Hi Guys – For those of you who read the Sunday Times sports section(I think you should read the Sunday Times article first to understand. It is attached below), please see the below response letter answering some of the issues raised. The original article was very disappointing and I felt a response was necessary given the seriousness of the allegations it contained, especially at a time when we all need to be working towards one common goal – winning the World Cup. Thanks, Sanga.
22 August 2010
S. R. Pathiravithana
The Sunday Times
No 8, Hunupitiya Cross Road
Colombo 2
Dear Mr. Pathiravithana,
Re: Cricket Values on Mammom’s Altar
I write with regard to the recent article in your column, Sunday Musings, regarding a deterioration of cricket values in Sri Lanka. I am deeply alarmed and extremely disappointed that the article directly questions the integrity of my decision-making.
While I applaud a news publication addressing the important issue of match-fixing, I strongly object to you tarnishing my name, integrity and reputation. If you had spoken to leading ICC officials or members of the Anti-Corruption Unit you would have realised also that there has never been any question-mark raised over my integrity at any stage of my career. Indeed, if they had any suspicion whatsoever they would clearly not have allowed my continued position as the official representative for the world’s cricketers on the ICC Cricket Committee since 2006, they would not have renewed my contract as a Global ICC Ambassador for another two years in June 2010 having already been an ambassador for four years, and they would not have invited me as their keynote speaker for the recent ICC Annual General Meeting in Singapore.
I would like to answer directly the specific events mentioned in your column:
(1) The choice of Welegedera
The decision to open the bowling with Suraj Randiv and Chanaka Welegedera was discussed extensively between myself and the team management the previous evening and in the morning. The final choice made took into account the fact that Lasith Malinga, our main strike bowler, was fatigued, Sachin Tendulkar has a technical weaknesss against left-arm pace and that Welegedera would create addition rough for Randiv, our main weapon that day, to use against the right-handers. The decision was taken in the best interests of the team as a whole with a view to winning the game.
(2) “Dubious” use of part-time bowlers
You mention that I have shown “dubious bowling preferences” specifically with regard to the use of TM Dilshan and Tharanga Paranavitana, part-time off spinners, with the new ball during the New Zealand Test series last year.
As a general comment I would like to state that the use of part-time bowlers is a tactic that can surprise batsmen and I believe that being unpredictable sometimes makes life harder for our opponents. It has also worked for us in the past. For example, in the first Test against New Zealand last year, we managed to dismiss Ross Taylor by using Mahela Jayawardena. During the recent final Test against India the use of Randiv with the new ball also worked as we grabbed the wicket of Virender Sehwag.
With specific regard to the use of TM Dilshan and Tharanga Paranavitana as opening bowlers in the first and second innings of second Test against New Zealand, this was a specific team plan designed for use against a left-hander called Tim McCintosh. We believed that his footwork might be suspect against a slow bowler armed with the new ball and the plan was to trap him lbw, hence the preference for a part-timer who spins the ball less than one of our frontline spinners. The plan was a surprise tactic and after one over I felt it would not work and I changed back to a traditional method of attack with a fast bowler.
(3) My dismissal in the third Test
In the article you argued that my dismissal, caught at long on, needed to be questioned as “some of the events [in that game] are still a huge query”. The insinuation made was that the shot was reckless for someone with “intelligence”. While I was more disappointed than anyone with getting out, the problem was not my shot selection. On the contrary, one of the key reasons I was successful in the series was that I was aggressive. My style of batting involves me playing attacking strokes and dominating the bowling. At the time I was on the look-out for runs and I knew I had two options for lofted boundaries with India having placed a wide long on: I could try to hit over mid-wicket or straight back over the bowler’s head. I preferred the second option, but my footwork was not precise enough, I got too close to the ball and I ended up dragging the ball to long on. There is nothing questionable about the dismissal or the thinking behind the stroke. Cricket is a game of balancing risks and you cannot hope to succeed without taking any risk. Far from being reckless, my approach at the time was the right approach for the team as we tried to build a big total.
I hope the above three clarifications fully answer your concerns. I would appreciate it that you first seek clarifications from me before making unfounded and slanderous allegations that question my integrity as a cricketer and captain. Such damaging accusations undermine the team at the time when we all need to be focusing hard on both the ongoing tri-series and the forthcoming World Cup.
