Sri Lanka tour of Zimbabwe (2 Tests)

[Sammo360]

Angelo Mathews and Sean Williams in focus as Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka resume a strange rivalry

Zimbabwe are in such flux that Sri Lanka go into the series as favourites, despite consistency issues in both departments

www.espncricinfo.com

Sri Lanka tour of Zimbabwe (2 Tests)

SUN 19/1 - 07:00 PM AEDT
1st Test, at Harare, Jan 19-23 2020

MON 27/1 - 07:00 PM AEDT
2nd Test, at Harare, Jan 27-31 2020
Zimbabwe Test Squad / Players
Sean Williams (c), Regis Chakabva (w) , Craig Ervine, Kyle Jarvis, Kevin Kasuza, Timycen Maruma, Prince Masvaure, Brian Mudzinganyama, Carl Mumba, Ainsley Ndlovu, Victor Nyauchi, Sikandar Raza, Brendan Taylor, Donald Tiripano

Sri Lanka Test Squad / Players
Dimuth Karunaratne (c), Dinesh Chandimal, Dhananjaya de Silva, Niroshan Dickwella (w), Lasith Embuldeniya, Oshada Fernando, Vishwa Fernando, Lahiru Kumara, Suranga Lakmal, Angelo Mathews, Kusal Mendis, Dilruwan Perera, Kasun Rajitha, Lakshan Sandakan

Live stream

 

[PhatBoy]

Good way for Zimbabwe to ease their way back into test cricket

 

[ioppolo]

Forgive my ignorance, but why are the tests starting on a Sunday and a Monday respectively?

 

[ioppolo]

Zimbabwe openers crawled along but they're 2/173 currently after both made 55 & 63 respectively

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I've only seen the scorecards. It does look like slow going, but for Zimbabwe (even at home) to look competitive for a day is a minor win.
The lack of Test cricket possibly plays into the slow play. They don't have the opportunity to learn to pace an innings, especially with the domestic FC scene so often abandoned or otherwise disrupted.

 

[Pykie]

I've only seen the scorecards. It does look like slow going, but for Zimbabwe (even at home) to look competitive for a day is a minor win.
The lack of Test cricket possibly plays into the slow play. They don't have the opportunity to learn to pace an innings, especially with the domestic FC scene so often abandoned or otherwise disrupted.

Yep, their first test match in almost a year and a half.


They've only played 10 test matches in the last 6 years.


I think with the emergence of Afghanistan and Ireland as test playing nations, the drop off of Sri Lanka probably helps them tbh, as they now have a good group of nations who would be willing to regularly schedule matches.

It was basically them and Bangladesh for a long time at that level of cricket.

Although I could see Afghanistan jumping up to the West Indian level in the next decade based on the strength of their underage sides.

Zimbabwe will be forced to play more test cricket as well against these sides as part of the qualification for the 21-23 test championship, which will only benefit them.

 

[Sammo360]

Forgive my ignorance, but why are the tests starting on a Sunday and a Monday respectively?

Seems odd to me. They got a decent crowd too on Sunday but not many showed up on a normal work day yesterday as you’d expect. As for the 2nd Test, it looks like they’ve simply scheduled it with the minimum days off required after the 1st Test which means a Monday start.

There was no warm-up game scheduled (Sri Lanka team flew in on the Thursday), no DRS and no proper tv coverage, so I can guess the reasons are all to do with spending the least amount of money as possible.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Seems odd to me. They got a decent crowd too on Sunday but not many showed up on a normal work day yesterday as you’d expect. As for the 2nd Test, it looks like they’ve simply scheduled it with the minimum days off required after the 1st Test which means a Monday start.

There was no warm-up game scheduled (Sri Lanka team flew in on the Thursday), no DRS and no proper tv coverage, so I can guess the reasons are all to do with spending the least amount of money as possible.

I would think minimising costs would the reason; given Zimbabwe get practically nothing for media rights, regularly can't pay players, and get kicked from pillar-to-post by the ICC (as well as historically being highly corrupt with the little money they do get).
Although why they couldn't start Thursday and Friday, or Friday and Saturday, I don't really get. I presume Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka both have Saturday-Sunday weekends.

 

[Sammo360]

Here's a good insight into the costs associated to host a Test match

'The smaller teams want to play more, but they can't because the cash is not there'

Alistair Campbell talks about the tyranny of the TV rights cricket economy and why it's not realistic to expect the weaker teams to progress in all forms of the game

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[eth-dog]

What's happened to Chatara?

 

[PhatBoy]

What's happened to Chatara?

