Tours of Sri Lanka are getting progressively tougher for England. In 2000-01, they went into the final Test in Colombo with belief and momentum after squaring the series at Kandy (they ended up winning famously). In 2003-04, it was 0-0 going into the Colombo decider, but on that occasion they were only level after hanging on like men possessed in the first two Tests (they ended up losing heavily). Now, they go to Galle - a venue where Sri Lanka have won six and lost two of their 11 Tests - trailing 1-0 and wondering how in the name of Ottis Gibson they are expected to take 20 wickets on a pitch that has traditionally shown less life than a morgue. No, on the surface, it doesn't look good (and that's before the surface starts to break up on the fourth morning).
But it is impossible to follow England these days without getting sucked into the need to derive "positives" from even the most disheartening first-innings collapse on a flat one at, say, the SSC. So let's have a go, shall we? After all, it is nearly Christmas.
First, foremost, above all and overshadowing all else is Muttiah Muralitharan. There were signs during this week's draw in Colombo that England, in their own torturous way, are feeling more comfortable against him. A look at his strike-rates for the four innings of the series so far certainly suggests so: 35 in the first innings at Kandy; 72 in the second; 137 for the important chunk of the first innings in Colombo until he hoovered up three tailenders in nine balls at the death to massage his figures; and 162 in the second. The positive-spotters will note that, at this rate, he will have to send down about 30 overs per wicket at Galle.
Then there's the pitch. No one is quite sure how it will play, mainly because the Galle International Stadium has been a ghost venue ever since the tsunami enveloped it almost three years ago. It's a safe bet to say it will be slow and low like its pre-tsunami predecessors, but new pitches take time to establish their own character. The Rose Bowl is an extreme example of this phenomenon. England must cross their fingers and hope something has gone badly wrong with the preparation.
If it has, then the potential return of Matthew Hoggard will assume even greater significance. Asked during a commentary stint in Colombo which of the England bowlers the Sri Lankans feared most, Sanath Jayasuriya nominated Hoggard without any hesitation. If his back problem does clear up by Tuesday, his ability to curve the new ball into the left-handers' pads might at least spare England another vigil from Michael Vandort. It would be tough luck on Stuart Broad, who did not do a lot wrong on debut, but Hoggard remains England's best bowler in Asia by the length of one his plods.
Now is also the time to bring in Graeme Swann to accompany Monty Panesar. Swann represents a horse for a course, it is true, but pragmatism is the order of the day, and Ravi Bopara's education can wait, especially as his total of 16 overs in the first two Tests does not strengthen the argument that he is a mini-Flintoff. Matt Prior's form with the bat means that England can risk him at No6 for a Test they have to treat as a one-off, bat Swann at 7 and Ryan Sidebottom at 8. It is far from an ideal tail, but as Vic Marks pointed out yesterday, England's problem is taking wickets rather than scoring runs, and the control Swann might offer - this is no certainty, even after his gritty one-day performances - will allow the three quicks more respite than they got in Colombo. And anyway, a bit of batting instability is a small price to pay for a side chasing the series.
The odds remain against England, even with a plan as cunning as this. But it is hard to see which other XI they can perm from their squad that gives them a better chance. Oh, almost forgot to mention: Kevin Pietersen is yet to pass 50 in the series. Just a thought.
Extract taken from The Spin, Guardian Unlimited's weekly email on the world of cricket
