Is Pakistan the greatest cricket nation ever?

[Mamoon]

What is bogey team? I didnt know we had to take account of this specific classification when it comes to ranking teams. Hell, if its a classification then i request you omit Pakistan's record against Australia in Australia as they are our bogey team. Wait, even then we are better than England because we at least manage to beat Australia at our home!

If cherry picking and personal preference in deciding rankings was a thing, your justifications would be a good example of that.

What are Pakistan's achievements? Winning ICC tournaments, having a solid record in all countries in all formats except Australia & SA (to a lower extent), being the number one t20I team.

I own up to my words, there is no shame in admitting defeat unlike people who change their opinion and standards when it comes to their favorites.

Pakistan has produced ATGs in MOYO and YK in the past decade in batting. I could argue YK's case all day with you if you want.

Which elite fast bowler has india produced which in your opinion is the second best team in the history of cricket?

Some times, certain teams struggle against particular teams and it is difficult to explain why. It is a phenomenon that is observed in nearly every sport.

England have not beaten Pakistan in a Test series in 2010. However, in the same period, they have beaten India, Australia and South Africa home and away. Do you think the failure to beat Pakistan really matters?

Would you as a Pakistani fan care if we beat the top teams home and away, but fail to beat Sri Lanka and New Zealand?

Pakistan have done better than England against Australia? In what world?

England have won every home series against Australia since 2001, and dished out the biggest phainta Australia have received at home in their modern history, with three innings defeats in five games.

Pakistan have shamelessly lost every Test in Australia since Sydney 1995, and in the last four home series, the record is 2-2.

Australia won in 1998 and 2002; we won in 2014 and 2017. I have ignored the 1-1 in 2010 because the series was playing in England and we did not have home advantage.

Our record against Australia is bog average and our record in Australia is a joke.

Younis MoYo are not all-time greats. They are Pakistani legends only. Neither of them would ever make the second or third all-time XI, let alone first. They are around 25-30 batsmen ahead of them.

India have not produced a legendary fast bowler yet, but it is not the only factor. Our inability to produce a top tier all-time great batsman wouldn’t have been a problem if they would have been able to excel overall, which we have not.

Why are you highlighting the T20 ranking when you yourself stated that we are ignoring that format? You were the one who brushed aside West Indies’ WT20 wins remember?

Besides, this whole “wE ArE THe BeSt IN T20s” drama would be over soon. The only reason why we have been undefeated since 2016 is because we haven’t played India.

A T20 series with India today would be as humiliating as the Asia Cup.

 

[amax]

So you're telling me that an Asian pacer does better in Asia? Wow, what a surprise!

The point is that Steyn has exceptional stats in Asia (similar to Wasim), and better stats overall. All this despite playing in a batsmen dominated era. So there is nothing to suggest that Steyn isn't in fact a better bowler than Wasim.

Tbh pitches effect(Asian vs SENA) might be not that high as some people think(e.g Pollock mentioned dead pitches of UAE multiple times to put Pak bowlers stats in context). Its wear and tear of body that is caused in Conditions of Pakistan/india that is more devastating for fast bowlers(reduction of peak years and all that)

 

[amax]

I'm not interested in debating with you. Have fun living in the alternative universe where people like moyo and yk are ATGs.

Pakistan has produced only three ATGs Wasim, Waqar and Imran, rest are all good players. ATG is too often overused.

 

[Sidilicious]

Pakistan has produced only three ATGs Wasim, Waqar and Imran, rest are all good players. ATG is too often overused.

Miandad is also an ATG.

 

[Ab Fan]

Pakistan has MOYO and YK who both average above 50 and the former holds a record for highest centuries in a year.

Pakistan is producing the likes of Amir, Hassan Ali, Shaheen Shah Afridi who have won them silverware. Even in our worst we are still producing the likes of Shaheen and Babar.

Considering how our neighbor just managed to have a proper test bowler in Bumrah after decades. It doesnt matter much.

Considering your love towards the neighbours, we should also remember Ashwin and Jadeja averages 25 or under-25. So, it is not one bowler here.

Cricket is not about stats, a 50 batting average or 25 bowling avg. Moyo and to extent Younis pales in comparison to other great 50 average batsmen as their stats flatter themselves.

