The Linear Test World Champions

[BoyBrumby]

I was having a bit of a Google (as one does) & I stumbled across this site:

Test cricket world champions since 1876

We're indebted to a gentleman called John Birch who, taking the first ever test as his start, has proposed a theoretical test world championship belt similar to the ones in boxing, whereby you become world champions simply by beating the existing champions. A lot less complex a method than the ICC test rankings, certainly.

Amazingly, Zimbabwe were once the linear world champs by virtue of their win over India (the Indians having claimed the title by beating Oz in their 97/98 home series), but NZ have never held the title & SA haven't for over 100 years.

The site was last updated in 2001, when India again became champions with a home win over Australia, so I've taken the liberty of updating the title holders:

2001: India: drew 1-1 with Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe (2 tests)
2001: Sri Lanka: beat India 2-1 in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat Bangladesh 1-0 in Sri Lanka (1 test)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat West Indies 3-0 win in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat Zimbabwe 3-0 in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat Pakistan 1-0 in Pakistan (1 test)
2002: England: beat Sri Lanka 2-0 in England (3 tests)
2002: England: drew 1-1 with India in England (4 tests)
2002/03: Australia: beat England 4-1 in Australia (5 tests)
2002/03: Australia: beat West Indies 3-1 in West Indies (4 tests)
2003: Australia: beat Bangladesh 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2003/04: Australia: beat Zimbabwe 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2003/04: Australia: drew 1-1 with India in Australia (4 tests)
2003/04: Australia: beat Sri Lanka 3-0 in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2004: Australia: beat Sri Lanka 1-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat India 2-1 in India (4 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat New Zealand 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat Pakistan 3-0 in Australia (3 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat New Zealand 2-0 in New Zealand (3 tests)
2005: England: beat Australia 2-1 in England (5 tests)
2005/06: Pakistan: beat England 2-0 in Pakistan (3 tests)
2005/06: Pakistan: beat India 1-0 in Pakistan (3 tests)
2005/06: Pakistan: beat Sri Lanka 1-0 in Sri Lanka (2 tests)
2006: England: beat Pakistan 2-0 in England (4 tests)
2006/07: Australia: beat England 5-0 in Australia (5 tests)
2007/08: Australia: beat Sri Lanka 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2007/08: Australia: beat India 2-1 in Australia (4 tests)
2008: Australia: beat West Indies 2-0 in West Indies (3 tests)

Heartening to see we've 3 times held the title this decade, having not previously been champions since 79/80.

Only a bit of fun, obv. But hopefully diverting for a few minutes at least.

 

[Goughy]

Interesting. Was thinking about this no more than a day ago

Good to see

 

[Perm]

14 year run by the West Indies looks alright.

 

[steds]

Tried something like this a couple of months back after reading someone (Goughy?) say something about considering a side world champions after they beat the incumbents away from home. Not entirely sure about the accuracy, but came out with this:

From	Until	Team
1877	1882/83	Australia
1882/83	1899	England
1899	1903/04 Australia
1903/04	1909 	England
1909	1911/12 Australia
1911/12	1921 	England
1921	1932/33	Australia
1932/33	1934	England
1934	1954/55	Australia
1954/55	1961	England
1961	1970/71	Australia
1970/71	1971	England
1971	1974/75	India
1974/75	1994/95	West Indies
1994/95	current	Australia

 

[Richard]

Tried something like this a couple of months back after reading someone (Goughy?) say something about considering a side world champions after they beat the incumbents away from home.

'Twas Whelan.

 

[GIMH]

Just saw this now. Interesting stuff. Will be interesting to dig up now and again, if Australia lose a series anytime soon.

 

[_Ed_]

Amazingly, Zimbabwe were once the linear world champs by virtue of their win over India (the Indians having claimed the title by beating Oz in their 97/98 home series), but NZ have never held the title

Interesting stuff though.

 

[BoyBrumby]

India world champions!

I was having a bit of a Google (as one does) & I stumbled across this site:

Test cricket world champions since 1876

We're indebted to a gentleman called John Birch who, taking the first ever test as his start, has proposed a theoretical test world championship belt similar to the ones in boxing, whereby you become world champions simply by beating the existing champions. A lot less complex a method than the ICC test rankings, certainly.

