Back when beating #1 team meant something

[Gollum]

Used to be a special occasion, world would stand up and take notice. Almost always the lower ranked team would have to do something extraordinary to accomplish the feat. 

 

Kiwis cheating their way to a win against WI in 1980 (sure no official rankings then but all knew who the top dog was)

Aus ending WI dominance in 1995...that epic Waugh-Ambrose face-off

India-Aus 1998/2001/2008

Ashes 2005

RSA finally winning in Aus in 2008-09

 

Even when lesser teams became #1, was always noteworthy to see them fall. India losing the 1st 2 tests in 2011 Eng (marked end of Fab 4 era), the celebrations and joy on the faces of Poms looked special, genuine. Or when Proteas beat Poms in their backyard in 2012 (Amla 300, Steyn vs Anderson, KP destroying Steyn...), when India finally ended RSA's decade long unbeaten overseas run in 2015 (marked decline/end of another legendary gen and rise of a fearsome home side).

 

Look at this #1 team, lost 1-2 in RSA (all decided in 1st 6 days of cricket), crushed 1-4 in Eng, violated here (5.5 days total). Doesn't seem like a big deal, beating us. I still believe the ranking table doesn't lie, we are #1, not dominant, maybe first among equals. But we have made a mockery of the #1 ranking. Kiwis gave off vibes that it was no big deal, that the result was expected. Probably true, but still quite insulting.

 

Not enough to be #1 as per ICC formula, we must be that even in minds of all fans, undisputed #1. Some ICFers themselves are resigned to the opinion that we don't deserve to play the WTC final or that Aus deserves top ranking. Don't agree with them but ideally there should be no scope for such doubts. Had NZ played some outstanding cricket, memorable Kane 150, Boult delivering an ATG spell.....would still have been acceptable. But looked like they were operating at 3rd gear throughout, no way unbeatable. 

Edited March 2, 2020 by Gollum

[Suhaan]

Toone toh mujhe nostalgic kar diya bhai

Kya din th woh

[Vickydev]

The #1 teams earlier would seldom lose or at least be very tough to beat. And the team that did so was usually their closest challenger. The team who aspired to be like them and hence there was great rivalry and competition. Now anybody can beat anyone at home, so there really is no great achievement in that. 

[Zero_Unit]

is it just me or is ranking meaningless at this point? Forget about test, look who is ranked #1 in T20. beating them is no more fun than beating zim lol ... ranking seems to be a joke these days.

Every test team is a hero in their own den, goes out to play out of comfort zone, looks worst than ZIM and BD combined.

Edited March 2, 2020 by Zero_Unit

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Zero_Unit said:

is it just me or is ranking meaningless at this point? Forget about test, look who is ranked #1 in T20. beating them is no more fun than beating zim lol ... ranking seems to be a joke these days.

Rankings are simply ranking the current teams based on some metric .... on a system, someone is at #1 and someone at #10 .... the issue is when people associate #1 ranking as being equivalent to being as good as the ATG teams, which obviously held that #1 ranking in the past 

 

While ATG teams would be #1 on the ranking, not all #1 ranked sides are ATG teams  .... this is what needs to be understood 

Edited March 2, 2020 by zen

[Zero_Unit]

4 minutes ago, zen said:

Rankings are simply ranking the current teams based on some metric .... on a system, someone is at #1 and someone at #10 .... the issue is when people associate #1 ranking as being equivalent to being as good as the ATG teams, which obviously held that #1 ranking in the past 

 

While ATG teams would be #1 on the ranking, not all #1 ranked sides are ATG teams  .... this is what needs to be understood 

That's what am trying to portray through my message by stating pak is #1 T20 side (LOL) and I don't even know who is even ranked #1 in odi or test. Back in the days, we knew who the big dog was, it was always AUS. Beating them was a special occasion. We didn't need ranking to get excited about that ... today, almost all team (if not all) are mediocore. 

[zen]

1 minute ago, Zero_Unit said:

That's what am trying to portray through my message by stating pak is #1 T20 side (LOL) and I don't even know who is even ranked #1 in odi or test. Back in the days, we knew who the big dog was, it was always AUS. Beating them was a special occasion. We didn't need ranking to get excited about that ... today, almost all team (if not all) are mediocore. 

Yes, there is no ATG like team atm .... though Test rankings are more meaningful in the sense that teams were awarded titles based on holding the rank for a period of time .... Because of the championship status of #1 rank in Tests, teams worked hard to maintain the status ....  In LOIs, it is usually the ICC WC winner that is rated highly irrespective of the ranking 

[wanted_desi]

I felt so down after watching those pictures. 

[Vilander]

1 hour ago, Aiden said:

 Aus beating Pak of 90s at home 3-0 was also another example of beating number 1 team 

Pak was never no 1 just those few days when misbah was at helm. Its a pathetic team basically.

[bowl_out]

Isn't that a good thing it's changed? Those were times that one team absolutely dominated both forms of the game.. Now, there is no one team that dominates. 

 

On the flip side, it is annoying to see so much of home side advantage.. plus add the win the toss, win the game kind of conditions

[rkt.india]

17 hours ago, Gollum said:

Used to be a special occasion, world would stand up and take notice. Almost always the lower ranked team would have to do something extraordinary to accomplish the feat. 

 

Kiwis cheating their way to a win against WI in 1980 (sure no official rankings then but all knew who the top dog was)

Aus ending WI dominance in 1995...that epic Waugh-Ambrose face-off

India-Aus 1998/2001/2008

Ashes 2005

RSA finally winning in Aus in 2008-09

 

Even when lesser teams became #1, was always noteworthy to see them fall. India losing the 1st 2 tests in 2011 Eng (marked end of Fab 4 era), the celebrations and joy on the faces of Poms looked special, genuine. Or when Proteas beat Poms in their backyard in 2012 (Amla 300, Steyn vs Anderson, KP destroying Steyn...), when India finally ended RSA's decade long unbeaten overseas run in 2015 (marked decline/end of another legendary gen and rise of a fearsome home side).

 

Look at this #1 team, lost 1-2 in RSA (all decided in 1st 6 days of cricket), crushed 1-4 in Eng, violated here (5.5 days total). Doesn't seem like a big deal, beating us. I still believe the ranking table doesn't lie, we are #1, not dominant, maybe first among equals. But we have made a mockery of the #1 ranking. Kiwis gave off vibes that it was no big deal, that the result was expected. Probably true, but still quite insulting.

 

Not enough to be #1 as per ICC formula, we must be that even in minds of all fans, undisputed #1. Some ICFers themselves are resigned to the opinion that we don't deserve to play the WTC final or that Aus deserves top ranking. Don't agree with them but ideally there should be no scope for such doubts. Had NZ played some outstanding cricket, memorable Kane 150, Boult delivering an ATG spell.....would still have been acceptable. But looked like they were operating at 3rd gear throughout, no way unbeatable. 

We beat Aus at our home. Aus bear WI at home. Beating India at home is still a challenge.

[Stan AF]

The present Indian team is not #1. Never have been. I'd take hard truths over stats & numbers.