2-3 isn't that bad.
This 2-3 is very bad, because Pak lost the first 3 matches. If it were 2-2 tie, going into the 5th match, it would have been ok. This 2-3 is really bad. SL took the series before Pak won its first match. They were never able to put any pressure on SL, through out the series. SL lost the last 2 matches, because it was not critical for them anyways. This is a bad 2-3 for Pak.
^
Although there is some truth in what you're saying, are you then also suggesting that Sri Lanka are not a professional team? I am sure they would have loved a 5-0 or 4-1 series victory regardless of the dead nature of the last two rubbers. That it did not happen is all credit to Pakistan. A professional team like Australia would not have let up in their efforts to win 5-0 despite securing the series.
Mind you they were not friendlies. The record books w'd show that Pakistan leads SriLanka 70-45 in one-dayers.
And mind you they were not just defeats but heavy losses by 146 and 132 runs respectively. The way Sri Lanka played (or were not allowed to play) in the last two games can only be described as pathetic displays or surrender. If on the otherhand Pakistan had played like that and lost the series 5-0, I am sure most of us w'd be saying different things now. So give some credit to the team for getting something out of the series. But that ofcourse does not excuse their lame displays in the first two one-dayers.