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.

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.

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? =-.

Come on Modi. No one know who is BCCI president is. Ha.

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.

Let’s face it, friends- it’s the only possible explanation.

Loving it…
.-= Bari´s last blog ..Married Bachelor … oh yea!! =-.