Russel Arnold looks back on Galle

Having drawn or lost our last three Test series we were desperately keen to perform against England in Galle. It turned out to be an unusual match with both bowlers and batsmen struggling to prosper on an excruciatingly slow pitch. In spite of some controversy, however, I felt we deserved a win thanks to a brilliant batting performance by our top order and a really gutsy performance in the field.

Last year against South Africa in Galle we scored almost 150 by lunchtime as Sanath Jayasuriya scored an exhilarating century. This time, however, we only averaged only 2.5 runs per over. There were a number of reasons for this. Firstly the outfield was unusually slow, secondly the pitch was a slow turner and finally the English bowlers bowled very tightly.

It was not a normal Galle International Stadium wicket and was far too slow in pace. Batsmen could survive on it, but found it difficult to score freely and were forced to graft hard for their runs. Even when the wicket powdered up on the third day, the ball did not jump spitefully, nor shoot along the ground. This being the case, patience was always going to be the key to success.

Thankfully, in Marvan Attapattu, we have one of the most patient Test batsmen in world cricket. He possesses unbelievable concentration and when he gets set, you know that he is going to make a big score. Perhaps the most impressive aspect of the way he bats is his control of shot selection. If he feels that a particular shot is too risky he has the mental strength to cut out the shot. In Galle he quickly worked out the percentages and played accordingly.

England bowled tightly, but I thought they were far too defensive. The faster bowlers bowled too short and the spinners maintained a leg stump line. Yes, they made it difficult for us to score, but we were never likely to be bowled out. Their game plan appeared to be based around frustrating us. We would have liked to have scored at a faster rate, but saw no reason why we should throw our wickets away by playing rash shots.

Craig White and Darren Gough were the pick of the bowlers. White is deceptively quick through the air and both bowlers varied their pace well, tried the odd off cutter, Yorker and bouncer, and reversed the ball in the air. They at least made our batsmen think. On the whole though England bowled too short on that pitch. Chaminda Vaas showed that when he bowled. Robert Croft bowled as we expected, but we anticipated more from Ashley Giles, perhaps he was still concerned about his Achilles Heel.

When it came to our turn to field, it was really tough, but we always had hope of capturing those 20 wickets, particularly because of the approach of the English batsmen. Trescothick apart, who batted brilliantly and looks like he can really play, England were too negative and never looked to take us on.

In contrast, the South Africans, always had us thinking. They were willing to play positively and tried to rattle Murali. England preferred to just pad up and occupy the crease. I don't think you can play like that here. Obviously it is not easy to rattle Murali, but England's batsmen should learn from the approach of Trescothick. He was rock solid in defense and quick to punish anything loose.

I suspect that they have partially learnt that lesson - I hear that the English journalists have also been making the point - and I think we can expect a bolder approach in the Second Test Match. That is good news for the spectators. We though will have to be on guard and look forward to the challenge.