India's Srilankan Massacres

[aceofbase]

overrated. His records suggest so.

there is clearly a misconception....Jayasuriya played 89 matches against India in his career and India won 43 and lost 36 ...its clear edge for India.. To people who say that jayasuriya started performing from 1996 onwards....even in that period between 96 to 2009 when he retired ,,India has a better head to head record than SL... Bottom line:: India has always dominated against SL..

[vvvslaxman]

there is clearly a misconception....Jayasuriya played 89 matches against India in his career and India won 43 and lost 36 ...its clear edge for India.. To people who say that jayasuriya started performing from 1996 onwards....even in that period between 96 to 2009 when he retired ,,India has a better head to head record than SL... Bottom line:: India has always dominated against SL..

Not a myth from 1996 to 2002 . Srilanka won 18. India won 13 in the matches Jaya played. We were supposed to beat them comfortably. We got thumped in some matches. Jayasuriya was the chief destroyer. He averaged 50 at a strike rate of 102 during this period against India.

[rkt.india]

That Ganguly's 183 was easily the best. He was SO damn good against a quality attack that even Murali who was at his prime was purposely bowling wides and even started chucking. When the sixes didn't stop murali changed his action and was bowling medium pace. Was a pleasure to watch - wish Dada had that kind of confidence everytime he came out to bat

SL attack was crap. Murli was not at his prime. He didn't have any doosra then. He was ineffective without that. Pitch also blunted him.

[Precambrian]

Not a myth from 1996 to 2002 . Srilanka won 18. India won 13 in the matches Jaya played. We were supposed to beat them comfortably. We got thumped in some matches. Jayasuriya was the chief destroyer. He averaged 50 at a strike rate of 102 during this period against India.

That period coincided with SL's one of best phases in cricketing history. Aravinda, Ranatunga, Murali growing into the conqueror, the WC win etc. India on the other hand was going through a generation shift. Plus other issues like matchfixing etc. This is demonstrated by overall records of the two teams in the same period you mentioned. India lost more than it won. It had more wins than losses against only England and Zimbabwe among established teams. SL on the other hand had a positive win loss ratio against pretty much all teams excepting Eng, Aus and SA. Out of these, the win-loss was nearly 1 against Eng and Aus, and only SA really dominated SL overall. Not denying that Jaya contributed his bit to SL's dominance, but India were overall weaker than SL and by no means were "Expected to beat them comfortably" as you mentioned. For example, Tendulkar averaged a mighty 58.31 with a SR of 89 against Sri Lankans for 9 years between 1995 and 2003. But we don't call Lankans being Tendulkar's *****es in this period do we?

[Precambrian]

SL attack was crap. Murli was not at his prime. He didn't have any doosra then. He was ineffective without that. Pitch also blunted him.

Murali had over 200 test wickets at an average of 26.6 and 170 ODI wickets at 27. Not godly numbers but those aren't pathetic as well. It cannot be denied Ganguly was in god mode that day. The way he treated Vaas and Murali was just glorious. The pitch wasn't really a road either. Pretty much all our bowlers got good purchase from it in the second dig.

[vvvslaxman]

That period coincided with SL's one of best phases in cricketing history. Aravinda, Ranatunga, Murali growing into the conqueror, the WC win etc. India on the other hand was going through a generation shift. Plus other issues like matchfixing etc. This is demonstrated by overall records of the two teams in the same period you mentioned. India lost more than it won. It had more wins than losses against only England and Zimbabwe among established teams. SL on the other hand had a positive win loss ratio against pretty much all teams excepting Eng, Aus and SA. Out of these, the win-loss was nearly 1 against Eng and Aus, and only SA really dominated SL overall. Not denying that Jaya contributed his bit to SL's dominance, but India were overall weaker than SL and by no means were "Expected to beat them comfortably" as you mentioned. For example, Tendulkar averaged a mighty 58.31 with a SR of 89 against Sri Lankans for 9 years between 1995 and 2003. But we don't call Lankans being Tendulkar's *****es in this period do we?

Statistics hardly explains the misery of a fan.. He gave nightmares to every Indian fan. Not ust one dayers.. He averages 67 against us in Tests despite he became a specialist bat only after 1996. Dude.. Tendulkar hardly inflicted the psychological damage like Jaya did to us. If i have to draw a parallel Viru vs pakistan.

[Precambrian]

Statistics hardly explains the misery of a fan.. He gave nightmares to every Indian fan. Not ust one dayers.. He averages 67 against us in Tests despite he became a specialist bat only after 1996. Dude.. Tendulkar hardly inflicted the psychological damage like Jaya did to us. If i have to draw a parallel Viru vs pakistan.

Re-summarizing, we weren't good as team in that period. We lost against everyone including Lankans. I am merely saying it's more of perception. Raw numbers indicate Tendulkar had dominated SL over nearly a decade but that is not the general perception. In tests, i agree, but most were on pucca airport runways.

[BeautifulGame]

Statistics hardly explains the misery of a fan.. He gave nightmares to every Indian fan. Not ust one dayers.. He averages 67 against us in Tests despite he became a specialist bat only after 1996. Dude.. Tendulkar hardly inflicted the psychological damage like Jaya did to us. If i have to draw a parallel Viru vs pakistan.

Exactly. The 340 in Colombo the destruction in Delhi 189 in Sharja were we got bundled for 50 odd .That's just at the top of my head Jayasuriya was always a nightmare when we played them.Only other player that scared that bad was McGrath imo

[vvvslaxman]

Re-summarizing, we weren't good as team in that period. We lost against everyone including Lankans. I am merely saying it's more of perception. Raw numbers indicate Tendulkar had dominated SL over nearly a decade but that is not the general perception. In tests, i agree, but most were on pucca airport runways.

Ya..itdoesn'tmatter.. After Tendu made 137 and India posted what was considered to be a sizble total those days, this guy comes in and Srilanka was 42 for 0 in first 3 overs. Unheard of those days. We were shell shocked.

[21cent]

India has been paying it back to SL for quite a while now, although, mostly in bilateral. With WC, we are even with t20 and 2012 WC. Asia cup has been pretty evenly contested too. It just these freakin bilateral series that India has owned us completely. And I agree with the view on Jayasurya, ppl are making a big deal about Rohit's score being more than SL in the last ODI. But in one of the sharjah cups, Jaya scored 184 or something and India scored 50 in total. That's what you call utter domination. Plus he along with Kalu revolutionized the way ODIs are played. It is a greater achievement that any stat IMO.