How Would You Rank The Teams?

[Dizzy #4]

The weird and unusual ODI tables of.......................weridness


1. Australia
2. New Zealand
3. Sri Lanka
4. South Africa
5. Pakistan
6. India
7. England
8. Bangladesh
9. West Indies
10. Kenya

11. Canada
12. Zimbabwe
13. Scotland
14. Ireland
15. Netherlands
16. Nambia
17. Hong Kong
18. Bermuda
19. UAE
20. USA

21. Uganda
22. PNG
23. Denmark
24. Italy
25. Oman
26. Iseral
27. Malaysia
28. Belize
29. Argantina
30. Fiji

31. Cayman Islands
32. Nigeria
33. Zambia
34. Singapore
35. China
36. Giblatar
37. Tanzania
38. Afganistan
39. Vanavatu
40. Isle Of Man

41. France
42. Japan
43. Lehesto
44. Cuba
45. Bahamas
46. Cook Islands
47. Spain
48. Greece
49. Mawawi
50. Maldives

 

[Magrat Garlick]

The weird and unusual ODI tables of.......................weridness


1. Australia
2. New Zealand
3. Sri Lanka
4. South Africa
5. Pakistan
6. India
7. England
8. Bangladesh
9. West Indies
10. Kenya

11. Canada
12. Zimbabwe
13. Scotland
14. Ireland
15. Netherlands
16. Nambia
17. Hong Kong
18. Bermuda
19. UAE
20. USA

21. Uganda
22. PNG
23. Denmark
24. Italy
25. Oman
26. Iseral
27. Malaysia
28. Belize
29. Argantina
30. Fiji

31. Cayman Islands
32. Nigeria
33. Zambia
34. Singapore
35. China
36. Giblatar
37. Tanzania
38. Afganistan
39. Vanavatu
40. Isle Of Man

41. France
42. Japan
43. Lehesto
44. Cuba
45. Bahamas
46. Cook Islands
47. Spain
48. Greece
49. Mawawi
50. Maldives

Israel.
Argentina.
Gibraltar.
Vanuatu.
Lesotho.
Malawi.

And Norway have thumped Spain twice and deserve to be in your fifty.

 

[Dick Rockett]

And Norway have thumped Spain twice and deserve to be in your fifty.

A little bias, perhaps?

 

[Dizzy #4]

Norway could, but Spain has come good recently!

 

[steds]

11. Canada
12. Zimbabwe
13. Scotland

Left out of Pedro's perfick world and now this. What have we done to get on the wrong side of all you?

 

[cricket_fan23]

The whats the point of tables but here it is anyway" Test Table
1) England
2) Australia

 

[Dizzy #4]

Left out of Pedro's perfick world and now this. What have we done to get on the wrong side of all you?

Making John Davison angry will lead to a ODI tenner and a ODI Double ton in 80 balls

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Left out of Pedro's perfick world and now this. What have we done to get on the wrong side of all you?

Oh I see now, you've Single Malt in your blood.

In a Perfick World Table: Test

England, Ireland, New Zealand (too close to call)
Norway
Holland
Zimbabwe
West Indies
India
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
Pakistan
South Africa
Australia
Scotland

That better?

 

[silentstriker]

SA just got whipped 3-0 at home to Australia in tests. That removes any hope of competing with the rest of the teams vying for #2.

1. Australia


2. England

3. Pakistan
4. India


5. Sri Lanka
6. South Africa
7. New Zealand


8. West Indies




9. Bangladesh




































10. Zimbabwe

 

[Jono]

SA still are a better test team than SL.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

SA just got whipped 3-0 at home to Australia in tests. That removes any hope of competing with the rest of the teams vying for #2.

1. Australia


2. England

3. Pakistan
4. India


5. Sri Lanka
6. South Africa
7. New Zealand


8. West Indies




9. Bangladesh




































10. Zimbabwe

Australia would like to think there's that much daylight between England, but there isn't.

 

[silentstriker]

SA still are a better test team than SL.

Five, six and seven are interchangable. Same with three and four.

 

[silentstriker]

Australia would like to think there's that much daylight between England, but there isn't.

Only England think there isn't. We'll find out in the Ashes. England won in SA, but Australia dominated them 3-0.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Only England think there isn't. We'll find out in the Ashes. England won in SA, but Australia dominated them 3-0.

But for bad light England's victory there would've been more handsome. Anyway, SA flatter to deceive and aren't the best barometer. Aus have had it fairly easy since the Ashes to be honest, whereas England have had to tour the sub-continent.

We shall see, as you say, and Aus are still favourites at home of course.

 

[steds]

Oh I see now, you've Single Malt in your blood.

In a Perfick World Table: Test

England, Ireland, New Zealand (too close to call)
Norway
Holland
Zimbabwe
West Indies
India
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
Pakistan
South Africa
Australia
Scotland

That better?

Fantastic, sir.

 

[silentstriker]

But for bad light England's victory there would've been more handsome. Anyway, SA flatter to deceive and aren't the best barometer. Aus have had it fairly easy since the Ashes to be honest, whereas England have had to tour the sub-continent.

We shall see, as you say, and Aus are still favourites at home of course.

Yea, Australia gave SA their first whitewash at home in over a century. And they have actually won in the subcontinent instead of going 0-2, and 1-1.

And as for

But for bad light England's victory there would've been more handsome.

Thats like saying, "If Don Bradman played one more test after his last to improve his average, he would have had an average of over 100."

But he didn't play, and his average isn't over 100. Ifs and buts are good for hypothetical situations, but you can't make judgements on them.

 

[GIMH]

Yes but when weather/light has saved a team from losing a game, this should be remembered when assessing a team's achievements in that particular series, ie the monumental victories over Aus/SA should both really have been 3-1, but they weren't, but the position we were in in the bad light Test in SA, and the way the rain on the 3rd day basically reduced Old Trafford to 4 days should be remembered, England's dominance in both series, it could be argued, is not reflected in the scorelines.

 

[silentstriker]

Yes but when weather/light has saved a team from losing a game, this should be remembered when assessing a team's achievements in that particular series,

No, it shouldn't. Just like umpiring decisions shouldn't. Light and umpires are part of the game, and they can help you as well as hurt you. Don't use that as an excuse, or as an 'if' statement.

ie the monumental victories over Aus/SA should both really have been 3-1, but they weren't, but the position we were in in the bad light Test in SA, and the way the rain on the 3rd day basically reduced Old Trafford to 4 days should be remembered, England's dominance in both series, it could be argued, is not reflected in the scorelines.

Its irrelevent. Because then I can say, England should have lost the second test but for an unfortunate incident with McGrath and a cricket ball. But thats a prettty rubbish explanation as McGrath did slip, and Australia did fall short. And so England won.

Luck works both ways, its not an excuse or an explanation. I don't buy it for a second.