PDA

View Full Version : SRilanka humiliates weak teams?


james007
June 26, 2007, 01:48 PM
Is it the case that they always humiliate weak teams to make some records. Like getting out canada for only 35. humiliating weak teams in WC. I mean they didn't need to score 577/6 in reply to 89.

Electrequiem
June 26, 2007, 01:50 PM
They play cricket like it is supposed to be played ... they give their 100% in every match they are playing, regardless of the "weakness" of the opposition.

Tigers_eye
June 26, 2007, 01:50 PM
Yes they needed to do that. That is how they play cricket. if they really wanted to humiliate then they would have declared at 200 and tried to finish the game in 4 sessions.

sandpiper
June 26, 2007, 01:52 PM
because they too were humiliated in the same fashion during eighties

Tigers_eye
June 26, 2007, 01:53 PM
Steve Spurrier the ol ball coach was asked once why he runs up score on a game where the result is already locked. His answer was it was not his job to stop the offense. It was the other teams defense's job.

Rubu
June 26, 2007, 01:58 PM
Isn't it the team who went to WC final? Isn't it considered the best SL team ever? Instead of trying to find some excuses (AND making a wholesale change to the team) we need to realize our weaknesses and start working on it.

cricketboy
June 26, 2007, 02:18 PM
Srilanka is one of the best team of the world and probably the best bowling attack in the world now specially after McGrath and Warne's retirement. Theya re playing like champions , not humiliating anybody!

Sadz
June 26, 2007, 02:40 PM
They always play wicked against strong teams i think against australi in world cupin 1 of the matches they left out key players. showing off eh?

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 02:48 PM
well i agree to a certain extent. the most humiliating part in todays play was to see vaas getting a century..who knows if malinga or murali too could have got one...no doubt sri lanka could have declared much much earlier but they just went for records and vaas will now hold a century when he retires, how nice the bd bowlers are.

on the contrary can u believe it the highest from the first innings was only 16 on the same dumb, dead and flat pitch?

Sohel
June 26, 2007, 02:48 PM
Sri Lanka scored 756 for 5 in an innings against South Africa with Mahela scoring 374 and Sanga scoring 287 in a 624 run, 3rd wicket partnership. The Lankans went on to win by an innings and 156 runs. South Africa must be a "weak team" then eh?

Match scorecard: http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/slvrsa/engine/match/249193.html

Another link about big runs: http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/254838.html

No need to flaunt your ignorance and dis somebody else just because you're frustrated. Growing up ain't that hard to do.

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 03:07 PM
well i think if saf played so badly they were humiliated as well on that day. however things like this are rare and occurs once or twice in a year. having said that, saf at least scored 450+ in their second innings, that was some fightback. i hope bd also shows some fight back not only in the second innings but in the remaining two test as well and we dont see the same picture at least again in this series.

habfreak
June 26, 2007, 03:18 PM
Is it the case that they always humiliate weak teams to make some records. Like getting out canada for only 35. humiliating weak teams in WC. I mean they didn't need to score 577/6 in reply to 89.
making 577/6 was more like a respect shown rather than humiliationfor Bangladesh. Would u prefer them declaring at 280, assuming that BD couldn't possibly score more than 200 in their second innings?

sandpiper
June 26, 2007, 03:22 PM
you raised a good point, but may be they intended to give their lower order some batting practice :)
making 577/6 was more like a respect shown rather than humiliationfor Bangladesh. Would u prefer them declaring at 280, assuming that BD couldn't possibly score more than 200 in their second innings?

