all to see. In simple terms, he was pleading with his senior most player to use his head.
Afridi was bowling his final over. Had Shanaka resisted the temptation to take him on and simply seen him off, Sri Lanka would have been in a far better position.
Kirsten is a good man. Beyond coaching the team, he has made a genuine effort to instil the values that earned him enormous respect from team mates and opponents alike during his playing days.
Watching his side squander one golden opportunity after another must be driving the South African up the wall. For Sri Lankan cricket fans, however, this is familiar territory. They have seen this movie far too many times and the ending rarely changes.
Kirsten is known to be meticulous in his preparation, leaving no stone unturned when it comes to homework. He would be well advised to devote some of that diligence to studying the characters in his dressing room. If he intends to learn about them the hard way, he is in for a particularly painful education.
First came the Niroshan Dickwella episode. Few would quarrel with Kirsten’s assessment that Dickwella is the finest gloveman in the country. But wicketkeeping ability was never the issue. It was the baggage and distractions that came with him. Three years ago, Sri Lankan cricket drew a line in the sand and decided enough was enough. Bringing him back was a step in the wrong direction.
The same argument applies to Dasun Shanaka. On Sunday, he returned to ODI cricket after an absence of two years and nine months. Like Dickwella, Shanaka had done precious little of significance to warrant a recall. And, as with Dickwella, his return appears to have come at the Head Coach’s insistence. He seems to be placing a lot of emphasis on experience. These are decisions Kirsten may live to regret.
Players blessed with cricketing intelligence and common sense seem to be an increasingly endangered species in our part of the world. Too many modern day cricketers are reluctant to push their boundaries, challenge themselves or venture beyond their comfort zones.
Kirsten’s efforts to reform a deeply entrenched and often incorrigible system deserve both appreciation and wholehearted support. But even the finest coach cannot make bricks without straw. He must choose his personnel wisely.
All too often in Sri Lankan cricket, coaches and selectors end up at loggerheads, each pointing the finger at the other when results go south. This time, encouragingly, there appears to be genuine cooperation. Both parties are pulling in the same direction, determined to achieve something worthwhile.
That makes it all the more important that they do their homework on the players they choose to back.
Shanaka could prove a costly gamble, just as Dickwella did. Their problems are different, of course. Shanaka is not associated with the sort of drug related controversy that engulfed Dickwella. His weakness lies elsewhere: a reluctance to accept responsibility for his own shortcomings and a tendency to look for someone else to blame.
That, too, can become an enormous distraction in a dressing room.
Kirsten has taken on the admirable challenge of changing Sri Lankan cricket’s culture. But before he can change the system, he must make sure he is backing the right people. Otherwise, the very players he hopes to reform may end up undermining the good work he has set out to do.