Amazingly, Zimbabwe were once the linear world champs by virtue of their win over India (the Indians having claimed the title by beating Oz in their 97/98 home series), but NZ have never held the title & SA haven't for over 100 years.

The site was last updated in 2001, when India again became champions with a home win over Australia, so I've taken the liberty of updating the title holders:

2001: India: drew 1-1 with Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe (2 tests)
2001: Sri Lanka: beat India 2-1 in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat Bangladesh 1-0 in Sri Lanka (1 test)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat West Indies 3-0 win in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat Zimbabwe 3-0 in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2001/02: Sri Lanka: beat Pakistan 1-0 in Pakistan (1 test)
2002: England: beat Sri Lanka 2-0 in England (3 tests)
2002: England: drew 1-1 with India in England (4 tests)
2002/03: Australia: beat England 4-1 in Australia (5 tests)
2002/03: Australia: beat West Indies 3-1 in West Indies (4 tests)
2003: Australia: beat Bangladesh 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2003/04: Australia: beat Zimbabwe 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2003/04: Australia: drew 1-1 with India in Australia (4 tests)
2003/04: Australia: beat Sri Lanka 3-0 in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
2004: Australia: beat Sri Lanka 1-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat India 2-1 in India (4 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat New Zealand 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat Pakistan 3-0 in Australia (3 tests)
2004/05: Australia: beat New Zealand 2-0 in New Zealand (3 tests)
2005: England: beat Australia 2-1 in England (5 tests)
2005/06: Pakistan: beat England 2-0 in Pakistan (3 tests)
2005/06: Pakistan: beat India 1-0 in Pakistan (3 tests)
2005/06: Pakistan: beat Sri Lanka 1-0 in Sri Lanka (2 tests)
2006: England: beat Pakistan 3-0 in England (4 tests)
2006/07: Australia: beat England 5-0 in Australia (5 tests)
2007/08: Australia: beat Sri Lanka 2-0 in Australia (2 tests)
2007/08: Australia: beat India 2-1 in Australia (4 tests)
2008: Australia: beat West Indies 2-0 in West Indies (3 tests)

Thought I'd update this:

2008/09: India beat Australia 2-0 in India (4 tests)
2008/09: India beat England 1-0 in India (2 tests)
2008/09: India beat New Zealand 1-0 in New Zealand (3 tests)
2009/10: India beat Sri Lanka 2-0 in India (3 tests)
2009/10: India beat Bangladesh 2-0 in Bangladesh (2 tests)

As we can see, India are not only the no.1 test side in the ICC rankings, but also the current linear world champs having wrested the crown from Oz by winning the Border/Gavaskar series in 2008 and successfully defending their crown 4 times since.

 

[Goughy]

Just done somethng similar using the idea that you have to beat the Champ in their home to take the title (ie have to knock out the Champ to take the belt)

So using 3 match series min and have to win away.

Linear World Champs

Start - 1899- Eng
1899 1903/04- Aus
03/04 - 09- Eng
09 - 11/12- Aus
11/12 - 21- Eng
21 - 28/29- Aus
28/29 - 30- Eng
30 - 32/33- Aus
32/33 - 34- Eng
34 - 54/55- Aus
55 - 61- Eng
61 - 70/71- Aus
70/71 - 71 Eng
71 - 74/75- India
74/75 - 94/95- WI
94/95 - 08- Aus
08/09 - 08/09- SA
08/09 - Pres- Aus

Gah, Aus still on top. SA with the shortest reign in Test history.

 

[Pratters]

Yeah I like to take it as that as well Goughy. Any changes if it was reduced to less than 3 tests?

 

[Somerset]

Both interesting and somewhat depressing to hear that New Zealand have never been the holders of the "world test champion title" on such a list, yet even Zimbabwe have managed it. For the record I do prefer Goughy's list and criteria that to take the title, a side must win away from home in Ranfurly Shield style.

 

[Goughy]

Just done somethng similar using the idea that you have to beat the Champ in their home to take the title (ie have to knock out the Champ to take the belt)

So using 3 match series min and have to win away.