As for India, they also still produced Anil Kumble and Javagal Srinath during their worst days. Your neighbours have also produced Kapil Dev and Sunil Gavaskar in the past along with quartet of spin bowling, and have achieved no. 1 test ranking way back in 70s as well. This is all your neighbours achieved pre 2000. Post 2000s, we have produced some legendary batsmen like SRT, Dravid, Dhoni, Kohli and Pujara. Among bowlers, there is Ashwin, Jadeja, Shami and Bumrah.


However,

 

[TM Riddle]

Pakistan has produced only three ATGs Wasim, Waqar and Imran, rest are all good players. ATG is too often overused.

Add Miandad to the list as well.
BTW where do you rank Steyn among top fast bowlers? Do you think he was better than the two Ws in the longer format?

 

[Sachin136]

Miandad is also an ATG.

On the fence about that because he was mediocre against the best team of his time (WI).

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Pakistan is the only team besides australia who has won more tests than they lost. They are surely a better test team than india historically.
In LOIs india is ahead of pakistan.
For me the list of best cricket countries is as follows.
1.Australia
2.West indies
3.South aFrica
4.Pakistan
5.India
6.England
7.Srilanka
8.Nz

 

[latecut]

Miandad only scored against weak bowling attacks of his era, such as New Zealand and india. His record against West Indies is poor.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Pakistan has produced five atgs:
Imran
Wasim
Waqar
Saqlain(odis)
Javed. (tests)
India has produced six atgs.:
Sachin
Gavaskar(tests)
Dravid(tests)
Kohli
Dhoni(odis)
Kapil dev.

 

[Bhaijaan]

On the fence about that because he was mediocre against the best team of his time (WI).

Kallis was quite mediocre against Australia.

Warne was below mediocre vs India.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Miandad only scored against weak bowling attacks of his era, such as New Zealand and india. His record against West Indies is poor.

His record against australia is very good.
If we consider performances against best teams only then even dravid won't be an atg.

 

[Ted123]

Kallis was quite mediocre against Australia.

Warne was below mediocre vs India.

Kallis has got a hundred in match saving cause against Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne in Australia.

Averages 48 in Australia, 41 overall vs Australia with 5 hundreds.

 

[Gullycricket]

Pakistan is the only team besides australia who has won more tests than they lost. They are surely a better test team than india historically.
In LOIs india is ahead of pakistan.
For me the list of best cricket countries is as follows.
1.Australia
2.West indies
3.South aFrica
4.Pakistan
5.India
6.England
7.Srilanka
8.Nz

Fair

 

[Bhaijaan]

Kallis has got a hundred in match saving cause against Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne in Australia.

Averages 48 in Australia, 41 overall vs Australia with 5 hundreds.

Exactly the point. Mediocre.

 

[Sidilicious]

Pakistan has produced five atgs:
Imran
Wasim
Waqar
Saqlain(odis)
Javed. (tests)
India has produced six atgs.:
Sachin
Gavaskar(tests)
Dravid(tests)
Kohli
Dhoni(odis)
Kapil dev.

You cant really have ATG who is only an ODI ATG as overall ATGs. Dhoni and Saqlain are not ATGs for me.

For me ATGs are
Imran Khan
Wasim
Waqar
Miandad

The greats are
Inzamam
Saqlain
YK

For India ATGs are
Sachin
Gavaskar
Dravid
Kapil Dev

The greats are
Dhoni
Kohli (will be an ATG in a couple of year)
Kumble
Laxman

 

[Sachin136]

Kallis was quite mediocre against Australia.

Warne was below mediocre vs India.

There's a difference between averaging in the 40s (Kallis in and vs WI) and averaging in the 20s/low 30s (Miandad in and vs WI).

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

You cant really have ATG who is only an ODI ATG as overall ATGs. Dhoni and Saqlain are not ATGs for me.

For me ATGs are
Imran Khan
Wasim
Waqar
Miandad

The greats are
Inzamam
Saqlain
YK

For India ATGs are
Sachin
Gavaskar
Dravid
Kapil Dev

The greats are
Dhoni
Kohli (will be an ATG in a couple of year)
Kumble
Laxman

For those who grew up in 90s and early 2000s odis were as important as test matches . According to me odis is the most well balanced format of this sport and greats in odis should be considered as atgs

Wasim, waqar, sachin, sehwag, dravid were as famous for their odi exploits as they were for tests.

