India move up to fifth place in Test rankings

[ehsan]

India move up to fifth place in Test rankings


The Indian fans who took umbrage at India's drop to eighth place in the ICC's latest ODI rankings can take heart from the Test ratings. India have moved up one spot to fifth place in the ICC Test table. In the latest update to the table, India have gained three points for a tally of 94, primarily because results from the period August 1999 to July 2000 were dropped off. India lost five out of eight Tests during that year - a 0-3 drubbing in Australia was followed by a 0-2 whitewash at home against South Africa.

Meanwhile, England, who lock horns with South Africa in a five-Test, have a chance to make some big moves in the rankings. Even if they win the series 1-0, they will supplant New Zealand in third place on the table. This comes about because results from three years ago drop off the official table, and that includes the 2-1 series victory New Zealand achieved over England in 1999.

To move to second, England needs to achieve at least a 4-0 series win. This is despite the fact that in the re-shaping of the championship South Africa are the team to have benefitted most. South Africa could consolidate its place on the table by winning the series. But even if it were to achieve an improbable whitewash of England it would not be sufficient to overhaul the rampant Australians in top position.

When the update occurs on August 1, the positions will be: (with rating change in brackets)

1 Australia 129 points (presuming it beats Bangladesh in second Test starting Friday in Cairns) (0),

2 South Africa 119 (+ 4),

3 New Zealand 107 (+ 3),

4 England 101 (+ 3),

5 India 94 (+ 3),

6 Sri Lanka 91 (- 6),

7 Pakistan 90 (- 1),

8 West Indies 83 (+ 1),

9 Zimbabwe 58 (0),

10 Bangladesh (-2).

[Let Uz Chat]

so pakistan are seventh they playa ome serie against bangladesh and south africa ina monh or so's time so what will be their position if they win both test series.

[Talha]

What the....now that makes no sense what so ever! How on earth did India manage to climb? But it doesn't matter anyway as their next series is against New Zealand and then against Australia so things should even themselves out. Though they probably did actually climb due to the fact that the West Indies beat Sri Lanka and Sri Lanka dropped of the pace a bit.

I'm gonna go ahead and say I think England will manage to get a 4-0 win and get second or at least manage to take 3rd place from New Zealand. Elsewhere Pakistan and The West Indies don't play for a while as do neither India, New Zealand, Zimbabwe or Sri Lanka so things could be pretty much "as you were" for a fair while - At least until the end of the year I don't think there will be much change.

[LahoriMunda]

Indians cried when they went down the ODI ranking, and blamed the ranking system to be flawed. Now that they have moved up in Test ranking there is no crying or accusations of flawed ranking system. I mean the system is either good or bad you cant change your views depending on how your team fared.

ICC ODI rankings no more than a joke
S Rajesh - July 21, 2003

Sourav Ganguly has often been accused of uncalled-for outbursts, but most of the cricketing world will support his recent attack on the ICC's ranking system for one-day internationals. To most experts, it was clear that India deserved to move up from fifth position on the basis of their recent performances; third place, or perhaps even second, reckoned pundits. However, according to the ICC's official ODI table, India deserved no more than an eighth rank. Little wonder, then, that most people see these rankings as a joke.

The ICC's press release then even attempted to explain the bizarre rating: other teams benefitted from the fact that results of matches played between August 2000 and July 2001 had been dropped, while India paid the price for inconsistent performances over the last year.

The first reason is a valid one: England had only two wins from 14 games in the period mentioned, while West Indies and New Zealand had win percentages of less than 35. All three teams move up in the latest rankings, but at the expense of India, who have been punished for no fault of theirs. Over the last two years (August 2001-July 2003), India won 56.25% of their ODIs, with only Australia, South Africa and Pakistan having performed better. England won just 49% of their matches over that period, and yet ascended to third place on the basis of having performed even worse earlier. And if the argument is that matches in the last 12 months get twice the weightage of the ODIs in the earlier year, then England lose out there too – a win percent of 44, lower than all teams except the three minnows.

Another reason suggested for India's poor rating was the high number of matches they played against the minnows, and the few times they clashed against Australia. (Since the system takes into account the quality of opposition, a win against Bangladesh fetches fewer points than a win against South Africa.) While that's a valid point – India played 14 times against Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and Kenya, and only twice against Australia – it is ridiculous to penalise a team for it.

In fact, the methodology ensures that a win against any opponent improves the rating; conversely, a loss against any team brings down the rating. So, India's 11 wins in 14 ODIs against the minnows should still have ensured that their rating improved. Further, India achieved a 50% win record against the other teams over two years – better than all except Australia and South Africa. England, on the other hand, played seven times against Australia in this period, and lost all seven matches. Surely, their rating could not have benefitted from it.

Apart from not differentiating between home and away wins, the biggest drawback of this method is its failure to assign higher weightages for bigger matches. So, the importance factor of the World Cup final and a meaningless ODI between India and Zimbabwe is exactly the same. That's fine for a team like Australia, who win every match regardless of its importance. To differentiate between the rest of the teams, it's critical to factor in how they fare at the crunch.

