Which was a more difficult sub-continent tour?. India or Sri Lanka?

[War]

Basically referring to the last 20 years when touring India opposition teams had to encounter Kumble/Harbhajan + various average spinners who became dangerous on those wickets. While touring Sri Lanka facing Murali/Vaas @ their respective peaks.

Which was more difficult for non sub-continental touring teams IYO?. I sort of give the edge slight to Sri Lanka, since if i recall all of Australia tours to those countries that i saw when those bowlers where @ their peaks (IND - 98, 2001, 2004 & SRI 99 & 2004) i always felt SRI was harder. Even when AUS conquered IND in 2004, I rated the series in SRI a couple months before that wayyyyy higher.

Even various England tours to those countries id say it was harder in SRI.

Thoughts?

 

[icyman]

Sri Lanka. Indian tours are no longer the ones they used to be. Mainly cause of the fact that India lacks quality spinners. In fact, we play only the over-hyped spinners nowdays.

SRL -conditions are totally different. Their attack is splendid and can cause havoc at any given point of time.And they are virtually unbeatable at home.

 

[pcfan123]

The ball swings in Sri Lanka more than anywhere else in the SC

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

it's been sri lanka recently mostly because facing murali in sri lanka is probably as difficult as batting gets, blah blah, throws, bangladesh, failed in australia, whatever, put him on Galle or Colombo and no one was going to score much unless their name was brian lara.

but it's pretty tight, I think sri lanka sometimes looked tougher because they have that knack of destroying teams, their two main batsmen were usually very high scorers once they were in.

 

[used2bcool]

It's not just their attacks - Sangakkara and Jayawardene are near impossible to get out in those conditions.

India are still a dangerous proposition at home but we've played a part in our own demise. We no longer prepare wickets to assist our players, instead favoring the so-called "sporting tracks,' which is just curator-speak for "featherbed." We play tests in Ahmedabad regularly which has the most pathetic, slow, low, flat wicket on the face of the earth. We have a bowling attack that can't take wickets without help to save their lives and we keep giving them these cement tracks to deal with. If we back our players' skills (spin bowling and the ability to play spin better than anyone else) and make pitches that suit them (pitches that crack from the 2nd evening onwards or just flat out dustbowls) we can once again instill fear in the minds of the touring teams.

 

[Slowcoach]

True...India could be tough if they prepared dustbowls...they are a good team...but their attack has no penetration.

Sri Lanka is tough because the humidity and the variable bounce and seam gives the pace bowlers a chance...plus they aid spin...and Sangakkara and Jayawardena murder teams on those pitches.

Pakistan was tough in the 80's, but then became easier because of Wasim and Waqar. This lead to a change from spinner's pitches to pace bowler's pitches which gave visiting teams more of a chance (hell, even Zimbabwe won a series there). Check the stats for Pakistan home matches in the 90's if you don't believe me...Pakistan struggled at home to just about everyone.

 

[Robelinda]

Sri Lanka for sure. But I think it depends who is touring SL, the pitches seem tailor made for certain countries.

 

[Papa_Smurf]

No contest - has to be SL. The partnership of Sangakarra-Jayawardene to content with in one innings. Have to content with Murali in his own backyard with home support in the other.

India has never given that much assistance to Kumble+Harbhajan in the recent years. Sure, their stats might look better compared to visiting spinners, but that's mostly because they didn't have to bowl to the Indian batsmen.

 

[mohit_dude10]

Some stats, taking into account matches played at both countries during last 10 years. It shows India has been more tough to beat at their home than Sri Lanka.

@ Sri Lanka

Aus - 4 wins out of 4 - 100% 
Eng - 2 wins 3 lost 4 draws - 22%
Ind - 3 wins 5 lost 1 draw - 33%
SA - 1 win 4 lost 2 draw - 14%
Pak - 3 wins 3 lost 3 draw - 33%

@ India

Aus - 3 wins 7 lost 3 draws - 23%
Eng - 2 wins 3 lost 2 draws - 28%
SL - 4 lost 2 draws - 0% 
SA - 2 wins 3 lost 2 draws - 28%
Pak - 1 win 2 lost 3 draws - 16%

 

[STLIndian]

Sri Lanka beat up on the weak teams to make themselves look good.

Sri Lanka last 20 years at home:

16 Wins, 17 Losses against AUS, ENG, SA, IND, and PAK

25 Wins, 1 Loss against NZ, WI, ZIM, and BAN



India last 20 years at home:

31 Wins, 13 Losses against AUS, ENG, SA, SL, and PAK

10 Wins, 1 Loss against ZIM, NZ, and WI.

I'll also add that Sri Lanka has played ZIM or BAN 15 times, while India has only played them 5 times.

----------

Unless I made a mistake with the stats (don't think I did, I looked at multiple sources), India is WAYYYYY more difficult to beat at home than Sri Lanka. It's not remotely close.

 

[War]

Sri Lanka beat up on the weak teams to make themselves look good.

Sri Lanka last 20 years at home:

16 Wins, 17 Losses against AUS, ENG, SA, IND, and PAK

25 Wins, 1 Loss against NZ, WI, ZIM, and BAN



India last 20 years at home:

31 Wins, 13 Losses against AUS, ENG, SA, SL, and PAK

10 Wins, 1 Loss against ZIM, NZ, and WI.

I'll also add that Sri Lanka has played ZIM or BAN 15 times, while India has only played them 5 times.

----------

Unless I made a mistake with the stats (don't think I did, I looked at multiple sources), India is WAYYYYY more difficult to beat at home than Sri Lanka. It's not remotely close.

TBF Sri Lanka hasn't exactly been a difficult place to tour for 20 years exactly. The Murali/Vaas combo began to click as world-class unit in the late 1990s & lasted probably up until 2008.

 

[Sedition]

I always considered the tours of India as tougher, from an Aus viewpoint anyway. I rated India as a slightly more competitive team, and the sledging always seemed at it's fiercest.. add to that I think the crowds were a little less friendly in India than Sri Lanka.
All that made me look forward to Indian tours as being the toughest.

 

[AngryPixel]

Just checking, Has Australia fared this badly in any other country in last decade? Just 3 wins out of 13 matches

 

[STLIndian]

TBF Sri Lanka hasn't exactly been a difficult place to tour for 20 years exactly. The Murali/Vaas combo began to click as world-class unit in the late 1990s & lasted probably up until 2008.

K, let's look that up.

Sri Lanka at home from 1997 to 2008:

12 Wins, 11 Losses against IND, AUS, SA, ENG, PAK

20 Wins, 1 Loss against NZ, WI, BAN, ZIM



India at home from 1997 to 2008:

17 Wins, 11 Losses against SL, AUS, SA, PAK, and ENG

6 Wins, 0 Losses against WI, NZ, ZIM

We're taking their BEST period of test cricket and they're still not as good as India.

----------

Just checking, Has Australia fared this badly in any other country in last decade? Just 3 wins out of 13 matches

Well, India has 7 wins and 3 losses.

Next best is England with 5 wins and 6 losses.

SA has 2 wins and 7 losses.
WI has 1 win and 5 losses
BAN is 0-2, SL is 0-3, and NZ is 0-7.

PAK hasn't played AUS at home this century.

 

[War]

I always considered the tours of India as tougher, from an Aus viewpoint anyway. I rated India as a slightly more competitive team, and the sledging always seemed at it's fiercest.. add to that I think the crowds were a little less friendly in India than Sri Lanka.
All that made me look forward to Indian tours as being the toughest.

Ok so when AUS conquered the sub-continent in 2004, by winning in Sri Lanka & India. Which tour did you find tougher challenge?.