Buddhika_s
June 26, 2007, 03:28 PM
because they too were humiliated in the same fashion during eighties

haha well said, so true, back in 80's and early 90's sl was in the receiving side of all the records but hard work after 96 able to get most of those records back like,

Highest ODI score, 443/9 against Netherlands in 2006
Highest Test Score, 952/6 against India in 1998

Lowest ODI Scores,
1.) 35 (18 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2004
2.) 36 (18.4 overs) Canada v Sri Lanka 2002/03
3.) 38 (15.4 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2001/02
7.) 54 (26.3 overs) India v Sri Lanka 2000/01

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 03:35 PM
you jumped to 7th after 3rd..where is 4,5,6 mate?

anyway u will find one two low scores (< 100) for every nation becoz they have been playing cricket for so long. the problem is when such low scores instead of a rarity becomes the predominant one.

sandpiper
June 26, 2007, 03:36 PM
I know these statistics. No hard feelings intended. :wave: the present Srilankan team is a collection of gems. Even I used to like the players like Mahanama, Gurusinha, Mendis, De Silva, Arjuna ... they were really outstanding. just wanted to notice the amount of difference with the top cricketing nations (srilanka had during that period) :)

cheers
haha well said, so true, back in 80's and early 90's sl was in the receiving side of all the records but hard work after 96 able to get most of those records back like,

Highest ODI score, 443/9 against Netherlands in 2006
Highest Test Score, 952/6 against India in 1998

Lowest ODI Scores,
1.) 35 (18 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2004
2.) 36 (18.4 overs) Canada v Sri Lanka 2002/03
3.) 38 (15.4 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2001/02
7.) 54 (26.3 overs) India v Sri Lanka 2000/01

orzoon
June 26, 2007, 03:53 PM
Isn't it the team who went to WC final? Isn't it considered the best SL team ever? Instead of trying to find some excuses (AND making a wholesale change to the team) we need to realize our weaknesses and start working on it.

I think it's the right time that banglaFans try to understand that ODI and TESTS are very different ball games,not the least to speak about the BD players.

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 04:05 PM
making 577/6 was more like a respect shown rather than humiliationfor Bangladesh. Would u prefer them declaring at 280, assuming that BD couldn't possibly score more than 200 in their second innings?

delaying the inevitable is like slow poison..its more humiliation than respect..and btw if they would have declared at 280 how would have vaas then manage to score a century? i am glad that they stopped their humiliation at that point and dont let further lower order batsman to carry on.

orzoon
June 26, 2007, 04:26 PM
well,syzygy I have a quiz for you.

Which were/are the (a) mother and (b) father of HUMILIATIONS for BANGLADESH TEST team ?

1)Gillespie scoring his FIRST HUNDRED or (oops) dou ble HUNDERED ?

2)chaminda VAAS scoring his maiden CENTURY ?


mine : 1 (a) , 2(b).

Buddhika_s
June 26, 2007, 04:29 PM
you jumped to 7th after 3rd..where is 4,5,6 mate?

anyway u will find one two low scores (< 100) for every nation becoz they have been playing cricket for so long. the problem is when such low scores instead of a rarity becomes the predominant one.

well we weren't talking about other countries were we? that's why i number them otherwise ppl will start saying 4th record is wrong.

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 04:30 PM
well,syzygy I have a quiz for you.

Which were/are the (a) mother and (b) father of HUMILIATIONS for BANGLADESH TEST team ?

1)Gillespie scoring his FIRST HUNDRED or (oops) dou ble HUNDERED ?

2)chaminda VAAS scoring his maiden CENTURY ?


mine : 1 (a) , 2(b).

well orzoon mate, i think i have to agree with your selection :)

Buddhika_s
June 26, 2007, 04:30 PM
I know these statistics. No hard feelings intended. :wave: the present Srilankan team is a collection of gems. Even I used to like the players like Mahanama, Gurusinha, Mendis, De Silva, Arjuna ... they were really outstanding. just wanted to notice the amount of difference with the top cricketing nations (srilanka had during that period) :)

cheers

yup after 96 they really turned it around

hope bangladesh can do the same, hopefully soon

sandpiper
June 26, 2007, 04:32 PM
just scroll up to the 14th post, getting packed for 54 after playing one day cricket for more than 25 years is a memorable achievement, indeed ;)
Lowest ODI Scores,
1.) 35 (18 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2004
2.) 36 (18.4 overs) Canada v Sri Lanka 2002/03
3.) 38 (15.4 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2001/02
7.) 54 (26.3 overs) India v Sri Lanka 2000/01

well,syzygy I have a quiz for you.

radagast
June 26, 2007, 04:35 PM
I mean they didn't need to score 577/6 in reply to 89.

