India are the number one ranked cricket side in the world.
The ICC say so.
Rankings are obvious as important to cricket as my asshole is to your next meal.
India have done well of recent times, but away from home they are just ok.
India’s record home and away the last time they played teams for the last 4ish years:
Aus lost away, won home.
Bangladesh won away, won home.
England won away, won home
New Zealand won away, Kiwis hate India
Pakistan lost away, won home
South Africa lost away, drew home
Sri Lanka lost away, won home
West Indies won away, won home
India’s record against everyone bar Australia and South Africa is number 1 worthy.
But if they can’t beat Australia or South Africa away, or even beat South Africa at home, they are hardly the number one side.
Four series for one victory. Not great.
Also their away record, one that has always pissed off their fans.
If you take out Bangladesh, they have lost half of their away tours.
South Africa’s record in the same time:
Australia, won away, lost home
Bangladesh won away, won home
England won away, KP doesn’t like going home
India drew away, won home
New Zealand, don’t like lamb, won home
Pakistan won away, won home
Sri Lanka lost away, Sri Lanka don’t seem to tour SA
West Indies don’t like reggae music, won home
What is the problem here? South Africa don’t play enough test cricket.
There are four incompletes here, and amazingly one of them is not Pakistan. All of them are very winnable. Surely this is the reason they are not number one.
I would never try and understand the test ranking system, but it amazes me that a team that has two series in that time would not be number one and a team that has lost 4 series would be.
Perhaps if South Africa had played a few more test series in that time, instead of playing Australia all the time, they might be number one.
This year South Africa will play six test matches.
Next year India is scheduled to play two test matches against Bangladesh.
What a way to defend your title.
I have said it before, there should probably be no number one side at the moment, no one really deserves it. India because of away losses, South Africa because they don’t play all the countries. Australia because they keep losing. Sri Lanka because they lose away and almost never play. And England, because.
Although, I am quite happy that South Africa aren’t number one.
If I have missed anything, or got something wrong, feel free to buy my book so I can afford a fact checker.
I agree there is no number 1 side in the world at the moment. All the top teams are a bit inconsistent. But the ranking system has been in place for many years (even with its flaw of weighting home and away series the same) and it sets the same standards for all. India have played good cricket over the past few years and are worthy of the spot (even if only for a short while)
India bagging at its best, and the wonderful thing is that our favorite the ICC is also bagged in the process…
the truth is that ICC doesn’t give a fuck who is number 1 or number 211 (though if you count the west indies as one, there will be 204, then again i will have to write a book to afford a fact-checker). All it cares about is that it gets more and more money.
The ranking system was designed with an obviously inherent flaw – the points are cool, but the rating points (the lesser number) does not take into account the home and away scenario.
Credit must be given where its due – so here I go – thank you JROD, for this type of insight.
Phew, why didn’t I post it on paddlesweep?
.-= Ankit Mishra´s last blog ..IPL is Must for T20 Success – Vaughan =-.
Hey, JRod, I went to amazon to check out ur new book but they say it hasn’t been released?!?!?!? So would I be able to get it sent to my BIL in England if I pay the cash now? Kinda confused here! :)
.-= Cricket Tragic´s last blog ..Smith absolutely loves Morgan! =-.
UJ,
Subtle difference between being the #1 side in the world and being the best side in the world ( the premise of your argument)!.
Talking of deservability, during the time Australia was “number 1″, its record against India stood at 10 Tests apiece. And in the series head to head, India edged it at 4-3 with a draw.
Steve Waugh is statistically the winningest captain in history. Yet he did not win a series in India.
Ricky Ponting stands second in the list of winningest captains.
His record ( in India as captain) Played 5, Lost 3 Drew 2.
Overall ( versus India as captain) – Played 9, Won 2, Lost 4, Drew 3.
Anything and everything can be qualified, just as is the case with India becming #1.
The rankings credit consistency. India has been the most consistent side amongst all Test playing nations over the last 2 years or so, therefore it ascended to the spot of #1
Which is not the same as being the best side in the world. You wont find any Indian making that claim – yet. But give us time – we have all the tools for becoming the next great dynasty!
Cheers,
H, Number one is different to best, but I doubt the ICC have that stipulation. Have I missed something, when did I say Ricky or Waugh were the best captains in history? I thought this was about India, South Africa and rankings, not Australia and India. Funny how it always comes back to Australia.
Alex, there are no comments on cricinfo because cricinfo don’t want them. I don’t have anything to do with it. I’d rather comments there, as I could ignore them and let the idiots fight amongst themselves rather than coming here.
CT, It is on pre-release. Hasn’t been printed yet.
