The proponents for changing to a four day Test format may well have to reconsider their course of action, given the excitement and wonderful finish to the 1st Test between Pakistan and Sri Lanka in Abu Dhabi. A hard fought, tense and even contest went down to the final day, on which 16 wickets fell to leave Sri Lanka a somewhat surprised winner by 21 runs. Given that a four day Test, even with extended hours, would not necessarily have brought about such a finish is something that must be taken under careful consideration when it comes to making any changes in the future.
The game was a seesawing affair, and so close throughout that it is quite amazing to have the finish that came about. Both teams have had their moments in the past 12 months, though on current form and the fact that they had never lost a Test match at this ground you would have expected that Pakistan would have been favourites. Sri Lanka is going through a rebuilding phase and has yet to find suitable replacements for three legends of the game in Jayawardene, Sangakkara and Dilshan Their captain Angelo Matthews resigned recently after poor results, and their bowling relies massively on Rangana Herath being the strike bowler. Pakistan too has recently lost Younis Khan and Misbah ul Haq but appear better set up in the bowling attack.
Sri Lanka lost three of their top four cheaply after winning the toss, but surprised somewhat in compiling 419 in their first innings. Captain Dinesh Chandimal led the way and showed how effective he can be with the bat by scoring 155 not out and anchoring the innings from his entrance at 3/61. Dimuth Karunaratne contributed 93 before his unfortunate run out stalled the innings. Niroshan Dickwella with 83 and Dilruwan Perera with 33 also helped to pull the innings back to a competitive total. Pakistan’s bowlers were deadened by the flat wicket and were not as effective as they have been in recent years on this surface. Their reply was just as formulated, with everyone in the top seven getting start but all of them unable to go on and get a big score that would give them an advantage. Herath’s 5/93 from 40 overs restricted their total to 422 and a lead of just three runs.
After being able to recover from disaster in their first innings, the same couldn’t be said of Sri Lanka’s second innings. At stumps on day four they were 4/69, a lead of just 66, and needing to bat for probably two sessions in order to make the game safe. Mohammed Abbas made the first two incisions early on Day 5 in dismissing both overnight batsmen, and at 6/86 only Dickwella on 4 could save them. The last four wickets managed to add 52 runs, 36 of those from Dickwella who remained not out on 40. He coaxed and cajoled his tail to stretch their efforts, and the ninth wicket partnership of 34 with Sandakan doesn’t look like much, but they were valuable, valuable runs. Yasir Shah’s 5/51 was the contributing factor to the concluding of the Sri Lanka second innings. With Sri Lanka dismissed for just 138, it left Pakistan with only 136 runs to get to win the 1st Test, and surely almost everyone watching believed it was only a matter of how long.
Enter Rangana Herath and Dilruwan Perera.
Oh yes, Lakmal made the terrific dismissal of Azhar Ali his own, but it was the twin spin attack on the wearing wicket that brought the game into Sri Lanka’s favour. After Lakmal’s initial burst they bowled virtually unchanged, probing and penetrating and attacking, and they kept finding a way to get through. Pakistan found themselves the victim of their own sub-continent tactics, crowded around the bat, stifling their defensive and attacking play. At 5/36 there was real trouble, yet skipper Sarfraz Ahmed and Haris Sohail mounted their own rescue mission. When Sarfraz was stumped off Herath being the aggressor, and Sohail was pinned LBW by Perera in defence, the jig was up. That Perera was denied the final wicket by delivering a no ball, which only allowed Herath to clean up that wicket to reach 400 Test dismissals, perhaps summed it up for everyone. It was Herath’s Test match, finishing here with 6/43 to complete an 11/136 match haul which reinvigorates his appeal as a match finisher.
The summation of the match will be an interesting one. Those who want four day Tests will argue that the cricket for the first three and a half days was stodgy and slow and not in any way the kind of cricket the modern watcher is looking for. Those who argue for the Test to continue to its full distance will argue that had this been shortened it would have been seen as a dull Test match, and that perhaps those arguing for change would then suggest a three day Test is required. As it turns out, Test cricket wins with a great result borne from hard uncompromising cricket early on, and flashy and fascinating cricket in the stretch on a wicket that needed time to reveal its full complexities. In the long run, isn’t that what we want from Test cricket?
No comments:
Post a Comment