Rank the test sides

[subshakerz]

Sorry but SL are a stronger test side than Eng these days, and yes I'd back them to win in Eng too.

My Rankings would be

1) India
2) SA
3) SL
4) Aust
5) Eng
6) Pak
7) = NZ & WI

India has never beaten SA or Australia on their own soil, and until they beat at least one of them, they are not close to no.1.

 

[Flem274*]

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

Stop your constant whining ffs.

 

[brackenNY]

*Loading shotgun*

In regards to rankings, I'd have them pretty much as the ICC do.

I'm sorry but NZ is not a very good test side.

 

[Athlai]

*Loading shotgun*

In regards to rankings, I'd have them pretty much as the ICC do.

South Africa 122
X
X
Sri Lanka 119
India 119
X
X
Australia 116
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
England 105
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Pakistan 84
X
New Zealand 82
X
X
X
X
X
West Indies 76

[Bangladesh 13]

 

[slugger]

South Africa 122
X
X
Sri Lanka 119
India 119
X
X
Australia 116
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
England 105
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Pakistan 84
X
New Zealand 82
X
X
X
X
X
West Indies 76

[Bangladesh 13]

nice way to show the ladder..

does this give good reason to create a 2 tier test comp.

 

[tooextracool]

To those that think India is a better side than SA. Err, India can't be a better side than SA, if they have beaten them in a series once (in 2004, at home) in the last 12 years.

 

[silentstriker]

I think it's a three horse race, so lets look at heads up, home and away:

India: Loss vs SA, Draw vs SA, Loss vs Aus, Win vs Aus (1-2-1)
SA: Win vs Aus, Loss vs Aus, Win vs Ind, Draw vs Ind (2-1-1)
Australia: Win vs SA, loss vs Aus, Win vs Ind, Loss vs India (2-2)

So it's:

1. SA
2. Australia
3. India

I do think India has a chance in SA the next time they tour, but you can't argue with results.

 

[pasag]

India have to be above Australia, just have a more complete, stable, well rounded and in form side at the moment.

 

[silentstriker]

India have to be above Australia, just have a more complete, stable, well rounded and in form side at the moment.

Australia won in SA, India didn't. India tour again soon, so maybe then. But I don't think you can be ranked #2 when you haven't beaten either of your competitors at their home while both of the other guys have.

 

[Dissector]

I think it's a three horse race, so lets look at heads up, home and away:

India: Loss vs SA, Draw vs SA, Loss vs Aus, Win vs Aus (1-2-1)
SA: Win vs Aus, Loss vs Aus, Win vs Ind, Draw vs Ind (2-1-1)
Australia: Win vs SA, loss vs Aus, Win vs Ind, Loss vs India (2-2)

So it's:

1. SA
2. Australia
3. India

I do think India has a chance in SA the next time they tour, but you can't argue with results.

You can argue with the results if one of the tests was affected by legendarily bad umpiring like in Sydney which cost us a draw. And there are different ways of slicing the results. For instance even if you include the Sydney test, India is 3-2 up in their head to head with Australia over 8 tests.

Before the Ashes I would say India and Australia were about equal but now Australia has lost to England in England whereas we managed to beat them fairly convincingly a couple of years back. That is the difference.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Erm, one of the defeats came from picking the 4 seamers, or are you still going to claim that not picking a proper spinner was the right way to go?

Nah, it came from getting bowled out for 160 in the first innings. There's nothing Hauritz could have done about that. He may have reduced the deficit slightly if he bowled well, but I don't think he was worth -200 runs with his bowling. If our seamers had bowled better lines and been more consistent in the last game we were still in with a chance. Stuart Broad showed what could be done if you bowled well on that wicket

 

[Ikki]

Agree with the greyhound. As much as not picking Hauritz was a blunder, the batsmen have to own that loss. What a poor collapse.

 

[Migara]

1. SAF
2. IND
3. AUS
4. SL
5. ENG
6. PAK
7. NZ
8. WI
9. BAN

SL has not done enough to be at top 3. If they beat India in India, they'll definietly be #2 for me.

 

[Dissector]

BTW I noticed that Zimbabwe is not listed in the ICC rankings. Have they officially lost test status or is that because they haven't played enough tests to make the rankings?

 

[wpdavid]

Wouldn't Aus have been officially number 1 if they'd won at the Oval but they're number 4 as they lost? Tells me that it's all too close to make any meaningful statements. Having seen this series, I can't work out how Aus won to well in SA. The top 3 are probably interchangeable depending on form, fitness / availability and conditions. SL are probably right at 4, although they'd clean up where there was much help for M&M. England are at the beginning of a WIP.

 

[inbox24]

I reckon India and South Africa are too close to call, joint first for mine and Australia third although must see how we go against Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

 

[GIMH]

I think it's a three horse race, so lets look at heads up, home and away:

India: Loss vs SA, Draw vs SA, Loss vs Aus, Win vs Aus (1-2-1)
SA: Win vs Aus, Loss vs Aus, Win vs Ind, Draw vs Ind (2-1-1)
Australia: Win vs SA, loss vs Aus, Win vs Ind, Loss vs India (2-2)

So it's:

1. SA
2. Australia
3. India

I do think India has a chance in SA the next time they tour, but you can't argue with results.

Can't just rank them on what they do against each other, being the best in the world means you always get results, not just against the other top sides.

 

[silentstriker]

Can't just rank them on what they do against each other, being the best in the world means you always get results, not just against the other top sides.

Yes, but these three sides are close overall in terms of recent results, so I ranked them head to head.

 

[Protean]

I'd say SA & India joint first, with Aus a tiny bit behind right now, though I'm sure not for too long. Then SL a bit behind them.

 

[Langeveldt]

So I assume the official rankings mean **** now that SA are top of them?