**Official** South Africa in England 2012

[Ruckus]

Old results being removed from the calculations. Happens once a year.

Far out that's crazy then. No. 2, no way are we better than SA.

 

[uvelocity]

shhhhh

 

[Spark]

Far out that's crazy then. No. 2, no way are we better than SA.

The joys of actually winning home series

 

[Ruckus]

Home/away has no effects on ranking points though.

 

[Spark]

No, but it certainly helps.

 

[Ruckus]

Do you know roughly how old the results are that were removed?

 

[GIMH]

Do you know roughly how old the results are that were removed?

It's usually three years. We dropped off big time this time in 07.

That would mean defeats to India and Saffa, and a win in Saffa, are struck from Aus's record, right?

 

[Cabinet96]

Do you know roughly how old the results are that were removed?

The rankings now calculate all series after the Ashes in 09. You losing to number 5 England when you were number 1 would have affected you badly in the rankings. As would the loss in India in 08. The loss at home to SA is no longer a factor either.

Basically 3 series Australia lost are now no longer a factor in the rankings. You've only lost 2 series in the time frame used. Them being the Ashes and the loss in India in 2010.

England are a long way ahead now though. I think we might be able to get away with losing to SA and still being number 1

 

[Spark]

You won't. SA will still go to #1 if they win (regardless of how big the win is).

If they lose badly, they can drop, though.

 

[Jacknife]

The rankings now calculate all series after the Ashes in 09. You losing to number 5 England when you were number 1 would have affected you badly in the rankings. As would the loss in India in 08. The loss at home to SA is no longer a factor either.

Basically 3 series Australia lost are now no longer a factor in the rankings. You've only lost 2 series in the time frame used. Them being the Ashes and the loss in India in 2010.

England are a long way ahead now though. I think we might be able to get away with losing to SA and still being number 1

Na any win for SA will take them to the top spot just but if they lose 2-0 or 3-0 they go down to 4th.

 

[Heboric]

SA with all the players they have should been the dominant team of the last 5 years but what have they done? They choke every world cup and lose random test matches. On paper SA do have a better team that England but they are the great underachievers so I can see why England fans think we're going to win.

A 3 match series where the weather is pretty bad and the two teams are pretty close is always going to be a variance fest. All 3 series results are distinctly possible

Now I am really confused, one minute South Africa have rubbish players and the next they were suppose to dominate with these mystery players we dont have.

Plus there is one country and its supporters that is surely not allowed to rag the Proteas regarding choking and that is the English.

 

[Ruckus]

You won't. SA will still go to #1 if they win (regardless of how big the win is).

If they lose badly, they can drop, though.

So are you saying SA can still go to no.1 if they only win 1-0 (2 draws)? Why would one test win give them 9 points? Seems a bit excessive given the minor difference in rankings.

 

[Spark]

So are you saying SA can still go to no.1 if they only win 1-0 (2 draws)?

Yep.

 

[uvelocity]

need to know how aus can go to #1

3 ties?

ranking predictor broken

 

[Cabinet96]

WOW, I'm stunned they could make up 9 points with a one nil win. Would England drop down to third if they lose the series closely?

Sorry for the questions, he rankings predictor isn't working for me.

 

[Ruckus]

heh it's kind of funny to think that despite all the problems going on with the Aus team, we are officially ranked 2nd in tests and 1st in ODs. Not half bad, that. A fair bit of BS going on there though.

 

[Cabinet96]

I wouldn't call it BS. It's just that Australia's worst year in test cricket, for a long time, is no longer a factor in the rankings, because it happened quite a while ago. You've only lost two series in the time of the rankings, one of which was a trip to the number 1 team.

South Africa have hardly dominated in the last 3 years. Sure they've been steady and haven't lost any series I, I don't think. But they missed out on cashing in and defeating teams heavily like Australia and England have.

 

[Cabinet96]

Just had a play with the predictor:

So if SA win 1-0 or 2-1 they will be level on points with England.

If SA win 2-0 they will go to number 1 with England number 2.

If SA win 3-0 England will drop down to 3.

If England win 1-0 or 2-1 there is no change to the rankings.

If England win 2-0 or 3-0 SA will go down to 4th

If the series is drawn England will lose one point and SA will gain one point. There will be no change in the rankings.

 

[theegyptian]

Now I am really confused, one minute South Africa have rubbish players and the next they were suppose to dominate with these mystery players we dont have.

Plus there is one country and its supporters that is surely not allowed to rag the Proteas regarding choking and that is the English.

dude you have two modern (and potentially all time) greats in Kallis and Steyn. England have well no-one really close.

SA's last five Test series: 1-0 v NZ (A), 2-1 v SL (H), 1-1 v Aus (H), 1-1 v Ind (H), 0-0 v Pak (in UAE.

This South Africa team is one of the great underachieving teams of all time imo. In an era when there has been no great team SA really should have been the dominant nation with the players they have at their disposal but for some reason they reeally haven't been.

 

[Jacknife]

Now I am really confused, one minute South Africa have rubbish players and the next they were suppose to dominate with these mystery players we dont have.

Plus there is one country and its supporters that is surely not allowed to rag the Proteas regarding choking and that is the English.

When have England gone in as one of the favorites for comps and then choked.