Fifty over cricket was primarily invented to bring in the spectators who were deserting Test cricket, because the established game was beginning to be a bore. Test cricket was a big yawn because the action dished out during the five days was unattractive with most games ending in stalemates with the contesting teams not showing any urge to play attractive and forceful cricket that spectators yearn for.

Imagine that William Shakespeare (1564 – 1616) lived today and wrote the Comedy of Errors, or of Love’s labour lost; the cricketing world may have thought that the English bard derived his inspiration from the situation Sri Lanka cricket is currently placed. For, how else can the absurd position Sri Lanka’s cricket is placed today be described, than with such words of that English playwright?

At a time when the general cricket machine is in a slow sinking quagmire, the decline in junior cricket in the near future has been in the focus.

A few decades ago when a schoolboy shines above the rest one could just predict his path into the national side as imminent. But, today though Sri Lanka being a Test playing nation with more facilities available for the development of game, there is more than a general decline in the game at that level.
In search of an answer The Sunday Times sought the views of a man who has been involved with the game at almost all levels in the island. Former National coach Jayantha Seneviratne is one of the few persons in the country who brandishes the level four coaching certificate. Now he has been entrusted with the responsibility of being a national selector while also being a coaching instructor to Sri Lanka Cricket. Jayantha also was the coach of his alma mater Nalanda Collage from 1986 to 2002. He also has handled his Club, Bloomfield for a couple of seasons.

We posed him a simple question – “What’s wrong?”

Jayantha sees the commercial exploitation of cricket at Junior Level as the biggest bane that has hit the sport in this island. According to him for a commercial sponsor one has to make the game attractive and to do that you have to make it a commercially viable limited overs game.

There are many uncertain avenues that a young cricketer has to travel in this present trend. In this present system from your younger days you are trained to play limited overs cricket and the focus is win at any cost. As a result negative trends begin to creep in according to Jayantha. He also added “The coaches now teach a young bowler to be economical rather than being a wicket taking bowler. A wicket taking bowler has to be positive and accurate and here the chances of you being scored off are greater. At the same time when the bowler adopts negative tactics then the batsman has also has to develop counter methods. As a result unorthodox stroke play creeps into his repertoire.

“For instance a lot of young players now try to play the slash instead of the drive. When they play the slash they are not in complete control over their shot. They play it because they have seen Sanath Jayasuriya playing that stroke and scoring runs. But, the irony is that Sanath Jayasuriya is a rare gifted player and every young cricketer cannot become another Jayasuriya.”

Former National coach Jayantha Seneviratne drives a point. Pic by Berty Mendis
The former National coach made a brief comparison to his school days and now. He said “At that time we played only twelve matches for the season. In spite of that how many cricketers scored a thousand runs for the season? At that time it was a race as to who would get there first. I still can remember from Nalanda Bandula Warnapura was going for it, at Ananda the Wettimuny brothers – Sunil and Mithra had a great following. Then from Royal it was Asitha Jayaweera and Jagath Fernando then at St. Sebastian’s Duleep Mendis and Hemal Mendis was hammering away while in Kandy Jayantha Monnekulame and Bernard Perera were piling on the runs. The school standard was as such. The basics that we were taught at that time were to learn to build your innings up. Play in the ‘V’. If you were an opening batsman you had that added responsibility of seeing the shine off. So as a result it was the top order batsmen who scored heavily at that time.”

It was not only good batsmen that the game produced at that time. The schools also produced bowlers who bagged lots of wickets. Left arm spinners Ajith de Silva from Ananda, Jayantha Amerasinghe from Royal, Sridharan Jeganathan from Wesley and Ranil Abeynaike from S. Thomas’ were heavily among the wickets. Then off spinner Lalith Kaluperuma was very effective for Nalanda while among the seam bowlers Leslie Narangoda and Ranjan Gunatilleke stood out. In short what I am trying to say is that schools produced good cricketers with great potential on a regular basis as we were given the right focus and the correct temperament”.

