March 17, 1996 is a date that is etched into the minds of cricket fans all over the world, the day where the game's newest superpower truly emerged out of the backwaters.
Sri Lanka were no strangers to being at the ICC Cricket World Cup prior to the 1996 tournament which it co-hosted.
The Asian country had been a participant since the tournament's inception back in 1975, but had struggled mightily, tallying a total of four wins in five World Cups prior to the 1996 edition.
While the story of the underdogs winning the World Cup after starting the tournament as rank outsiders is amazing in itself, the precursor to the World Cup, an acrimonious Sri Lankan tour of Australia in the summer of 1995-96 truly set the scene for a titanic tale.
Ball tampering accusations, tense post-match encounters, umpiring controversies, this tour just about had it all. Central to it all was the man who would eventually become the greatest wicket-taker the game has known: Muttiah Muralitharan.
Twenty-five years on, Wide World of Sports spoke to some of the key men involved from both the Australian and Sri Lankan camps about the infamous summer which eventuated in cricket's greatest ever fairytale.
Humble beginnings
It was in August 1992, just months after another failed World Cup campaign, that Sri Lanka unearthed an unorthodox off-spinner from Kandy named Muttiah Muralitharan. The man who became affectionately known as 'Murali' had risen rapidly through Sri Lanka's ranks, dominating the high school circuit before being fast-tracked into Arjuna Ranatunga's Test side to take on Allan Border's Australian team for the second Test in Colombo. Muralitharan finished with figures of 1-32 off 17 overs and 2-109 off 34 overs as the Test ended in a draw.
Mark Taylor, Australian captain: We knew about Murali, but we weren't that concerned by him. Firstly we had to work out that he was an off-spinner with an unusual action, because (Allan Border) wasn't sure! We had a meeting before the third Test in 1992 and I remember saying to everyone that we shouldn't worry about his action, just worry about what he does with the ball. We knew he was a big off-spinner, but in those days he didn't have a doosra or an arm ball. We just agreed to play him as a big off-spinner. From that point of view he didn't worry us, because at the time he bowled from really wide of the crease, and for me as a left-hander, if Murali was going to hit the stumps he had to pitch a fair way outside leg. The only way he was going to get you out was bat-pad, or caught somewhere. He wasn't going to bowl too many left-handers, or get you LBW. Even for the right handers, he was that wide on the crease that LBW was highly unlikely.
Aravinda de Silva, Sri Lankan vice-captain: Initially we saw him playing some of the club games and realised that he was one guy who was able to spin the ball. I think those days the key was for a spinner to try and spin the ball, so he had that natural ability. We had to give him the opportunity and he was quite fortunate that even Arjuna at the time felt that he had the potential and we were all ready to back him. The action was unorthodox, needless to say, but more importantly, if you looked around the world the success story for many was being unorthodox. I think Sri Lanka had a habit of picking unorthodox players who really did something different to the normal textbook style. It ultimately helped us to be world champs playing the style of cricket we did the best and coming out as a strong outfit.
Roshan Mahanama, Sri Lankan batsman: Everyone was talking about Murali because he could even spin a ball on a concrete slab, but he didn't have many variations, he just turned the ball miles. When we saw him at training that was the first time I can remember meeting him, everyone was surprised because (the ball) started from outside off stump and went on to leg side. So something he had to work on was his variation, he was very raw. Yes, by turning the ball you can get wickets, but as you gain experience, you need to have control and variations as well. We all felt that he had the talent and he had proven himself by getting wickets at the school level.
Romesh Kaluwitharana, Sri Lankan wicket-keeper (as told to Sri Lankan TV network Swarnavahini): When Murali first started, he would practice for a long time. He would try a lot of things, so at the start each ball was something different. When I first started keeping to him I struggled to read what he was bowling. So either I would give him a sign or he would say the third ball of every over was a variation. But sometimes he would lie and bowl a variation from the first delivery of the over. One drinks break, he said he would not bowl a doosra, then bowled five straight doosras in his first over after the break.
Chaminda Vaas, Sri Lankan paceman: I remember watching Murali play in his first Test match in 1992. I knew about him because we had played against each other in high school, he played for St Anthony's and I played for St Joseph's. The first time I faced him, immediately I noticed how much he spun the ball, but I also realised how much of a fighter he was. He worked so hard and never gave up and became an inspiration to us all.
A superpower in the making
Between the 1992 and 1996 World Cups, Ranatunga had begun meticulously putting together his squad of 14 players to take to the tournament. Along with blooding Muralitharan, the Sri Lankans also unearthed their greatest ever fast bowler, Chaminda Vaas in August 1994. With Vaas and Muralitharan spearheading the attack, and the team having a host of now experienced batsmen such as Ranatunga and de Silva, Sri Lanka began to claim large scalps away from home. Vaas and Muralitharan played key roles as Sri Lanka won series' in both New Zealand and Pakistan before arriving on Australian shores at the end of 1995. Australia too, was on the rise, having blooded their own two-headed bowling monster of Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne. Now under Taylor's guidance, Australia had assumed the title as the best team in the world after beating the West Indies in the West Indies.
Ian Chappell, ex-Australian captain turned Nine commentator: Arjuna had captained Sri Lanka here in 1989-90, and I remember being very impressed both by his captaincy, and Aravinda's batting. I don't think I really became aware of Kaluwitharana and Jayasuriya until that point, and then suddenly you saw what they could do and how it changed the way the one-day game was played, which was very interesting. No doubt they were a side on the up. It was a definite change of approach by the Australian Cricket Board. It was recognition for the improvement that Sri Lanka had shown. So for Sri Lanka to get the MCG Test was a big achievement.