South Africa lost their last home series against England. You lose a billion points if that happens to you.
They should have it sorted in about a fortnight.
.-= King Cricket´s last blog ..When Freddie Became Jesus =-.
India is real number 1. Numero Uno!. hurray.
That said , india actually won against aussies. Without whitey bucknor ( why does he thinks he get favor if helps aussies?) help , there is no chance in hell aussie would have won sydney Test.
Dhoni is the man. But God helps him to achieve this.
Rahul dravid had the same team, But his by the book captaincy did not crush opposition. he was timid.
Dhoni makes great decision on the field like Army General. Like genghiskhan. Haha.
Without dhoni even with this team india could not have won , indians are born to draw the game with unatheletic people in the team. They are born to accumulate runs. Not all indians , some section of indian cricket team get pickeds often and their job is nudge , dab and accumulate and shiver when pressure applied.
Any captain need go to guy, Dhoni need God of sehwgology to win with ease. Period.
He try to win 20/20 without half fit sehwag. He want to show he is tha man. we all know what happpned…FREE FALL.
Dhoni need to worship GOD if he wants to be the winningest captain India ever produced.
In 30 minutes , sehwag changes the game , then it will be walk in the park , a regular day in the office.
I still think India need only 3 people , DHoni , Rahul Dravid and sehwag. Others can be replaced like tires. Dhoni is the engine , sehwag is the fuel , dravid is the frame. Ha my analogy of indian team with car.
jrod , Write article in cricinfo and promote your book again there. Allow comments.
Just enjoy the fact that someone other than Australia is number one. Ind and Aus have produced some of the best test cricket in recent history, albeit with tons of controversies. And the fact that the legendary Pakistan fast bowling is beginning to show its face can be only good news. If six of their top seven batsmen decide to grow a spine, we will have exciting years in store for test cricket. And if Vettori bats, bowls and fields till he drops dead, NZ can just about to manage to stay on the sidelines for much longer. So overall, hurray!
Homer – great job defending us there!
Alex – your words amaze me. The central idea to India’s consistency has been their teamwork. Are you telling me that:
Gambhir does not complement Sehwag?
Sachin’s adaptability to any situation, ability to play in ANY manner, and sheer class can be done without?
Laxman, The less-mentioned genius? Really?
This is the most complete batting lineup India has ever had, man. Even with Yuvraj in there.
.-= Rishabh´s last blog ..Sehwag paints the field red =-.
UJ,
“ICC President Malcolm Gray presented South African cricket captain Shaun Pollock with the ICC Test Championship Mace today to mark South Africa’s rise to the top of the ICC Test Championship table.
“On behalf of the ICC I would like to congratulate Shaun and his team for the excellent standard of Test match cricket they have played over recent years, which has now earned them top position on the ICC Test Championship table,” said Gray.”
Surely you remember this – happened bang in the middle of Australia’s glory years too!
Oops.. I mentioned the “A” word again, or maybe you need to take the argument for what it is, and not with a couple of chips on your shoulder!
Cheers,
H, What chips are they Homer, elaborate?
You are right about the comments on cricinfo. you funny article on dravid and people get mad.
They do not understand the humor.
I’m a little perplexed by the amount of disparagement, if not outright derision being expressed at India’s rise to the top. Granted they are not the Australia of the past decade, but they are not that bad either. There is no outstanding no.1 right now, just a bunch of no 2′s who’ll keep playing musical chairs with the top spot. It’s that simple. Why people assume India is not among the top three in the world in Tests is a little vexing and I don’t blame some for claiming prejudice to be the reason. We’ve been good at home and our away record is not that bad. Here’s a little stat box from cricinfo.
Win-loss ratios in overseas Tests in 2000s
Team Tests Won Lost W-L ratio
Australia 53 31 13 2.38
South Africa 54 21 18 1.16
India 56 19 19 1.00
Pakistan 44 14 19 0.73
England 57 16 22 0.72
Sri Lanka 43 13 20 0.65
New Zealand 38 8 18 0.44
West Indies 54 6 37 0.16
Australia’s figures indicate the fact that they were dominant until two years ago. Since then they’ve lost to England away and SA at home. My point is however that there’s not much separating SA and India in terms of away performances. Why do people still talk about how India’s ranking is because of solely home performances?
Add to this, the fact India haven’t lost to anyone apart from SA and Aus at home unlike SA who have lost to England, of all teams, at home. I feel India are just as good as SA or Aus and deserve their spot, albeit temporary, at the top.
H, You’re right, I’m the one with the chips.
