Cumulative Team Rankings

[Zakaz]

If you add the ratings of teams in all three formats and divide by three, you get the following cumulative team rankings:

1. India - 121
2. England - 117
3. Pakistan - 112
4. South Africa - 110
5. New Zealand - 109
6. Australia - 106
7. Sri Lanka - 86
8. West Indies - 83
9. Bangladesh - 77

 

[Zakaz]

Didn't rank Zimbawe as its ratings are pretty low and I think Afghanistan should be ahead them but Afghanistan hasn't got test rating yet.

 

[Zakaz]

Tbh, I think these rankings actually paint a fairly accurate standings of of nations when talking about "overall" cricket.

 

[ikky47]

India and England are the best 2 teams over all formats combined which is very true. Then in the middle I would say it's SA followed by NZ/Pak and Aus at the minute. But once Warner & Smith return I expect them to be back up alongside SA.

 

[Zakaz]

India and England are the best 2 teams over all formats combined which is very true. Then in the middle I would say it's SA followed by NZ/Pak and Aus at the minute. But once Warner & Smith return I expect them to be back up alongside SA.

Pakistan is an unbeatable giant in T20s with an outstanding record, thats why Pakistan is ranked ahead of South Africa in overalls. In ODIs and Tests, yes South Africa is ahead of Pakistan but difference in T20s between us is bigger than difference in Tests and ODIs combined. South Africa series will give us a clear image (I expect pakistan to lose but Pakistan will give tougher fight in South Africa than South Africa will give in UAE)

 

[AMSS]

Truly bizarre op even by the outlandish standards set by some on this forum. Right up there with babar-haris being the world's best batting duo.

 

[Zakaz]

Truly bizarre op even by the outlandish standards set by some on this forum. Right up there with babar-haris being the world's best batting duo.

I am open for discussion

 

[the_outsider]

If you add the ratings of teams in all three formats and divide by three, you get the following cumulative team rankings:

1. India - 121
2. England - 117
3. Pakistan - 112
4. South Africa - 110
5. New Zealand - 109
6. Australia - 106
7. Sri Lanka - 86
8. West Indies - 83
9. Bangladesh - 77

But you shouldn't be.

Cannot give equal weightage to a 450 overs test match and a 40 overs T20.

 

[Zakaz]

But you shouldn't be.

Cannot give equal weightage to a 450 overs test match and a 40 overs T20.

I said this is ranking of "overall" cricketing nations, meaning test cricket is given as much weightage as ODIs and T20s, If you think test cricket is ultimate cricket and only test rankings matter and no other format matters then there is already test rankings made by ICC for you to look at.

 

[ikky47]

Pakistan is an unbeatable giant in T20s with an outstanding record, thats why Pakistan is ranked ahead of South Africa in overalls. In ODIs and Tests, yes South Africa is ahead of Pakistan but difference in T20s between us is bigger than difference in Tests and ODIs combined. South Africa series will give us a clear image (I expect pakistan to lose but Pakistan will give tougher fight in South Africa than South Africa will give in UAE)

I agree Pakistan is better than SA in T20s, but as you said the upcoming SA tour will give us a good indication of where this current Pak side stands. IMO Pak will do well to avoid a whitewash in the test series and should be looking to win the LO leg of the tour.

 

[Zakaz]

I agree Pakistan is better than SA in T20s, but as you said the upcoming SA tour will give us a good indication of where this current Pak side stands. IMO Pak will do well to avoid a whitewash in the test series and should be looking to win the LO leg of the tour.

Agreed

 

[the_outsider]

the only tangible way to assign weightage to each format is by the number of maximum balls that are bowled in them.

So if we give weightage to each format according to the length (overs) involved in each of them, the following rankings emerge.

Rank Team Score

1 INDIA 118
2 ENGLAND 112
3 SOUTH AFRICA 107
4 NEW ZEALAND 104
5 AUSTRALIA 103
6 PAKISTAN 99
7 SRI LANKA 90
8 WINDIES 77
9 BANGLADESH 68

 

[the_outsider]

I said this is ranking of "overall" cricketing nations, meaning test cricket is given as much weightage as ODIs and T20s, If you think test cricket is ultimate cricket and only test rankings matter and no other format matters then there is already test rankings made by ICC for you to look at.