You are kidding me right? This is professional cricket match, not some charity show. Or would you rather have them treat us like 'dood bhat'?

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 04:49 PM
just scroll up to the 21st post, getting packed for 54 after playing one day cricket for more than 25 years is a memorable achievement, indeed ;)

to answer your qs, just scroll up to post # 15.

btw i think we were talking about test cricket. i hope u will get back to ur stats server to search some more stats about ind now :)

Ahg984
June 26, 2007, 05:48 PM
haha well said, so true, back in 80's and early 90's sl was in the receiving side of all the records but hard work after 96 able to get most of those records back like,

Highest ODI score, 443/9 against Netherlands in 2006
Highest Test Score, 952/6 against India in 1998

Lowest ODI Scores,
1.) 35 (18 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2004
2.) 36 (18.4 overs) Canada v Sri Lanka 2002/03
3.) 38 (15.4 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 2001/02
7.) 54 (26.3 overs) India v Sri Lanka 2000/01

Not very important but that 7th lowest ODI score is actually the 8th lowest score.

EDIT: ok double checked the stats, WI and IND share the 7th place:-D , my mistake.

Ahg984
June 26, 2007, 05:52 PM
...
anyway u will find one two low scores (< 100) for every nation becoz they have been playing cricket for so long. the problem is when such low scores instead of a rarity becomes the predominant one.

good point .. worth repeating for those ppl who like to take cheap shots at other countries.

habfreak
June 26, 2007, 05:58 PM
delaying the inevitable is like slow poison..its more humiliation than respect..and btw if they would have declared at 280 how would have vaas then manage to score a century? i am glad that they stopped their humiliation at that point and dont let further lower order batsman to carry on.
All I'm trying to say is that Sri Lanka is treating us like they would to every other team...and I appreciate that because trying to attract sympathy from stronger teams will get us nowhere!

sandpiper
June 26, 2007, 05:59 PM
there is nothing to take cheap shots. (you people started making fun by posting those questions)

here is the whole list of lowest one day scores (less than 100)

India - 5 times
Bangladesh - 7 times
Zimbabwe - 8 times
Srilanka - 7 times etc.