R, I discounted SA’s loss to England because it was 5 years ago. And England have had about 5 captains since then. India’s away record isn’t terrible, but it isn’t as good as South Africa’s. I think India and SA are easily the top two teams, you’d be hard pressed to argue with that.
UJ,
“Number one is different to best, but I doubt the ICC have that stipulation. Have I missed something, when did I say Ricky or Waugh were the best captains in history? I thought this was about India, South Africa and rankings, not Australia and India. Funny how it always comes back to Australia..”
The fact that you completely ignore the point I am making and instead, reduce my argument to be akin to Australia bashing.
Its those chips that I am talking about.
Cheers,
Homer and Jrod,
Number one isn’t different to best, except in the sense that both of them can have various meanings. Neither of them should mean a crazy dominant side like Windies or Australia have been in the past (and as Homer points out, even they weren’t as dominant as some seem to demand). The ratings aren’t perfect, and they mean even less when teams aren’t playing many Tests, but in the end by some measure India have done more than S Africa and that is all that is being said. It’s obviously a pretty close call at the moment, however you look at it.
(For what it’s worth, while the ratings are influenced by the past, they only directly cover a bit more than the last three years at the moment – I haven’t checked how that would corresponds to Jrod’s summaries. If there is anything particular weird going on, it’s ogt more to do with Sri Lanka…)
.-= Jonathan´s last blog ..An umpire’s final decision? =-.
Jonathan,
South Africa were awarded the ICC mace in 2003, when everyone and his uncle knew that the best team in the world at that time was Australia.( I have put up the link in the earlier comment)
The demarcation between being #1 and the best was already made by the ICC and they have precedent to fall back on.
So yes, number 1 and the best are not synonymous, atleast in the world the ICC inhabits. And the sooner he understands it, the less angst it will cause UJ.
Cheers,
Jonathan, I went back about 4 years I think. But it was pretty haphazard, was just trying to find when teams had played each other home and away, wasn’t as easy as I had thought.
So, India are now the number 1 test nation. Shame they won’t actually play a test match in 2010. Still, I guess you can’t lose an away series if you don’t play.
The whole defeat of Srilanka was a planned distraction by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Homer, SAf were #1 what? #1 ranked in a ratings system. That is, they had the best rating. The ratings claimed to indicate how well teams had performed recently, so the claim was that SAf was the best-performing team of that time. It’s not a difference between “best” and “#1″, it’s just a matter of how you measure/analyse it. The ratings sacrifice some amount of sense/accuracy for a degree of objectivity, but they’re still trying to measure the same thing the rest of us are – the best team. Also, it would make just as much sense for me to say India is the #1 team based on my own opinion, quite apart from the ICC or any other ratings.
I don’t think that’s the issue here – Jrod says no team deserves #1 status. Really, noone ever has to deserve it to be #1 or the best, they only need to be better than everyone else. Different ratings and opinions will disagree with each other more now than a while ago, so it might be fair to say that it’s not clear which team is better than the other, if any, right now, but it’s nothing to do with achieving a particularly dominant record home and away.
Jrod, fair enough – if it were easy, I’d have bothered checking myself!
Jonathan,
“SAf were #1 what? #1 ranked in a ratings system. That is, they had the best rating. The ratings claimed to indicate how well teams had performed recently, so the claim was that SAf was the best-performing team of that time.” – and by the same token , India are now the best performing team in world cricket and are therefore, #1.
And it is on that basis that I dispute UJ’s claim that “there should probably be no number one side at the moment, no one really deserves it.”.
The rankings system has been in place since 2001. And between then and now, no one thought it necessary to question the way the numbers were crunched.
No one thought it necessary to question the rankings when South Africa beat Australia in Australia and became the #1 side (despite not winning a series in India) or when Australia beat South Africa in South Africa to become the number 1 ( despite losing to India in India and to South Africa at home).
It is only now, when India are number 1 that everyone wants a relook of the rankings system!
Cheers,
If I remember correctly Sri Lanka was the #2 team in the world before this series.. Don’t remember anyone talking about it..
.-= namya´s last blog ..What goes round comes around =-.
This should be fairly obvious to whoever follows test cricket:
Top 3 teams: SA, India, Aus, in no particular order
Namya, Sri lanka at #2 was a statistical aberration that has been corrected.
And this should be fairly obvious to whoever follows cricwithbollocks.
Top 3 batsmen: Sehwag, Sehwag and Sehwag
As long as he’s around, who gives a fuck about the rankings…
My two cents: Any Test ranking which does not take into account the differance between home and away will always be faulty.
I cannot accept India as no.1 till it beats Australia and SA at their home turf. Same as I never accepted SA as no. 1 when Australia was running rampant.
