To all those who think India is number one and not SA

[Desi Cartman]

^ I agree chandan. We still dont win overseas enough.

[King Tendulkar]

tell this to dsr aka King Tendulkar:cantstop:

We are No 1. Dont care what the rankings say. We need a series against the safiies to prove it. Or a tri series in UK between India, SA and Aussies. A tri test series would show we are No 1

[Lord]

We are No 1. Dont care what the rankings say. We need a series against the safiies to prove it. Or a tri series in UK between India' date=' SA and Aussies. A tri test series would show we are No 1[/quote'] so u would trust a one- off series instead of rankings formed by performances over the years?clearly SA r the best side atm. a tri-test series is a stupid idea anyways:hysterical:we r yet to be consistent away from home.the sooner u realise it the better

[King Tendulkar]

so u would trust a one- off series instead of rankings formed by performances over the years?clearly SA r the best side atm. a tri-test series is a stupid idea anyways:hysterical:we r yet to be consistent away from home.the sooner u realise it the better

Check out our stats away from home since year 2000. Its very good

[Lord]

Check out our stats away from home since year 2000. Its very good

yeah they r very good,n we r a very good team,but not better than SA.EVEN THE STATS SHOW IT.

[Chandan]

^ I agree chandan. We still dont win overseas enough.

It is not that. Actually till 2010, we're not going to get enough opportunities also, even if we want to improve upon our previous failures abroad. 1.Will we convert the series failure in Australia to victory by 2010?No. 2.Will we convert the series failure in SA to victory by 2010? No. 3.Will we convert the series failure in SL by 2010? No. 4. Will we win a series in Pak which we had lost there the last time we played in Pak by 2010? No At the most, we'll get a chance to win in NZ, and we have to try to not only win that series but win it heavily. Perhaps we can improve our home record by beating SA in 2010 and NZ also, if they visit by 2010.

Check out our stats away from home since year 2000. Its very good

How, dsr, how? We've lost in Australia last year. We lost in SL last year. we lost in SA in 2007 We lost in Pak in 2006. We lost in NZ in 2002-03. So how is the record very good? Winning at just WI and England are very good and we should be number 1 team just for that achievement? Where is the logic in your statement?

Check out our stats away from home since year 2000. Its very good

[Shane]

and u wont sides even now' date='will u?:winky:[/quote'] Nope firmly on the fence, its the matter of the heart and the mind, Heart - India Mind - SA So, fence it !!!

[Lord]

Nope firmly on the fence, its the matter of the heart and the mind, Heart - India Mind - SA So, fence it !!!

thats my predicament too.even my heart says India(it always does:eyedance:),BUT mind says SA n we gotta go wid it! so for a change,u sorta agree with me!:two_thumbs_up:good:icflove:

[cochise]

My heart and mind say India. The stats say South Africa. The rankings say Australia.

[Lord]

My heart and mind say India. The stats say South Africa. The rankings say Australia.

wat more south africa have to do to be no.1? as 4 aussies,thier position at the top is almost gone

[Chandan]

It is not that. Actually till 2010, we're not going to get enough opportunities also, even if we want to improve upon our previous failures abroad. 1.Will we convert the series failure in Australia to victory by 2010?No. 2.Will we convert the series failure in SA to victory by 2010? No. 3.Will we convert the series failure in SL by 2010? No. 4. Will we win a series in Pak which we had lost there the last time we played in Pak by 2010? No At the most, we'll get a chance to win in NZ, and we have to try to not only win that series but win it heavily. Perhaps we can improve our home record by beating SA in 2010 and NZ also, if they visit by 2010. How, dsr, how? We've lost in Australia last year. We lost in SL last year. we lost in SA in 2007 We lost in Pak in 2006. We lost in NZ in 2002-03. So how is the record very good? Winning at just WI and England are very good and we should be number 1 team just for that achievement? Where is the logic in your statement?

Now King Tendulkar, Will you reply how?

