Test Team World Rankings

[heathrf1974]

I'm still a bit confused by the current test team world rankings. I believe India should be number 1 but Australia shouldn't be fifth. Anyway I did some number crunching and formed the table below. This table is based on the most recent home and away test series between each of the top eight nations. A series win=+1, draw=0 and loss=-1.

Team Series Win Series Draw Series Loss Total
Australia 10 1 3 +7
South Africa 9 3 2 +7
India 8 3 3 +5
Sri Lanka 5 5 4 +1
England 5 2 7 -2
Pakistan 4 4 6 -2
New Zealand 1 5 8 -7
West Indies 1 3 10 -9

However, these results include a handful of test series going back to 2002, due to some countries having not toured at some places for a while (i.e. New Zealnd in Pakistan).

So I gathered info over the last four years based on the win/loss ratio of these teams that is shown below

Team W/L ratio
South Africa 2.30
Australia 2.27
India 2.11
Sri Lanka 1.87
England 1.33
New Zealand 0.46
Pakistan 0.42
West Indies 0.16

Anyway I just find some of the rankings confusing and yes I do have a lot of time on my hands today. Any opinions on these tables and/or the current ranking system?

 

[Hurricane]

What are the win loss ratios for the past two years. Perhaps that would be a better indicator of the current rankings. Rather than the last 4 years.

 

[Flem274*]

Australia conveniently above India I see.

 

[Somerset]

In fairness to the ICC's system, "the rankings are also weighted to give preference to recent form and take no account at all of matches played more than three years ago." (from an Andrew Hughes article)

Just looking at the last three years, its interesting to note that Australia's win-loss ratio drops to 1.81 in the last three years, which actually places them around fourth or fifth (which coincides with their ranking on the official ICC table). Their recent form (three consecutive losses) certainly doesn't help them in making their way up the table either. Taking all that into consideration I tend to think that the ICC rankings are a reasonable representation of where the teams stand.

 

[Shri]

India will start to take a hit on the rankings from 2014 or so then.

 

[Somerset]

What are the win loss ratios for the past two years. Perhaps that would be a better indicator of the current rankings. Rather than the last 4 years.

Australia's ratio drops even more drastically to 1.40 over the last two years (although I will admit that its up to 2.66 this year despite their recent three losses since they didn't drop a home test in 2010 and beat NZ 2-0).

 

[morgieb]

Used to be the old CW Rankings that were a more accurate representation of where the teams stand. Current one tends to punish teams who don't play enough.

 

[vcs]

The Numbers Game: Australia's fall from first to fifth | Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

 

[Teja.]

The Numbers Game: Australia's fall from first to fifth | Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

at the gulf of difference in the win-loss ratio between India and the next 4 teams.

W/L ratios against the top 8 teams since 2008

India - 2.16

South Africa - 1.71

England - 1.63

Sri Lanka - 1.6

Australia - 1.54

Pakistan - 0.3

West Indies - 0.18

New Zealand - 0.16

Lol'n at the thought of what our Ratio would have been if we got play 7 games against this Pak outfit too tbh.

 

[GotSpin]

at the gulf of difference in the win-loss ratio between India and the next 4 teams.

W/L ratios against the top 8 teams since 2008

India - 2.16

South Africa - 1.71

England - 1.63

Sri Lanka - 1.6

Australia - 1.54

Pakistan - 0.3

West Indies - 0.18

New Zealand - 0.16

Lol'n at the thought of what our Ratio would have been if we got play 7 games against this Pak outfit too tbh.

loln at the thought of India playing away from the sub-continent...

 

[Teja.]

Just ftr we still have a W/R record of 2 outside the subcontinent over the same period. However, I fully agree that it is too small a sample size to be worth considering. Our real test will be against SA later this year.

 

[GotSpin]

Just ftr we still have a W/R record of 2 outside the subcontinent over the same period. However, I fully agree that it is too small a sample size to be worth considering. Our real test will be against SA later this year.

