what was mahela jayawardene thinking?

i am asking that question literally. what were his and sri lankan team management's reasons for dropping muttiah muralitharan and chaminda vaas from the the match against australia?

i must confess that first time i heard this just before the match, was the first time that i doubted the sri lankan team's capacity to win the cricket world cup this year. cricket is a game of character and being negative is not the way to go. at first glance this seemed to be a very negative move on the part of our team.

but is it a negative move? let us go through several possible reasons.
(btw several bloggers have already written about this while the match was going on; a week in sri lanka, scourge!)

fixing the semi finals?
one of the possible reasons, which comes to mind initially, is that sri lanka was trying to manage where and against who it plays the semi finals. but that explanation cannot be correct. final placement of teams in the super eights points table, which will determine the semi final ties, will depend on several things; actual results of several matches ( sl vs aus, aus vs nz, sl vs ireland, and even sa vs eng, etc. ) and the margins of victory (thus net run rate of teams) in those matches. it is absurd to think that all that can be managed (or sl tried to) through one match. so this cannot be the explanation.

injury free rest
another explanation is that resting vaas and murali and preventing any injuries to them (thus preserving them 'intact' for semis and finals) is in the best interests of sri lankan team. that is part of the 'official' explanation. unfortunately injuries are not confined to actual matches, as lasith malinga's injury showed. sri lankan management will look really foolish if vaas or murali were to incur one (which god forbid!) in the next few days. however this was done before in larger scale when same bowlers were not included in the indian tour. but a tour and a match are two different things. on the whole if this was the correct explanation, it is a bit negative. (however mahela and co. are the ones best placed to know what is best for the team.)

trying out
other part of 'official' explanation is more positive in intent. sri lankans wanted to try out the malinga bandara and nuwan kulasekera. while some may question the wisdom of trying them out against one of the most devastating batting lineups, imo that very fact makes it a very positive move. (in any case this is the first opportunity sri lanka got to experiment) only it did not come off. our batsmen did not put enough runs on the board for those bowlers to bowl at. in addition both nuwan kulasekara and malinga bandara would have been confident if murali and/or vaas were at the other end or were available to replace them, instead of farveez maharoof or dilhara fernando during the match. anyway viewed from this angle this move was a positive one, but sri lankans did not go about it in the correct way.

mind games
another explanation is that sri lankans were trying to play mind games with australians; holding back the main strike bowlers (vaas, murali and malinga) so that they can be unleashed on unaccustomed australians in the semi or final, and while trying to fluster them with lesser bowlers in this match. problem with mind games is that, as the wily detective in novel crime and punishment says, 'they can cut both ways'; australians weren't flustered, their bowlers got the better of most of our batsmen, andrew symonds who wanted some time on the middle got some, it looked like we were afraid to expose our best bowlers to their batsmen while they wanted to expose their best players to all comers (they certainly did not rest anyone, they would have played shane watson if he was fit). most of all they beat us comprehensively in a game that was supposed to be (including in their own assessment) very close. all that would not do them any harm, with regard to morale and momentum. btw they are not all that unfamiliar with vaas and murali in any case.

we on the other hand were trashed. saying that only nine of the beaten side will face them again won't take away that fact. a close defeat with out best bowlers bowling would have been much better psychologically. a similar trashing with out best bowlers bowling would have been worse, but if we want to win the world cup we should have the confidence in our own ability to win. mind games cut both ways.

not that negative
in conclusion this move by the sri lankan team management was not all that negative as it first appears ( and as some biased international commentators may try to make it out - such commentary is another perhaps not significant negative consequence). however we did not do the right things to benefit from its positive aspects.

sri lankans should have done what mahela was saying they were doing all along; face each match one at a time instead of thinking too much ahead. unfortunately he did not do that yesterday. results are in australians' favor. pity.

let us hope that our sri lankan team has enough moral strength to take the few positives and lessons (batting of chamara silva, mahela, and maharoof, russel arnold's wickets, how we can handle australian attack shaun tait in particular, australian plans against our batsmen, etc) and forget the negatives. and hopefully go on to defeat the australians in the semi or final.

෴

ps
quite apart from its effect on cricket and cricketers on the field, dropping of our best bowlers was a let down to all the spectators everywhere (not to mention sponsors). everybody must remember that in the end it is the spectators that make this tournament important. too much of this will put people off.