the #1 test team in ICC rankings

disagreement over 'and', not 'or' shocker

lardbucket wrote:disagreement over 'and', not 'or' shocker

It's like a spat at a logic convention.

& here I was thinking you saw the twat in yourself before you saw the twat in others.

buckSH wrote:& here I was thinking you saw the twat in yourself before you saw the twat in others.

You wear it like a gleaming medal that's 3 foot round. I am blinded whilst you are around.

twat-shades is what you need.

buckSH wrote:twat-shades is what you need.

Yeah, there are some twat-shades on here - they're called the ignore function. I choose not to use them.

no point in going through an empty forum I guess.

the ignore function is quite superfluous ...

Since the the crown has been finally bestowed upon its rightful owner.

there just wasn't much to the ICC #1 when Aus or SA held it, but now it suddenly seems to have acquired so much meaning.

It must be said that the ICC #1 is like the sword of excalibur, in the hands of the rightful owner it works wonders and in ordinary hands it does nothing whatsoever.

buckSH wrote:Since the the crown has been finally bestowed upon its rightful owner.

there just wasn't much to the ICC #1 when Aus or SA held it, but now it suddenly seems to have acquired so much meaning.

It must be said that the ICC #1 is like the sword of excalibur, in the hands of the rightful owner it works wonders and in ordinary hands it does nothing whatsoever.

And yet you still don't understand why people call you racist.

He does. Just too stupid to acknowledge it.

err .. what race are we talking about here. the 'Indian race' ??

According to ICC rankings India have played 32 tests in the ranking period which is more than any team except England. Talk about perceptions.....

Batman wrote:According to ICC rankings India have played 32 tests in the ranking period which is more than any team except England. Talk about perceptions.....

Yes, I was surprised at that. It's interesting, I'd love to see how that's broken down - not from a sceptical perspective, just curiosity.

We've got a fairly fluid situation at the moment with no one outstanding side. I can't see the current Indian side consolidating that position in the next few years, it may be up and down for a number of different teams. But then there may be sufficient talent coming through for India to be the next dominant nation for all I know. It's going to be up for grabs for a while yet.

Shoeshine wrote:

Batman wrote:According to ICC rankings India have played 32 tests in the ranking period which is more than any team except England. Talk about perceptions.....

Yes, I was surprised at that. It's interesting, I'd love to see how that's broken down - not from a sceptical perspective, just curiosity.

We've got a fairly fluid situation at the moment with no one outstanding side. I can't see the current Indian side consolidating that position in the next few years, it may be up and down for a number of different teams. But then there may be sufficient talent coming through for India to be the next dominant nation for all I know. It's going to be up for grabs for a while yet.

Yeah. Agree. Things will be tough once our famed middle order legends retire.

Incidentally it seems WI has only 3 tests this season, the ones they are playing in Aus. And here I was thinking we had the least ones planned this year.....

I guess to an extent it depends on how you define "current season". They've got South Africa over there for three Tests, but that's pretty late in the 09/10 season cycle, more equivalent to the 2010 northern hemisphere summer season. Obviously, having a scheduled trip from Zimbabwe in February shafts the Test programme to a fair extent.

Shoeshine wrote:I guess to an extent it depends on how you define "current season". They've got South Africa over there for three Tests, but that's pretty late in the 09/10 season cycle, more equivalent to the 2010 northern hemisphere summer season. Obviously, having a scheduled trip from Zimbabwe in February shafts the Test programme to a fair extent.

Yeah. Again I must say I am baffled. Didn't ICC revoke Zimbok's test status? Aren't they only supposed playing ODIs atm? I read somewhere else that after bangars India was to have a rubber against Zimboks, but this was not mentioned anywhere else.

are BCCI the #1 ODI team too ..

they should be by today I gues.

x-post

shows just why we are so awesum .. bruaaaah

some stats excavated from cricinfo show just why India is god damned brillaint.
LET'S TALK CRICKET

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/records/211599.html

>300 >350
Sri Lanka 32 4
South Africa 37 9
Australia 59 7
India 56 13
New Zealand 27 4
England 23 2
Pakistan 51 3
West Indies 24 1

look at the number of > 350 scores.
obviously India are doing really good.

buckSH wrote:x-post

shows just why we are so awesum .. bruaaaah

some stats excavated from cricinfo show just why India is god damned brillaint.
LET'S TALK CRICKET

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/records/211599.html

>300 >350
Sri Lanka 32 4
South Africa 37 9
Australia 59 7
India 56 13
New Zealand 27 4
England 23 2
Pakistan 51 3
West Indies 24 1

look at the number of > 350 scores.
obviously India are doing really good.

Whap a paddle in the saddle
Harry doesn't like Ben Harper
Silver flies, like the thighs
Massive oh massively passive

Can you skim a stone
Can you trim a bone
Can you rim a Joan
Can you crim a loan

so many tests being played these days.

but let us not forget who is no.1

buckSH wrote:so many tests being played these days.

but let us not forget who is no.1

In the UK I think Rage Against the Machine are above India.

Surely you must be kidding .. you do acknowledge that we are no. 1 at test cricket.

what does the SA-Eng draw imply for SA prospects for #1 ?

Even if Banindia stay at #1 for the next thousand years, unforunately Bucky will still be the same zero-impact streak of insignificance after year 1000 that he was before dfay 1.