Cricketweb ODI Rankings

[marc71178]

I like the way every side's rating has benefitted from the Bangladesh win!

 

[Bazza]

Yes that was a surprise to me but it does make sense when you think about it!

 

[Zinzan]

Oh dear what a howler! Nice one Steulen though for spotting it!

OK, so lets see what really happens to the rankings:

Home
Australia 1325 (-9)
Sri Lanka 1165 (-7)
South Africa 1140 (-8)
England 1116 (-6)
New Zealand 1047 (-9)
Pakistan 914 (-5)
West Indies 858 (-4)
India 847
Zimbabwe 250
Kenya 176
Bangladesh 64

Away
Australia 1533 (+11)
New Zealand 1041 (+12)
Pakistan 999 (+12)
India 964 (+8)
England 963 (+13)
South Africa 895 (+12)
Sri Lanka 817 (+11)
West Indies 692 (+12)
Zimbabwe 405 (+11)
Kenya 357 (+13)
Bangladesh 27

Total
Australia 1429 (+1)
New Zealand 1044 (+2)
England 1039 (+3)
South Africa 1017 (+1)
Sri Lanka 991 (+2)
Pakistan 956 (+3)
India 906 (+4)
West Indies 775 (+4)
Zimbabwe 328 (+6)
Kenya 266 (+6)
Bangladesh 45 (+31)


Well the result is much the same but of course in the long run this will have an effect.

So a quick look at the upcoming games:

Bangladesh v Zimbabwe (5)
Australia v Pakistan v West Indies (9 matches plus 3 finals if needed)
South Africa v England (7)
New Zealand v Australia (5)
South Africa v Zimbabwe (3)

So we could see a fair bit of movement in the bottom three if Bangladesh keep up their recent form, and also with the top four all in action there could be some changes near the top of the table.

I'm not suggesting that I could come up with a better ratings formula...

However do you really think England are the 3rd best one day side???

Personally I would have them 8th...ahead of Zim, Bang and Kenya

This is not based on any formula's, but is simply my opinion. I don't rate the English oneday side at all.

Nice to see NZ at 2 though, As a kiwi I certainly won't dispute that.

 

[marc71178]

This is not based on any formula's, but is simply my opinion. I don't rate the English oneday side at all.

Thank you for your opinion.

However since all opinions can have elements of bias in them - a formula is fairer to use.

I believe this one gives more points to victories over big sides, and so England's CT game against Australia has a big improvement on their ranking.

 

[Jono]

I like the way every side's rating has benefitted from the Bangladesh win!

Yes... India just felt like being generous

 

[Bazza]

Also worth remembering zinzan that there is not much between NZ at 2 and SL at 5 so one or two series can see the rankings change a fair bit.

 

[crickmate]

when will be the next update?

 

[Bazza]

The next update will be after all the current series have finished, ie the VB Series and South Africa v England.

 

[Swervy]

I'm not suggesting that I could come up with a better ratings formula...

However do you really think England are the 3rd best one day side???

Personally I would have them 8th...ahead of Zim, Bang and Kenya

This is not based on any formula's, but is simply my opinion. I don't rate the English oneday side at all.

Nice to see NZ at 2 though, As a kiwi I certainly won't dispute that.

I think its fair enough having England at third...they have in the last few months beaten and tied with SA in SA (I know the series hasnt finished,but in my opinion England look the better team),beaten Australia,Sri lanka and completely outplayed India in a three match series.

The one team I would question is WI, i think they are a much better ODI than they are given credit for

 

[Jamee999]

Will the tie do anything strange to the points system?

 

[Zinzan]

I think its fair enough having England at third...they have in the last few months beaten and tied with SA in SA (I know the series hasnt finished,but in my opinion England look the better team),beaten Australia,Sri lanka and completely outplayed India in a three match series.

The one team I would question is WI, i think they are a much better ODI than they are given credit for

Will we ever hear the end of Englands one win over Aust in the CT (at home). I remember that game well, and despite that fact that England played well they did win a pretty vital toss from memory. Before that one win they loss 3 out of 3 to NZ and then afterwards they lost to a very ave W.Indies side in the final that I thought they would win for all money.

I'm suppose I'm just confused that there is such a small gap between NZ at 2nd and Eng at Third. NZ won over 80% of their onedayers (better % than Aust) in 2004 including a number of games against SA,PAK,ENG,WI and Aust hardly weak opposition. I don't know what Eng's winning % was, perhaps someone can let me know but I'm sure it wasn't even close to this.

Also I would have thought the recent 1-1 series between NZ and Aust in Aust would have counted for as much as Engs 1 win at the CT as this was a win over Aust at home.

 

[marc71178]

Yes, but a 1-1 draw isn't a win!

 

[Zinzan]

Yes, but a 1-1 draw isn't a win!

one of the games was

 

[Deja moo]

I think its fair enough having England at third...they have in the last few months beaten and tied with SA in SA (I know the series hasnt finished,but in my opinion England look the better team),beaten Australia,Sri lanka and completely outplayed India in a three match series.

The one team I would question is WI, i think they are a much better ODI than they are given credit for

2-1 isnt 'completely outplayed'. England struggled like newborn babes in the third game.

 

[Sir Redman]

Something I've noticed in many sports with rankings is that England and English players always seem to get unproportionally large points with their victories/good performances.
I dont know how England manage to be third here for the life of me I can't see what they've done to get that high. I agree with Zinzan although I would not have England all the way down at 8...possibly 6?

 

[marc71178]

I have to say that is a lod of hogwash that the rankings give England more points than anyone else - it is a level formula for all.

And incidentally I believe the ICC ratings have England at 4.

 

[Swervy]

2-1 isnt 'completely outplayed'. England struggled like newborn babes in the third game.

dead rubber match...England were by far the superior of the two teams in that series

 

[Deja moo]

dead rubber match...England were by far the superior of the two teams in that series

Yes, England were the superior team. Still, 2-1 doesnt justify "completely outplayed" considering the batting collapse in the third game.

 

[Zinzan]

dead rubber match...England were by far the superior of the two teams in that series

The "dead rubber" excuse is losers mentality. They wouldn't have wanted to lose it.

 

[Swervy]

The "dead rubber" excuse is losers mentality. They wouldn't have wanted to lose it.

look..how the hell would a NZ supporter know what its like to be playing a game where you have already won the series