Skip to main content

Do the rankings really reflect performance?

There's been a lot of talk recently about the ICC Test rankings and the seismic shift with Australia dropping to No. 4 and Sri Lanka moving up to No. 2. However a closer look at the relative performances of the top 5 teams since 2007 (the last two years) leads to lots of questions.

South Africa can be indisputably said to be No. 1. They have won nearly 64% (50% excluding Bangladesh) of their matches and importantly won matches away in almost every country. Their only weakness has been a slight inability to battle to draw matches where they fall behind. Sri Lanka at No.2 are certainly ranked higher than their performance deserves. 54% of matches won looks good but when you take out Bangladesh, it falls to less than 32% which is not great by any standards. Moreover only one of the non-Bangla victories have come away from home. To be fair, they have lacked opportunity and its high time they got more three match series as well as the chance to play the top teams regularly. At No. 3, India have a quite poor overall win ratio of less than 36% (32% excluding Bangladesh) but they have recorded away victories in Eng, Aus, SL, and NZ which helps as does the fact that they have a high draw ratio. Australia at No. 4 have won 48% of their Tests and won matches away in the WI, SA, and Eng and their current ranking is harsh in my opinion. England have (as can be expected) played the most matches and have a win ratio of 34% but apart from NZ have not managed to win away anywhere so their ranking is probably fair.

Overall I think SA are probably #1 and Australia #2 with Sri Lanka, India and England being fairly even as the third best teams in the world. With so little to choose between so many teams, it certainly makes for an exciting time to be a cricket fan.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Happy New Year .....

....well almost......its only 2 months in to 2009 so I guess its not terribly late for the first post of the year :-) The end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 has been quite engrossing primarily because of the tussle for supremacy between Australia and South Africa. And its interesting how once again, the Aussies are showing that the biggest mistake 'pundits' can make is to write them off. But I am jumping way ahead. The series in Australia was a real cracker and it was great to see the Springboks actually delivering so well on their abilities for once and not choking at the big moments. And in Steyn, Amla, de Villiers, Duminy and Morkel they have some real stars in the making and should be a strong team for some time to come. Australia's struggles on the other hand were not surprising after their performance in India. The same guys, i.e. Hayden and Lee continued to underwhelm and with the inexplicable selection of Symonds made things worse for Ricky Ponting. They were a l...
Post a Comment
Read more

Season ending review

Well, officially the season hasn't quite ended since the last one-dayer between Australia and South Africa still remains to be played but given that its a dead rubber, the season is as good as over. And what a season its been. Probably as much action off-field as on it, but its been riveting throughout and the quality of Test cricket overall (apart from the WI-Eng series) has been top-notch and a welcome reminder of why I like the 5 day format the most. The two Aus-SA series have in particular been fascinating to watch though a lot of it has been driven by Australia waiting too long to make much needed changes. South Africa though has truly come on in leaps and bounds and though they will be losing Kallis and Ntini sooner rather than later, their decreasing reliance on them over the last year or so has meant that they won't be missed much. Their one-day game has come along strongly too and they should have a genuine shot at the World Cup this time. Australia on the other hand h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Of backward selections and England's future

A couple of interesting selectorial decisions recently by England and India (and actually as its turning out Australia as well!). For once I think the England selectors didn't panic and showed the right thinking by not picking either Key or Ramprakash for the Oval Test. And luckily for them, both Bell and Trott have performed well enough to vindicate the decision. India on the other hand have actually gone the other way bringing Dravid back to the one-day squad. I'm a bit ambivalent on that one. While the decision to leave out Rohit Sharma and retain Raina was certainly the right one, bringing back Dravid is questionable. It would have been a bolder decision to pick someone like Kohli or Rahane who both played really well in the Emerging Players Trophy recently, mainly because Dravid is quite unlikely to feature in the 2011 World Cup so why bring him back now? As for the Aussies, they will certainly be regretting not picking Nathan Hauritz for the Oval. A defensive decision if...
Post a Comment
Read more