De Silva: 1995 was slightly different because obviously the rivalry was mainly because we felt they were one of the best teams in the world at the time. The reason for us to feel that they were a rival was because, I don't know for the others, but for me, beating them was one of my main ambitions at the time. I was really looking forward to playing against them at all times. All those tours helped us and the key was at this stage, this team had been playing together for a long time, almost seven or eight years by the time the 1995 tour came. That really helped us to understand each other's strengths and weaknesses. We gelled as a team and played according to the strengths we possessed.
Ian Healy, Australian wicket-keeper: I think Sri Lanka was always valued highly by Australia. We were front and centre when it came to getting Sri Lanka into Test cricket. The Sri Lankan population in Melbourne obviously warranted them playing there, and obviously their talent, they had a very good team. That was mainly based around their batting and their spinners. They had a couple of really good quicks, and the others just had to work very hard.
Mahanama: The tension built from that 1995 tour. We got the impression that the Aussies felt that we had started to perform as a group. The world also started to follow the progress of Sri Lankan cricket. After that we had a triangular series in Sharjah, West Indies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and we won that triangular as well. That was an indication that we had started to perform. Coming into Australia, our confidence levels were quite high as well. They would have planned and studied and wanted to test our mental toughness. Leading up to that tour, we had started to do well and if you look back at the guys who were in the squad, there were about six or seven who had a lot of experience. If you look at that group, they had more experience than most other players around the world, but we were not given that kind of respect or recognition, maybe because we had just gotten into the big league. That period of the 1995 tour was really a test where our group had a blend of experience and youth. Murali was raw in that sense, Chaminda was (in his) early days, there were so many (young players) and quite a lot of our fast bowlers were raw.
Taylor: They'd risen a bit since their early days in the 1980s. All of a sudden they had players who could make good Test hundreds against quality bowling, and in the right conditions they could bowl you out and take 20 wickets in a Test. Going into the series, we would never have said it publicly, but we felt very confident about the series, particularly playing them here in Australia. The only anomaly was the Test in Sri Lanka in Colombo in 1992, where we won by 11 runs in a game where they should have won. That's the only thing that we were a little bit concerned about.
Arjuna Ranatunga, Sri Lankan captain (as told to Sri Lankan TV network Swarnavahini): When I started selecting the squad from 1994 onwards I wanted to create a family rather than just a team. I knew there was no lack of talent on our team. The players in this squad were willing to sacrifice for the betterment of the team. I just had to give them jobs to do and they did those jobs, but we were also very lucky.
Vaas: We came into the tour full of confidence because we had won away from home, even though people like Kapil Dev had said we couldn't take 20 wickets away from Sri Lanka. We won in New Zealand and then won in Pakistan after losing the first Test against a very strong team. We also won a tournament in Sharjah before the Australia tour.
Australia too, were on the rise, having blooded their own two-headed bowling monster of Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne in the preceding years. Now under Taylor's guidance, Australia had assumed the title as the best team in the world after beating the West Indies in the West Indies in a tightly-fought Test series between March and May of 1995. It did not seem like it at the time, but Sri Lanka's tour of Australia saw two of the world's most in-form sides against one another.
De Silva: Australia was the best team in the world at the time and it was one of the hardest teams to beat, especially at home. We wanted to come to Australia and do our best to see where we stacked up. Obviously, that particular tour gave us a lot of strength and that strength carried on till the end of the World Cup.
Taylor: We felt at the time we'd taken on other sides, particularly England the previous summer in Australia, who had better fast bowling attacks than Sri Lanka did, and yet we took care of England OK. There's no doubt, as is still the case today, Australia in Australia is hard to beat. You're not going to beat Australia with fast bowling, unless you've got four good ones like the West Indies used to have, and you're probably not going to win with one or two good spinners. You need to have a good well-rounded attack. If I look at the Sri Lankan attack of that time, it was good, but really designed around slowish pitches. We felt that their quicks weren't going to worry our batsmen as much as our quicks would worry their batsmen.
Healy: Between about 1993 and 1997 were very good times for us. Mainly based on the Ashes and the West Indies victory in 1995. I really don't think we'd mastered the sub-continent, but we were in good touch.
Chappell: It was a very good Australian side. The win in the Caribbean was a huge win. An Australian side hadn't won there in more than 20 years. It was a strong Australian side, they were recognised by pretty much everyone as the best team in the world by that point.
Mahanama: A lot of people hated Australia for their competitiveness. But Sri Lanka was always grateful to Australia for nurturing Sri Lankan cricket since they got Test status. Australia was one of the first countries who gave us a full tour. They had always backed Sri Lankan cricket and the ACB (Australian Cricket Board) had been supportive of our inclusion into full member status and supported us more than other countries. I don't think England gave us a three-Test series until we won the World Cup, they hardly played us.
While their cricket could more than do the talking, the Australians had also developed a reputation for their mental disintegration of opponents on the field. Sri Lanka needed to toughen up, and they turned to an Aussie to help them do it in the lead-up to the Australian tour and the World Cup which was to follow.
Mahanama: We had just hired Dav Whatmore (as coach), and that was the best thing to happen to us because Dav not only told us how to play the game, but he worked on areas where we needed help. We also hired Alex Kontouris, he was a three-in-one, a physio, masseuse and a trainer. We were the only team that did not have a physio in the 1992 World Cup and when we told our board, they said, 'You guys don't need physios, just start performing' but they didn't realise you needed to look after players. Guys like Murali, Chaminda Vaas and even Aravinda De Silva would not have gone that far if not for someone like Alex Kontouris being there.