It is not about which format you give more "importance". It's abou the fact that the 3 different formats are 3 totally different types/games of cricket. The rules change completely. The resources each team have change completely.

T20s can never be given equal weightage to Test matches, in such a culmulative ranking method, even if you as a team/nation/individual give more "importance" to T20Is than Test matches.

 

[Sidilicious]

This is flawed methodology, and one cannot use an equal status for all formats, because it’s simply not the case. There needs to be a ratio between the formats.

This ratio will always be subjective to the person,

But something like 60 : 30 : 10 or 50 : 35 : 15 for Test : ODI : T20 would be ideal.

Having said that, I still believe that we do not need different rankings for T20 and ODI. They should really have a combined rankings.

 

[Sachin136]

the only tangible way to assign weightage to each format is by the number of maximum balls that are bowled in them.

So if we give weightage to each format according to the length (overs) involved in each of them, the following rankings emerge.

Rank Team Score

1 INDIA 118
2 ENGLAND 112
3 SOUTH AFRICA 107
4 NEW ZEALAND 104
5 AUSTRALIA 103
6 PAKISTAN 99
7 SRI LANKA 90
8 WINDIES 77
9 BANGLADESH 68

This makes absolutely no sense. We don't give one particular format more weight just because it is longer.

 

[the_outsider]

This makes absolutely no sense. We don't give one particular format more weight just because it is longer.

Number of overs is the only tangible and measurable difference that can be found across all 3 formats.

I'm not saying this method is perfect but this is a simple way of assigning weightage to formats in a way that has a concrete number assigned to each format (i.e. no of overs).

 

[Arsalan Pro]

Number of overs is the only tangible and measurable difference that can be found across all 3 formats.

I'm not saying this method is perfect but this is a simple way of assigning weightage to formats in a way that has a concrete number assigned to each format (i.e. no of overs).

With so many more overs in Tests than T20Is and even ODIs, your ranking system is basically going to show the Test rankings with some minor changes.

 

[the_outsider]

With so many more overs in Tests than T20Is and even ODIs, your ranking system is basically going to show the Test rankings with some minor changes.

Well obviously. And it mirrors how the different formats have cascading levels of difficulty.

To give you the actual weightage figure:

Test - 76.27%
ODI - 16.94%
T20I - 6.77%

 

[Kohli The King of Chase]

England
India
South Africa
New Zealand
Pakistan
Australia
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
West Indies

 

[imshally81]

If you add the ratings of teams in all three formats and divide by three, you get the following cumulative team rankings:

1. India - 121
2. England - 117
3. Pakistan - 112
4. South Africa - 110
5. New Zealand - 109
6. Australia - 106
7. Sri Lanka - 86
8. West Indies - 83
9. Bangladesh - 77

Very good idea.... The Cumulative Team Ranking
ICC should work on this....

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I don't think it's fair to consider all three formats as equal in-terms of value. Yes, all three represent different challenges but I fail to see how being No.1 is T20s should hold the same value as being No.1 in Tests or even ODIs.

 

[Zakaz]

I don't think it's fair to consider all three formats as equal in-terms of value. Yes, all three represent different challenges but I fail to see how being No.1 is T20s should hold the same value as being No.1 in Tests or even ODIs.

You guys saying test cricket is real cricket bla bla, just go look at test rankings then, I clearly said, this is "overall" team rankings where each format is given equal importance, don't like it? just follow test rankings then. This also applies to [MENTION=147270]the_outsider[/MENTION]

 

[Zakaz]

This is flawed methodology, and one cannot use an equal status for all formats, because it’s simply not the case. There needs to be a ratio between the formats.

This ratio will always be subjective to the person,

But something like 60 : 30 : 10 or 50 : 35 : 15 for Test : ODI : T20 would be ideal.

