Gavin Rennie on the Sri Lankans and the Harare Test against South Africa

Gavin Rennie talks to John Ward about the match between the President's XI and the Sri Lankans and about the Test match against South Africa at Harare Sports Club.

We won the toss in the match against Sri Lanka and decided to bat. It was played at Bulawayo Athletic Club on a fairly flat wicket, although one end had a green patch to it so the seamers generally bowled from the one side and the spinners operated from the other.

The Sri Lankans have a new bowler called Gallage who picked up the first four wickets. He bowls fast-medium, quite similar to Perera - quite a full length and tries to swing the ball both ways. I opened the batting but didn't find him difficult to play at all; the guys just kept playing down the wrong line and getting caught behind or trapped lbw, which was his game plan.

But then Gary Brent and I settled down and formed a useful partnership. We both played positively; by this time the pitch had flattened out after a little early life, but we still had to work for the runs. The Sri Lankans were missing Chaminda Vaas, Wickramasinghe and Muralitharan from their attack, but we still had to score the runs. We just kept out the good balls, waited for the bad balls and made it our objective to put them away.

Their new bowler Herath was playing, left-arm spin, very similar to Grant Flower. He turns the ball a bit either way with very little change of action, and has a very good flight. He has the Gleeson-type delivery, applying spin with his finger bent behind the ball, but we could pick up the direction of the spin in the air, although not so much from the hand. He generally bowled the inswinging delivery to the right-hander and left-hander alike; he seemed able to wing it both ways. Our objective was not to get on to the back foot against him in case we failed to pick up the one that went the other way and be trapped lbw. Once we got on the front foot to him we seemed to be able to dominate him, and whenever he bowled anything full we drove it back down the ground. As long as we could see which way the seam was rotating and the angle of the seam, we were able to read the spin.

When Sri Lanka came in to bat they dominated right from the first ball. Atapattu took strike, and he put away David Mutendera for three or four fours through the cover and point region in the first over. That was their attitude throughout their innings; if we bowled short, they hooked or cut it, and if we bowled full they were powerful drivers of the ball. So it was quite hard bowling to them, especially as the pitch had flattened out more on the second day.

They simply took this as a batting practice and just piled on the runs. We spoke to them on the third morning about making a game of it, and it was suggested that they declare as they had almost reached our first-innings total so that we could set them a target in 40 or 50 overs at the end of the day. But Jayasuriya, who is their captain but was sitting out in this match, decided that he wanted his batsmen to have as much practice as possible, so they did not follow our suggestion.

So the game just ended as a dead draw, as the Sri Lankans batted through the day for practice. The wicket was of no assistance to the bowlers -- certainly by the third day it was very flat -- and the two captains decided to call off the game at half-past four. It was a good game for me personally as I answered the selectors for leaving me out of the 13-man squad for the Test by scoring a century. It helped me regain my confidence after having some of it knocked out of me during the Australian and South African Tests.

On the bowling side Gary Brent was the mainstay of our seam attack, and then Andrew Whittall took six wickets on a flat wicket, which was quite an achievement against their batting line-up. For both Andrew and me it was a case of proving to the selectors once again that we are capable of doing the job.

The previous week I had heard unofficially that I had been left out of the squad for the Harare Test against South Africa. After I scored the century, Trevor Penney, our coach and one of the selectors, contacted the convenor Andy Pycroft and told him about my innings, and then later on that day came back to me and told me I was back in the squad.

As far as the South African Test was concerned, we were always going to struggle after losing the toss on that wicket. It was clearly a bowler's wicket on the first day.

I think the change of captain did make a small difference to the team for this match. Alistair Campbell has been lacking in form recently and so hasn't really led from the front; perhaps the pressure of captaincy and the team not doing well was all getting to him, and maybe it was the best thing for him personally to resign.

But I think Andy Flower coming in as captain did in a way give the team a new breath, a new start. There was a refreshing kind of feeling in the team and the players seemed to have that extra bit of energy towards it all because they saw it as a sort of second chance. For the team I think it was the best decision but I feel really sorry for Alistair Campbell. It was a really tough decision to make and I hope I'm never in that position -- I don't know what I would do. For Andy to come back as captain was a brave move because the team isn't doing well, and he has the confidence in himself to lead from the front and encourage the team to pick themselves up and start doing well.

