Sri Lanka Wins a Test

Sri Lanka has squared the Test series against South Africa, leaving the decider to be played in Cape Town.  The win was by a resounding margin of 208 runs and was Sri Lanka’s first Test win since the retirement of Murali.  They went 15 matches without a win.

Notably, South Africa went into the match without pace bowling sensation, Vernon Philander.  He was injured before this match and was a great loss.  Since his debut against Australia recently, he has played an incredible three Tests and taken 24 wickets at 12.37, bagging five wickets in an innings on four occasions.   Not all nations boast Australia’s embarrassment of pace bowling riches and they were big shoes to fill.

But full credit to Sri Lanka.  Their trouble in the AM (After Murali) era has been bowling other teams out and they did it in style this Test, mowing down South Africa for 168 and 241.

Australia’s Pace Bowling Riches

Australia has put away India in the 1st Test in Melbourne.  Australia won comfortably in the end but typically of recent times for Australia, it was a match of stumbles, comebacks and excitement.  However, in this match, Australia displayed one quality that it has not shown for a long time and that was sustained, tight, pace bowling.

I have to say that Mitchell Johnson is not missed.  Well, he was but in a good way.  I was watching today as Australia applied the blow torch, thanking God in heaven that I did not have to dread Johnson coming on to spray a few around and give a couple of “four balls” an over.  On the other hand, where did Ben Hilfenhaus come from?  Last time I saw him bowl – almost one year ago – he was awful.  He looked sensational this Test with pace that I never knew he possessed.  The new selectors can pat themselves on the back over that decision.

With this trio, one wonders if Harris and/or Cummins were fit, would they be automatically brought back?  I don’t think so.  Unless Australia decides to go without a spinner in say, Perth.  Australia should not be too excited yet – this pitch, which Bill Lawry and I thought was an excellent Test wicket, offered plenty of assistance.  I want to see how these guys go on a flat track.

Australia won this Test on the backs of the fast bowlers and not just with the ball.  All three made important contributions with the bat.  Siddle’s 41 in the first innings was very important, as was Pattinson’s 55 for the match without being dismissed and Hilfie provided 34 runs.  To put that into perspective, the pace trio made 134 runs.  Clarke, Marsh, Warner and Haddin (four batsmen) made a combined 110 runs.

But let me not forget Ricky.  In a bowlers’ match, he was the only batsman to pass 50 twice and he made the highest aggregate of the match (122).

I would also like to note that perhaps “The Wall” has a few holes in it.  While it seemed a disaster for Australia at the time when Siddle bowled Dravid from a no ball, in the end, by the end of the match, Dravid had been cleaned bowled (and I mean clean) by all three Australian quicks!  I would suggest that is a first.

And finally, I thought it was poetic justice seeing Hussey, as he made the highest score of the match, be given not out, when he was out, a whole three times and the Indians had no DRS to fall back on.  True, Hussey could have had his own DRS in the first innings when he was wrongly given out first ball.  You could argue that this was the perfect argument against DRS – it all comes out in the wash.  And I happily accept that reasoning.  What I don’t accept is one nation being allowed to dictate terms to the sport’s governing body.  Either the DRS is mandated and adopted in all Tests, or it is abandoned.  How ridiculous would it be in a tennis tournament if challenges were in place from match to match, depending on the whim of each player?  I can’t really see much difference in Test cricket at present.

Exciting times as we head to Sydney.