Same with Sri Lanka too. When have they last played a test series outside the SC...maybe I forgot one?

ftr I wouldn't have aus as no.2 like the rankings in the OP

 

[marc71178]

Used to be the old CW Rankings that were a more accurate representation of where the teams stand. Current one tends to punish teams who don't play enough.

How exactly does the current system penalise sides? It's done on an average per games played.

 

[aussie]

In fairness to the ICC's system, "the rankings are also weighted to give preference to recent form and take no account at all of matches played more than three years ago." (from an Andrew Hughes article)

Just looking at the last three years, its interesting to note that Australia's win-loss ratio drops to 1.81 in the last three years, which actually places them around fourth or fifth (which coincides with their ranking on the official ICC table). Their recent form (three consecutive losses) certainly doesn't help them in making their way up the table either. Taking all that into consideration I tend to think that the ICC rankings are a reasonable representation of where the teams stand.

The bolded is pretty much whats wrong the ICC ranking system or any ranking system in general. Thats a ridiculous way to judge who is the best.

As I always say, I simply propose to have no ranking system at all. The purpose it serves isn't a purpose worth serving IMO.

The flaws are insoluble. You will never get a ranking system that does what some people want done - tells you unequivocally which team is "best". Because sometimes there is no "best" as it is right now.

 

[heathrf1974]

at the gulf of difference in the win-loss ratio between India and the next 4 teams.

W/L ratios against the top 8 teams since 2008

India - 2.16

South Africa - 1.71

England - 1.63

Sri Lanka - 1.6

Australia - 1.54

Pakistan - 0.3

West Indies - 0.18

New Zealand - 0.16

Lol'n at the thought of what our Ratio would have been if we got play 7 games against this Pak outfit too tbh.

That's a bloody good list. They must largely weigh it on the last two years. Cheers.

 

[Teja.]

I'd refrain from ranking the sides before the Ashes and the Ind-SA series at the end of the year. Will clear a lot of doubts I have.

 

[smash84]

at the gulf of difference in the win-loss ratio between India and the next 4 teams.

W/L ratios against the top 8 teams since 2008

India - 2.16

South Africa - 1.71

England - 1.63

Sri Lanka - 1.6

Australia - 1.54

Pakistan - 0.3

West Indies - 0.18

New Zealand - 0.16

Lol'n at the thought of what our Ratio would have been if we got play 7 games against this Pak outfit too tbh.

It might well have been worse. Considering that Pakistan have been a pathetic team in the 2000s and with one of their weakest bowling attacks sides managed to beat India at home (the series in which Irfan Pathan got a hattrick in Karachi test and India lost that one) as well as drew with them in India.

I personally think that had Amir and Asif not been involved in the scandal that they are in, an India Pakistan contest would have been a mouth watering prospect. Pakistan generally tend to play well against India IMO.

Given India's current strong line-up I would have backed them to win but I am sure Pakistan would have given them some competition.

 

[vcs]

I'd refrain from ranking the sides before the Ashes and the Ind-SA series at the end of the year. Will clear a lot of doubts I have.

What does Sri Lanka's programme look like?

 

[vcs]

It might well have been worse. Considering that Pakistan have been a pathetic team in the 2000s and with one of their weakest bowling attacks sides managed to beat India at home (the series in which Irfan Pathan got a hattrick in Karachi test and India lost that one) as well as drew with them in India.

I personally think that had Amir and Asif not been involved in the scandal that they are in, an India Pakistan contest would have been a mouth watering prospect. Pakistan generally tend to play well against India IMO.

Given India's current strong line-up I would have backed them to win but I am sure Pakistan would have given them some competition.

You are right, India had some strong teams on paper in 2005-2006 but really struggled to actually back it up with performances. Even our wins in that time were unconvincing. I blame it on Greg Chappell.

 

[heathrf1974]

Thanks for replying. I thought the rankings maybe based on the last four years but it seems it maybe loosely based on the last two which I think is too brief.