Yours sincerely
Kumar Sangakkara
Sports
Cricket values on Mammon’s altar
Cricket, by and large, has turned professional and in the last decade or so it has turned so competitive that the ICC introduced a special award which was called ‘The Spirit of the Game award’ and the first recipients of it were the cricketers from New Zealand in 2004.
I remember well, when the ICC patted Sri Lanka’s back in 2007 and made them the recipients of that coveted award, someone asked me what it was all about. I explained, “The Spirit of the Game involves respect for opponents, one’s own captain and team, the role of the umpires, the game and its traditional values.”
But since Mahela Jayawardena hung up his crown to become just another member of the team that accolade by the name of ‘Spirit of the Game’, according to some cricket pundits, has been on the wane.
What happened in that fateful over that rookie off spinner Suraj Randiv bowled may have been a culmination of events that have been coming down the line. Virendra Sehwag has said that it was not the first instance that the Lankans have fouled upon an Indian batsman reaching his hundred. He was referring to a match played at Kattack, India where star batsman Sachin Tendulkar was deprived of a well-deserved century by a Lasith Malinga wide.
Former Sri Lanka skipper Mahela Jayawardena with ICC’s ‘Spirit of the game trophy which was presented to Sri Lanka. At one point this was our national cricketing pride.
The musings asked former National Test opening batsman Sidath Wettimuny for his comments on the Randiv incident and he was frank enough to say, “I did not see the incident. It was brought to my notice when an Indian journalist called me and asked for my comments about it. However in hindsight, if something was done against the spirit of the game during that match, it is not cricket.” This was a matter that went against the Indians and that made the headlines. However this incident eclipsed other incidents in the same match, which need to be questioned.
No one spoke about the incident when a leading player tried to pull a rising ball from outside the off stump – intending to sail the ball over mid wicket while the ball was moving sharply -- and managed only to top edge it. Then another batsman, after getting his eye in, played the most unbecoming sweep shot and paid the price. This too went almost uncriticised.
Even some of the events in the third Test, which Sri Lanka lost to square the series, are still a huge query. First an in-form batsman, who has the intelligence, came up to almost fourscore and lofted the ball to find the only long-on fielder at the rope. It looked the same as something that happened against Australia with another batsman way back in history.
Also in the third Test, when India was struggling at three down overnight, the Lankans brought in Welagedera, the most unproductive bowler of that game. He operated from one end for some time while Lasith Malinga and Ajantha Mendis who were fresh and ready, were ignored. An easy catch was spilled off Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman was still struggling in the series in spite of his innings in Galle.
But when Tendulkar was out finally, the Indian batting had settled down and they were on their way to victory.Besides the spirit of the game, one insider pointed out dubious bowling preferences. While Sri Lanka was playing against New Zealand in August last year Dilshan was enjoying tremendous success. He once mentioned that he only had not opened bowling for Sri Lanka while engaging in every other discipline on the other side of the boundary line. Pop! In the next match Dilshan comes out using the new ball to bowl only three overs in the whole innings and he bags the wicket of Vettori while operating in the 73rd over of the innings.
In the same match another dubious move was when Tharanga Paranavithana used the new ball for just one over. What is the purpose of operating with a spinner, especially in a test match, for just one over? I still wonder why those moves did not catch the eye of the anti-corruption officials of the ICC. At this time of age there is ball-by-ball betting at the centres. I bet the ICC official present may have made a visit to the then Lankan team manager for a little chat. However the facts are stubborn. One must admit that there is a huge deterioration in cricket in general in this country.
It begins at the administrative level. When one gets politically motivated weak administrations their main outlook is survival at any cost. We at this end hear of senior players accompanying the administrators to meet people that matter on certain issues. This means those who are used for purposes other than playing the game on the field, the administrators, tend to lose control of the players. Then at the same time the players themselves get used to taking short cuts and use step ladders for their survival. This definitely culminates in general deterioration in administration.
At the same time even the players are more money-minded and their centre of gravity is based on the next American dollar rather than the national cause. Some incidents that occurred here in Sri Lanka may have been the residue that had emanated from the last IPL. Right now the stormy winds have taken the ship of ‘Good Spirit’ far off course. What Sri Lanka needs is a close scrutiny of things that are happening and to sift them through the smallest mesh so that they eradicate some of the sin.