That was one of the first times that we were exposed to mental conditioning coaches and what not and (Dav) brought in someone to speak to the team and to give us the confidence to face those challenges with courage.
Some of the guys didn't even understand what the Aussies said on the field, so when we look back they were really wasting their time. The four-letter word (f–k) was the only one everyone knew and we were wondering why they were coming up with that. What we thought was that someone would only use the four-letter word when someone had done something wrong.
Australia puts the foot down
The tour got under way with the first Test being played at the WACA in Perth. Ranatunga won the toss and elected to bat, but that proved to be the only win the tourists would have for the next few days. Michael Slater slammed 219, coming close to surpassing Sri Lanka's first innings total himself as Australia amassed a monster total of 5-617. A prodigy hailing from Tasmania by the name of Ricky Ponting made 96 before he was cruelly adjudged LBW off Vaas, while Muralitharan finished with unflattering figures of 2-224 off 54 overs as Slater and company smacked him to all parts. Australia took out the first Test by an innings and 36 runs, but what had previously been a good relationship between the two teams began to flip. Rumours begin to circle that Sri Lanka had been engaging in ball-tampering, while the tourists also experienced drama with the logo on their playing tops.
Healy: We were expecting a happy summer, we'd actually chosen to do our pre-World Cup camp at Colombo, because we loved that area so much. We loved the people of Sri Lanka, and the lifestyle of Sri Lanka so much, so it was going to be a great summer.
Mahanama: In Perth there were two incidents that a lot of people do not recollect. The first was that they felt that our logo, the Singer logo, was too big. I don't know who complained but it was there in the media to the extent where it was highlighted to the match referee. The match referee, Graham Dowling, came and checked the logo and it was confirmed that it was according to the ICC's rules at the time. Then they said we were tampering with the ball, that was the talk in the media. Later on, they found out that there was a manufacturing defect of the batch of Kookaburra balls. There was no proof, but even if we were tampering, our guys were too raw, so they had bigger challenges than tampering the ball.
We lost, but we still had a beer at the end of the match. Maybe the Aussies felt that we were spoilt sports, but in our culture we don't do it. Even over here, after (a match) you say bye and then you go home. We don't go into the opposition's room to have a beer, that's not our culture. This is where people need to understand different cultures of different people coming from different backgrounds. For us there where two separate drawbacks, it wasn't our culture, and the language barrier. There were only a few players who might have been comfortable talking in English to some of these players. The others would have gotten the wrong interpretation. We did it after the first Test, but then things changed after the second Test, which was the Boxing Day Test.
Taylor: I thought Ricky just wanted to get out on the same score as me! He got to 96 and thought he couldn't go past Mark Taylor, he had future captaincy written all over him! Looking at that scorecard, Aravinda de Silva got me for 96, I reckon it was the only ball that turned all day. He bowled off-spin from around the wicket, and I'm thinking here's a nice easy way to get to 100. I went to whip one through the leg side and it actually spun. I was absolutely plumb.
The eye of the storm
After a two-week gap, in which both Australia and Sri Lanka played in ODI fixtures in the Benson & Hedges World Series, the two sides reconvened in Melbourne for the Boxing Day Test. The Test was Sri Lanka's first on the grand stage of the MCG, a stage they would not return to again until 2012. Ranatunga again won the toss, this time inserting the Australians. With 55,239 fans in attendance, the Test began without incident but things changed when Muralitharan was brought into the attack. Australia are 2-117 when umpire Darrel Hair calls no ball as the off-spinner bowls to Mark Waugh. The first call catches everyone by surprise, including Tony Greig on commentary for Nine, who initially thinks Muralitharan is being called for his back foot landing in an illegal position. Hair calls Muralitharan six more times before day one is in the books and Australia's eventual 10-wicket win becomes a footnote.
Mahanama: We didn't know (what it was for), everyone was looking and we thought that he had overstepped. Murali had that tendency to do it, and from what we had heard in the past, if someone was calling (no-ball for throwing), generally it would be the square leg umpire because he had a better view. So we thought he had overstepped or he was crossing the return crease or something like that. Then when Darrel had told Arjuna, that's when things got a little out of hand and from our point of view, that entire Test match was ruined. There were all sorts of stories that the Australian board and the Australian team knew that Murali was going to be called and that's why some of the Australians said we shouldn't have played Murali in that Test match, but we as a team did not know. I don't know if our management heard about it, because we weren't privy to that, but as players we didn't know.
Taylor: I remember sitting in the changerooms when Murali was called, and we were all a bit shocked. Yes, there'd been talk about it in the media, especially how he supposedly had this arm that wouldn't straighten, but I can't recall any indication that someone was going to call him in the game. When it happened, I was thinking, 'What's going on?' and then quickly it was 'What are they going to do about it?' They switched him to the other end and Steve Dunne didn't call him. And then the media storm began.
MORE: Ugly dispute that nearly finished legend's career
De Silva: We couldn't believe it. We had to take it as it came because we had to play according to the rules. When he was called at times we had to take him off and fight the case outside of the playing field. That's when this thing started and the most important part was that he was called after taking a number of wickets. We couldn't fathom as to why they had taken so long to call him. If they wanted to, they had a lot of opportunities.