35 (18 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka Harare 2004
36 (18.4 overs) Canada v Sri Lanka Paarl 2002/03
38 (15.4 overs) Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka Colombo (SSC) 2001/02
43 (19.5 overs) Pakistan v West Indies Cape Town 1992/93
45 (14 overs) Namibia v Australia Potchefstroom 2002/03
45 (40.3 overs) Canada v England Manchester 1979
54 (26.3 overs) India v Sri Lanka Sharjah 2000/01
54 (23.2 overs) West Indies v South Africa Cape Town 2003/04
55 (28.3 overs) Sri Lanka v West Indies Sharjah 1986/87
63 (25.5 overs) India v Australia Sydney 1980/81
64 (35.5 overs) New Zealand v Pakistan Sharjah 1985/86
65 (24 overs) United States of America v Australia Southampton 2004
65 (24.3 overs) Zimbabwe v India Harare 2005/06
68 (31.3 overs) Scotland v West Indies Leicester 1999
69 (22.5 overs) Zimbabwe v Kenya Harare 2005/06
69 (28 overs) South Africa v Australia Sydney 1993/94
70 (25.2 overs) Australia v England Birmingham 1977
70 (26.3 overs) Australia v New Zealand Adelaide 1985/86
71 (23.4 overs) Pakistan v West Indies Brisbane 1992/93
73 (26.3 overs) New Zealand v Sri Lanka Auckland 2006/07
74 (31.1 overs) New Zealand v Pakistan Sharjah 1989/90
74 (40.2 overs) Pakistan v England Adelaide 1991/92
74 (29 overs) New Zealand v Australia Wellington 1981/82
75 (28.5 overs) Canada v Zimbabwe Port of Spain 2006
76 (30.1 overs) Bangladesh v Sri Lanka Colombo (SSC) 2002
76 (27.3 overs) Bangladesh v India Dhaka 2003
77 (19.3 overs) Bangladesh v New Zealand Colombo (SSC) 2002/03
77 (27.4 overs) Ireland v Sri Lanka St George's 2006/07
78* (16.5 overs) Sri Lanka v Pakistan Sharjah 2001/02
78 (24.1 overs) India v Sri Lanka Kanpur 1986/87
78 (24.4 overs) Bermuda v Sri Lanka Port of Spain 2006/07
79 (34.2 overs) India v Pakistan Sialkot 1978/79
80 (30.4 overs) West Indies v Sri Lanka Mumbai (BS) 2006/07
81 (48 overs) Pakistan v West Indies Sydney 1992/93
84 (35.3 overs) Kenya v Australia Nairobi (Gym) 2002
84 (17.4 overs) Namibia v Pakistan Kimberley 2002/03
85 (47 overs) Pakistan v England Manchester 1978
85 (30.1 overs) Zimbabwe v West Indies Ahmedabad 2006/07
86 (37.2 overs) Sri Lanka v West Indies Manchester 1975
86 (31.5 overs) Bangladesh v New Zealand Chittagong (MAA) 2004/05
86 (29.3 overs) Netherlands v Sri Lanka Colombo (RPS) 2002/03
86 (32.4 overs) England v Australia Manchester 2001
87 (32.5 overs) Pakistan v India Sharjah 1984/85
87 (29.3 overs) West Indies v Australia Sydney 1992/93
87* (34.2 overs) Bangladesh v Pakistan Dhaka 2000
88 (46.1 overs) England v Sri Lanka Dambulla 2003/04
89 (25 overs) Pakistan v South Africa Mohali 2006/07
89 (37.2 overs) England v New Zealand Wellington 2001/02
90 (37.1 overs) Kenya v India Bloemfontein 2001/02
91 (35.5 overs) Sri Lanka v Australia Adelaide 1984/85
91 (31.5 overs) West Indies v Zimbabwe Sydney 2000/01
91 (35.4 overs) Australia v West Indies Perth 1986/87
91 (29.1 overs) India v South Africa Durban 2006/07
91* (26.4 overs) Netherlands v Bermuda Benoni 2006/07
91 (30 overs) Ireland v Australia Bridgetown 2006/07
92 (24.5 overs) Zimbabwe v England Bristol 2003
92 (14.5 overs) Canada v Kenya Nairobi (Jaff) 2006/07
92 (32.3 overs) Bangladesh v Zimbabwe Nairobi (Aga) 1997/98
93 (34.3 overs) Australia v South Africa Cape Town 2005/06
93 (36.2 overs) England v Australia Leeds 1975
93 (31.3 overs) Bangladesh v South Africa Birmingham 2004
93 (35.2 overs) West Indies v Kenya Pune 1995/96
94 (33.2 overs) Canada v Kenya Toronto 2006
94 (31.7 overs) England v Australia Melbourne 1978/79
94 (35.3 overs) Bangladesh v Pakistan Moratuwa 1985/86
94 (31.4 overs) Zimbabwe v Pakistan Sharjah 1996/97
94 (52.3 overs) East Africa v England Birmingham 1975
94 (32 overs) Kenya v Pakistan Birmingham 2004
94 (25.2 overs) New Zealand v Australia Christchurch 1989/90
96 (41 overs) Sri Lanka v India Sharjah 1983/84
97 (33.4 overs) New Zealand v Australia Faridabad 2003/04
98 (34 overs) Sri Lanka v South Africa Colombo (RPS) 1993
98 (39 overs) Sri Lanka v India Sharjah 1998/99
99* (36.3 overs) Zimbabwe v West Indies Hyderabad (Decc) 1993/94
99 (19.1 overs) Zimbabwe v Pakistan Kingston 2006/07
99 (33.3 overs) Sri Lanka v England Perth 1998/99

good point .. worth repeating for those ppl who like to take cheap shots at other countries.

Ahg984
June 26, 2007, 06:06 PM
ok, ok i over reacted cuz i sensed hostility from some posters in the SA vs Ind thread.