Having said that, I still believe that we do not need different rankings for T20 and ODI. They should really have a combined rankings.

Thats a sensible point you made...

 

[jusarrived]

Well obviously. And it mirrors how the different formats have cascading levels of difficulty.

To give you the actual weightage figure:

Test - 76.27%
ODI - 16.94%
T20I - 6.77%

Depends actually . Pujara may tell you its easier girding out 200 balls on a square turner than scoring 50 runs at 200sr .
I love test cricket , but it would be unfair to give higher weightage to one format over other

 

[jusarrived]

I don't think it's fair to consider all three formats as equal in-terms of value. Yes, all three represent different challenges but I fail to see how being No.1 is T20s should hold the same value as being No.1 in Tests or even ODIs.

May be cos T20s is more popular with 80% of cricket fans ?

 

[DRsohail]

the only tangible way to assign weightage to each format is by the number of maximum balls that are bowled in them.

So if we give weightage to each format according to the length (overs) involved in each of them, the following rankings emerge.

Rank Team Score

1 INDIA 118
2 ENGLAND 112
3 SOUTH AFRICA 107
4 NEW ZEALAND 104
5 AUSTRALIA 103
6 PAKISTAN 99
7 SRI LANKA 90
8 WINDIES 77
9 BANGLADESH 68

Fair assesment.i Agreed here we deserve to be there and India as well.

 

[jadaja]

India would whoop Pakistan in T20s .Pakistan is not best T20 side.

 

[szrana]

India would whoop Pakistan in T20s .Pakistan is not best T20 side.

Easier said than done. By that logic India isn't the best test side, either.

 

[jadaja]

Easier said than done. By that logic India isn't the best test side, either.

It is fact, India has lost just one match against Pakistan. India is best current test side becuase it is unbeatable in Asia.India has to improve dramitacally its record in SENA countries to be counted among all time great teams.

Pakistan honestly is no match for India in any format , if Pakistan wins any match against India it would be an upset like CT finals.

 

[szrana]

It is fact, India has lost just one match against Pakistan. India is best current test side becuase it is unbeatable in Asia.India has to improve dramitacally its record in SENA countries to be counted among all time great teams.

Pakistan honestly is no match for India in any format , if Pakistan wins any match against India it would be an upset like CT finals.

Pakistan is also the best T20 side, because they have won 11 series on the trot against everyone excluding India. Its not Pakistan's fault if India refuses to play them.

 

[jadaja]

Pakistan is also the best T20 side, because they have won 11 series on the trot against everyone excluding India. Its not Pakistan's fault if India refuses to play them.

Even if Pakistan wins 20 series against world invitational 11, still it is not better than India. I just don't see any quality players who are better than India team in Pakistan.

 

[the_outsider]

May be cos T20s is more popular with 80% of cricket fans ?

ICC Rankings is not a popularity contest.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

You guys saying test cricket is real cricket bla bla, just go look at test rankings then, I clearly said, this is "overall" team rankings where each format is given equal importance, don't like it? just follow test rankings then. This also applies to [MENTION=147270]the_outsider[/MENTION]

I do. But I am glad I don't need these superficial rankings to make me feel good about my team, which seems to be the reason why you created them.

 

[ManFan]

Not a bad idea because there needs to be a definite "number one team".

 

[the_outsider]

You guys saying test cricket is real cricket bla bla, just go look at test rankings then, I clearly said, this is "overall" team rankings where each format is given equal importance, don't like it? just follow test rankings then. This also applies to [MENTION=147270]the_outsider[/MENTION]

If you actually created an "overall ranking" I would understand. But you have not.

All you have found is the average rating points across 3 formats. That is not the same as "overall ranking "

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

May be cos T20s is more popular with 80% of cricket fans ?

Really? and where did you find this out? A Twitter poll?

 

[Ab Fan]

If a team plays 3 tests, 5 ODIs and 3 T20s, will they give equal focus to each of the three formats??

An example to explain this, three years ago, in 2015, South Africa toured India for 2 T20s, 5 ODIs and 4 tests.

