Inability to handle pressure at a final, a major weakness

Anton Abeysekera

We have failed once again and succumbed to pressure at the final hurdle. We reached four World cup finals, and in March this year after a dogged series reached the final of the Commonwealth Bank tri series but the result was the same, our batting fell apart and we lost inexplicably.

First of all we must extend our congratulations to our team for their spirited display that brought them to the final of this T20 World cup. They batted well and bowled brilliantly to reach the Final. There was pressure at all the preliminary matches they played including the semi final against Pakistan but they handled pressure well fought back and raised the expectations of the cricket mad Sri Lankans fans, but unfortunately it was not to be.

In fact at the presentation ceremony Nasser Hussein posed the question to Mahela “How can you reach the final four times and lose is it a psychological thing”.

When one analyses the sequence of events that took place during the final it certainly points in that direction. When West Indies batted first the efforts of the Sri Lankans to contain them in the initial overs were indeed commendable. The manner in which Ajantha. Mendis, Angelo Mathews, and Nuwan Kulesekera bowled sending back the top order West Indian batsmen worthy of praise and showed maturity in handling bowling changes. The Spinners were used judiciously as it was evident that the West Indians were not comfortable in playing spin.

When Malinga was used thereafter it became evident that Samuels was targeting him for an onslaught and it did not stand to reason why Mahela persisted with his strike bowler when he was being thrashed. In Management, Gurus say that in a crisis one must think out of the box and was it necessary to use his strike bowler when it became obvious that he was being targeted by one batsman? He could have been brought on after the exit of Samuels. The result was that Malinga ended up giving 54 runs in his four overs. This was a critical point in the game and was the first step that shifted the advantage to the West Indies.

However 138 runs was not a total beyond the reach of Sri Lanka who had an excellent top order supported by an equally good middle order which had stood the test during this world cup before the final and came out on top.

Perhaps the early exist of Dilshan was the initial shock which broke the morale of the team. Mahela and Sanga batted sensibly but it became evident from body language that Mahela was succumbing to scoreboard pressure and his rash stroke play was indicative that he was trying to push the score along. Another factor that added to the pressure was the threat of rain and Mahela was seen trying to figure out the runs that would be needed in the event the final was decided upon on a D and L system. Ironically what followed immediately after was the rash reverse sweep which brought about his downfall. In my view Mahela and Sanga were going along at a reasonable pace and there was no necessity to panic. They key would have been to preserve the wickets and take the risks later on in the innings.

They should have continued taking the ones and twos and gradually built up the innings. But this was not to be and Sanga too followed his friend and leader by playing an awful slog sweep which was uncharacteristic of this fine cricketer, with a sound technique. What followed is history as all the other Middle order batsmen panicked in their quest for quick runs and lost their wickets. Thanks to valiant effort by Nuwan Kulesekera who scored a valuable 26 runs our margin of defeat was reduced to 36 runs.

The concept floating around that the side batting first wins the match appears to be superstition or a myth however if it is true for environmental or other reasons it is unfair for the authorities to hold a final in a location where the winner is decided upon at the toss of a con.