The Australian bowlers did not do a whole lot wrong. But the truth of the matter is that they should have been defending a far bigger lead, if they were even bowling at all on day three
Daniel Brettig in Pallekele28-Jul-20161:32
‘We missed our half-chances’ – Lyon
“Kill the other guy before he kills you” was a line beloved of Jack Dempsey, the world heavyweight boxing champion of the early 1920s. Dempsey’s phrase is known to plenty of sportsmen, and Allan Border once used it to describe how Australia squandered the advantage of hosting the 1992 World Cup. Border is present in Kandy to watch this match, and was unimpressed by the visitors’ batting effort on day two, which happened also to be his 61st birthday.No-one knows better than Border that Test cricket can often require a similar level of ruthlessness to that espoused by Dempsey: the ability to slam the door shut on the opposition before they can take the chance to regroup and respond later on in a match. Having rolled Sri Lanka cheaply on the first day, Australia’s batsmen had the chance to do the slamming, a role they have generally enjoyed. Through some poor shot selection and diligent Sri Lankan bowling, they did not, and the consequence was to watch Kusal Mendis charge into the resultant breach.It was a somewhat ironic turn of events, given that over the past 33 years it has invariably been the Sri Lankans squandering strong positions over Australia. Border led his 1992 touring team to a most unlikely victory in Colombo after surrendering a first-innings advantage of 291. A more confident and accomplished Australian side thrice bailed out Ricky Ponting on his first tour as captain in 2004, when in each Test the tourists surrendered a first innings lead. Most dramatic of the turnarounds came in Kandy, where Australia were bowled out for 120 on day one, but managed to limit Sri Lanka to a first innings lead of 91.Those figures were oddly reminiscent of proceedings at Pallekele the past few days: the rush of wickets on day one, the failure to take advantage on day two, the strong riposte on day three. The major difference of course was the reversal of roles, and the dominant innings being played not by a promoted Adam Gilchrist but the ebullient Mendis. At length he showcased an arsenal of strokes to be widely admired, and a level of determination to put some of the Australians’ less savoury day two shots to considerable shame.His combination of positivity and organisation contrasted with Steven Smith’s stumping, even if there was some good fortune along the way. For most of the morning Steve O’Keefe looked a decent chance to get Mendis lbw with a ball sliding into the stumps from around the wicket, and the left-arm spinner’s withdrawal from the attack due to a hamstring complaint was a grievous blow to Smith. O’Keefe’s eagerness to chase lbw verdicts also had the impact of costing Australia their two DRS referrals before lunch arrived, an eventuality that, like their first innings batting, would sting later.Otherwise the Australian bowlers did not do a whole lot wrong: Mitchell Starc got the new ball swinging for a couple of early wickets, Josh Hazlewood retained a disciplined line without the same seam movement he had found on day one, and Nathan Lyon delivered spells that were never less than presentable and often dangerous. But the truth of the matter is that they should have been defending a far bigger lead, if they were even bowling at all on day three.Batting conditions in this match have been somewhat tricky, but never impossible. Greater application was required when Australia had the chance, for they will now be facing a testy fourth innings chase and the prospect of facing up to Rangana Herath and Lakshan Sandakan with scoreboard pressure on their side. Most troubling for the coach Darren Lehmann will be the fact that Australia’s mediocre first innings took place without the worry of a mighty first innings total hanging over his batsmen: the impediment widely attributed to their failures in the UAE in 2014.Instead, they were simply confounded by the muddle of their own minds and techniques, with failings gleefully exploited by the aforementioned spin duo. That will be maddening for each batsman to ruminate upon, as evidenced by the sullen faces and gestures of frustration that cropped up increasingly across day three. When Smith offered a Border-style teapot pose it wasn’t hard to recall his stumping; when Mitchell Marsh kicked the dust in mid-pitch after another stout Sri Lankan forward defensive, it was as much about the Sandakan googly he missed as the ball that had just been hit.Even the momentous occasion of Lyon’s 200th Test wicket was reduced to something of a sidelight by the match scenario. Five years ago Lyon had made his debut with a five-for against Sri Lanka in Galle, his first-ball victim Kumar Sangakkara. The smiles and celebrations were more reserved, even fatigued this time around, after Dhananjaya de Silva bunted a catch to mid-off. More runs in the bank and Lyon may not only have been chasing wicket 200 but the buzz of an innings victory.Mentally speaking, the Australians now have a sizeable hurdle to get over, just as Sri Lanka have done over the years. But where Sri Lanka’s issue often seemed to be about overcoming Australia in a Test match, Australia’s issue is with finding a way to win in Asian conditions. In recent times they have been able to console themselves with the thought that encounters with India and Pakistan were won by the more accomplished team in the conditions. But an unfancied Sri Lankan side with an abominable recent record is another matter entirely.The coaching staff and team psychologist Michael Lloyd will have a power of work ahead of them should a defeat unfold here. A sub-par result in Sri Lanka would likely require a substantial rethink abut the way some of Australia’s set-up has operated under Lehmann, with the emphasis on providing plenty of net bowling and throw-down volume for batsmen while leaving them free to find their own methods to succeed. Lehmann is fond of saying mistakes are fine so long as they are not repeated: he must now hope for plenty of remedial work in the fourth innings.There have been times leading into this match when it was easy to wonder where Sri Lanka’s runs would come from, given the retirement of the “big three” and the repeated failure of their replacements in subsequent Tests. A sturdy Australian first innings and this sequence may well have continued, under the weight of runs and the crush of pressure. Smith’s team contrived to leave the game open, however, and now find themselves staggering towards the latter rounds of this contest behind on points.
