Cricketweb ODI Rankings

[Duncan]

Bazza... that 1-0 win was not a series... it just a one-off ODI celebrating BCCI's Platinum Jubilee. That should not be counted as a series. You guys should also try to incorporate the margin of defeats in this system. Like give more points to a team for winning by a margin of like 159 runs.

 

[Swervy]

Bazza... that 1-0 win was not a series... it just a one-off ODI celebrating BCCI's Platinum Jubilee. That should not be counted as a series. You guys should also try to incorporate the margin of defeats in this system. Like give more points to a team for winning by a margin of like 159 runs.

why..a win is a win..a loss is a loss... the two teams go out there knowing what they have to do,and thats score more than the other team, anything less is no good. In my eyes a 150 run loss is a bad as a 10 run loss..the result remains the same

 

[Duncan]

So you are saying there is NO difference between a one wicket win compared to a ten wicket win? Or a ten run win compared to a hundred run win?

 

[marc71178]

At the end of the day no.

To be honest, most sides are evenly matched anyway, so over 10 games the most you'd ecpect is a 6-4 either way.

 

[Zinzan]

At the end of the day no.

To be honest, most sides are evenly matched anyway, so over 10 games the most you'd ecpect is a 6-4 either way.

Please don't suggest that apart from Australia the rest of the pack are pretty even.

New Zealand for example in the last 18 months (apart from being destroyed by Australia) have beaten ....


South Africa 5-1
Pakistan 4-1
West Indies 3-0
England 3-0
and
Sri lanka 1-0

Given that form I don't think your 6-4 either way applies to NZ.

NZ's only problem in ODI's recently is they have been hammered by Australia, which to me has no relation on where they stand in relation to the other teams given Australia are so far ahead of the rest.

 

[Deja moo]

The ICC table looks more accurate than this one IMO.

 

[Deja moo]

It's not our fault that India and Pakistan refused to play for so long, undermining the system.

It is your fault you created a system that couldnt cope with that .
Honestly Neil, no one is going to take this system seriously anymore if you insist on justifying India gaining and Pakistan losing points after the series we have all witnessed.

 

[Bazza]

Bazza... that 1-0 win was not a series... it just a one-off ODI celebrating BCCI's Platinum Jubilee. That should not be counted as a series. You guys should also try to incorporate the margin of defeats in this system. Like give more points to a team for winning by a margin of like 159 runs.

Yes but if you don't count one off matches then Pakistan haven't played in India for 6 years. I think the majority would agree that is far too long to be relevant!

 

[Bazza]

The ICC table looks more accurate than this one IMO.

Well you're entitled to your opinion but I don't think a table which doesn't include results for each team against every other is really an indicator of form.

 

[Bazza]

So for that compensation you keep a series so many years old? doesnt that make the system poor.

Which series have I kept which is 'so many years old'? If you're talking about the previous Pakistan in India series it's from November 2004, 5 months ago!

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Out of interest, how would the ratings look if you only kept the last series, instead of the last two?

 

[chaminda_00]

Out of interest, how would the ratings look if you only kept the last series, instead of the last two?

Couldn't you have a rating system that only takes in the last series and doesn't count one off matches as a series, cus clearly this system isn't any better then the ICC one.

 

[Pratters]

Which series have I kept which is 'so many years old'? If you're talking about the previous Pakistan in India series it's from November 2004, 5 months ago!

Then how was the last series a clean sweep when the result in that series was 3-2 in favour of India when India last toured Pakistan as far as I remember.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Then how was the last series a clean sweep when the result in that series was 3-2 in favour of India when India last toured Pakistan as far as I remember.

The system counts home and away games separately. The third-last time (thus the one to be removed) Pakistan toured India for ODIs was in 1998/99 (Pepsi Cup), where they won 3-0.

 

[Pratters]

The system counts home and away games separately. The third-last time (thus the one to be removed) Pakistan toured India for ODIs was in 1998/99 (Pepsi Cup), where they won 3-0.

Which means games not 4-5 seasons ago, but 7 seasons ago was included in the system.

I am not saying every system is perfect. But when fallacies in a system becoem evident, efforts must be made to imrpove on the system rather than defend them.

Bazza has done an excellent job on coming up with this system. I am sure he along with the support of others can come up for a few modifications to imrpove the system.

 

[mofo123]

Please don't suggest that apart from Australia the rest of the pack are pretty even.

New Zealand for example in the last 18 months (apart from being destroyed by Australia) have beaten ....


South Africa 5-1
Pakistan 4-1
West Indies 3-0
England 3-0
and
Sri lanka 1-0

Given that form I don't think your 6-4 either way applies to NZ.

NZ's only problem in ODI's recently is they have been hammered by Australia, which to me has no relation on where they stand in relation to the other teams given Australia are so far ahead of the rest.

what abt NZ being hammered 5-0 in pakistan...stop missing out facts

 

[Zinzan]

what abt NZ being hammered 5-0 in pakistan...stop missing out facts

Yes, I didn't bring it up for 2 reasons.

1) If you'd actually read my statement above you'd see i said in the last "18" months. That pakistan series was more than 18 months ago.

2) That was a 2nd string NZ side with at least 4 players making their oneday debuts.

3-4 months later when both teams were close to full strength ...NZ hammered Pakistan 4-1.

So you should stop missing the facts

 

[Deja moo]

Well you're entitled to your opinion but I don't think a table which doesn't include results for each team against every other is really an indicator of form.

Come on mate, its not just an opinion, is it? Can you really say that England at 2 and Pakistan below India in the table is more accurate than the current ICC table ? If this is how the system works, its obviously flawed and needs to be improved.

 

[Bazza]

Out of interest, how would the ratings look if you only kept the last series, instead of the last two?

We do only keep the last series.

 

[Bazza]

Which means games not 4-5 seasons ago, but 7 seasons ago was included in the system.

No, that series from 1998/1999 was not included in the system. That is one reason for counting even a one off match as a series - teams don't always play full series often enough to keep it current, which judging by several comments here over the last couple of days, people consider important.