 

[Sidilicious]

For those who grew up in 90s and early 2000s odis were as important as test matches . According to me odis is the most well balanced format of this sport and greats in odis should be considered as atgs

Wasim, waqar, sachin, sehwag, dravid were as famous for their odi exploits as they were for tests.

Fair point. I grew up in the 90s and ODIs were important, especially those tri-series. But, other than the WC, they never superseded tests. I remember very well, after Dada won the Border Gavaskar trophy in Chennai in 2001, he said something on the lines of that we look forward to the ODIs, but this test series was the more important.

 

[Shandarchowka]

Lol @ 2nd greatest cricketing nation

My rankings considering all eras, innovations brought into the game, and magnetic players produced -

1. Australia
2. West Indies
3. Pakistan
4. South Africa
5. England
6. India
7. Sri Lanka
8. New Zealand

Zimbabwe, Afghanistan deserve a special mention.

I'm not going to rank other minnows, waste of time.

 

[shah_1]

They will easily win the series right now

Last time AB rescued SA, and they are an average batting unit without him. India wouldn't mind green pitches with an improved bowling line up.

 

[Bhaijaan]

When India was goign through their transition period from 2011 to 2014 they were losing timidly in SENA without any fight whatsoever.

At least Pakistan are standing up and showing fight every now and then.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Pakistan has produced only three ATGs Wasim, Waqar and Imran, rest are all good players. ATG is too often overused.

And their legacy is also questionable due to ball tampering and patetrotic umpires. OK even accepted that he used bottle caps. There are two players hated and booted out for an year for tampering and Pak fans are celebrating these guys have heroes. They are all great bowlers. I fee they wouldn't Be ATGs without tampering

 

[SportsWarrior]

On the fence about that because he was mediocre against the best team of his time (WI).

His stats are greatly enhanced by patriotic umpiring.

 

[loves_cricket]

Natural talent one day transforms in to great performance, if given right direction and support.
Without doubt Pakistan got it plentiful.
World cricket on whole is now going thru crisis. stadiums are empty and not many high level and intense games are played as in past.
World cricket needs Pakistan and strong Pakistan.
When international cricket returns back in Pakistan, as in past it's natural talent will flourish.
I wish that will happen soon.

 

[GrandMaster]

I didn't know such thread exist

 

[Ganju Baba]

Absolutely!

Pakistan is really, truly the greatest cricketing nation on the planet and will continue to remain so for the rest of eternity.

The true Champs of the game. Unparalleled, unequalled, and life of the game.

Cricket is nothing without Pakistan.

 

[fitCricFan]

and the purpose of this embarrassing thread is ..............

 

[Hitman]

Yousuf averages 29 against Australia, 29 against SA, 29 against SL, and 34 in India. How is he an ATG?

YK didn't do enough overseas (regardless of his averages there) and wasn't good enough against pace to be an ATG. He's in a tier below with Amla, Clarke, VVS, etc.

Anyway, too much discussion about a list Mamoon posted. Let's get back to the topic.

Also averages 31 in Aus, 26 in SA, 33 in SL. ATG? )

 

[giri26]

Pakistan are a very good team and have great Test record historically which is getting dwindled right now. Pakistan is just about maintaining their positive W/L record in Tests (136 wins and 127 losses). This is similar to what happened with WI. Pakistan still are a decent team but based on historic record, you cannot call a team greatest. If that's the case why isn't WI, who have 2 50 over WC's, 2 T20 Titles, A champion trophy win and good record prior to 1994 in most countries not considered greater? They should be second only to Australia in terms of achievements. West Indies unfortunately after the 1994/95 season have been so poor that they lost so many games tarnishing their record in Tests. 185 Tests post 2000 and won only 37 of those losing 109.

 

[Bubby]

When India was goign through their transition period from 2011 to 2014 they were losing timidly in SENA without any fight whatsoever.

At least Pakistan are standing up and showing fight every now and then.

The transition happened begin from 2014 onwards, that 2012 side still had Tendulkar and 1-2 guys, even during our transition period from 2014 India did gave good fight to SENA country barring England

 

[giri26]

When India was goign through their transition period from 2011 to 2014 they were losing timidly in SENA without any fight whatsoever.

At least Pakistan are standing up and showing fight every now and then.