At the end of the tournament, what we remember?? SA were absolutely clueless vs spin in test series and got dominated by India all the way. They did won ODI and T20 series but were dominated completely in tests and tests were what mattered the most. It was that result which hurt them.

So, equal weightage can't be given to each format.

 

[jusarrived]

ICC Rankings is not a popularity contest.

Does ICC say anywhere that T20 ranking has less weight age than Tests ?

 

[jusarrived]

Really? and where did you find this out? A Twitter poll?

No sir . I watch both Test and T20 matches in stadiums unlike most experts here who follow it on cricinfo , so would safely say T20s are more popular than ODIs/Tests and thats not changing anytime soon .

 

[TM Riddle]

Nice way to somehow accommodate Pakistan in top 3 lol.
Well done op.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

No sir . I watch both Test and T20 matches in stadiums unlike most experts here who follow it on cricinfo , so would safely say T20s are more popular than ODIs/Tests and thats not changing anytime soon .

Cricket is not a popularity contest

 

[Zakaz]

Nice way to somehow accommodate Pakistan in top 3 lol.
Well done op.

Do the calculations yourself if you dont believe me

 

[Hamad_H]

The weightage for the 3 formats should be equal like the op has done or I think a 25:50:25 split between Tests, ODIs and T20s. ODIs should get highest because it is in the middle of the two extremes and the main world cup is ODIs. What would a 25:50:25 split look like for rankings?

 

[Zakaz]

The weightage for the 3 formats should be equal like the op has done or I think a 25:50:25 split between Tests, ODIs and T20s. ODIs should get highest because it is in the middle of the two extremes and the main world cup is ODIs. What would a 25:50:25 split look like for rankings?

Yea, I think I should make new cumulative rankings with different weightage on different formats, How do I do a poll on how much weighting each format gets?

 

[Sunny_majoka]

Well obviously. And it mirrors how the different formats have cascading levels of difficulty.

To give you the actual weightage figure:

Test - 76.27%
ODI - 16.94%
T20I - 6.77%

This makes no sense.
Odis should be given more weightage
Because it is the most popular format in cricketing world.
Followed by tests and t20s.
It should be like 5020
This will give more efficient result to find best team in all formats

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

If you add the ratings of teams in all three formats and divide by three, you get the following cumulative team rankings:

1. India - 121
2. England - 117
3. Pakistan - 112
4. South Africa - 110
5. New Zealand - 109
6. Australia - 106
7. Sri Lanka - 86
8. West Indies - 83
9. Bangladesh - 77

This makes no statistical or data segmentation sense whatsoever!

You have not defined any class limits, neither have you provided any sort of weights to the criteria that you have marked for selection. You cannot obtain a sample set from varying formats which cater to different set of rules and can influence the final run of play massively (a small example - 'the free hit' which is only available in LOI and not in Tests). There is a reason why there are different rankings for different formats and your nonsense just proved it as so.

Miserable data analysis fail here........

 

[Sunny_majoka]

Even if Pakistan wins 20 series against world invitational 11, still it is not better than India. I just don't see any quality players who are better than India team in Pakistan.

That's just arrogance nothing else
You should digest the fact that "Pakistan is best t20 side in the world"

 

[BDfanforever]

Not a good idea, and this will never happen. As seen from the thread, everyone has their own definition about the weight.

 

[Kohli The King of Chase]

45% Test
35% ODI
20% T20I

 

[Zakaz]

45% Test
35% ODI
20% T20I

This sounds reasonable, but I think, more suitable option is:
40% Test
35% ODI
25% T20I
Any takers?

 

[jadaja]

That's just arrogance nothing else
You should digest the fact that "Pakistan is best t20 side in the world"

Nothing arrogant about it , Pakistan is not better t20 side than India.

 

[BDfanforever]

This sounds reasonable, but I think, more suitable option is:
40% Test
35% ODI
25% T20I
Any takers?

25% is too high for T20.

Test 50%
ODI 40%
T20 10%