Darrell Hair, ICC Test umpire: If he was allowed to take wickets in matches when I was umpiring, it wouldn't be right. Nearly every umpire I umpired with had concerns, they just weren't willing to take the final step. But if you've got concerns it means something is wrong, and it should have been dealt with. I just found it was easier to get an idea of someone's action from the bowler's end. I know you've got other things to think about but that was my preference. People said there was a long-held tradition that the umpire at square leg has called a bowler for throwing, but there's also a long-held tradition that you don't throw! Sometimes when you're at square leg it might be easier to see a change in a fast bowler's action, but the way he bowled was a little bit different. He bowled a lot of legal deliveries, and you can see the difference in the legal ones better from the bowler's end. You don't have to say it straightens by 15 degrees or 30 degrees or whatever, you know what happens when an arm straightens.
Vaas: When the no-ball incident happened, we were all surprised but being one of the younger players, the seniors insulated us from all of the drama and allowed us to focus on playing. They dealt with all the off-field issues, the senior players and the management, all we had to do was play the game. That was a true sign of leadership, because we didn't feel that anything bad was going to happen to us.
The Boxing Day aftermath
The Murali affair destroys an already frosty relationship between the two teams. The Sri Lankans are adamant that Australia's players knew Muralitharan was going to be called ahead of the Test match. Muralitharan's fledgling career appears to be on life support after he is called by Australian umpire Ross Emerson during a ODI against the West Indies in Brisbane just weeks later. The youngster is no-balled five times in the space of three overs and the incident ends his Australian tour. The Sri Lankan team rallies behind Muralitharan after a rousing speech from Ranatunga following the Boxing Day Test.
Mahanama: We decided not to play Murali (after Brisbane) because from there onwards we realised that they were going to target him. We made sure that Murali stayed with us and got all the testing done by Daryl Foster. We gave Murali confidence and we kept him in the team. As a group, we didn't allow Murali to feel that he was victimised and that it was going to be the end of his career. We wanted him to know that it was just a hiccup and we remained together.
MORE: Controversy that derailed summer of cricket
I still remember Arjuna telling the guys enough is enough and we're not going to take anything lying down. If you give it, we give it back. It can get nasty and it's not our style, and they would have thought that they were getting us out of our comfort zone, which was not the case. Arjuna said let's stand up against it as a team, and that's exactly what we did. It really motivated us to perform and it would have translated into some of the players who followed afterwards like Kumar Sangakkara, Mahela, Dilshan, Malinga and so on. It was all during that tour where he got everyone together and mentioned that. Sometimes it could backfire, but for us it worked because we came back stronger.
Healy: Around the circuit I think the suspicions were high, and the game was just not ready to deal with it. I think Darrell almost got it right, he should have called him under the letter of the law, because he had suspicions. He'd pre-warned the ICC, he'd pre-warned the team, by all reports. The warnings were there, and they must have been quite nervous that it would happen in Melbourne. And then he did it seven times. He probably should have just done it once, that would have been a big enough stir. Call him once and see how ill-equipped the game is in dealing with it, and leave it at that. Don't overdo it on Boxing Day. Darrell Hair did the right thing calling him once, but not seven times.
MORE: 'Drastic final step' that sparked cricket chaos
It wasn't our problem, but it very quickly became Darrell Hair's problem. I saw him that night standing outside the hotel in Melbourne, and I said, 'Mate, you did the right thing.' He was quite appreciative of that comment, because I suspect he was under pressure already, and it was only a few hours after it had happened.
Hair: I tried very hard to ignore (the media coverage), but it wasn't easy. When you get to the umpires room the next day and the Herald Sun and The Age are scattered all over the table, you know what's been said. Initially a lot of the newspaper reports were more about what the ICC might do. I don't think there was anything to say what I did was wrong, they were grappling with the problem of how it all came to that.
De Silva: Obviously (Muralitharan) was really down and upset. Right throughout the tour, we had a very stressful few months after that with the cricket board getting involved and legal teams. Things were taken into a different level and there were lawyers walking in and out of the hotel. It was very difficult for us to focus on the game and our performances reflected that. When the ODIs came, we picked the team without him, which gave us a source of strength to continue fighting for him. We all thought that was the end. I think even Murali would have thought that. But there was a lot of external support which kept him going and the fight went on.
Taylor: From a captaincy point of view for me, it was a pain in the neck to be Australian captain at that time. All of sudden there was an issue that people wanted me to comment on, that from both a personal and team point of view, didn't concern me. It wasn't our bowler, and to be honest Murali wasn't worrying us at the time. He took 1-124 in that match, and 2-224 in the previous match in Perth. But then we had this issue with people asking us what we thought, even whether or not we had a say in it. That's what annoyed me the most. There was an inference from certain journalists that somehow this whole thing was instigated in the Australian change rooms because we were worried about Murali. That certainly wasn't the case, and his figures in that series back that up.
MORE: The Murali conspiracy theory that angered Australia
Ranatunga: When you go to Australia, they try to get you down mentally by any means possible. They used to stay in five-star hotels, while we would get three-star hotels, or the buses we'd use were different. If we finished a match at 11pm, they'd put us on the 6am flight the next morning, but Australia would come on the later flight. From the moment you land there, it's not through the cricket that they beat you, it's mentally. From my first tour in 1984 I noticed it. The best thing that happened to me was that I had seen it from when I joined the team at 18. I decided that by the time I was going to lead the team that things would be done differently. Once we forced them to change the hotel and said we'd boycott the tour otherwise. It was through things like this that we were able to show that we weren't beneath the Australian team.