India's losses in 2011-2012 in England and Australia was with Sachin, Dravid, Laxman and Sehwag. All of them were in their last legs. The bowling wasn't that great either. Zaheer got injured after one spell in England and our bowling in Australia wasn't good. After the greats retired, India did not do badly in SENA except for in England in 2014 (lost 1-3). 0-1 loss in SA with a chance of winning one Test, 0-1 loss to NZ with a chance to win both the Tests, 0-2 loss to Australia while drawing 2 games and getting close in one of the Tests. So we were not half as bad during the transition.

 

[giri26]

The transition happened begin from 2014 onwards, that 2012 side still had Tendulkar and 1-2 guys, even during our transition period from 2014 India did gave good fight to SENA country barring England

The transition happened 2013 December onwards as Sachin played in the home series against WI. I don't consider Dhoni's retirement as part of the transition as he was supposed to play longer but decided to give up to concentrate on LO formats. Dhoni in 2014 was still only 33. The actual transition started when Sachin, Dravid, Laxman retired.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Pakistan has produced five atgs:
Imran
Wasim
Waqar
Saqlain(odis)
Javed. (tests)
India has produced six atgs.:
Sachin
Gavaskar(tests)
Dravid(tests)
Kohli
Dhoni(odis)
Kapil dev.

If Saqlain is a ATG then why not Kumble? Why not Ashwin?

 

[Sachin136]

If Saqlain is a ATG then why not Kumble? Why not Ashwin?

Or Chandra and Bedi.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

If Saqlain is a ATG then why not Kumble? Why not Ashwin?

Saqlain is an ODI atg.
Ash and jumbo weren't great odi players.
Ashwin and kumble are not good enough in Sena to be labelled as test greats.
Though one can argue that (both formats combined) kumble acheived more than saqlain.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Or Chandra and Bedi.

Surely amongst top 10 spinners ever but they avg 28 and 29 respectively in tests.

 

[Sachin136]

Surely amongst top 10 spinners ever but they avg 28 and 29 respectively in tests.

I think standards should be a bit lower for spinners. There should certainly be at least 10 spinners who are considered as ATGs.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Saqlain is an ODI atg.
Ash and jumbo weren't great odi players.
Ashwin and kumble are not good enough in Sena to be labelled as test greats.
Though one can argue that (both formats combined) kumble acheived more than saqlain.

Saqlain is no ATG. 200 wickets dont justify ATG level for a player of 90s. Ashwin has 350 test wickets at 25. That has more value than 200 at 22 in ODIs. I am not even going into Kumble's 600 plus test wickets.

 

[TM Riddle]

Last two decades have skewed the stats in favor of India and I firmly believe that India is in top 3 along with Australia and South Africa if we consider all formats.
I would put England at 4 followed by Pakistan who have been pretty disappointing in the new millennium.

 

[cricketjoshila]

My Ranking

1.Australia
2.WI
3.India
4.Pakistan/ENG
5.SA
6.SL
7.NZ

 

[Bhaijaan]

My Ranking

1.Australia
2.WI
3.India
4.Pakistan/ENG
5.SA
6.SL
7.NZ

India is ahead of England due to being a better ODI team than them in last 15 years?

 

[cricketjoshila]

India is ahead of England due to being a better ODI team than them in last 15 years?

Or for winning 2 WCs 1 T20 and 2 CTs.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Or for winning 2 WCs 1 T20 and 2 CTs.

Okay so we are counting T20s and Champions atrophied now to determine the greatest cricket teams?

 

[SportsWarrior]

LOL at people's delusions. Pakistan was always a good team. But no way they are the best cricketing nation even in Asia. India has done everything Pak have done and more. Heck even Lanka has done everything pak has done in LOIs and have done that earlier than pak. Pak used to be very good in tests and used to be a better team oversees. For all the flak india gets as a poor tourists, india has always been the pioneer in winning overseas when it mattered. India was the first Asian team to win series in England, WI, NZ and now Aus. India also was the first to win ODI WC, major tournament in Australia, T20I WC, CT, Asia cup all achieved outside India All major milestone were reached by india overseas and Pak followed suit in some of them. Don't kid yourselves in thinking that pak is some kind of a great cricketing nation

 

[SportsWarrior]

Okay so we are counting T20s and Champions atrophied now to determine the greatest cricket teams?

