Have Australia done England a favour?

This was supposed to be the season when cricket's playing field evened out, with the retirements of Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne bringing Australia back into the fold. But after seven days at Brisbane and Hobart, the chasm between those in baggy green and the rest is as yawning as ever, with Sri Lanka in real danger of heading home on the back of two defeats by an innings.

This was to be the tour where Muttiah Muralitharan broke Shane Warne's record in his rival's backyard. Instead, he has toiled 96 overs for three wickets - still five short of Warne - that have cost him 103.33 apiece. His compatriots have fared little better.

Over the course of nearly four days, they have sent down a total of 290 overs, picking up just nine Australian wickets for...1093 runs. Those are the kind of numbers Sri Lanka are used to piling up in home Tests. This time, it's them on the receiving end of a hobnailed boot. It hasn't made for pretty viewing back home.

After news agencies boycotted the first Test in protest at Cricket Australia's policies, a Sri Lankan newspaper went to print with a black space where a picture should have been. That image appears to be apt in more ways than one now. After the excitement of reaching the World Cup final - they pushed Australia all the way too - this has been the most sobering of reality checks.

The biggest headlines have been off the field, with Marvan Atapattu's jokers-headed-by-a-muppet outburst against the selectors. And with three days to go in Hobart, it will need a miracle of Oval proportions for Sri Lanka to salvage anything from a series where they have been thoroughly outplayed.

They head back home in a few days, by which time England will be into their warm-up routine in Colombo. And within a week of touching down back home, it's up to Kandy for the first of three Tests. It's Murali's hometown and a venue where he has taken 108 wickets at a ridiculous average [16.06] in just 15 Tests.

The veneer of invincibility though is peeling off a little. Against Pakistan in 2006, Sri Lanka built a lead of 109 at the Asgiriya Stadium, only for Mohammad Asif and Abdul Razzaq to rout them for just 73 in the second innings. Murali then went wicketless at Pakistan chased down a tricky 183-run target at more than four an over.

That match epitomised a careless habit that Sri Lanka have fallen into over the past few years. Against Australia back in 2004, they established first-innings leads in every Test, only to lose all three. When it came to the crunch, their batsmen faltered and their bowlers couldn't deliver.

Assuming that England do come up with a tactic to see off Murali, the rest of the bowling is hardly frightening. Lasith Malinga and Dilhara Fernando have as many poor days as they do good ones, and Chaminda Vaas is now too slow to be especially lethal.

After his outburst, the chances are Atapattu playing again are decidedly slim, and that leaves them heavily reliant on Jayasuriya, Sangakkara and Jayawardene for runs. England's bowlers had the better of them in the one-day series, and it's likely that slow, low pitches will be requested for the Tests.

It's unlikely though that they'll be square turners designed to suit Murali. On pitches that took some turn, Graeme Swann was the most effective spinner on view in the one-day series. For the Tests, England will have Monty Panesar, and a pitch where the ball turns at billiard-table angles will only further expose the myth that Asian batsmen are far more proficient players of spin.

When Sri Lanka lost 2-0 away to India two years ago - Murali was in the squad - the damage wasn't done by pace bowlers, but by Anil Kumble [in Delhi] and Harbhajan Singh [in Ahmedabad]. If England's batsmen apply themselves as well as they did in the middle three one-day games, they have every chance. As Australia have shown, neutralising Murali is half the battle won. Deny him wickets, and the Lankan lions looks toothless. If they continue in this vein, Michael Vaughan's younger pride might just inflict a mauling.

Comments

[Ramesh]

Not sure whether England can benefit from the mauling that SL are receiving. They have to be bold and skillful, and England have rarely managed to be both at the same time. Do they have real, burning desire to be that good? Only great team and players have that, and England are not a great team. SL are suffering, just as other teams are, by not having that desire to overcome hostile conditions.

[Rajeev Mohan]

Not sure about the fate awaiting the Indians when they tour there. If Murali has been dealt with so easily, how do we expect Harbhajan and Kumble to make any difference. Lee and Johnson have been fast but I guess our batting (except Ganguly) can deal with them. Last thing we want is a whitewash like this Aus-SL series.

[Dileep]

If England show as much commitment and fight as they did in India last year, they'll be fine. I mean, what odds would you have got on Shaun Udal emerging a hero on the last day of the series?

[Tim]

Nice piece Dileep. i hope you're right.

[Dileep]

That too is becoming a bit of a myth now. Australia won in both India and Sri Lanka in 2004, South Africa just hammered Pakistan. New Zealand drew series in both India and Sri Lanka. England have won Tests in all three countries this decade...

[Ottayan]

Like other sub-continental teams, at home,Sri Lankans are a different kettle of fish.