Probably still getting over the shock of being named in my novelty Facebook ‘pinhead World XI’ a few years ago

 

[PhatBoy]

I think this has worked out really well for Zimbabwe.

a Series against Ireland or Afghanistan could have only had a negative outcome - win and it doesn’t mean anything, lose and it’s a disaster - facing a side like Sri Lanka who are talented enough to test them and beat them but generally average and not able to absolutely destroy them is going to help them a lot

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I think this has worked out really well for Zimbabwe.

a Series against Ireland or Afghanistan could have only had a negative outcome - win and it doesn’t mean anything, lose and it’s a disaster - facing a side like Sri Lanka who are talented enough to test them and beat them but generally average and not able to absolutely destroy them is going to help them a lot

They - as do all the smaller and ignored nations - need all the long form cricket they can get, they just can't afford to host it. And to be honest, there's every chance Afghanistan would knock them over - certainly in India and probably in Zimbabwe. Assuming Afghanistan's best players were available.
Losing the "Test Fund" when the big 3 took over, and not returning it when their grip dropped slightly, is really hurting the less financial nations.
Not that Zimbabwe would be in good shape regardless, their own admistration seems to have been rather less than adequate.

 

[PhatBoy]

They - as do all the smaller and ignored nations - need all the long form cricket they can get, they just can't afford to host it. And to be honest, there's every chance Afghanistan would knock them over - certainly in India and probably in Zimbabwe. Assuming Afghanistan's best players were available.
Losing the "Test Fund" when the big 3 took over, and not returning it when their grip dropped slightly, is really hurting the less financial nations.
Not that Zimbabwe would be in good shape regardless, their own admistration seems to have been rather less than adequate.

their admin is a joke. And I agree they need all the cricket they can get. Sri Lanka at home though was a really good outcome though as far as I’m concerned.

the ICC really is a s**t organisation. Having the ability to fix so many issues and simply refusing to do it is pretty poor.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

their admin is a joke. And I agree they need all the cricket they can get. Sri Lanka at home though was a really good outcome though as far as I’m concerned.

the ICC really is a s**t organisation. Having the ability to fix so many issues and simply refusing to do it is pretty poor.

I'm not going to disagree with any of that.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I've caught a little bit of play this session. Zimbabwe's attack looks capable of bowling a line, mostly, but not capable of actually forcing wickets. Clearly the pitch is dead, and inexperience must play a part. They just don't look a First Class side up on today's performance.
edit: A few shots from Dhananjaya then were bloody horrible, he deserved to get out.

 

[corbies]

Sikandar Raza took 7-for to go with his 72 in the first innings to have Zimbabwe well on top.

 

[Sammo360]

I've caught a little bit of play this session. Zimbabwe's attack looks capable of bowling a line, mostly, but not capable of actually forcing wickets. Clearly the pitch is dead, and inexperience must play a part. They just don't look a First Class side up on today's performance.
edit: A few shots from Dhananjaya then were bloody horrible, he deserved to get out.

the attack is basically a second string lineup to be fair. No Chatara, Jarvis or Cremer. Mpofu is another one but he’s probably too old now.

 

[cricketnut14]

the attack is basically a second string lineup to be fair. No Chatara, Jarvis or Cremer. Mpofu is another one but he’s probably too old now.

say what ?
cremer 57 wkts @ 46
mpofu 29 @ 48

 

[Sammo360]

say what ?
cremer 57 wkts @ 46
mpofu 29 @ 48

Well, that is their best. We are talking about Zimbabwe here.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Well, thats new. One ball in the day, six, get 50, declare.
The idea that Zimbabwe would be in a position declare would seem surprising enough before the game, but that is an unusual way to get there.

 

[eth-dog]

Go Zimbabwe!

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

The pitch is placid, and I don't think they've managed a full day's play yet. I don't see Zimbabwe taking ten wickets, but Sri Lanka might (unlikely) throw ten wickets away.
Good thing it wasn't a four day Test. Despite looking very much like a draw this has interest on day five; and with all the time lost the proposed extra overs per day in a four day game would not have been played.

 

[Sammo360]

I'm surprised Sri Lanka didn't send Dickwella up the order to give the total a crack.

A draw is a decent result for Zimbabwe. They go to Bangladesh to play another Test in 3 weeks.

 

[Wedge McManus]

I would think minimising costs would the reason; given Zimbabwe get practically nothing for media rights, regularly can't pay players, and get kicked from pillar-to-post by the ICC (as well as historically being highly corrupt with the little money they do get).
Although why they couldn't start Thursday and Friday, or Friday and Saturday, I don't really get. I presume Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka both have Saturday-Sunday weekends.

The ICC has bent over backwards to accommodate Zimbabwe and as you yourself mention, what money they do get usually goes precisely nowhere it needs to go so not sure what you're on about