Murad
June 26, 2007, 07:47 PM
Lowest Totals in a Test Innings

26 New Zealand v England Auckland 1954/55
30 South Africa v England Port Elizabeth 1895/96
30 South Africa v England Birmingham 1924
35 South Africa v England Cape Town 1898/99
36 Australia v England Birmingham 1902
36 South Africa v Australia Melbourne 1931/32
42 Australia v England Sydney 1887/88
42 New Zealand v Australia Wellington 1945/46
42 *India v England Lord's 1974
43 South Africa v England Cape Town 1888/89
44 Australia v England The Oval 1896
45 England v Australia Sydney 1886/87
45 South Africa v Australia Melbourne 1931/32
46 England v West Indies Port of Spain 1993/94
47 South Africa v England Cape Town 1888/89
47 New Zealand v England Lord's 1958
47 West Indies v England Kingston 2003/04
51 West Indies v Australia Port of Spain 1998/99
52 England v Australia The Oval 1948
53 England v Australia Lord's 1888
53 Australia v England Lord's 1896
53 West Indies v Pakistan Faisalabad 1986/87
53 *Pakistan v Australia Sharjah 2002/03
54 New Zealand v Australia Wellington 1945/46
54 West Indies v England Lord's 2000
54 Zimbabwe v South Africa Cape Town 2004/05
58 South Africa v England Lord's 1912
58 *Australia v England Brisbane 1936/37
58 India v Australia Brisbane 1947/48
58 India v England Manchester 1952
59 Pakistan v Australia Sharjah 2002/03
59 Zimbabwe v New Zealand Harare 2005/06
60 Australia v England Lord's 1888
61 England v Australia Melbourne 1901/02
61 England v Australia Melbourne 1903/04
61 West Indies v England Leeds 2000
62 England v Australia Lord's 1888
62 Pakistan v Australia Perth 1981/82
63 Australia v England The Oval 1882
63 Zimbabwe v West Indies Port of Spain 1999/00
64 England v New Zealand Wellington 1977/78
65 *England v Australia Sydney 1894/95
65 Australia v England The Oval 1912
65 New Zealand v England Christchurch 1970/71
66 *Australia v England Brisbane 1928/29
66 India v South Africa Durban 1996/97
67 India v Australia Melbourne 1947/48
67 New Zealand v England Leeds 1958
67 New Zealand v England Lord's 1978
68 Australia v England The Oval 1886
70 Australia v England Manchester 1888
70 New Zealand v Pakistan Dhaka 1955/56
71 England v West Indies Manchester 1976
71 Sri Lanka v Pakistan Kandy 1994
72 *England v Australia Sydney 1894/95
72 South Africa v England Johannesburg 1956/57
72 South Africa v England Cape Town 1956/57
72 Pakistan v Australia Perth 2004/05
73 New Zealand v Pakistan Lahore 2002
73 *Sri Lanka v Pakistan Kandy 2005/06
74 Australia v England Birmingham 1909
74 New Zealand v West Indies Dunedin 1955/56
74 New Zealand v England Lord's 1958
75 England v Australia Melbourne 1894/95
75 South Africa v England Leeds 1907
75 Australia v South Africa Durban 1949/50
75 India v West Indies Delhi 1987/88

Lowest Total for each Test Country
26 New Zealand v England Auckland 1954/55
30 South Africa v England Birmingham 1924
30 South Africa v England Port Elizabeth 1895/96
36 Australia v England Birmingham 1902
42 *India v England Lord's 1974
45 England v Australia Sydney 1886/87
47 West Indies v England Kingston 2003/04
53 *Pakistan v Australia Sharjah 2002/03
54 Zimbabwe v South Africa Cape Town 2004/05
71 Sri Lanka v Pakistan Kandy 1994
86 Bangladesh v Sri Lanka Colombo (RPS) 2005/06
144 ICC-XI v Australia Sydney 2005/06

Link (http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/TEAM/LOWEST_INNS_SCORES.html)

One World
June 26, 2007, 08:57 PM
Then Australia humiliates everyone, nahh
they are doing their job right, professionalism, head to toe!