Vaas: The team wanted to protect Murali. We didn't think Murali's career would be ended by this incident because we knew by the laws that an umpire would have to warn the captain first before calling no-ball. We had also travelled to most parts of the world by that stage and his action hadn't been a problem anywhere else. We had no idea that something like this could happen on Boxing Day. This happened over and over again. After the Test series, Murali got called again. Then we felt that this was about trying to tarnish Murali's name and it was a pre-planned thing because they felt that Murali was going to be a threat to them in the near future. This happened again when we toured in 1999 in a ODI against England.
A bitter ending
Sri Lanka ends its tour with a 148-run loss in the third Test in Adelaide in January 1996. Relationships were further frayed when Ranatunga had instructed his players not to shake the hands of the opposition following the second final of the Benson & Hedges Series in Sydney, where the Australians had won by nine runs. While Sri Lanka had played some of its best cricket following the no-ball incident, even defeating Australia in two ODIs, Taylor's men edged two closely fought finals in Melbourne and Sydney. Ranatunga's men were getting closer, but Australia still appeared a cut above the tourists.
Taylor: I remember in Adelaide we had a couple of beers. The feeling between the sides wasn't too bad. There was the moment during the one-dayers where Arjuna wouldn't shake my hand, which was disappointing, but that was an individual thing. It wasn't right throughout the side, there was a number of Sri Lankan players who I'd played against a lot, going back to Under 19s. There was certainly no ill-feeling between the majority of players. I suspect Arjuna wouldn't shake my hand because of that belief it was instigated by us.
Where it started a bit of a firestorm was the suggestion the whole thing came from the Australian dressing room, or the ACB. That was the problem. People were trying to make it an Australia vs Sri Lanka thing.
Mahanama: We might not have agreed (on the handshake snub), but that was the decision that was taken by the captain and the management, and we just followed. That was also because there was a remark towards Sanath (Jayasuriya), and that's why we behaved in that manner. Knowing the player involved, I don't think it was said in (a racist) manner. It was just in the heat of the moment. Obviously when you don't shake hands after a final and there's a Test to play after that, that's an indication that it's not going to be the same. When something like that happens, it's only time that will resolve the issue. To be fair to the Australian players, I don't think they said anything in particular on the field (with regards to the no-balls).
Healy: We started to get cranky with each other. They weren't trusting us, and what we were telling them, which was that we had nothing to do with it. It affected the relationship between the two teams for sure, and then the vitriol from the sub-continent started ahead of the World Cup. It was a bit silly, because it had absolutely nothing to do with us.
MORE: Healy comes clean on most famous sledge
De Silva: Our relationship was okay with some of the players, but then the rivalry became greater. Every time we got on the field playing against them, it was a case of real aggression from both ends. I guess they thought (we were becoming a threat) or else they would not have resorted to this sort of action. Sometimes you get a lot of opposition when you become strong, so that's a part of life and I guess a part of cricket.
The rivalry reaches the World Cup
The two sides are pitted against each other in Group A of the round robin stage of the World Cup. Sri Lanka finishes top of the group with a 5-0 record after both Australia and the West Indies forfeit playing games in Colombo following the Colombo Central Bank bombing on January 31, 1996, just weeks before Australia's scheduled match in Sri Lanka. Australia's decision to forfeit further inflames tensions between the two sides, but helps Sri Lanka reach the knockout stage of the tournament for the first time in six attempts. Australia finishes second in the group, while India and the West Indies also qualify for the knockout stages. After the drama in Australia, Ranatunga is advised to leave Muralitharan out of his squad, but respectfully declines.
Taylor: It was purely security related. That World Cup was a very unenjoyable time, particularly at the start. We boycotted a game, and PILCOM, who were the organising committee, wanted to kick us out of the tournament. It wasn't something we enjoyed doing. But by the end of the 1995-96 summer there was the feeling that it had become an Australia vs Sri Lanka problem. It was no longer just about Murali's action. It had really blown up. Craig McDermott was getting death threats. Things had escalated way out of control. I think it's fair to say we had genuine fears about what may or may not have happened had we gone to Sri Lanka. When the decision was made that we wouldn't go to Sri Lanka, I don't think there was a player who was disappointed to hear that. We were far more comfortable not going, and I don't say that lightly, because the tour to Sri Lanka in 1992 had been great. It was a very nice country. But we would not have felt safe in Sri Lanka in 1996.
Mahanama: Things got worse when the Central Bank bomb went off and the Aussies decided they weren't going to tour. A country like Australia isn't exposed to things like that, but then three or four years later, when there were three or four bombs that went off in London, more or less the same set of players did not even object. From that time onwards, we played a healthy brand of cricket between the countries, but the relationship was not the same.
Healy: There was lots of back and forth with the Federal Police, DFAT, lots of advice and discussion. And then at the same time we're trying to work out where we could go, because India wasn't being very accommodating either. They pretty much left us to our own devices for the first two weeks of that World Cup. The training grounds, the facilities and the hotels were pretty average.
Vaas: Playing a World Cup to me was huge as a youngster, I was 22 at that time. My main thing was to do the best for the country. The good thing that happened was that the neighbouring countries, India and Pakistan, took steps to come to Sri Lanka to show that Sri Lanka was a safe country. They played a joint game and we were very happy, that's how we started our tournament. Playing a tournament in Sri Lanka was huge for Sri Lankans and for the players. We were surprised when they didn't come and we felt it. We heard that they were not going to come because of the war which we had in Sri Lanka. The government and everyone tried to do the right thing and tried to get the teams to Sri Lanka, but unfortunately they didn't come.