Linear World Champs

Start - 1899- Eng
1899 1903/04- Aus
03/04 - 09- Eng
09 - 11/12- Aus
11/12 - 21- Eng
21 - 28/29- Aus
28/29 - 30- Eng
30 - 32/33- Aus
32/33 - 34- Eng
34 - 54/55- Aus
55 - 61- Eng
61 - 70/71- Aus
70/71 - 71 Eng
71 - 74/75- India
74/75 - 94/95- WI
94/95 - 08- Aus
08/09 - 08/09- SA
08/09 - Pres- Aus

Gah, Aus still on top. SA with the shortest reign in Test history.

Haha, ****. Just realised that Steds did this exact same thing earlier in the thread.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

The international football unofficial world championships is a lot more interesting, partly because if there are a few unusual results it can get dragged around a few backwaters before reemerging.

 

[wpdavid]

Haha, ****. Just realised that Steds did this exact same thing earlier in the thread.

At least you've ensured that England no onger have the shortest reign

Not sure about all of this, tbh. Granted anything to streamline the current situation is worth discussing, but the above just seem too open to rogue results. I've not seen a lot to change my view that the test championship is either pointless because it's blatantly obvious who the best side is or meaningless because the top sides are too close to call.

 

[Jono]

It's not meaningless if that's the case because it gives teams something to aim for. If a 3-0 result means a team jumps up in the rankings instead of 2-0, then it may make that team go out in a dead rubber and try and win the match a bit more than they might have if it were simply a dead rubber with no consequences.

 

[Neil Pickup]

The international football unofficial world championships is a lot more interesting, partly because if there are a few unusual results it can get dragged around a few backwaters before reemerging.

There must be a way to design a club football one that ended up in Exeter (via Manchester and Leeds) during the last month...

I do like the way that the Netherlands Antilles managed to become football World Champs in 1963 by beating Mexico, and that it's been round Zimbabwe and Angola in the last decade.

 

[GIMH]

I had the whites as champions of Europe in 99 after we beat Oxford. They had just beaten Everton in the previous round, who had beaten Liverpool in the derby before that. Liverpool had beaten Arsenal early in the season and Arsenal had beaten Man U in the Charity Shield. Man U were the actual champions of Europe.

Of course, I decided to ignore any previous lineage in there by starting with the 1999 European Cup final, but hey, it just seems a logical starting point

 

[chasingthedon]

Just done somethng similar using the idea that you have to beat the Champ in their home to take the title (ie have to knock out the Champ to take the belt)

So using 3 match series min and have to win away.

Linear World Champs

Start - 1899- Eng
1899 1903/04- Aus
03/04 - 09- Eng
09 - 11/12- Aus
11/12 - 21- Eng
21 - 28/29- Aus
28/29 - 30- Eng
30 - 32/33- Aus
32/33 - 34- Eng
34 - 54/55- Aus
55 - 61- Eng
61 - 70/71- Aus
70/71 - 71 Eng
71 - 74/75- India
74/75 - 94/95- WI
94/95 - 08- Aus
08/09 - 08/09- SA
08/09 - Pres- Aus

Gah, Aus still on top. SA with the shortest reign in Test history.

The must win away rule seems a little harsh on the 1969-70 South Africans - they crushed the "champion" Aussies 4-0.

 

[cbuts]

NZ were robbed!

Much like Suzie robbed us in 1995
The French in 1999
Mortlock in 2003
Wayne Barnes in 2007......

The Disputed Years 1980-84

At the end of 1979 England, the then World Champions, flew to Australia to play a three test series. At the same time Australia also played a series against the West Indies. Both series took place at the same time with the West Indian series starting first. The "standard" World Championship looks at the score when a series finishes to determine the winner and, as the series between Australia and the West Indies ended first, it does not count towards the championship.

However by the end of the second test against England in January, Australia were already 2-0 up in the series. It could be argued therefore that they were already World Champions when they played the West Indies in the third test two weeks later.

If that were so a rather different pattern emerges which briefly sees New Zealand holding their only title......

 

[GIMH]

Just saw this thread linked at the bottom of another thread I was reading

Interestingly, England hold the title under steds/Goughy's method and will do so until at least next June, while India need two wins in the next two to keep hold of the linear title.