Electrequiem
June 26, 2007, 08:59 PM
Then Australia humiliates everyone, nahh
they are doing their job right, professionalism, head to toe!
Spot on.

syzygy
June 26, 2007, 10:00 PM
Lowest Totals in a Test Innings

Lowest Total for each Test Country
26 New Zealand v England Auckland 1954/55
30 South Africa v England Birmingham 1924
30 South Africa v England Port Elizabeth 1895/96
36 Australia v England Birmingham 1902
42 *India v England Lord's 1974
45 England v Australia Sydney 1886/87
47 West Indies v England Kingston 2003/04
53 *Pakistan v Australia Sharjah 2002/03
54 Zimbabwe v South Africa Cape Town 2004/05
71 Sri Lanka v Pakistan Kandy 1994
86 Bangladesh v Sri Lanka Colombo (RPS) 2005/06
144 ICC-XI v Australia Sydney 2005/06

Link (http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/TEAM/LOWEST_INNS_SCORES.html)

thanks for the stats. according to the stats apparently bd is the best test side followed by sri lanka. and finally some hope for ind too. at least we are better than south africa and australia :)

so bd should target not to score below 86, ind not below 42 , aussies not below 36 and so on... in their respective test innings for future test matches to maintain their elite status and rankings! sweet :)

Thunder
June 28, 2007, 04:35 AM
Its not humiliation, its how Srilanka plays.. always tough and competitive and the best of the asian teams.

james007
July 13, 2007, 08:20 PM
lol yeah scoring against noobs is great,

DotBall
July 13, 2007, 08:41 PM
Eita ki mama-vagna cricket match? It is test cricket and they are representing a country and they are professional. The way Sri Lanka played is the right way to play given the situation. It is not their problem that we can not play.
Where is the pride if we are to define our success based on other pitty on us?
This is absolutelly a rubbish thread.

riad
July 13, 2007, 09:13 PM
Srilanka usually playes brutal against bangladesh not only recently ..... I remember we used to get mauled by them in late 80's.
But no hard feelings toward lanka.... they suppose to do this. Remember? we, the fans, always have day dream about humiliating other weaker cricket playing countries?
Nothing wrong with that. we will do it in 5/6 years inshallah.

al Furqaan
July 13, 2007, 09:57 PM
Steve Spurrier the ol ball coach was asked once why he runs up score on a game where the result is already locked. His answer was it was not his job to stop the offense. It was the other teams defense's job.

oh gosh, all my Tennessee friends hate spurrier...rackin up points in meaningless 4th quarter blow outs...

abherath
July 13, 2007, 10:31 PM
because they too were humiliated in the same fashion during eighties

Well not to this extent, if you call this "humiliation", that is.

Sri Lanka beat India and Pakistan in unofficial tests, much before they got test status.

But this is not humiliation. This is cricket. if Bangladesh get to play top teams more often, they will improve, like thay have done in ODIs.

Sri Lanka has been playing a lot of test cricket with Bangladesh. Look at that positive, without thiniking of "humiliation".

abherath
July 13, 2007, 10:34 PM
Eita ki mama-vagna cricket match? It is test cricket and they are representing a country and they are professional. The way Sri Lanka played is the right way to play given the situation. It is not their problem that we can not play.
Where is the pride if we are to define our success based on other pitty on us?
This is absolutelly a rubbish thread.

Very right.

In this sense, admire Ashraful who seems very courageous against all odds, playing against Sri Lanka.

OZGOD
July 13, 2007, 11:17 PM
Is it the case that they always humiliate weak teams to make some records. Like getting out canada for only 35. humiliating weak teams in WC. I mean they didn't need to score 577/6 in reply to 89.

The whole point of being a good team is to humiliate weaker teams and grind them into the dust. It's called having a killer instinct. That's how you develop an aura (e.g. WI of the 70s and 80s, OZ of the 90s to today).

Sovik
July 15, 2007, 03:40 PM
thats what you should do. show no mercy. its not charity match they are playing. they are playing in the highest level

Buddhika_s
July 15, 2007, 05:59 PM
lol yeah scoring against noobs is great,

do you happen to be an australian?

if so, were you the one who painted all of the body in black and wrote "no ball" on the chest in white?