De Silva: The players were very upset, but in a way it helped us. Them and the West Indies not coming gave us two extra points in the group stage. We hoped that we would be able to play against them in the knockout games. It surprised us because after India and Pakistan toured Sri Lanka as a combined team, we thought that it would be okay for the Australians and West Indies players to come.
Chappell: In my opinion it was ridiculous not to go, with the trouble that Sri Lanka had gone to. They'd organised head-of-state security. Fly in on the day, and fly out again at night, which is what a lot of rugby league teams had to do in 2020. If you've got an option to play, you don't forfeit a match. To me the most important thing to come out of that was a comment from Arjuna, where he said that they wanted to play Australia in the knockout stage of the tournament. Not too many teams at that stage were saying that. He said it straight away. To me that was a good move tactically and psychologically.
Ranatunga: I was told not to select Murali after the problems he had in Australia, but I said I needed him in the team. They said if Murali gets called during the tournament, that we won't be able to find a replacement for him. I told them to give me the 14 players I wanted and if Murali was going to be called, then I'd be happy to go with 13 players. We began to peak when it came to the quarter-finals.
Muttiah Muralitharan, Sri Lankan spinner (as told to Sri Lankan TV network Swarnavahini): I don't think any other captain would have stood up for me like Arjuna did, because as a captain, the risk was too large. He took that decision because he felt that I wasn't doing anything wrong. It was from that incident that we became really close as a team. We had our own internal problems in the lead-up to that World Cup. In 1993, they dropped Aravinda because his fitness was supposedly not good. There were little problems, I'm not going to say it was a perfectly harmonious team right from 1991-92 to the 1996 World Cup. All the problems disappeared when we unified to fight this one problem. I give a lot of credit to Arjuna and Aravinda for keeping the team together.
The collision course
Placed on the opposite sides of the knockout bracket, the stage is set for Sri Lanka and Australia to meet in the World Cup final in Lahore. Sri Lanka easily dispatches England in the quarters, while a Mark Waugh special helps Australia chase down 287 against New Zealand to advance. Both sides are forced to overcome early holes in their semi-final clashes, with Sri Lanka facing India at Eden Gardens, while Australia faces the West Indies in Mohali. At certain stages of their semi-finals, both sides look like going out of the tournament. Chasing a modest target of 208, the West Indies are 2-165 at one stage before Shane Warne spins Australia to a five-run victory. After coming in with Sri Lanka 2-1 in the first over, de Silva lashes 66 off 47 deliveries to lift Sri Lanka to 8-251. In response, the tournament's leading runscorer, Sachin Tendulkar, single-handedly lifts India towards the final. The home side is 1-98, with Tendulkar already on 65, when a moment of magic from Kaluwitharana ends his innings and in turn, India's hopes. India collapses to 8-120 before match referee Clive Lloyd awards the match to Sri Lanka after unruly fans set the stadium alight and pelt the Sri Lankan fielders with projectiles.
Kaluwitharana: We felt a major difference after that stumping. The more you batted on that wicket, the more it started to break up. Murali and Kumar (Dharmasena) were bowling well, but Sachin was batting that well that you couldn't tell that it was a bad wicket. But after this wicket, I felt like the match was over.
Mahanama: I still recall it being the most humid day I have experienced and the unbelievable atmosphere. To this day, it is my proudest knock in limited overs cricket for many reasons: Our opponents, the match situation, the audience and the conditions.
Taylor: We'd boycotted the match against Sri Lanka, and we lost to the West Indies as well. We were certainly a long way from being favourites to win the tournament. We played the West Indies again in the semi-finals, and somehow we win the game after being 4-15. It was a strange World Cup.
De Silva: We can't forget in that game we had a lot of contributions in order to reach the total of 251. Roshan, Arjuna, Vaasy all made some runs lower down the order. Even when India was only one down, we felt that we could turn the match around with a couple of quick wickets. That was a real team win.
Healy: Our semi-final win was a big surprise, but that might have been our final I reckon.
Ranatunga: More than winning the World Cup, I thought it would be a great achievement if we just made it to the final. The feeling of winning the World Cup became stronger after we won the match against India.
Vaas: The way Australia came into the final, we knew they were going to be very difficult opponents, but we didn't take it lightly. We had our routines and we kept them throughout the tournament and it helped us.
Captain fantastic gets on top
The Sri Lankans are quietly confident heading into the final as the tournament's only undefeated team. Ranatunga's side redefines how teams structure a 50-over innings off the back of his blazing opening pair of Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana, who take full advantage of fielding restrictions inside the first 15 overs. The openers' assault sets the table for an experienced middle order which mows down a number of targets throughout the tournament. Despite winning the toss, Ranatunga stuns many by inserting the Australians. Little do they know, he's got an ace up his sleeve.
Ranatunga: The day before the final, when we were practicing in the evening, the ground was wet with dew. The groundsman at the Gaddafi Stadium in Lahore was the same groundsman that had been there when I first toured in 1982. I told him to give us a good wicket without leaving much grass on it, and he said he would. In order to get used to bowling in the dew, our spinners would dip the ball in a bucket of water and then bowl with it.
The night before the final, I wanted to figure out whether the dew was going to play a part in the final. We were at a major event and I told (Sri Lankan team manager) Duleep Mendis to organise a vehicle and we went to check out the ground and the outfield was soaking wet. We then decided that we had to bowl first because we could win the match if we held them to a score around 250.