I think there are a couple of minor technical problems hindering our batting at the moment. The bowlers are doing a great job, bowling on one side of the wicket, in the channel, where they are asked to bowl. We are just lacking a bit of confidence, and with a couple of technical problems corrected and some confidence restored we'll be back to our winning ways.

We haven't played a Test match since last December, and then we get Australia and South Africa together at the start of a new season, and that is tough. The only opportunity this season we had to play a three-day game, although it wasn't first-class, was against Western Province, just a few days before the Test. Our top batting order played and Andy Flower scored a century, but this was the only opportunity we had of playing the longer game before the Australian Test, and one game is not enough preparation, especially if you get a couple of good balls and you don't score many runs.

We were in a way mentally prepared to bat on that Harare Sports Club pitch, knowing that we might lose the toss, but we gasped a bit when we heard we had lost the toss - "Here we go again!" But in that situation they did try to stay positive and go out there with a good attitude. There is certainly no home advantage for Zimbabwe at the moment; we might as well be playing the South Africans and Australians at home on their own wickets because we are not having much luck with our pitches at home and the toss is not going our way.

Even the weather seemed to suit them, as when they were coming to the close of their first innings the rain came down and the covers were on for quite a few hours, and then when we had to come in and bat in our second innings the next day the wicket was quite a bit more juiced up.

I was down to bat at number seven again, after opening the innings in all my previous Tests. Obviously I would prefer to open, and I think my statistics show I've done quite well opening. It's disappointing to me to have lost that opportunity. Batting seven is quite a different mental approach; there are different pressures from opening. It's easier in a way in that you don't have to go in and face the new ball, but you still have to go in and perform. It's often difficult because you might be batting with an all-rounder or if we lose a few wickets with a bowler at the tail end. There's the opportunity to score a forty or a seventy, but the chances of scoring a hundred are a lot smaller. I prefer to open, definitely, but if I had a really free choice I would go for three or four rather than opening.

It was really tough for me going out to bat in the first innings because the top order hadn't put up a good performance at all and we were about 70 for five. The South African quicks were doing their job brilliantly, their tails were up and they were firing on all cylinders. They were sledging as much as they could, and Paul Adams had a lot to say under the helmet at short leg. But we expect that, and for me it spurs me on; it gives me more grit, more determination to stick it out there and perform.

Klusener was quite hard to bat against as he was getting quite a lot of late swing into my pads, but Pollock was really difficult to face; he kept on hitting the seam and the ball was going whichever way he wanted. Hansie Cronje kept hitting that nagging length -- couldn't go back, couldn't go forward -- and hitting the seam at will with his off-cutters and leg-cutters. In that situation we couldn't be positive; I couldn't go out there and play my shots as freely as I would have liked to, because we had to try and consolidate as much as possible. Knowing that Guy Whittall was to come after me I couldn't play as positively as I would have liked.

When we went into the field, the game plan was to attack off stump or just outside it, on a good length, rather than stray on to middle or leg because that would allow the South Africans easy runs. The bowlers did that well -- Henry Olonga bowled well, Bryan Strang bowled very well and so did Pommie Mbangwa - although there were rather too many short balls early on. The South Africans are brilliant, rather like the Australians, at putting away the bad ball. As soon as we gave them half a chance they took advantage of it.

Boeta Dippenaar and Adam Bacher opened their innings; they didn't score at a great rate but they batted out that last hour on the second day. The hardest batsman to bowl to was Jacques Kallis who just put away the bad balls very freely. When the ball was short he pulled it for four, but when our bowlers pitched the ball up more he was a bit quieter, unless it was wide of the off stump, when he put it through the covers very confidently. He put on a good partnership with Hansie Cronje, who was also difficult to bowl to. Then Klusener came in and smashed some quick runs, and in this situation I don't think our bowlers were too confident or knew where to bowl. If they pitched it up it went for four; if they pitched it short it went for four. The South African top order is very difficult to bowl to, and they bat all the way down to nine.

