The newly appointed Sri Lanka Cricket interim administration led by Eran Wickremaratne came into office promising a fresh start with a clean-up act. They moved swiftly. Work has already begun on drafting a new constitution, which they promised would be completed within six months. A forensic audit is being conducted to identify the real issues within the organisation’s finances. The urgency to restore order after years of chaos is understandable.
Sri Lankan cricket desperately needs restructuring, accountability and direction. This is exactly what is expected of a group of professionals now running SLC. But some of their own actions have already created confusion.
Their first major move was to appoint new selectors. Not that they are new to the job, having held the same responsibilities previously. In principle, there is nothing wrong with that. Every administration has the right to appoint people they trust to key positions. However, there is confusion surrounding the manner in which the change was carried out.
The previous selection committee, headed by Pramodya Wickremasinghe, had not even completed six months in office. More importantly, there was no clear indication that their services had been formally terminated before the new committee was announced. It created uncertainty and unnecessary controversy.
Soon after the squads for the West Indies series were announced, the new chief selector, Upul Wijegunawardene, stated that his committee had not selected the squads. Understandably so. They were only a few days into the job when the teams were announced. But what followed deepened the confusion.
Wickremasinghe admitted that his panel had selected the squads, including the new white-ball captain, before the selectors changed hands. However, he claims that the original squad submitted by his committee was subsequently altered.
He says players such as Nuwan Thushara and Binura Fernando were added to the T20 squad, while Nishan Madushka and Kasun Rajitha were brought into the Test setup. Dunith Wellalage was reportedly nominated as ODI vice-captain, with Kamindu Mendis receiving leadership responsibilities in Tests and T20Is.
If that is the case, then who exactly made these changes? That question remains unanswered, and that is the real danger.
Selection is one of the most sensitive aspects of the game. Every player in the system watches closely. Every omission creates disappointment. Every inclusion invites scrutiny. If there is uncertainty about who is selecting teams, then the entire process loses credibility.
The most striking example in this saga is the inclusion of Nuwan Thushara. There is no debate about his talent. He is among Sri Lanka’s most promising white-ball bowlers and possesses rare skills in the shorter format. Sri Lanka undoubtedly needs him. But the issue here is not talent. It is consistency in policy.
Under the previous administration and selection panel, strict fitness standards were introduced. This was backed by the Ministry of Sports. The rationale behind the programme was simple. Sri Lankan cricket had become increasingly vulnerable to injuries, particularly among fast bowlers and all-rounders. The policy was designed not as punishment but as protection. The logic was difficult to argue against.
Sri Lanka suffered enormously at the recent World Cup due to injuries to key players. Eshan Malinga, Wanindu Hasaranga and Matheesha Pathirana were all unavailable at crucial stages. Their absence severely weakened Sri Lanka’s campaign and almost certainly cost the team a place in the knockout stages. The script may well have been different had all three been fit and available.
That painful experience was precisely why fitness benchmarks were enforced more rigorously. Yet now the message appears to have changed overnight. Wanindu Hasaranga and Thushara, both of whom missed their IPL stints due to fitness issues, are back in the national side. The previous SLC stance only denied these cricketers the opportunity to rub shoulders with the best players in the world while representing their IPL franchises and earning valuable professional experience, along with significant financial rewards.
If policies can suddenly shift depending on who occupies office, what message does that send to players? Professional sport cannot function effectively when the goalposts are constantly moved.
This inconsistency is perhaps the most worrying aspect of the current situation. Fitness standards cannot be rigid under one administration and negotiable under another. Selection policies cannot change depending on personalities, political pressure or sentiment.
There must be a system. Sri Lanka Cricket urgently needs a transparent, clearly documented selection policy that survives administrative changes. Whether it concerns fitness benchmarks, disciplinary matters, leadership appointments or selection criteria, players must know exactly where they stand. Otherwise, confusion becomes the norm.
Equally concerning is the apparent role of the National Sports Selection Committee, which reviews squads before ministerial approval is granted. If players who have not met minimum fitness standards are still receiving endorsement, then one must question whether the existing framework is being properly enforced at all.
Sri Lankan cricket has suffered enough from inconsistency, impulsive decision-making and shifting agendas. This new administration came into office promising reform and professionalism. It is still early days, and they deserve time. But reform cannot merely be about replacing individuals. True reform requires consistency, clarity and the courage to uphold standards even when they are inconvenient. Otherwise, Sri Lanka Cricket will continue to surprise us, but for all the wrong reasons.