[Zap_Brannigan]

I am not saying that India is number 1 but there are some holes in your theory. We faced NZ back in 2002, which we lost. We toured Pak and won in 2004 and toured again in 2006 and lost. But acc. to your table, the 2002 tour of NZ is more important that the more recent 2004 tour to Pak. Additionally, when you take games as far as 5 years back into account, it is not the same side that they have at the moment. You really cant say that the 2008 Indian test team should lose points because of the 2002 Indian team loss. Another issue is that a 5-0 drubbing is as good as a 3-2 loss What it comes down to is giving more points to recent games, more points for win against better teams and completely removing anything older than 2 years. My simple ranking system would be, A = Tests won in last 1 year period * 2 * (10 - Rank of opponent) *1.5 (if away) B = Tests won in the 1 year period prior to 1 year * (10 - Rank of opponent) *1.5 (if away) C = Tests lost in last 1 year * 2 * Rank of opponent * 1.5 (if home) D = Tests lost in the 1 year period prior to 1 year * Rank of opponent *1.5 (if home) Total Points = A + B - C - D Acc to this system, 1. Priority given to recent tests 2. More points for win against good opponents 3. Points lost for losing against poor opponents 4. More points for away win 5. Points lost for home loss

[Chandan]

I am not saying that India is number 1 but there are some holes in your theory. We faced NZ back in 2002, which we lost. We toured Pak and won in 2004 and toured again in 2006 and lost. But acc. to your table, the 2002 tour of NZ is more important that the more recent 2004 tour to Pak. Additionally, when you take games as far as 5 years back into account, it is not the same side that they have at the moment. You really cant say that the 2008 Indian test team should lose points because of the 2002 Indian team loss. Another issue is that a 5-0 drubbing is as good as a 3-2 loss What it comes down to is giving more points to recent games, more points for win against better teams and completely removing anything older than 2 years. My simple ranking system would be, A = Tests won in last 1 year period * 2 * (10 - Rank of opponent) *1.5 (if away) B = Tests won in the 1 year period prior to 1 year * (10 - Rank of opponent) *1.5 (if away) C = Tests lost in last 1 year * 2 * Rank of opponent * 1.5 (if home) D = Tests lost in the 1 year period prior to 1 year * Rank of opponent *1.5 (if home) Total Points = A + B - C - D Acc to this system, 1. Priority given to recent tests 2. More points for win against good opponents 3. Points lost for losing against poor opponents 4. More points for away win 5. Points lost for home loss

ICC official ranking gives weitage to matches/series played in last two years only. But some were not willing to accept it. Then I showed them the plain home and away table which have series as far back as 02-03 into the account. Even according to that, Australia is the number one side, SA 2ns and India 3rd. So there are two rankings producing the same result--enough to suffice that Australia is current no 1 SA is current no 2 India is current no 3. You can find how ICC rankings are calculated. It is quite a complicated method but still far more fool-proof than any other. Here is how you calculate it.

The ICC Test Championship is a national competition run by the International Cricket Council in the sport of cricket for the 10 nations that play Test cricket. The competition is notional in the sense that it is simply a ranking scheme overlaid on all international matches that are otherwise played as part of regular Test cricket scheduling. In essence, after every Test series, the two teams involved receive points based on a mathematical formula. The total of each team's points total is divided by the total number of matches to give a 'rating', and the Test-playing teams are ranked by order of rating (this can be shown in a table). The points for winning a Test match or series are greater than the team's rating, increasing the rating, and the points for losing the match or series are always less than the rating, reducing the rating. A drawn match between higher and lower rated teams will benefit the lower-rated team at the expense of the higher-rated team. An 'average' team that wins as often as it loses while playing a mix of stronger and weaker teams should have a rating of 100. The calculations for the Table are performed as follows: *Each team scores points based on the results of their matches. *Each team's rating is equal to its total points scored divided by the total matches and series played. (A series must include at least two Tests). *A series only counts if played in the last three years. *Series played in the first two years of the three-year limit count half; essentially, recent matches are given more weight. *To determine a team's rating after a particular series: *Find the series result *Award 1 point to a team for each win *Award 1/2 point to a team for each draw *Award 1 bonus point to the team winning the series *Award 1/2 bonus point to each team if the series is drawn *Convert the series result to actual ratings points *If the gap between the ratings of the two teams at the commencement of the series is less than 40 points, then the ratings points for each team equals: *(The team's own series result) multiplied by (50 points MORE than the opponent's rating) PLUS *(The opponent's series result) multiplied by (50 points LESS than the opponent's rating) *If the gap between the ratings of the two teams at the commencement of the series is more than or equal to 40 points, then the ratings points for the stronger team equals: *(The team's own series result) multiplied by (10 points MORE than the team's own rating) PLUS *(The opponent's series result) multiplied by (90 points LESS than the team's own rating) *If the gap between the ratings of the two teams at the commencement of the series is more than or equal to 40 points, then the ratings points for the weaker team equals: *(The team's own series result) multiplied by (90 points MORE than the team's own rating) PLUS *(The opponent's series result) multiplied by (10 points LESS than the team's own rating) *Add the ratings points scored by the team to the total ratings points already scored (in previous matches, as reflected by the Table) and calculate the new rating.