In the morning when I was walking out to do the toss, I saw Imran Khan and he asked me what I'm going to do. He said that it looked a good wicket and to bat first, but I had already decided that we were going to field first. I spoke to Duleep and we said we had already decided so let's stick to the plan. Normally, when someone like Imran, who was the captain of the previous World Cup winning team, tells you to do something, you do it.
Taylor: They put us in, which I was surprised about, because I would have batted. But we hadn't been there long enough to know about the dew at night. That's what they were worried about, and it was a factor, because Warnie couldn't bowl as well as he would have liked. But our biggest problem was we should have made 30-40 more runs.
Healy: We trained too hard the day before. Each team got one net, so all our batters had to go through one net, and it took way too long. It was a boring training session, then it poured with rain. It was still raining in the morning and we thought there was no way we were playing. Tubby went down to the ground with the manager just to have a look, and he rings up and says, 'Get down here, we're playing.'
Despite the World Cup final being the biggest match of their lives, many of the Sri Lankan players are ice-cool on the morning of the match, even surprising Ranatunga himself. Much of the bad blood between the two sides has simmered by this stage, although the Sri Lankan captain can't help but take a dig at Australia's new pin-up boy: Shane Warne. By this stage, Ranatunga is public enemy No.1 in the Australian camp, exactly where he wants to be.
Ranatunga (as told to The Island's Rex Clementine): I woke up a little late and as I was walking in for breakfast, Duleep Mendis and Roshan Mahanama joined. We could see the Australians; all wearing the same kit, seated in same table and having breakfast. I asked where are our chaps. Roshan informed me there's a carpet sale downstairs and all our guys were there. I quickly went there. The boys were bargaining at top of their voices. I was angry. Here we are going to play greatest game of our lives and preparation could be better. But Duleep told me something interesting. He said, 'Look, before a big match players are tensed. But look at our guys. They are relaxed. Don't put undue pressure on them.' I thought 'fair point'. Then, I went towards my teammates and started bargaining at top of my voice.
Vaas: We were very relaxed heading into the final. I remember before the match, we all went for breakfast and that hotel had a small shopping area where they sold carpets and sarees. We went through and some of the players bought some carpets, including me, and we were just so relaxed. We were supposed to arrive at the ground at 11:45 am, with the match starting at 2:00 pm. Up until 11:00 am, we were relaxing and shopping.
Chappell: On the day before the final, I was at practice to interview Warnie, and Ravi Shastri was there to interview Arjuna. When I got there Australia were just about to start, so I had to wait until they finished. Obviously, whatever Arjuna had said in his interview had got back to Warnie, because when he came up to me, even before I'd say hello, he asked me, 'What's that fat bastard said about me now?'
Apparently Arjuna had said that Warnie was just a media myth. Again, I thought to myself that not too many players around the world would come out and say that. It told me that Arjuna was in the Australian's heads before the match even started. That's why I thought he was such a good captain, he wasn't afraid of anybody. That approach flowed through to the team.
Mahanama: He would have realised how players treated him and Sri Lanka over the years and he stood up for it. Being a fatherly figure, he was older than most of us and he wanted to get that message across that you can't mess around with him. Outwardly, the Aussies did not like Arjuna, but deep inside they respected him because he was the only one who gave back their own medicine. At the time, not many players did that apart from the West Indians, but they didn't have to.
Healy: He was confrontational, but I thought it was a nice sort of confrontational, and firm. He was doing what Virat Kohli now does with India, he was leading them out of submission, leading them out of a submissive mindset to a competitive mindset, to not take a backward step. I think he did it quite well, he wasn't too confrontational. He was strong, as you should be at that level of cricket.
Taylor: Arjuna was a very good captain. He generally did things you didn't want him to do, including calling for runners and all that sort of stuff. There's no doubt that was all part of his plan. He was only doing what came naturally. He can be antagonistic, but he was only doing it to give Sri Lanka the best chance of being competitive.
If he was honest he probably lined up the two sides, and realised that in Australian conditions they were going to struggle to win. And his way of ensuring they would be competitive was to do as much as possible to annoy us. In a way, the whole Murali thing, as much as they probably didn't enjoy it, it was a good distraction for them. It gave them something else to cling to, to have that mindset that the Aussies were just belting them up, even though it wasn't the case.
Mahanama: There was a little bit of tension between Arjuna and Warnie because Warnie's comment about he can't go shopping or something to that effect was in the media. That was more of an individual battle, but for us as teams I don't think it mattered. In that World Cup, everyone else moved on but Arjuna had this (motivation) and he wanted to keep quiet and give it back. We had so many issues that if there was any comment, Arjuna would have given it back. I know in the final there was a bit of chatter between Arjuna and Warnie, but the others just moved on.
The Lahore Final
Australia gets off to a flyer after being inserted into bat, with Taylor leading the charge. His side is 1-137 when he is dismissed for 74 off 83 deliveries, and with him goes Australia's momentum. The Aussies stumble to what seems to be a competitive total of 7-241. In response, Sri Lanka loses both openers cheaply to fall to 2-23 when De Silva walks in. What ensues is arguably the finest innings in the country's rich cricketing history. De Silva is unbeaten on 107, while Ranatunga lashes an unbeaten 47 off just 37 deliveries, as Sri Lanka wins the final by seven wickets and claims the 1996 World Cup.
