What worth are rankings anymore?

[Arachnodouche]

England are obviously proving to be **** in the subcontinent.

India have been a joke abroad the last year but I'll bet the shirt off my back that people like Ashwin and Ojha will wreck visiting teams at home more often than not, and the bats will stand up to be counted as well. Same applies to Pak, and to a lesser degree to SL.

Australia are back to dark horse status, and almost as unpredictable as Pakistan of the 90s. Probably the most fun team to keep tabs on as well because of their pace attack and general quirkiness.

South Africa, on recent record, seem to be the most consistent of the lot, having regularly pulled back a Test or two over here, and also having won series in Eng, SA, and NZ over the past 4 years.

So, my question is, do you attach more significance to a non-subcontinental team winning away from home in non-subcontinental conditions (for eg. Aus winning a Test in SA), as opposed to, say, SL winning a Test in India? Or is it just a gigantic cluster**** all around? I think it is.

 

[Spark]

Rankings are entirely comparative, so on that basis they're fine.

Same goes for the player rankings too btw. As indicators of form they're as good as you get.

 

[rza]

These rankings will always discriminate against South Africa/Pakistan and Sri Lanka because they ussually play around 10 tests less every year that Aus/Eng/India. Is it fair to say England is the world's best Test team when they played far more games than South Africa?

 

[Spark]

These rankings will always discriminate against South Africa/Pakistan and Sri Lanka because they ussually play around 10 tests less every year that Aus/Eng/India. Is it fair to say England is the world's best Test team when they played far more games than South Africa?

Yes.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Rankings are entirely comparative, so on that basis they're fine.

Same goes for the player rankings too btw. As indicators of form they're as good as you get.

What do you base these comparisons on, though? I guess this swerves somewhat towards the latter part of my post - do you consider a comprehensive Ashes win by England in Oz a better achievement than a Sri Lankan win on Indian or Pak soil? And do you think there should be repercussions vis-a-vis ranking points for heavy defeats as being currently absorbed by England (or India over the last year)?

 

[Spark]

I would consider it a greater achievement but primarily because a 5 Test series > 3 Test series, as the more Tests in a series, the more accurate and revealing the result will be wrt the comparative quality of the two teams. Given that SL have never won a Test in India at all IIRC it's a moot point regardless.

And absolutely getting slaughtered should see you punished.

 

[silentstriker]

Rankings are fine, because the other choice is what???

A Test championship. Yea, that'd be awesome. Don't hold your breath though.

 

[Spark]

What I really hope with a Test championship is that it doesn't become the be-all-and-end-all and we start treating Tests as "build-up".

 

[four_or_six]

The test number 1 ranking is more clear cut when someone is some distance ahead... at the moment there's three good teams (England, India, South Africa) and Pakistan and Sri Lanka are also pretty dangerous at home. It just means the ranking will get passed around for a while I reckon.

 

[weldone]

The test number 1 ranking is more clear cut when someone is some distance ahead... at the moment there's three good teams (England, India, South Africa) and Pakistan and Sri Lanka are also pretty dangerous at home. It just means the ranking will get passed around for a while I reckon.

Australia? They should be considered slightly better than Sri Lanka at least, I think.

 

[Spark]

Can only presume she forgot...

 

[weeman27bob]

What I really hope with a Test championship is that it doesn't become the be-all-and-end-all and we start treating Tests as "build-up".

Maybe I'm the only one, but it always frustrates me how many tests are just seen as a build-up to the Ashes.

 

[Xuhaib]

The test number 1 ranking is more clear cut when someone is some distance ahead... at the moment there's three good teams (England, India, South Africa) and Pakistan and Sri Lanka are also pretty dangerous at home. It just means the ranking will get passed around for a while I reckon.

apoart from SA no body on that list is good away from home. My rankings

Sa
Aus
Eng,Pak,SL,Ind
Nzl
Wi

 

[four_or_six]

Australia? They should be considered slightly better than Sri Lanka at least, I think.

Australia?! We haven't won away from home since we went to Bangladesh, and yet we were all over them. Prank team IMO.

 

[Debris]

Australia?! We haven't won away from home since we went to Bangladesh, and yet we were all over them. Prank team IMO.

Since Australia went to Sri Lanka??

 

[Howe_zat]

I'm amused by the thread title implying that somehow rankings used to be better.

 

[Cabinet96]

Rankings show what they always have, how well teams have done over a period of time. The number 1 team may not be the best team in the world, but they've been the most successful.

And absolutely getting slaughtered should see you punished.

This.

Maybe I'm the only one, but it always frustrates me how many tests are just seen as a build-up to the Ashes.

Yeah always annoys me to. However, I'm sure the team that England or Australia are playing against before the Ashes feels even more aggrieved.

 

[marc71178]

England are obviously proving to be **** in the subcontinent.

India have been a joke abroad the last year

The 2 are incomparable - India have been abysmal with bat AND ball in both series.

England have been bowling in a manner befitting their status as world's best attack.

 

[marc71178]

These rankings will always discriminate against South Africa/Pakistan and Sri Lanka because they ussually play around 10 tests less every year that Aus/Eng/India.

No, they don't. The number of points gained is divided by matches played so playing fewer matches is irrelevant.

The thing that stops SA is that they keep on failing to win series.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

SA would be top of the rankings before now if they had won a few series. How many series draws in a row did they have?

England will beat SA in England in the summer having disposed of WI first. Then they will go to India and get trounced.