Is the ICC Ranking system a joke?

Neither Lara nor SRT being in the top 20 test players. Lara making the top 20 one day players but not SRT despite the highest number of one day matches, runs, centuries and possibly MoM records against his name? Hayden>Lara+SRT. And Steyn who has not even played half the tests as Lillie is much greater? Is this some joke? Or is ICC finally coming public with what a stupid organization it is?

WGAF?!

Kallis has the most MOMs.


SRT's highest Test rating is surprisingly low suggesting he has made a brilliant career of being consistent rather than having any mega highs.


Lillee is a different story - because of WSC his rating is articially low as was penalised for missing a stack of "official" Australian test matches. Greg Chappell is similarly affected.

Nath wrote:WGAF?!

Obviously batman does.

I don't really care frankly. But it does catch my eye when SRT and Lara don't make a list of all time 20. Just makes me wonder whether the people who came with such ratings did so while they were doped?

Or just maybe SRT is not as good as you think.

Batman wrote:Lara making the top 20 one day players but not SRT despite the highest number of one day matches, runs, centuries and possibly MoM records against his name?

I think Price Waterhouse had Lara at the Number 1 rating for the longest period of any batsmen in the past 18 years.

in ODIs

its the old pwc rating system. its not an all-time ranking system, more of a 'form' ranking. its unbelievable how much crap there is in the media about it

'sanga better than lara, stuart clark better than wasim, shock, horror!'

people need to get a clue

SRT has nothing on Ian Bell.

Rankings schmankings....

Nothing will ever convince me Hayden is 14 runs better per innings player than Gooch was. It's all personal opinion.

Hayden isn't fit to trim Gooch's moustache.

Batman wrote:Neither Lara nor SRT being in the top 20 test players. Lara making the top 20 one day players but not SRT despite the highest number of one day matches, runs, centuries and possibly MoM records against his name? Hayden>Lara+SRT. And Steyn who has not even played half the tests as Lillie is much greater? Is this some joke? Or is ICC finally coming public with what a stupid organization it is?

Anything started and run by the Brits is a joke ..




on the rest.

Henry wrote:Hayden isn't fit to trim Gooch's moustache.

Also had an argument with TO once about Andy Flower when he choked as I said Graham Thorpe was easily his equal if not better despite having an average of 5 runs less.

Statistics are generally rubbish - Flower played the top 3 teams in the world during his era about 20% of the time, 70%+ of Thorpes tests were against the top3.

*Buckaroo* wrote:

Anything started and run by the Brits is a joke ..

Best you get off a cricket forum and off the world wide web immediately then you likkle joker!

Buckaroo the Farkwit.

JKLever wrote:

*Buckaroo* wrote:

Anything started and run by the Brits is a joke ..

Best you get off a cricket forum and off the world wide web immediately then you likkle joker!

Owned!

Interesting. He would also have to, for starters:

Stop flying jets.
Stop speaking/writing in English.
Stop believing in gravity.
Stop believing in evolution.

OTOH, maybe he already does a few of those.

Henry wrote:Hayden isn't fit to trim Gooch's moustache.

This is a joke right?

Anyway, Subi's in "over-reaction when I don't actually understand what I am talking about" shock:


ICC forced to backtrack on all-time player rankings

Cricinfo staff
January 15, 2009

The ICC has been forced to issue a hasty media release after criticism of its rankings following Wednesday's announcement that Matthew Hayden was rated as the 10th-best Test batsmen of all time. One newspaper said that it had been forced into a "damage-limitation exercise" after the top 10 did not feature Sachin Tendulkar, ranked at No. 26.

"This does not necessarily mean he is the 10th-best Test batsman or 18th-best ODI batsman in the history of the game," an ICC spokesman said. "The rankings give an indication of how players peaked during their careers but do not give a full picture of those players' level of consistency or longevity in the game.

"The rankings are a great way to compare the performances of players but the all-time list of highest-rated players does not by itself rank those players in terms of true greatness. For that reason some players, who are considered by most observers of the game to be truly great, such as Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Wally Hammond, Greg Chappell and others, do not feature in the top 20 in the all-time high ratings."

But many remained far from convinced. "I am appalled at the ICC's methods of devising the best batsman and the best bowler," fumed Kapil Dev. "It is all the more disappointing when I see that the names of Gavaskar and Tendulkar do not figure on the top."

India's former left-arm spinner Maninder Singh labelled the rankings a "joke" and said "sadistic" ICC officials should stop coming out with such lists. Even BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah was moved to describe the rankings system as laughable.

"I don't know if anyone takes this ranking system seriously, it has no bearing on anybody," Shah told the Sydney Morning Herald. "There are so many other companies in India doing these sorts of rankings and the ICC just wants to get some publicity for their own system."

Cricinfo

yeah, the reaction of the media and former players here has been embarassing. no one has a clue on how these rankings work. they think its some 'official icc all time rankings for make benefit the glorious sport of cricket'

JGK wrote:
"I don't know if anyone takes this ranking system seriously, it has no bearing on anybody," Shah told the Sydney Morning Herald. "There are so many other companies in India doing these sorts of rankings and the ICC just wants to get some publicity for their own system."

Yeah well I mean the ICC obviously only supposedly run the frigging game, who are they when compared to our own BCCI methods. Anybody who disagrees ours aren't better should email our head of statistics Kartikeya@bcci.in

I was listening to SEN yesterday morning and the twits hosting the morning show had no idea what these rankings meant either. I'd hate to see how they'd have reacted if the ICC released the equivalent bowling rankings with DKL appearing at about 35. It's embarrassing that these stoopid qunts are given a large audience to discuss topics that they don't understand.

"I don't know if anyone takes this ranking system seriously, it has no bearing on anybody," Shah told the Sydney Morning Herald. "There are so many other companies in India doing these sorts of rankings and the ICC just wants to get some publicity for their own system."

OMFG, Niranjan Shah talking sense! This may well be the year poverty is done with and global peace is achieved.

Ross wrote:I was listening to SEN yesterday morning and the twits hosting the morning show had no idea what these rankings meant either. I'd hate to see how they'd have reacted if the ICC released the equivalent bowling rankings with DKL appearing at about 35. It's embarrassing that these stoopid qunts are given a large audience to discuss topics that they don't understand.

That part was sarcastic right.