quote:

Originally posted by mirchy:
The system was flawed from the outset. It doesn't take many factors into account which really are relevant.
a) Draws due to weather
b) first innings lead
c) margins by which a draw was scraped (1/2 wickets) or was it a genuine draw.
and there are a few more. BTW, IMO such factors should also play a role to substantiate points gained or lost in a win/loss.

A formula that would please all has yet to be found. However, in no case should a series win be punished with loss of points.

A whinge of the highest order. Only point a has any merit, the others is pure pap.

The ICC's ranking system is mediocre because of the following reasons:

1. A random time span
2. A random year end (August 1)
3. Not measure of extent of victory
4. No differentiation between venue of the game (home or away)
5. A ranking based on time rather than matches.

The Ranking ignores ICC's own Test tours schedule.

So what happens on the ICC's rating is pretty much irrelevant.

If we look at this series for example:

First Test,

ICC - India 0.500 West Indies 0.500
My Rating - 0.538 West Indies 0.462 (India - 762/16, West Indies 669/19) Points spread - (WI- 133.3, India - 152.9)

Second Test,

ICC - India 0.500, West Indies 0.500
My Rating - India 0.608 West Indies 0.392 (India - 588/8, West Indies 509/17) Points spread - (WI - 86.0, India 133.4)

Third Test,
ICC - India 0.500, West Indies 0.500
My Rating - India 0.500, West Indies 0.500
(India - 660/14, West Indies 753/16) Points spread - (WI - 141.23, India 141.36)

Fourth Test,
ICC - India 1.00, West Indies 0.00
My Rating - India 0.681, West Indies 0.319
(India - 371/20, West Indies 322/20) Points spread - (WI - 66.85, India - 71.75, India Win Bonus - 69.300, Away win bonus in WI - 1.732).


The series rating is derived by averaging the respective points spreads.

India 142.86, West Indies 106.60. Series rating: India 0.573, West Indies 0.427

1.732 is the lowest Win Bonus amongst all Test playing nation. Beating Australia in a Test in Australia currently results in the visitors getting a win bonus of 25.58 (the highest)

quote:

Originally posted by *Chandan*:

quote:

Originally posted by fcxx:
Number 4 is right for IND! They have not beaten a top 5 test country since March 2004(home or away).

Top 5?

Now which teams would be that?

Australia
England
Pakistan
India
?

PAK, AUS, ENG and SA are the current "top 5" teams. I know IND did beat SA in 2004 but back then they were not as good as they are now.
If we analyze the top 3 teams then we will see that the rankings are fairly fair.

1- AUS: no justification required.
2- ENG: Won 6 out of their last 9 including the victory over the Aussies.
3- PAK: Won the last 3, including wins over IND and ENG.

Surely if 'A' teams were included Australia A would be the number 2 side in the world?

quote:

Originally posted by Sunfish:
Surely if 'A' teams were included Australia A would be the number 2 side in the world?

The current # 2 team holds the Ashes.

quote:

Originally posted by fcxx:
1- AUS: no justification required.
2- ENG: Won 6 out of their last 9 including the victory over the Aussies.
3- PAK: Won the last 3, including wins over IND and ENG.

How many have India and Pakistan won in their last 9 series?

quote:

PAK, AUS, ENG and SA are the current "top 5" teams.

Come again?

quote:

Originally posted by *Chandan*:

quote:

Originally posted by fcxx:
1- AUS: no justification required.
2- ENG: Won 6 out of their last 9 including the victory over the Aussies.
3- PAK: Won the last 3, including wins over IND and ENG.

How many have India and Pakistan won in their last 9 series?

