da casino： It has been hard enough for spectators to get to Pallekele for the Test match this week. Those who did were further insulted on day four by the home board’s decision to not use floodlights

da bwin： Daniel Brettig in Pallekele29-Jul-2016During one of many rain delays to afflict this Test match, the martial beat of by the Cranberries was piped through the public address system at the Pallekele International Stadium.Something was unmistakably fitting about this choice of song, for a couple of reasons. First, there is something zombielike about the capacity of Test cricket to keep cheating a death pronounced by many; secondly, the way the game has been treated by its custodians is as mired in the 1990s as the Cranberries themselves.Arriving in Kandy last week, it was patently clear that few if any locals had any idea a Test match was about to be played in their midst. While Sri Lanka’s love for cricket is self-evident – just count the number of formal or impromptu matches you can spot on a walk or drive of any length – the lack of awareness about a looming match between the hosts and Australia was alarming. The Earl’s Regency Hotel, host to both the teams and the match officials, was decked out with a welcome banner and a mocked-up scoreboard in the foyer, but outside this cosseted space nary a sign existed.No use of lights ‘disappointing but both countries have to agree’

Sri Lanka’s coach Graham Ford and the Australian batting coach Stuart Law appeared at odds when asked why lights had not been used during instances of bad light in Pallekele. Ford said the lights could not be used because other venues for the series do not have lights. “It doesn’t go across my desk,” Ford said. “We’ve got the instruction in the match referee’s meeting. I believe it’s because there aren’t floodlights at all the venues. That’s the reason for the decision.”
However Law said the tourists were happy to use the lights and that it had been up to the home board not to. “That’s always disappointing, both countries have to agree to it,” he said. “We were quite happy to proceed, that’s our policy in Australia, we’re playing day-night Test matches now, so even red-ball cricket if the lights are available we want to use them and play as much as we can. It’s disappointing but just the way it is.”

Little appeared to have been done by way of promotion, whether in terms of physical advertising or television spots. Cricketers are everywhere on billboards in Sri Lanka, but they tend to be for the recently retired duo of Kumar Sangakkara or Mahela Jayawardene. Five years ago on Australia’s previous Test match visit, it was the imposing figure of the late Tony Greig beaming from all directions. Even the broadcasters seemed to have their eyes elsewhere: bizarrely, there have been more advertisements for the Zimbabwe versus New Zealand series being aired on cable TV than this one.So it has been hard enough to know the Test match is actually taking place. That is before anyone considers the issue of how to find the time, money or transport to get there. Pallekele is about half an hour’s drive out of central Kandy, a single arterial road taking would-be attendees past a couple of military bases before arriving at a ground built largely for the 2011 World Cup. While tickets for the match itself are not overpriced, transport costs and time are major obstacles.Speaking of time, the timing of the match had more to do with fitting it into the international schedules of Australia and Sri Lanka than any consideration for spectators. A Tuesday start to a Test match might be acceptable in Australia if that day happens to be Boxing Day or January 3, but it would never occur otherwise. It is a fact of the current international climate that nations like Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh and Pakistan must scrap for tours from more prosperous nations, and squeeze the matches in wherever possible. The Tuesday start here means extra matches elsewhere, and a better television deal. It also means forfeiting the chances of a decent crowd.This is not to say that Sri Lanka Cricket is completely unaware or unwilling to deal with the issue of Test match attendances. Earlier this week a senior SLC figure stated that he did not see Pallekele as a Test ground, and there are plans to try to rejuvenate the old Asgiriya Stadium closer to the centre of town. Asked about what sort of attendance was expected for this match, he replied: “A few thousand.” That included the schoolchildren invited to day one and permitted to play matches on the outfield during lunch, a worthy exercise. But the onus is on SLC to give fans a chance to turn up, and then provide for as much cricket as possible when they do.That brings us to arguably the most maddening element of the past four days: Pallekele’s unused lights. Twice in the game, but most prominently on the fourth afternoon, play was called off for reasons of bad light, the sort of anachronism to cause non-cricket fans to wonder at the point of even playing the game. The circumstances leading to the loss of more than two hours on day four included the delicate position of the game, in which both sides seemed happy enough to retreat and regroup. It was also driven by the stipulation that the umpires must keep a consistent reading as their baseline for adequate light, via their meters. On day three the issue had been the introduction of pace, but on day four there seemed no question of Angelo Mathews using anything other than spin against the muddled feet of Steven Smiths’ side.But the most defining factor by far in the lack of cricket for spectators and television viewers was the inability of the umpires to call for Pallekele’s floodlights to be switched on and so augment the sun shrouded by tropical clouds. The relevant clause of the ICC’s Test match playing conditions allows for the umpires to “authorise the ground authorities to use the available artificial lighting so that the match can continue in acceptable conditions”. Contrary to a popular perception, there is no provision barring the use of lights if not every Test series venue is equipped with them.The more devilish detail arises from a “Note” beneath that clause. It states: “Home Boards may, prior to the commencement of the series, seek the approval of ICC to amend this playing condition to provide that artificial lights will not be used at specific venues.” Therefore, it was SLC who chose not to allow the use of lights at Pallekele, for reasons best known to the board and its president Thilanga Sumathipala. As a Cricket Australia spokesperson put it: “We were happy to use them but both teams have to be in agreement.” As outspoken advocates of day-night Tests, CA could hardly say otherwise.Entering this series, few gave Sri Lanka much of a chance, perhaps explaining the lack of promotion, the Tuesday start, and the scheduling of a match in a venue no-one seems to want to turn up to. How sad then for Sri Lanka’s cricketers, spectators and television viewers, that lights could not be used when a rare victory over Australia had become a real possibility. If this was a disappointment it could not be called a surprise: Test cricket and its supporters have been saddled with these obstacles more times than anyone would care to count. It is, as the Cranberries sang in Zombie, “the same old theme”.