They just batted very well and the wicket now suited them. On the first day we had a lot of rain and the covers were on it for a long time, and by the time the covers came off the following morning I think the grass had stood up, and when they gave it the mandatory trimming with the mowers they trimmed off all the green. Certainly the wicket on the third day was completely different from what it had been like before; it was a lot flatter and it looked, as the Australians would say, like a road. We knew it would do a bit in the first hour or hour and a half, and we knew our bowlers would have to make the most of that. We got a couple of wickets in the first hour, but thereafter we were certainly struggling.

Most of the South African batsmen have a similar style and anything bad is put away. Mark Boucher drove brilliantly on that wicket and anything short he put away; you cannot bowl short to him. He batted really well and his temperament is pretty good too; his focus was brilliant. For us fielding it was a good lesson that the temperament, choice of shots and the discipline he showed was quite an example to follow.

In the seven overs straight after lunch Boucher and Shaun Pollock scored about 60 runs, and I think the bowlers bowled too short and failed to keep to one side of the wicket. We had a team chat during the drinks break, and after that the bowlers brought it back and bowled with more discipline again.

In summary, it was also a tall order for us to hope to win the Test match after losing the toss on that wicket. It certainly wasn't suitable for batting first, and after being bowled out for 102 we were never going to win. After the South African batting display a draw looked less on the cards than ever. We were always behind it from the first ball.

In the second innings we knew we could not bat out the two days just by blocking it out. Occupation of the crease is always important, but the game plan was to go out and play positive, disciplined cricket and try to keep the scoreboard ticking over. Each batsman tried to do that; Alistair Campbell played well, hooking and cutting well, and Murray Goodwin was playing brilliantly, leaving the ball very well, cutting and driving.

When I went in there that was my game plan as well, to play positively, see off the good ball, leave where I could and bat positively where I could. I saw that opportunity when Adams came on and I tried to dominate him. This season my batting has really been transformed. I'm in so much better nick with my bat face coming through straight now; last season I played with my bat face too closed and wasn't striking the ball well at all, as I was tending to pull the bat across the line of the ball. This season I'm striking it as well as I have ever struck it, and it's given me that extra confidence to back myself if I need to play an attacking shot over the infield. I'm trying to hit the ball as late as possible and strike it with the bat going through the line of the ball, with as straight a face as possible. I've also changed my grip slightly since last season; all little things that come with experience. So I went out there and that's how I played this time.

We had a team meeting straight after the match, and the team leadership realise that they don't need to make any major panic changes to the side. They don't think the best plan would be to go out and pick a whole new Test squad after losing three matches in a row against the world's best. We realised in the meeting that we have to put these three Tests behind us, use what little good did come out of them and take it into the Sri Lankan series. We need to go out there positively, full of fire and confidence, and really take the game to the Sri Lankans. We can't hang back whimpering over our losses; we have to close the door on it and move on.

The South Africans weren't like the Australians; the Australians played extremely tough cricket on the field, as did the South Africans, but where they differed was that off the field we could rub shoulders with the Australians in the changing rooms afterwards and lean on them for experience, learning from them. Steve Waugh and Glenn McGrath in particular helped me out in that area. I don't know whether it's because we're neighbours and there is a derby between us, or perhaps it was our victory over them in the World Cup, but the South Africans are really not interested in talking to us, and I certainly wouldn't feel at all welcome or comfortable going into their changing rooms for a chat after the game. The Australians were far more approachable.

Hansie Cronje was perhaps the only approachable player in their team. He came into our changing room afterwards and sat next to Andy Flower, and I think he just encouraged Andy and the team through him, to keep our chins up and keep fighting.

It was always a tall order for us to play well against the Australians and the South Africans, the two top Test teams in the world, without having played any first-class cricket before the tours. But I would like to think we will see a different Zimbabwe team in this coming tour by Sri Lanka, a team that's going out there with a lot more confidence to win. Handling Muralitharan will be a big task; it's a matter of working out how we're going to play him and what shots to use against him if he does overpitch the ball or pitch it short. In the tour of Sri Lanka two years ago I scored a fifty in both of the Tests against Sri Lanka, so I did get to know his bowling quite well. It will still be difficult dealing with him, but we plan to go into these Test matches with a new confidence and give it a full go.