We are aware that the guys from the ICC are sniffing around and the Sri Lankans better pull their socks up and clean up the stable before more stink hits the street. Right now the can of worms is too full.
22 August 2010
S. R. Pathiravithana
The Sunday Times
No 8, Hunupitiya Cross Road
Colombo 2
Dear Mr. Pathiravithana,
Re: Cricket Values on Mammom’s Altar
I write with regard to the recent article in your column, Sunday Musings, regarding a deterioration of cricket values in Sri Lanka. I am deeply alarmed and extremely disappointed that the article directly questions the integrity of my decision-making.
While I applaud a news publication addressing the important issue of match-fixing, I strongly object to you tarnishing my name, integrity and reputation. If you had spoken to leading ICC officials or members of the Anti-Corruption Unit you would have realised also that there has never been any question-mark raised over my integrity at any stage of my career. Indeed, if they had any suspicion whatsoever they would clearly not have allowed my continued position as the official representative for the world’s cricketers on the ICC Cricket Committee since 2006, they would not have renewed my contract as a Global ICC Ambassador for another two years in June 2010 having already been an ambassador for four years, and they would not have invited me as their keynote speaker for the recent ICC Annual General Meeting in Singapore.
I would like to answer directly the specific events mentioned in your column:
(1) The choice of Welegedera
The decision to open the bowling with Suraj Randiv and Chanaka Welegedera was discussed extensively between myself and the team management the previous evening and in the morning. The final choice made took into account the fact that Lasith Malinga, our main strike bowler, was fatigued, Sachin Tendulkar has a technical weaknesss against left-arm pace and that Welegedera would create addition rough for Randiv, our main weapon that day, to use against the right-handers. The decision was taken in the best interests of the team as a whole with a view to winning the game.
(2) “Dubious” use of part-time bowlers
You mention that I have shown “dubious bowling preferences” specifically with regard to the use of TM Dilshan and Tharanga Paranavitana, part-time off spinners, with the new ball during the New Zealand Test series last year.
As a general comment I would like to state that the use of part-time bowlers is a tactic that can surprise batsmen and I believe that being unpredictable sometimes makes life harder for our opponents. It has also worked for us in the past. For example, in the first Test against New Zealand last year, we managed to dismiss Ross Taylor by using Mahela Jayawardena. During the recent final Test against India the use of Randiv with the new ball also worked as we grabbed the wicket of Virender Sehwag.
With specific regard to the use of TM Dilshan and Tharanga Paranavitana as opening bowlers in the first and second innings of second Test against New Zealand, this was a specific team plan designed for use against a left-hander called Tim McCintosh. We believed that his footwork might be suspect against a slow bowler armed with the new ball and the plan was to trap him lbw, hence the preference for a part-timer who spins the ball less than one of our frontline spinners. The plan was a surprise tactic and after one over I felt it would not work and I changed back to a traditional method of attack with a fast bowler.
(3) My dismissal in the third Test
In the article you argued that my dismissal, caught at long on, needed to be questioned as “some of the events [in that game] are still a huge query”. The insinuation made was that the shot was reckless for someone with “intelligence”. While I was more disappointed than anyone with getting out, the problem was not my shot selection. On the contrary, one of the key reasons I was successful in the series was that I was aggressive. My style of batting involves me playing attacking strokes and dominating the bowling. At the time I was on the look-out for runs and I knew I had two options for lofted boundaries with India having placed a wide long on: I could try to hit over mid-wicket or straight back over the bowler’s head. I preferred the second option, but my footwork was not precise enough, I got too close to the ball and I ended up dragging the ball to long on. There is nothing questionable about the dismissal or the thinking behind the stroke. Cricket is a game of balancing risks and you cannot hope to succeed without taking any risk. Far from being reckless, my approach at the time was the right approach for the team as we tried to build a big total.
I hope the above three clarifications fully answer your concerns. I would appreciate it that you first seek clarifications from me before making unfounded and slanderous allegations that question my integrity as a cricketer and captain. Such damaging accusations undermine the team at the time when we all need to be focusing hard on both the ongoing tri-series and the forthcoming World Cup.
Yours sincerely
Kumar Sangakkara
Sports
Cricket values on Mammon’s altar
Cricket, by and large, has turned professional and in the last decade or so it has turned so competitive that the ICC introduced a special award which was called ‘The Spirit of the Game award’ and the first recipients of it were the cricketers from New Zealand in 2004.