So okay to count some bilateral which were played mostly like amatures but not major ICC tournaments. If CT is not such a big deal why does Pak fans are so boastful of it. India has two of it and one runner up. Infact they are the most successful team in T20I and CT

 

[Arajit]

ICC Cricket Rankings are fairly demonstrates who are the greatest cricketing nations in the history of the game. I have compiled average of Team Ratings during the annual re-weighting of the Team Ratings fro both Tests (starting from 1952 to 2019) and ODIs (1981 to 2019). The Annual Teams rating for Tests is available from 1952 and for ODIs its available from 1981.

The Average Team Ratings in Descending order (hence team rankings) for ODIs are
1. Australia - 118.00
2. South Africa - 115.14
3. England - 105.69
4. India - 104.56
5. Pakistan - 103.77
6. West Indies - 102.69
7. New Zealand - 99.46
8. Sri Lanka - 94.68
9. Afghanistan - 54.80
10. Zimbabwe - 51.23
11. Bangladesh - 47.14
12. Ireland - 35.58
13. Kenya - 16.20
14. Netherlands - 10.25

Similarly the Average Team Ratings in Descending order (hence team rankings) for Tests are
1. Australia - 111.34
2. South Africa - 104.18
3. England - 102.53
4. West Indies - 99.26
5. Pakistan - 96.36
6. India - 95.90
7. Sri Lanka - 90.32
8. New Zealand - 83.21
9. Zimbabwe - 43.11
10. Bangladesh - 20.22

Since these are only statistics the don't present entirely correct picture but they fairly demonstrate who are the greatest cricketing nations of all time.

The anomalies of West Indies Lower Ranking in ODIs are due to these Ranking started after Their ODI peaks in 1970s and their lower ratings since 2000. Further Afghanistan's higher ranking in ODIs than Zimbabwe are due limited sample size of just 5 years rankings for Afghanistan where they averaged 54.80 while Zimbabwe are ranked since last 26 years while averaging 51.23.

Test Rankings are fairly perfect picture of the team performances except Weest Indies lower ranking that South Africa due to absence of South African Rating during Apartheid Ban for 24 Years

These are figures for Tests


These are Figures for ODIs

 

[Arajit]

ICC Cricket Rankings are fairly demonstrates who are the greatest cricketing nations in the history of the game. I have compiled average of Team Ratings during the annual re-weighting of the Team Ratings fro both Tests (starting from 1952 to 2019) and ODIs (1981 to 2019). The Annual Teams rating for Tests is available from 1952 and for ODIs its available from 1981.

The Average Team Ratings in Descending order (hence team rankings) for ODIs are
1. Australia - 118.00
2. South Africa - 115.14
3. England - 105.69
4. India - 104.56
5. Pakistan - 103.77
6. West Indies - 102.69
7. New Zealand - 99.46
8. Sri Lanka - 94.68
9. Afghanistan - 54.80
10. Zimbabwe - 51.23
11. Bangladesh - 47.14
12. Ireland - 35.58
13. Kenya - 16.20
14. Netherlands - 10.25

Similarly the Average Team Ratings in Descending order (hence team rankings) for Tests are
1. Australia - 111.34
2. South Africa - 104.18
3. England - 102.53
4. West Indies - 99.26
5. Pakistan - 96.36
6. India - 95.90
7. Sri Lanka - 90.32
8. New Zealand - 83.21
9. Zimbabwe - 43.11
10. Bangladesh - 20.22

Since these are only statistics the don't present entirely correct picture but they fairly demonstrate who are the greatest cricketing nations of all time.

The anomalies of West Indies Lower Ranking in ODIs are due to these Ranking started after Their ODI peaks in 1970s and their lower ratings since 2000. Further Afghanistan's higher ranking in ODIs than Zimbabwe are due limited sample size of just 5 years rankings for Afghanistan where they averaged 54.80 while Zimbabwe are ranked since last 26 years while averaging 51.23.

Test Rankings are fairly perfect picture of the team performances except Weest Indies lower ranking that South Africa due to absence of South African Rating during Apartheid Ban for 24 Years

These are figures for Tests
View attachment 87028View attachment 87029

These are Figures for ODIs
View attachment 87030View attachment 87031

This about Ratings.
There is stark difference in Ratings and Rankings
If we compare Rankings

Out of 68 Annual Re-weightings in Tests Top Ranked Nations are
Australia in 27 instances,
West Indies in 21 Instances
England in 9 Instances
India in 7 Instances and
South Africa in 4 Instances

Similarly Out of 39 Annual Re-weightings in ODIs Top Ranked Nations are
Australia in 18 instances,
West Indies in 9 Instances
South Africa in 7 Instances
England in 4 Instances and
India in 1 Instance

 

[Nikhil_cric]

I fail to see why WI are rated so highly in tests even if you give higher weightage to tests. Their W/L ratio is even lower than India's.