The good news for India is that though they are ranked eighth, only three points separate them from third-ranked England. Assuming that the rest of the teams maintain their current points tally, India only need to beat New Zealand in the first match of the triangular series in October to move to fifth place. If India win their next match as well, against Australia, then they might displace England as the third-best ODI team. Given the credibility levels of the ratings, though, not many will actually care.


© Wisden CricInfo Ltd

[fair_&_balance]

Originally posted by LahoriMunda:
Indians cried when they went down the ODI ranking, and blamed the ranking system to be flawed. Now that they have moved up in Test ranking there is no crying or accusations of flawed ranking system. I mean the system is either good or bad you cant change your views depending on how your team fared.

I think ICC's ranking system is bad.They need to come up with much better system.

[Asif_k]

Originally posted by LahoriMunda:
Indians cried when they went down the ODI ranking, and blamed the ranking system to be flawed. Now that they have moved up in Test ranking there is no crying or accusations of flawed ranking system. I mean the system is either good or bad you cant change your views depending on how your team fared.

LM - It's not the first time the ICC rankings have been criticized. some time back I remember Waqar doing the same and blamed the TEST Rankings for Pakistan's poor standings. We never heard Waqar anything about the rankings when Pakistan moved up in ODIS.

http://www.gupistan.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46028&highlight=RANKING+PAKISTAN

I am not a big fan of Rankings either and i dont think there is a perfect ranking system which will keep every team happy. Whoever's team ranks lower is going to crib.

[Asif_k]

Originally posted by fair_&_balance:
I think ICC's ranking system is bad.They need to come up with much better system.

I think This is the new ranking system they came up with this year after everyone pointed flaws in the old ranking system. ICC cant creat rankings to make people happy.

Bottom Line is If India performs well they will move up. Look at Australia, South Africa, They are doing well consistently that's why they are way above everyone.

[Spock]

Originally posted by Asif_k:


I think This is the new ranking system they came up with this year after everyone pointed flaws in the old ranking system. ICC cant creat rankings to make people happy.

Bottom Line is If India performs well they will move up. Look at Australia, South Africa, They are doing well consistently that's why they are way above everyone.

Asif, I think the system works mathematically, so it would appear to be flawed, for instance if India looses a match (in which it fights well against the Aussies), its still a loss mathematically, but to anyone who saw the match, they will say India put up a good fight, and had a good team, hence the present ranking system, which works on the mathematical statistics may not appear to make much sense.

[Faisal]

Originally posted by LahoriMunda:
That's fine for a team like Australia, who win every match regardless of its importance.

I liked this line the best. Win everything. And then, no more worry about the petty rankings. There is only one rightful place in any rankings: The Top. The rest are all mediocre.

[fair_&_balance]

Originally posted by Spock:


Asif, I think the system works mathematically, so it would appear to be flawed, for instance if India looses a match (in which it fights well against the Aussies), its still a loss mathematically, but to anyone who saw the match, they will say India put up a good fight, and had a good team, hence the present ranking system, which works on the mathematical statistics may not appear to make much sense.

Spock,

Yaara what has happened to you. I hope you are keeping well. I noticed from last 2 weeks your post has started making sense. Nice change or someone has hacked your id.

[LahoriMunda]

ICC defends rankings

The International Cricket Council has again defended its one-day rankings following recent criticism over India being rated eighth of the 11 countries.

Cricket's world governing body insists that the system used to draw up the ranking list provides "objective, fair and fact-based analysis".

The ICC says that although India reached the World Cup final in South Africa, they have performed indifferently in other series over the past two years.

"India's success at the ICC Cricket World Cup does not alter history," said David Kendix, the developer of the ratings system.

"Given its inconsistent performances against teams that were rated below it in the table, it should be of no surprise that India has been unable to improve its rating."

The Kendix system does not rely simply on the number of one-day victories achieved by a team.

It also takes into account the relative strength of the opposition.

"The ICC system is sensitive enough to recognise that a win against Australia is harder to achieve than a win against one of the lower rated teams and so rewards teams more for wins against stringer sides.

"In looking at the schedule over the past two years, we can see that the average strength of India's opponents has been significantly lower than the average strength of the opposition faced by any of the other top eight teams," said Kendix.

"Given that India has been playing consistently against 'weaker' opposition, it should be no surprise that it needs to win more often against these types of teams in order to improve its rating."

India return to action in October with a triangular one-day series against Australia and New Zealand and victories against them would enable India to climb the table.

When the currently rankings list was published earlier this month, Indian skipper Sourav Ganguly said he could not take it seriously.

"It's very strange. I don't know how the International Cricket Council derived its conclusions. I see no logic behind this," Ganguly commented.

Since the beginning of 2001, India have played 80 one-day internationals, winning 45 and losing 31, with four no results - a success rate of 59 per cent.

[teaser]

Originally posted by fair_&_balance:

Spock,

Yaara what has happened to you. I hope you are keeping well. I noticed from last 2 weeks your post has started making sense. Nice change or someone has hacked your id.

Maybe you have come to your senses j/k

[fair_&_balance]

Originally posted by teaser:


Maybe you have come to your senses j/k

hum... Do I Know you?