PAK have won 5 of their last 10 and 3 were drawn!
Wins came against
1- SA (home)
2- NZ (away)
3- ENG (home)
4- IND (home)
5- SL (away)

Draws against
1- SL (home)
2- WI (away)
3- IND (away)

Lost vs
1- IND (home)
2- AUS (away)



IND have won 6 of their last 10

Wins came against
1- PAK(away)
2- WI (away)
3- ZIM (away)
4- BAN (don't remember)
5- SL (home)
6- SA (home)

Draws

1- ENG (home)
2- PAK (home)

losses
1- PAK (away)
2- AUS (home)

quote:

4- BAN (don't remember)

4- BAN (away)

quote:

Originally posted by fcxx:

quote:

Originally posted by *Chandan*:

quote:

Originally posted by fcxx:
1- AUS: no justification required.
2- ENG: Won 6 out of their last 9 including the victory over the Aussies.
3- PAK: Won the last 3, including wins over IND and ENG.

How many have India and Pakistan won in their last 9 series?

PAK have won 5 of their last 10 and 3 were drawn!
Wins came against
1- SA (home)
2- NZ (away)
3- ENG (home)
4- IND (home)
5- SL (away)

Draws against
1- SL (home)
2- WI (away)
3- IND (away)

Lost vs
1- IND (home)
2- AUS (away)



IND have won 6 of their last 10

Wins came against
1- PAK(away)
2- WI (away)
3- ZIM (away)
4- BAN (don't remember)
5- SL (home)
6- SA (home)

Draws

1- ENG (home)
2- PAK (home)

losses
1- PAK (away)
2- AUS (home)

So you see, India has won more series than Pak. England have also won only 6 of their last 9 series (as you said). So India should not have been below them!

But I'm never bothered about ranking. If one plays well, obviously their ranking will be better, however flawed any system might be!

Of their last 14 series (home and away against every test team except Zim and Bangladesh),

India

vs Australia lost
in Australia draw
vs England draw
in England draw
vs South Africa won
in South Africa lost
vs New Zealand draw
in New Zealand lost
vs Pakistan draw
in Pakistan lost
vs Sri Lanka won
in Sri Lanka lost
vs West Indies won
in West Indies won

Theyve won 4/14, lost 5/14, drawn 5/14

Pakistan

vs Australia lost
in Australia lost
vs England won
in England draw
vs South Africa won
in South Africa lost
vs New Zealand won
in New Zealane won
vs West Indies won
in West Indies draw
vs India won
in India draw
vs Sri Lanka draw
in Sri Lanka won

Pakistan won 7/14 lost 3/14 drawn 5/14

So Pakistan should be above India.

This is a ranking we are trying to establish. Including the latest series (home and away) is a better way to establish where a Test nation is.

Indias win in 2004 in Pakistan means nothing now, because they went there in 2006 and lost.

Those 14 contests ive stated above are the 14 different contests any team can undertake in Test cricket. Therefore teams must be judged based on those contests.

Indias strength as a Test team is better measured by considering these 14 contests, rather than considering the last 10 series or 20 series or 5 series.

quote:

Originally posted by *Chandan*:
But I'm never bothered about ranking. If one plays well, obviously their ranking will be better, however flawed any system might be!

Well, that isnt true you know. India have dropped in the ICC ranking despite beating WI.

quote:

Originally posted by tailender:
Come again?

I think the next line of the joke goes 'No, this time it's mayonnaise.'

shakes,

It may sound like I want to give away moral victories. But if you've read anything I've written in the past, you wouldn't even consider that option. All I was suggesting was that draws aren't draws – or shouldn't be – in a rating system that determines the comparative position of a team. If a team has to fight hard to save a draw (no doubt commendable), yet it can't be awarded the same points as one which was fighting for a win. You would then be awarding points on the basis of luck. A case in point is the 4th day in the second test at St Lucia, where a certain victory was turned into a draw by inclement weather. I'm sure you wouldn't suggest it was a draw that earned the same amount of points both ways. Grey isn't a fifty-fifty mixture of black and white, there are shades of grey that have more black and others that have more white. Purely coincidental that one of the teams involved happens to be India, but my position would be the same if it were Pakistan, SL, WI, England or Nepal for that matter.

If you're going to punish a team that has won a series, no matter by which margin, then that team has no incentives left for the remainder of the series, once it’s irrevocably lost. The relative positions of the opponents on a listing have no bearing on their actual position in that series. I agree that the weighting has to be slightly biased towards the lower placed, but so must the home/away factor play a prominent role. That, too, was one of the main reasons why I said the 1st innings position in a draw should carry some weight as well.