Another grievance that Jayantha Seneviratne had was the wrong approach and the focus of the present cricket coaches. He said that Sri Lanka was a Test playing country and the players that come out of schools should have that as their ultimate goal. But, what is happening today was that the coaches churn out players to suit the call of the day that is limited overs cricket and added “May be in limited overs cricket there is a certain duration. But, it is disturbing that twenty-20 cricket also has come in with a bang into the under 19 level. This trend can completely shift the focus of the players. This twenty-20 tournament has come in the middle of the normal schools season. Recently I was in conversation with some current international cricketers and they themselves admitted that the shift from a twenty-20 mind frame to the longer version of building up an inning was difficult. Then I wonder how will these young cricketers who are engaged in the normal schools season could get back into the general trend? This is a real disturbing factor”.

There was another aspect that really disturbed the present national selector. It was the discipline. He said “While watching I saw one cricketer wearing an earring and another brandishing a tattoo. These are young schoolboy cricketers, and the heads of those schools should take more responsibility for cricketers who are being telecasted in a public forum. It is imperative that we produce cricketers with discipline”.

Finally Jayantha Seneviratne added “the only solution to this problem is to take away all forms of limited overs cricket at the junior level and only have friendlies so that the coaches would begin to teach the young ones the correct approach. Thereafter all such shortened forms could come into the streamline after the under twenty three level where the cricketer has learned his proper basics and could shift his focus according to the need of the hour”.

‘The Island’ has taken the initiative as a responsible national newspaper to invite the unbiased opinion of its readers on the theme country Vs. Money.

The reading public owe a deep debt of gratitude the Sports Editor of the newspaper for generously inviting reader’s views on this controversial topic.

‘The Island’ poses the question (1) should they be permitted to act on their own to keep their lucrative deals intact? My answer would be Yes. Why yes? Because the players had contracted a Sri Lanka Cricket approved private deal. Some of the players had signed a contract with the IPL when Sri Lanka had no scheduled Test matches during the period when the money-spinning Twenty-20 would be played. There were no shady deals when they did this. They did not defy any authority. This is the short and the long of the story.

If there are no commitments to play for the country, and when there is a grand offer, what will a professional player do? It is natural, they will go after those extra dollars.

After all, who does not like money-money earned through the sweat of one’s brow; not filthy lucre, illegally.

On the other hand, think of the professionals like doctors and lawyers, who are money motivated beyond measure! Some of them desert their patients and clients, sometimes putting them in awkward positions. Some of these individuals ignore professional etiquette.

When you consider the case of our cricketers, they have not acted in a manner detrimental to the interests of the cricket loving public and the country.

It is the fundamental human right of any individual to earn money, even amass wealth as long as it is through legal means. Have Mahela and Company breached any law of Sri Lanka Cricket? No, certainly not. Did they sign with the IPL after refusing national duty? Again, the answer is in the negative. Then why ridicule them?

The crux of the matter is someone has blundered somewhere. Who is this someone? It is the 1996 World Cup winning captain, Arjuna Ranatunge, for whom I have the highest respect and regard. Arjuna knows his onions, but it is surprising that this time, he has blundered. He was as cool as a cucumber in his glory days of cricket; he confronted with courage and determination those who tried to intimidate and discriminate. He brooked no nonsense from any quarter and provided the right leadership for his players. He had all the leadership qualities of a renowned captain and a good cricketer. He has an intense desire to improve the format and standard of cricket at all levels in the country, for which he made his Test debut as a teenager from Ananda College against England in 1982 at the Colombo Oval.

Now the cricketer turned politician has mellowed, but unfortunately, upset the apple cart and is in a sort of confrontation with his buddies. To be a captain of a team and to be a head of the Interim Committee are two different kettles of fish. It should be remembered that all captains are not good administrators. The present controversy surrounding the national cricketers is due to the fact that the SLC head went on his own to sign a deal that came unexpectedly. He expects the players to play against England when he knows well that the players are billed to play in the IPL. Leadership does not mean one acting according to one’s whims and fancies; nor should a head impose his will.

Why did he give into the ECB? It has only raised a hornet’s nest to disturb the cricketing fraternity.

It is clear as crystal that an unscheduled tour was heaped on the players. If they decline, they are labelled as unpatriotic and greedy for money.