.-= Dhananjay Mhatre´s last blog ..Dhaanu: Alec Baldwin is awesome. =-.
@jRod,
I dont see the point. Thats what rankings are there for, to rank the teams in some order. And it is pretty obvious there has been no dominant team in world cricket since India beat Australia 2-0 . why does it really matter who among India, SA, Australia is ranked no.1 ( as long as they are the top three), when none of them is clearly no.1. And if SA or Aus can be No,1 in the current scenario, why not India.
I think we’ve become used to seeing one team dominating world cricket for a so much time that we expect the no.1 team to be dominant. It doesn’t have to be, and from a neutral perspective, its good for the game if it isn’t that way. To hell with the rankings. All I care about is a good game of cricket whoever may be playing.
But I am seriously concerned about the lack of test matches in Indian schedule. I have forgotten the last time we played a proper 5 test series, and even If you have a test series, it goes to some small stadium, which usually turns out to be a batting beauty where you see the third innings declared on 5th day tea. Pitches may need to be tailored to suit the home team (that is an altogether different debate), but at least give one which is capable of producing an interesting match.
Well, let’s not get lost in detail and let’s not go too far back into the past.
Let’s look at India’s recent performances abroad against the important test-playing nations.
When we toured Australia last, we would have won (not drawn) the series but for the 8 CLEAR howlers of umpiring decisions against us in Sydney. And we beat them at their touted fortress, Perth.
We beat England when we last toured them.
We beat NZ at their place.
The one failure has been Sri Lanka but this does not count since the real argument is about India’s supposed weakness in facing quick bowlers on bouncy tracks. And we have more than made amends by thrashing Sri Lanka on similar Indian pitches.
The fact is that this Indian team is the best test side in the world. It’s about things falling into place and, at the moment, that has happened for India.
jrod, second homer and J here. Isnt this prety straightforward? In Tennis, injury layoffs drop you down the ratings. And women’s tennis had a #1 every week almost a few months back – because a bunch of players were closely matched.
SL was #2 a few days baclk – didnt see an article from you then
Aus became #1 when they had lost away to India and South Africa – same situation as you pointout to India now :-)(Ofcourse thanks to sydneygate, they had a notional home series win against india!)
Dont remember an article from you then.
Why now?
To even hint that Homer has chips on his shoulder is, not cricket. He has been very objective and cool in presenting his arguments – and he has pointed out facts. He hasnt been ranting aimlessly. This time, i am sorry to say, much as I respect you as one of the most objective aussie bloggers around, the chips seem to be on your shoulders
So funny that JRod thought about the ranking rationale only now, and not when SA/Aus have been no.1s even while not being the best sides in the world, since 2005.
Lets see: India holds the Border-Gavaskar trophy right now, and has also been the winner of their latest series against Eng, NZ, SL, WI and Pak. The only team they have drawn their latest series, is SA. And SA are deservingly placed at No.2.
We will know in a few hours time how the latest Test between Aus (No.3) and WI (No.8)goes.
But I think JRod has cleverly used one of his ‘stated tricks’to boost traffic to and discussion on his site – write about India :)
If only a % of these visitors end up buying the book about Freddie and Jesus (hey btw, Aus lost two of the last three marquee test series they’ve played), it would be great. I would love to buy the book.But Amazon is not as clever as JRod in serving the Indian geography.
Kumar, Have questioned the ranking systems many times, player ranking especially, and also team rankings. Including at one stage when South Africa went to the top of the one day table (sorry if that contradicts you), have even praised it when Australia lost the Ashes slipped to fourth (probably the only time I have praised it). I also wrote a bit about the position of last summer when England were ping ponging around the one day charts. And if I wanted hits, I wouldn’t have called the piece India become number one, I would have called it, India are shit, that would have quadrupled the amount of hits I got.
Raj, If Sri Lanka went to number one do you think I would have still written this post? I wrote about the aftermath of Australia winning a dead rubber in South Africa that no side was the obvious number one side in the world and the number one spot should be vacant. Funnily enough I didn’t get as many comments as when I said it this time. Must be all those chips on my shoulder.
Hi Jrod,
First time on your site .. read your article on Cricinfo, n just got pulled into cricketwithballs.com ….. very catchy name I must say or should I say website with real cricket and real balls !!!
Loving it…
.-= Bari´s last blog ..Married Bachelor … oh yea!! =-.
I think it’s pretty clear why India are number 1. It’s because JRod is a dirty, rotten, stinkin’ racist.