However, like I said, "A formula that would please all has yet to be found". Over-reliance on a flawed system to determine the relative position of a team on a listing is therefore, IMO, pure subjective BS and infantile at that. It is best left to those that derive orgasmic pleasure from breast thumping, the gorillas.

Mirchy, in conclusion, you are a big fan of moral victories.

Weather and failing to bowl out the other team are part of the game and always will be.

lets face it teams with poorer bowling attacks like india seem to be faced time and time again with situations where they failed to put away the other team on the 5th day.

you talk about the rain but in that st lucia test india still had 120 overs to bowl the west indies out, more than enough but they were not good enough why should the rankings reward them by basically giving them almost the same points as a win?

thats what makes a win so special.

there can be the smallest of margins between wins losses and draws.

quote:

Originally posted by mirchy:
shakes,

It may sound like I want to give away moral victories. But if you've read anything I've written in the past, you wouldn't even consider that option. All I was suggesting was that draws aren't draws – or shouldn't be – in a rating system that determines the comparative position of a team. If a team has to fight hard to save a draw (no doubt commendable), yet it can't be awarded the same points as one which was fighting for a win. You would then be awarding points on the basis of luck. A case in point is the 4th day in the second test at St Lucia, where a certain victory was turned into a draw by inclement weather. I'm sure you wouldn't suggest it was a draw that earned the same amount of points both ways. Grey isn't a fifty-fifty mixture of black and white, there are shades of grey that have more black and others that have more white. Purely coincidental that one of the teams involved happens to be India, but my position would be the same if it were Pakistan, SL, WI, England or Nepal for that matter.

thats for the fans to argue not a rankings system.

you talk of grey and black and white but a draw on paper has no grey it's either a draw or it's not.

if the rankings give one side more points in a draw then you might as well just give them the win.

for example we were all over south africa at perth but we couldn't put them away on day 5, do we then deserve some sort of rankings 'victory'? no of course not, they got the draw and the rest matters not.

there are no shades of grey with draws not as far as legit rankings go and you can argue it anyway you like but it's still moral victories.

quote:

you talk about the rain but in that st lucia test india still had 120 overs to bowl the west indies out, more than enough but they were not good enough why should the rankings reward them by basically giving them almost the same points as a win?

thats what makes a win so special.

Can't agree more. Though rain DID play its part by washing one entire day of test cricket (a day of cricket is invaluable for a team of bowlers like ours), still we had a lot of overs to bowl WI out, which we couldn't.

That's the beauty and satisfaction of registering an outright victory over opposition and hence gaining points from that.

It is good that the Kingston test was over in 3 days. Otherwise, with the kind of luck Indians enjoy, rain could well have come to the rescue of West Indies, no matter whatever the weather predictions were. ( Rain Gods are anti Indians, you know).

Indians tend to drop their standards to match their opponents when they face a weaker opponent.

That is why India only manages narrow 1-0 wins ( in the present series, and against an even weaker West Indian team in 1978-79 too) or sometimes not even that ( e.g. against a woefully outclassed Australia in Australia in 1985-86, India only drew 0-0, where they should have won 2-0).

Lack of killer instinct and inability to finish off the opponents has been a known trait of Indian cricketers for quite some time.

A draw occurs when a Test match is inconclusive.

The assumption in the ICC ratings that an inconclusive Test is an equal equal result is flawed. In every draw, one team is further from victory than the other. How much further is something that ought to be measured.

You can't do that in the official rating because it doesn't consider that cricket was played. You needn't even play cricket to have the ICC rating.

quote:

Originally posted by little_master:
Can I see a link to the rankings?

Why was I logged out?

quote:

Originally posted by Kartikeya:
A draw occurs when a Test match is inconclusive.

The assumption in the ICC ratings that an inconclusive Test is an equal equal result is flawed. In every draw, one team is further from victory than the other. How much further is something that ought to be measured.

Ytou can't do that in he official rating because it doesn't consider that cricket was played. You needn't even play cricket to have the ICC rating.

thats called a moral victory mate.