Irrespective of result of SCG test...

and whatever ICC ratings says isn't it fair to assume that SA are the new world no.1?

...

Why?

Why not?

For starters they've not lost a test series for what, more than 2 years now. Thats incredible. Australiaesque.

If it is okay with you, I'll hold fire til after the return series.

Fair enough, OP.

SA leg should be very interesting. If Clark can regain his fitness Aus can still count on its bowling.

I think an Aust win in the return series (not that I see that happening) would probably leave the title open with neither of SAf, Ind or Aust showing sustained dominance over the others as yet.

Can't see it happening.

SA look the best team out of the three, so you'd have to say they're numero uno.

Stuart Clark has done very well feeding off the other bowlers as a third seamer, but what Australia desperately need is someone to lead the attack. Brett Lee is too one-dimensional for this.

In the short-term if Clark can do this Australia should be just as strong as India & SA for the next year or two. They have the best batsman in the world, and a strong crop of other batsmen to support Ponting. However you need the bowling to win matches, and they've gone from having almost the perfect attack 3 years ago - McGrath, Lee, Clark & Warne, to something which is very average.

In Saf, the absence of a spinner will be less relevant. Johnson, Clark and Siddle is a pretty good line up.

Hopefully they will rest Johnson from the ODI series but the NSP are too stupid to do that.

JGK wrote:
Hopefully they will rest Johnson from the ODI series but the NSP are too stupid to do that.

I think he'll get a rest here and there.

Will Clark be fit for SA tour?

In 1995, why did Australia claim to be #1 after beating the Windies in the Windies? Windies hadn't lost a series in 15 years till that point.

RSA have every right to claim it.

Exactly, Salim.

Paul Keating wrote:In 1995, why did Australia claim to be #1 after beating the Windies in the Windies? Windies hadn't lost a series in 15 years till that point.

RSA have every right to claim it.

I don't think Aust did in 1995. It wasn't until they beat the Windies and Saf the following year that it was clear cut.

Australia the cricket team didn't.

But the media and a lot of past cricketers did.

Paul Keating wrote:In 1995, why did Australia claim to be #1 after beating the Windies in the Windies? Windies hadn't lost a series in 15 years till that point.

RSA have every right to claim it.

The difference was that Australia had been challenging for some time.

Australia effectively lost the 1992/3 series against the W'Indies by 1 run.

There was a general consensus that if Australia could knock off the W'Indies at home then it would prove they were the best.

In the last series between South Africa and Australia the Aussies won quite comfortably.

There's also the matter of a three-test series being a bit unsatisfying. Winning a four or five test series is a bigger effort.

Luckily we have another three tests straight after this so we can get a better guage on things. However if South Africa complete a series whitewash in Sydney that will remove all doubt about who's number one - coincidentally the ICC rankings will agree in that situation.

I think the rankings are pretty much on the money.

SG wrote:Will Clark be fit for SA tour?

He played a vital role in Australia going 1-0 up in the series on a damp pitch at Newlands last time out.

His figures in both innings:

SR Clark 17 3 55 5 3.23
SR Clark 16 7 34 4 2.12

Oz need Clark and Clarke.

PeterCS wrote:Oz need Clark and Clarke.

They are similar to Thomson and Thompson?

Odds on a 6-0 reverse for Oz over the two series?

You could see it happening at the moment...

I think most Australian cricket fans would, by now, be prepared for the team not being number one much longer. Those who ave been watching the seeming disintegration of the fortress since early 08 won't be surprised. I think in our heart of hearts, we might admit to ourselves that the #1 tag doesn't sit with us any more, but many of us won't agree to it publicly.

For mine, that's BS. We were lucky against India last summer but got away with it. We didn't absolutely cream the WIndies over t here. Played shite against India, and have looked sub-standard against South Africa.

Maybe some grace is allowable for a team to be removed from the top spot, which reflects OPs stance, after all the measure of a champion is how they bounce back. A mammoth win in Sydney and the return series would probably be enough to say there's life in the dog yet.

But for that to happen Zat, Aus has to bowl out the Saffers .... twice and cheaply.

Can maybe see the former happening, but not the latter.

Didn't say it was likely, merls, just what needs to happen.

SG wrote:Will Clark be fit for SA tour?

He said today that his recovery is ahead of schedule but he's still being conservative in his overall prognosis. He's not pushing himself to tour there.

I wouldn't rush to draw conclusions based on a county's ability to fight back from seemingly hopeless positions. Despite the winning margins they have not dominated either test in this series so, unless they win the third test or dominate a drawn game, i do not consider them ahead of Aus yet.

I think that if SAF win the next series everyone will agree that they are number 1.