South Africa beat Sri Lanka by an innings and 118 runs in the 3rd Test

[MENTION=135125]Pantani[/MENTION] - Interesting. Any specific reasons (eg. performance against other top teams - Aus, SA, India) you feel SL was about rank 3 despite ranked 5 in terms of win-loss?

Ps. Agree that India won only 2 more tests but SL lost 1 more than India despite playing 16 less tests. Hence the superior W/L of India.
 
[MENTION=135125]Pantani[/MENTION] - Interesting. Any specific reasons (eg. performance against other top teams - Aus, SA, India) you feel SL was about rank 3 despite ranked 5 in terms of win-loss?

Ps. Agree that India won only 2 more tests but SL lost 1 more than India despite playing 16 less tests. Hence the superior W/L of India.

Rank 5 is misleading because the gap between 3 and 5 is really small. I think England were definitely weaker than India and SL, and I think the venue mattered for seperating India and SL. In India, India were definitely better. In Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka were definitely better. Looking at performance country by country:

India were better than SL in: India, Australia, England, South Africa, and West Indies.

Sri Lanka were better than India in: Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, New Zealand and Pakistan

Both teams have identical records in Zimbabwe between 2002-08. So, I think we can conclude from the data that NZ aside, SL were better performers within the subcontinent while India were better outside the subcontinent. I also think it's fair to say that there was not a massive deal seperating the two teams, and that they were equal third behind Australia and South Africa.

Sri Lankan wins in that period generally needed Murali and the bowlers to show up, if they didn't, the batting was not good enough to save the match. This is why it was mostly win or lose, with few draws. Either the batsmen did great and the bowlers backed them up, or the batsmen failed and the bowlers saved them; but if the bowlers failed there was no way back more often than not. India had better batsmen, so when India's bowlers failed they could still save the match thanks to world class batsmen from 1 - 6.
 
agree that sri lanka side of the mid 00s was very strong, if it was around now it would maybe be the best in the world
 
Back
Top