[Donny]

Neither team is #1. Australia still holds that position. After all, they're unbeaten against South Africa this year. :regular_smile:

[Fontaine]

India are NOT number 1 and they won't be until they sort out several issues in the team. 1. We need a spinner that doesn't just take wickets in India but is a wicket taken threat abroad on 4th/5th day pitches like Murali/Warne. Harbhajan is not that guy. He's a good option as a controlling bowler which you definitely need but he doesn't get enough top order wickets. 2. We need another quality seam bowler that can bowl with great control and accuracy. I'm not talking about swing where Zaheer is doing a fine job but another bowler like a Munaf Patel who can bowl consistently at around off stump with a great line/length. Patel to his credit showed some of this in Sri Lanka and again in India recently but more needs to come. 3. Finally we need at least three more/young batsmen that can handle the batting tracks outside India where the bounce is higher and the pitches faster. We already have guys like SRT/Dravid/Laxman who can do this but they aren't going to be around for much longer. Is it Raina/Rohit or others? Whoever it is needs to show that they can play well in the middle and handle pitches in SA/Australia. The good news is that we already have large parts of the puzzle in two solid openers who play well abroad and at home against spin and pace. A great captain/wicket keeper/batsmen and three solid bowlers in ZK/Ishant/Bhajji and a couple of explosive batsmen like Yuvi. With the right type of coaching we can fine tune the young talent we have like Pathan who's having a superb domestic season, Vijay, Raina, and others to really come into the side and do well. Maybe even the likes of Kulkarni who's been a force this season bowling at 140 at times and taking lots of wickets. There's no question the talent is there in the ranks, India A and the under 21's.

[cochise]

After all, they're unbeaten against South Africa this year.

Fantastic! You got to give it to the man...he knows how to find the silver lining in the cloud. Forum bosses, I see some of my :stupido: humourous posts have been deleted from this thread...:--D

[Chandan]

India are NOT number 1 and they won't be until they sort out several issues in the team. 1. We need a spinner that doesn't just take wickets in India but is a wicket taken threat abroad on 4th/5th day pitches like Murali/Warne. Harbhajan is not that guy. He's a good option as a controlling bowler which you definitely need but he doesn't get enough top order wickets. 2. We need another quality seam bowler that can bowl with great control and accuracy. I'm not talking about swing where Zaheer is doing a fine job but another bowler like a Munaf Patel who can bowl consistently at around off stump with a great line/length. Patel to his credit showed some of this in Sri Lanka and again in India recently but more needs to come. 3. Finally we need at least three more/young batsmen that can handle the batting tracks outside India where the bounce is higher and the pitches faster. We already have guys like SRT/Dravid/Laxman who can do this but they aren't going to be around for much longer. Is it Raina/Rohit or others? Whoever it is needs to show that they can play well in the middle and handle pitches in SA/Australia. The good news is that we already have large parts of the puzzle in two solid openers who play well abroad and at home against spin and pace. A great captain/wicket keeper/batsmen and three solid bowlers in ZK/Ishant/Bhajji and a couple of explosive batsmen like Yuvi. With the right type of coaching we can fine tune the young talent we have like Pathan who's having a superb domestic season, Vijay, Raina, and others to really come into the side and do well. Maybe even the likes of Kulkarni who's been a force this season bowling at 140 at times and taking lots of wickets. There's no question the talent is there in the ranks, India A and the under 21's.