Taylor: In the end, the irony of the final was that myself and Mark Waugh got off to a brisk start, in the way that Sri Lanka had started playing. We made 240, and then we knock over their two openers who had been the ones who changed the game. Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana didn't make runs in the final. They were 2-9. They actually beat us at our own game. Aravinda batted beautifully, and Arjuna was the perfect foil for him, and they won comfortably, playing like we normally played.
De Silva: It was one of the greatest moments for Sri Lanka as well as for us personally. Winning a World Cup is every cricketer's dream, so for me, to be able to do that during my career, I am quite pleased to have been part of that, to bring glory to the country as a team. As a team we had gone through a lot so it was special for the entire squad.
Aggression is what I normally apply, so I just continued doing that. I didn't want to change my approach to the game at all. I enjoyed those kinds of games. I was really happy to be exposed to that situation because I enjoy challenges. That was an ideal situation for my kind of performance.
When we got closer to the target and knew we would win, we just wanted to get closer to the target and finish the job off. It was special because we had gone through a lot, myself and Arjuna. This was a precious moment to cherish forever.
Healy: We started well with the bat in the final in Lahore, but then we were all out for 240 instead of 290. Aravinda took a few wickets, that shouldn't have happened. And we just didn't make enough, they batted superbly. We were just about to go out and defend 240, and the lights go off. So we had to go and sit in the dark for about 30 minutes. We had them 2-23, both Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana were gone, but the others got the runs. It was a very frustrating couple of days.
Mahanama: That win put little Sri Lanka on the map. When you win a world event, you are recognised by countries that also don't play the sport. I can remember afterwards we went on a trip to the USA and the customs knew who we were. That's something that we as a group can be proud of and we should be thankful that people, mainly the players who played long before us for opening that path for all of us. Someone like Sanga has said that this is when we could compete on the world stage.
Vaas: When I saw the wicket, I thought it was a 270-280 wicket, but we managed to keep them under 250. We had a long batting line-up, so I thought we could get it. It depended on the openers and the No.3, how they bat out the opening overs. Right throughout the tournament, Sanath (Jayasuriya), Kalu and (Asanka Gurusinha) did their part. We had a belief in each other that we could get it our way in the final.
When we were watching the chase, we're all different. Some people like to sit, there are a few people who are very superstitious, they won't get up from their seat. Even in the semi-final, Sanath and Kalu had gotten out early so I knew that we could still reach the target. Sanath, Asanka, Roshan and Hashan (Tillakaratne) were the most superstitious. Murali loves to talk, so he never shuts up. Even in that situation, he keeps going and can't stop.
When Arjuna and Aravinda were batting, we knew we had the game won, because there were still lots of overs left and wickets in hand. In that moment, even if Arjuna and Aravinda had gotten out, we had enough back-up.
After claiming their maiden World Cup win, the Sri Lankans want nothing more than to head back home to celebrate with their loved ones. There's only one problem: their flight back to Colombo isn't until the next morning. The team decides to get creative in order to head home early, but is incredibly never able to celebrate properly due to the mayhem on the streets of Colombo.
Vaas: We never had an after-party. We were meant to fly out the next morning, but we wanted to get home as soon as possible. There was a flight that had come from Sri Lanka with passengers just to watch the game. It was a UL 320 Tristar and the pilot was Sunil Wettimuny. We were so thrilled to go back home as soon as the tournament finished, so we got on the flight with the passengers and went home. The flight was so full that we all sat on the floor, but we didn't care because we were so excited. Once we landed, the President at the time, Chandrika Kumaratunga, told us to come to Temple Trees (the official residence of the President). The streets were so full that it took forever to get from one place to the next. We made stops at people's home towns where they would place garlands around our neck. We landed in Sri Lanka at 6:30am and by the time all the official proceedings finished it was around 5pm.
The aftermath
The 1996 World Cup kicks off two parallel golden eras for both Sri Lanka and Australia. The Aussies recover from their crushing defeat to take out the next three 50 over World Cups, and four out of the next five. Sri Lanka's young core from the 1996 tournament, Jayasuriya, Vaas and Muralitharan, provide the backbone to more deep tournament runs, but another trophy eludes them. Ranatunga returns to lead Sri Lanka's title defence in 1999, but the reigning champs fail to make it past the group stage. Sri Lanka falls at the semi-final hurdle in 2003, de Silva's final tournament, and the final in 2007, both at the hands of Australia, before losing another final in 2011 to India.
Taylor: I've had a couple of beers with Arjuna since our playing days and I've got to say I've always enjoyed his company.
De Silva: Whenever they come to Sri Lanka, we meet them and they come over to my place whenever they have been around. The relationship is good.
Healy: I've seen quite a few of them. I keep in touch with Arjuna through his cousin. I've had dinner with him a couple of times. (Asanka Gurusinha) lives in Melbourne, so I've done some appearances with him, written him a reference or two. They're the two I've had the most to do with. I knew Mahanama and Aravinda pretty well.
Mahanama: I'm in the process of re-writing my book and I got quotes from some of the people that I played against, and Steve Waugh sent me quotes. I got in touch with Steve because we go back a long way, along with people like Wasim Akram and Anil Kumble. When I asked Steve, he had no hesitation. I meet Mark Waugh in my job, David Boon, so we have met and there's no bad blood. In Sri Lanka we don't keep anything in our chest, we just move on.
Vaas: I am mainly in touch with guys like Justin Langer, Darren Lehmann and Adam Gilchrist who are all great champions of the game.
Ranatunga: The most pleasing part to me is that 25 years later, these 14 players are still a family, we all still get along.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.