 

[Ab Fan]

The truth is: -

Aus
WI
India
SA
Eng
Pak
Sl
NZ

SA are getting underrated here. As a test team, they are way superior to any Asian side who have hold bat and bowl. As an ODI side, they have won Champions Trophy and has a very dominant win ratio against most teams. SA are still considered a top ODI team without winning a WC, that speaks for themselves in ODI cricket. A vastly superior LO team to England in their lifetime and at same level to them in test cricket.

 

[Ab Fan]

If I have to pick between SA, India, England and Pak, the order is: -

Tests

SA
England
India
Pak

Odis: -

India
SA/Pak(Pak have won a WC but overall their ODI record is quite poor compared to SA)
England

 

[KingKhanWC]

The truth is: -

Aus
WI
India
SA
Eng
Pak
Sl
NZ

SA are getting underrated here. As a test team, they are way superior to any Asian side who have hold bat and bowl. As an ODI side, they have won Champions Trophy and has a very dominant win ratio against most teams. SA are still considered a top ODI team without winning a WC, that speaks for themselves in ODI cricket. A vastly superior LO team to England in their lifetime and at same level to them in test cricket.

The thread is regarding history.

Can you please point out the W/L ratio of the teams you have put in order?

 

[Ab Fan]

The thread is regarding history.

Can you please point out the W/L ratio of the teams you have put in order?

Unfortunately I am not the statistics guy to put the numbers and W/L ratio. However, I can definitely give good and unbiased reasons of my rankings: -

As apparent, Australia and WI had two most dominant team anyone had in cricket history. No team have been at that level. WI team many believe were even better than Australia one but Australia overall have clearly surpassed them. So, they are top two as in the order.

SL and Nz are obvious 7 & 8.

Coming to the middle slots, we have SA, India, Pak and England.

As a test team, it is quite apparent that SA have been a dominant team over many years and have won test series in every single country. They also have got a great W/L record which is why I have them at 3. England for obvious reasons again, a team who has won series everywhere and being the country that laid the foundation of test cricket definitely are up there. It was close between SA and Eng in tests and I think this is kind off draw. However, in LO, SA absolutely wins over England. Better Win/Loss record against most teams by a margin and also a CT win.

India, again, have been a team that have won test series everywhere in the world except SA, were the only team that won a series against full strength Australian team(Ashes 2004 had McGrath missing in few games) and have got two WCs as well as two CTs to their name. These achievements clearly put them third and almost tied or at par with SA.

Pakistan have a great history as a cricket nation, won 1992 WC but haven't won test series in Australia and SA and the fact that they don't have a dominant home record is all what went against them and that is why they had to satisfy with no. 6 position in terms of overall achievements.

 

[Ab Fan]

Unfortunately I am not the statistics guy to put the numbers and W/L ratio. However, I can definitely give good and unbiased reasons of my rankings: -

As apparent, Australia and WI had two most dominant team anyone had in cricket history. No team have been at that level. WI team many believe were even better than Australia one but Australia overall have clearly surpassed them. So, they are top two as in the order.

SL and Nz are obvious 7 & 8.

Coming to the middle slots, we have SA, India, Pak and England.

As a test team, it is quite apparent that SA have been a dominant team over many years and have won test series in every single country. They also have got a great W/L record which is why I have them at 3. England for obvious reasons again, a team who has won series everywhere and being the country that laid the foundation of test cricket definitely are up there. It was close between SA and Eng in tests and I think this is kind off draw. However, in LO, SA absolutely wins over England. Better Win/Loss record against most teams by a margin and also a CT win.

India, again, have been a team that have won test series everywhere in the world except SA, were the only team that won a series against full strength Australian team(Ashes 2004 had McGrath missing in few games) and have got two WCs as well as two CTs to their name. These achievements clearly put them third and almost tied or at par with SA.

Pakistan have a great history as a cricket nation, won 1992 WC but haven't won test series in Australia and SA and the fact that they don't have a dominant home record is all what went against them and that is why they had to satisfy with no. 6 position in terms of overall achievements.