These are the points you've listed which we need to acquire to be a formidable team in test for a sustained period. I agree with all your points apart from having a good pair of openers away from home. Gambhir is yet to prove himself away from home in tests. But how many opportunities will he get to do so in near future apart from the 2 tests in NZ? And this is my point. We are playing very few number tests this year and even next year. Along with that, we won't be facing the top three test sides in next two years. How are we going to prove that we are the number one side, even if we have a team? BCCI has to do something to change the cycle so that we play the good teams within 12 years. There is no point playing with BD, NZ and WI for next 2 years.

[Chandan]

A good blog-piece I got to read today: Predictions for 2009 From Brendan Layton, Australia What are the predictions so far for '09? Will Australia be still number one by the end of the year? Will South Africa or India have overtaken them? Who will be the top batsmen? The top bowlers? The new heroes? I'm happy to pick up the slack and make my brave predictions for the new year, and I hope we can get some discussion going. Firstly, Australia will no longer be number one (This is of course referring to the ICC ranking system). They'll probably get beaten in South Africa, although if Stuart Clark plays the result will be much closer than first thought. However, Australia should retain the Ashes. England is a real mess at the moment. KP has resigned from the captaincy and there will be no Peter Moores. England is a shadow of the team that won the 2005 Ashes, although some of the heroes are still lingering around. Flintoff is still a force to be reckoned with, and KP is a genuine superstar batsman who can by dynamite against any opposition. However, their bowling attack is pretty flimsy, as is their choice of Bell at number three. Bell has never made a Test century unless another batsman has passed the mark before him, and while stylish, he just doesn't have any steel in his spine. India and South Africa will define excellence in 2009, and while India are looking as good as ever, South Africa have the advantage due to their finely balanced bowling attack and the coming of age of several of their players (Namely De Villiers and Amla). India has a classy team, led by two fine fast bowlers in Zaheer and Ishant. Ishant has the mark of an all time great, and will continue to improve as long as he doesn't break down due to his somewhat frail physique. Their problem is their aging veterans, who are approaching their use by date (Namely Dravid, Laxman, and Tendulkar, although the latter two players have a year or two left in them). Dhoni has a lot of charisma, and leads the team well, but India will not be able to challenge South Africa unless they win important series away from home. If they can beat the South African team outside of their comfort zone, then they will be the top side. In the meanwhile, they are probably one of the better limited overs sides around. And there is plenty of good young players coming through that could have a great affect on Indian cricket for the next few years. Look out for them at the 20/20 World Championship. Sri Lanka have looked terrific since introducing Ajantha Mendis into their attack. While they will have to worry about how to replace Chaminda Vaas in the near future, they have a good team that can give any team a real shake on their day. They do tend to rely on Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakarra too much, but when they go strong, they will surprise. They could well provide India with some anxious moments if they tour there, especially if any turners make an appearance. Pakistan, thankfully, are making some tours this year, including one to Australia. I'm glad they are getting some international cricket this year after a 2008 they'd rather forget. There will be no Mohammad Asif because of his idiotic drug taking, but Nasir Jamshed is a talented young opener, and they still have the services of Umar Gul, Sohail Tanvir and Yasir Arafat, not to mention the Britney Spears of cricket, Shoaib Ahktar. New Zealand may bloom this year with their youthful team, but India is their first obstacle and their relatively pedestrian attack will struggle. A lot will fall onto Tim Southee, Kyle Mills, and the ever-reliable Daniel Vettori. Hopes will ride on the crop of young batsmen coming through (Jesse Ryder, Daniel Flynn and Ross Taylor) to find their feet this year. Keep your eyes on Flynn. He is a player who loves a scrap. The West Indies had a long year, but the talent is there. Their fast bowling is a problem, but Jerome Taylor is still a damn good bowler. And Gayle, Sarwan, and the Shiv form a formidable batting trio. It is the rest of the team that needs to lift to match their depended-upon heroes. Another frustrating year looms. Ah Bangladesh. The more things changed, the more things stayed the same. Any improvements were blown open by irresponsible batting, inadequate bowling, and a generally undisciplined approach, although they gave Sri Lanka a serious scare in their recent Test series by reaching a 4th innings total in excess of 400. Sakib Al Hasan looks to be an allrounder of immense promise, let's hope they nurture him well. Don't be surprised if they pull off a shock in the World 20/20. Alrighty, looking at the schedule, I'll now make my predictions. The top Test run scorer of the year will be Virender Sehwag, although I reckon Michael Clarke will run him close this year. Both India and Australia have quite a few Test series this year. Sehwag always scores heavily, but Clarke is a batsman that is on the improve every year and his maturity has been evident this summer via several fighting knocks. The top wicket-taker will be Mitchell Johnson. 'Johnno' had a good year in 2008 to finish equal second highest wicket taker, and I reckon he will enjoy the responsibility of being the number one. England will be facing an immensely improved and dangerous Johnson in England this year. The top ODI run scorer will be, on a limb, either Gautum Gambhir or perhaps Kumar Sangakarra. Both are accomplished, and will face a glut of ODIs this year. The top ODI bowler is harder, but I'll go with Ajantha Mendis to elude second year syndrome and be a real force. Give us your opinions and let's get some lively discussion going. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ My comment : India doesn't get enough opportunities this year to showcase its brilliance in test cricket. Even success in 6 test and that too against such low ranked teams might not prove anything. At the most India will get an opportunity to avenge the loss in SL but even that'll not give it enough points. So, India should target to win every test it plays this year, home or away. That should help somewhat. Australia will be playing against SA and then England. So it'll have good opportunities. SA too will have a series against Australia and England while England have a series against Australia and SA. So these three nations play against each other this year and they have a far better opportunity to improve their ranking. BCCI must see how they are in a poor light with no tests against top ranked teams. But do they even care for tests?