I remember well, when the ICC patted Sri Lanka’s back in 2007 and made them the recipients of that coveted award, someone asked me what it was all about. I explained, “The Spirit of the Game involves respect for opponents, one’s own captain and team, the role of the umpires, the game and its traditional values.”
But since Mahela Jayawardena hung up his crown to become just another member of the team that accolade by the name of ‘Spirit of the Game’, according to some cricket pundits, has been on the wane.
What happened in that fateful over that rookie off spinner Suraj Randiv bowled may have been a culmination of events that have been coming down the line. Virendra Sehwag has said that it was not the first instance that the Lankans have fouled upon an Indian batsman reaching his hundred. He was referring to a match played at Kattack, India where star batsman Sachin Tendulkar was deprived of a well-deserved century by a Lasith Malinga wide.
Former Sri Lanka skipper Mahela Jayawardena with ICC’s ‘Spirit of the game trophy which was presented to Sri Lanka. At one point this was our national cricketing pride.
The musings asked former National Test opening batsman Sidath Wettimuny for his comments on the Randiv incident and he was frank enough to say, “I did not see the incident. It was brought to my notice when an Indian journalist called me and asked for my comments about it. However in hindsight, if something was done against the spirit of the game during that match, it is not cricket.” This was a matter that went against the Indians and that made the headlines. However this incident eclipsed other incidents in the same match, which need to be questioned.
No one spoke about the incident when a leading player tried to pull a rising ball from outside the off stump – intending to sail the ball over mid wicket while the ball was moving sharply -- and managed only to top edge it. Then another batsman, after getting his eye in, played the most unbecoming sweep shot and paid the price. This too went almost uncriticised.
Even some of the events in the third Test, which Sri Lanka lost to square the series, are still a huge query. First an in-form batsman, who has the intelligence, came up to almost fourscore and lofted the ball to find the only long-on fielder at the rope. It looked the same as something that happened against Australia with another batsman way back in history.
Also in the third Test, when India was struggling at three down overnight, the Lankans brought in Welagedera, the most unproductive bowler of that game. He operated from one end for some time while Lasith Malinga and Ajantha Mendis who were fresh and ready, were ignored. An easy catch was spilled off Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman was still struggling in the series in spite of his innings in Galle.
But when Tendulkar was out finally, the Indian batting had settled down and they were on their way to victory.Besides the spirit of the game, one insider pointed out dubious bowling preferences. While Sri Lanka was playing against New Zealand in August last year Dilshan was enjoying tremendous success. He once mentioned that he only had not opened bowling for Sri Lanka while engaging in every other discipline on the other side of the boundary line. Pop! In the next match Dilshan comes out using the new ball to bowl only three overs in the whole innings and he bags the wicket of Vettori while operating in the 73rd over of the innings.
In the same match another dubious move was when Tharanga Paranavithana used the new ball for just one over. What is the purpose of operating with a spinner, especially in a test match, for just one over? I still wonder why those moves did not catch the eye of the anti-corruption officials of the ICC. At this time of age there is ball-by-ball betting at the centres. I bet the ICC official present may have made a visit to the then Lankan team manager for a little chat. However the facts are stubborn. One must admit that there is a huge deterioration in cricket in general in this country.
It begins at the administrative level. When one gets politically motivated weak administrations their main outlook is survival at any cost. We at this end hear of senior players accompanying the administrators to meet people that matter on certain issues. This means those who are used for purposes other than playing the game on the field, the administrators, tend to lose control of the players. Then at the same time the players themselves get used to taking short cuts and use step ladders for their survival. This definitely culminates in general deterioration in administration.
At the same time even the players are more money-minded and their centre of gravity is based on the next American dollar rather than the national cause. Some incidents that occurred here in Sri Lanka may have been the residue that had emanated from the last IPL. Right now the stormy winds have taken the ship of ‘Good Spirit’ far off course. What Sri Lanka needs is a close scrutiny of things that are happening and to sift them through the smallest mesh so that they eradicate some of the sin.
We are aware that the guys from the ICC are sniffing around and the Sri Lankans better pull their socks up and clean up the stable before more stink hits the street. Right now the can of worms is too full.
....