To add further, India also enjoyed the no. 1 test ranking many years ago way back in early 1970s, which is again a huge achievement. So, that really put them in the top 3 tied to SAY or on par with them.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Unfortunately I am not the statistics guy to put the numbers and W/L ratio. However, I can definitely give good and unbiased reasons of my rankings: -

As apparent, Australia and WI had two most dominant team anyone had in cricket history. No team have been at that level. WI team many believe were even better than Australia one but Australia overall have clearly surpassed them. So, they are top two as in the order.

SL and Nz are obvious 7 & 8.

Coming to the middle slots, we have SA, India, Pak and England.

As a test team, it is quite apparent that SA have been a dominant team over many years and have won test series in every single country. They also have got a great W/L record which is why I have them at 3. England for obvious reasons again, a team who has won series everywhere and being the country that laid the foundation of test cricket definitely are up there. It was close between SA and Eng in tests and I think this is kind off draw. However, in LO, SA absolutely wins over England. Better Win/Loss record against most teams by a margin and also a CT win.

India, again, have been a team that have won test series everywhere in the world except SA, were the only team that won a series against full strength Australian team(Ashes 2004 had McGrath missing in few games) and have got two WCs as well as two CTs to their name. These achievements clearly put them third and almost tied or at par with SA.

Pakistan have a great history as a cricket nation, won 1992 WC but haven't won test series in Australia and SA and the fact that they don't have a dominant home record is all what went against them and that is why they had to satisfy with no. 6 position in terms of overall achievements.

Fair points.

If youre counting the UAE as home it's not fair imo. In Pakistan they have a good record I believe, not losing too many series over the years.

I remember Pakistan having the 3rd best W/L ratio which I dont think has changed. So why discount history and look at recent performances? If you have the 3rd best W/L ratio in history, how can you then only be no.6 in history?

 

[Ab Fan]

Fair points.

If youre counting the UAE as home it's not fair imo. In Pakistan they have a good record I believe, not losing too many series over the years.

I remember Pakistan having the 3rd best W/L ratio which I dont think has changed. So why discount history and look at recent performances? If you have the 3rd best W/L ratio in history, how can you then only be no.6 in history?

I know it is really unfair of me or all of us for counting UAE as home for Pakistan but there is absolutely no other way for that. We surely can't count them as home or neutral conditions for SA, Eng, Aus, NZ and WI. They are alien conditions for them. Also, SL and BD play their home matches at their home, so it would be unfair to them also calling UAE as neutral. Pakistan do play their home games in UAE and it has been now for last 10 years, so there is not much one can really do about it.

It is not something which will change if I say like those are not home matches for Pakistan because it is a general consensus only and that is something we have to accept.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I know it is really unfair of me or all of us for counting UAE as home for Pakistan but there is absolutely no other way for that. We surely can't count them as home or neutral conditions for SA, Eng, Aus, NZ and WI. They are alien conditions for them. Also, SL and BD play their home matches at their home, so it would be unfair to them also calling UAE as neutral. Pakistan do play their home games in UAE and it has been now for last 10 years, so there is not much one can really do about it.

It is not something which will change if I say like those are not home matches for Pakistan because it is a general consensus only and that is something we have to accept.

I guess we have to but imagine Aus having to play in say SA or NZ. The conditions wont be too different but everything else around it is not home. But I guess in some ways the pitches in Pak have been very flat at times in history and in the UAE apart from a handful of occasions offered enough to win test matches.

For me it's simple, whoever has the best W/L ratio is the best team and in this order, over history.

 

[Ab Fan]

The more I think SA further justifies to their top 3-4 slot. I mean in cricket, we talk about batting or bowling and them we think of Indian batting or Pakistan bowling but what we leave out is one important aspect of game, ie, fielding.

SA have completely revolutionized the fielding department. They have left a legacy in the fielding which has been umatched till now. Who can forget how Jonty Rhodes was miles ahead of any fielder of his era to have graced the game? He was a revolutionary in the fielding department and left a legacy which was further carried by Herschelle Gibbs, who then passed the mantle to AB de Villiers and now this is with Faf du Plessis.

All these names are arguably the best fielders of their very generation and which is why I feel SA definitely deserves to move maybe even higher but India's two WC wins is what really makes me settle on the above list.