[The Outsider]

My comment : India doesn't get enough opportunities this year to showcase its brilliance in test cricket. Even success in 6 test and that too against such low ranked teams might not prove anything. At the most India will get an opportunity to avenge the loss in SL but even that'll not give it enough points. So, India should target to win every test it plays this year, home or away. That should help somewhat. Australia will be playing against SA and then England. So it'll have good opportunities. SA too will have a series against Australia and England while England have a series against Australia and SA. So these three nations play against each other this year and they have a far better opportunity to improve their ranking. BCCI must see how they are in a poor light with no tests against top ranked teams. But do they even care for tests?

Can't really fault the BCCI too much here. Scheduling can rarely be glitch free and a smooth ride - Australia did not play a single test last year for almost a year and are playing by the buckets this year. But for the unexpected cancellation of the Pakistan tour, we would have played 10 tests in the year after playing 11 tests against Australia and South Africa in the previous year. Those 10 tests would have involved 3 challenging series - away in Pakistan and NZ, and at home against SL. Sounds like a pretty tough schedule to me. Even now, BCCI is trying to have one more test against NZ. I don't see how the BCCI are in poor light given the above schedule.

[Chandan]

I don't see how the BCCI are in poor light given the above schedule.

Why will you have two series against Australia, one series against SA and one against England--all in the same year? Most of the teams have one weak team and another strong team in their home season. India doesn't even have a home season in which it'll play a fixed number of matches! And wonder how can you say that Australia rarely played a test last year. They played 3 against India at home, then 3 against WI away, then 4 against India away and then 2 against NZ and 2 against SA at home last year. That makes it 14 tests in a year.