Let’s face it, friends- it’s the only possible explanation.
to be precise, I expected this question to rise. and honestly, India still isn’t good outside the Indian conditions. Though we shouldn’t forget their away record has improved immensely. There is still some tough competition for them ahead. Added to it is the lack of test matches in near future for India. Blame it on BCCI. :(
.-= Rishabh Jain´s last blog ..The brainchild of BCCI that has led to India’s shaky No.1 position =-.
The Indian test squad has come a long way from the teams of the 90s and the ranking might not mean much in terms of who’s the best in the world, but it does dovetail nicely with the internal narrative of Indian cricket over the last decade, which has been one of perseverance and progress (punctuated by the usual subcontinental silliness, but that’s just us). To Indian fans, it’s a milestone and an achievement to put a successful era in perspective, and frankly, it’s deserved. Now if only we could revive the India Pakistan test tours. And not let the politicians and savages take them away from us again.
This is right time to have 5 Test series against South Africa to decide who is BEST TEAM. Mano vs Mano.
But what BCCI do ? They cancell the 3 Test series with 5 ODI’s. I think BCCI is killing TESTS for sure.
You can’t be this greedy!. Every team must play same number of Tests every year.
Can BCCI add 3 more tests back? Can they do that?. We need 4 test (min) against SA in SA.
Come on Modi. No one know who is BCCI president is. Ha.
Homer, Jrod clearly doesn’t think much of the idea of always having a ranking. I disagree with how he puts it, and think it is an interesting exercise, even though it is always going to be debatable at some level.
I remember discussions back when SAf had the mace, but then again I am a nerdy type inclined to think about those things. As you say, however, everyone and their uncle thought Aus were dominant then, so it wasn’t a memorable debate as much as a few comments on the quirks of the ratings. I don’t think the fact that Wilde has come up with crazy articles with no basis at all means that others can’t make more reasonable comments about the state of play as they always have.
Several people have said that SL at #2 was a statistical anomaly. True, but dismiss it at your peril, since these things can easily be multiplied. If SL’s rating had been 11 points lower, SA would still be #1. As it is, SA need to win 2 more tests than England in their series to get back to the top – if SL’s rating had been 8 lower, they would only need to win the series by 1. Even a smaller change would make it easier for SA to regain the mace playing Pak next year. (Of course, the originally scheduled Ind v SA series would have been at a perfect time for everything except the IPL).
But those are the quirks in the system. India have well and truly ended up no 1 in that system. I happen to think they are better than SA (and the rest) at the moment, even apart from that. But it is fair to say that there isn’t much between SA and Ind either way, and the ratings reflect that too.
.-= Jonathan´s last blog ..An umpire’s final decision? =-.
A statistical ranking in no way denies your right to an opinion. People have been talking about rankings and how they are configured and if they are accurate since they were first introduced. Its never bothered me because it doesn’t affect my opinion, I can believe whatever I want to believe, and my system ie watch the cricket yourself, conclude who is the best for yourself, is much older and has far greater precedent than a maths boffins’ little play game.
I also think that if the ICC are going to play silly maths games then at least use it for some practical purpose. I believe that India should be allowed their number one status for six months and if by then they have not played another side in the top five (in at least a proper three Test series) then they are ineligible. If you are going to empower nerds at least empower them to force India (and every other nation) to play more Test cricket.
Hmm…how about some stats and some perspective: the top 5 teams against each other since the ODI CWC 2007
Team [HomeP-HomeW-HomeL-HomeD-HomeW/L; AwayP-AwayW-AwayL-AwayD-AwayW/L; TotalP-TotalW-TotalL-TotalD-TotalW/L]
Australia [9-5-3-1-1.60; 12-3-5-4-0.60; 21-8-8-5-1.00]
England [12-3-4-5-0.75; 5-0-2-3-0.00; 17-3-6-8-0.50]
India [12-6-1-5-6.00; 13-4-6-3-0.67; 25-10-7-8-1.43]
S.Africa [6-3-3-0-1.00; 10-5-3-2-1.67; 16-8-6-2-1.33]
S.Lanka [6-3-1-2-3.00; 5-0-4-1-0.00; 11-3-5-3-0.60]
Now, India is way ahead of the rest at home, second away, and is at the top on total and achieving this while having played each and every one of the other top 5 home and away which means India has played 8 series
Let’s put this in perspective: Saffers haven’t played SL or England at home, they haven’t played SL away either: total 5 series
Australia haven’t played England at home, and haven’t toured SL: total 6 series
S.Lanka haven’t played Oz, Saffers at home and England, Saffers, and Oz away: total 4 series
And finally the worst of the lot England haven’t played the old enemy, Saffers away and SL at home: total5 series.
Looks like BCCI cares after all:
http://www.cricinfo.com/southafrica/content/current/story/438958.html