This is midsummer madness! The question of going after money before country does not arise here because they have to honour their contractual obligations first. The principle that country comes first before money is irrelevant here, because national duty came into the picture long after the IPL deal.

However, if any of the cricketers had signed for three years with the IPL, I state it is highly unethical and immoral. If it is so, it should be condemned and severe punishment should be meted out. They have no moral right to play for the country. They should be sacked and debarred from playing competitive cricket. If any cricketer who has signed a deal covertly for three years should be hounded out, lock, stock and barrel.

Now to ‘The Island’s second question: "Do you feel the National team has to represent the country at any cost?" My answer is no. The aforesaid reasons support my contention. Furthermore, if the national team is to represent the country at any cost, there should be provisions in the law to prohibit players from signing any private contracts without the approval of SLC.

‘The Island’s last question is very interesting: "Do National players have any right to play for the country if they tend to give priority to their personal earnings at the expense of National duty?" My answer is Yes and No. "Yes," because the concerned cricketers did not have scheduled home or overseas engagements in the immediate future. Under the circumstances, they opted to serve the IPL with the full knowledge and approval of Sri Lanka Cricket. The question of the tour of England came as an afterthought, following the cancellation of the Zimbabwe tour. The muddled thinking of SLC led to this unhealthy episode. A person with an iota of common sense should understand that any professional, if he or she is not engaged officially, will always go for private practice if the offer is tempting. That is human nature. Why do you apply a different yardstick to our cricketers who are already wealthy, having represented the country? Professionals are always demanding and they will strike while the iron is hot. That is no crime.

"No," because if they choose to play for the IPL after being billed to play for the country. In other words, if a cricketer like Mahela had two choices - playing for Sri Lanka or the IPL; If he chooses the latter, then he has no moral or legal right to do national duty. When the coterie of cricketers signed with IPL, it was not "at the expense of national duty." So, how can anybody accuse them of going after money disregarding national duty?

This fallacious argument is both ridiculous and ludicrous.

Some have argued that they have become household names because of cricket and the game has given them the high recognition and the luxuries they enjoy. Why harbour jealousy over that? Serena Williams, Roger Federer, Ronaldo, Maradona, Tiger Woods, Brian Lara and others like Mohammad Ali have become famous not because of lawn tennis, football, golf, cricket and boxing, but because they had inborn talent and skill, sacrificed their time and energy, practiced with dedication and commitment to come off with flying colours.

So too with Mahela and Co. Just games will not bring famous names. You should have the willpower to achieve your goals. Is it fair to grudge their becoming super rich and household names after their sheer dedication and strenuous efforts?

Renowned international sportsmen or for that matter our national cricketers are not saints. It is the case of most people to go after material wealth; some achieve it by hook or by crook, throwing all norms to the winds. It is the nature of most people to strike gold at the first opportunity. Opportunity knocks at your door only once, but sometimes more. The cricketers have a few more years left to play for the country. So, when an opportunity is presented to them, will they refuse point blank to be saints and patriots? In a country where human values have hit rock bottom, I cannot understand why there is a big hue and cry when their deal is not shady.

To buttress my stand, let me tell you of some opportunists who seem to be politicians. They come to the public limelight to serve the country. They promise many things and finally take the people for a jolly good ride. While they line their pockets through illegal means, the ordinary people have just to grin and bear. Their credo is to serve themselves, not to serve the country, although they are elected by the people.

Their target is to have fat bank balances, here and abroad. Although, they mouth pious platitudes about patriotism and nationalism, how many are genuine in their utterances? The COPE report, the shady deals that have come to light in the Supreme Court cases bear testimony to my accusation.

Viewed in this light, what crimes have Mahela and others committed to receive so much brickbats?

It is incumbent on the part of all cricket lovers to understand that since gaining Test status, our cricketers have played a dominant role to bring glory, name and fame to mother Lanka. Our team reached dazzling heights of worldwide popularity in winning the ICC Award for Spirit of Cricket.

The hierarchy of Sri Lanka Cricket should not muddle the affairs of administration. Just because it has authority, it does not mean it should impose its will.

It is because of these gentlemen cricketers that Sri Lanka stands tall in the game of cricket. Let saner counsel prevail.