Quinton de Kock, Kagiso Rabada continue to charge up the ICC Test player rankings

[jeetu]

South Africa players Quinton de Kock and Kagiso Rabada have continued to move up the rankings after impressive performances in the second Test in Hobart which helped their side take an unassailable 2-0 lead in the three-Test series against Australia.

Wicketkeeper-batsman de Kock and pace bowler Kagiso Rabada, both stars of past ICC U19 Cricket World Cups, have achieved career-best rankings after having already broken into the top-20 following fine performances in the opening Test in Perth.

De Kock top-scored in the Hobart Test with a knock of 104 to move up eight places to 12th position in the latest MRF ICC Player Rankings for Test Batsmen, which were released on Wednesday morning.

Rabada has jumped four places to take 16th slot in the MRF Tyres ICC Player Rankings for Test Bowlers. Rabada grabbed five wickets in the match, including four for 34 in the second innings.

Both de Kock and Rabada are still in the qualification period, which means they have a good chance of making more gains in the day-night Test in Adelaide, which starts on November 24.

In other gains for South Africa players, man of the match Kyle Abbott’s nine wickets have helped him move up 20 places to a career-best 36th position, batsman Tenda Bavuma’s innings of 74 has lifted him to a career-best 39th rank, while all-rounder Vernon Philander has returned to the top 10 among bowlers and the top five among all-rounders with match figures of five for 52 and 32 with the bat.

For Australia, Usman Khawaja’s scores of four and 64 have helped him move up five places to 29th position in the batsmen’s list, which is headed by his captain Steve Smith.

 

[jeetu]

Batting (Till 16 Nov 2016)

Position	Points	Player
1	897	Steve Smith
2	844	Joe Root
3	841	Kane Williamson
4	832	Younus Khan
5	809	Hashim Amla
6	786	AB de Villiers
7	784	David Warner
8	777	Ajinkya Rahane
9	765	Alastair Cook
10	745	Cheteshwar Pujara
11	744	Misbah-ul-Haq
12	741	Quinton de Kock
13	733	Azhar Ali
14	725	Virat Kohli
15	725	Adam Voges
16	720	Jonny Bairstow
17	716	Angelo Mathews
18	691	Asad Shafiq
19	678	Dinesh Chandimal
20	677	Kraigg Brathwaite
21	675	Ross Taylor
22	668	Tamim Iqbal
23	661	Sarfraz Ahmed
24	661	Murali Vijay
25	633	Dean Elgar
26	631	Moeen Ali
27	625	Mominul Haque
28	623	Darren Bravo
29	614	Usman Khawaja
30	612	Dhananjaya de Silva
31	611	Francois du Plessis
32	603	Shakib Al Hasan
33	602	Ben Stokes
34	585	Shaun Marsh
35	580	Tom Latham
36	578	Kusal Mendis
37	571	Mohammad Hafeez
38	570	BJ Watling
39	563	Temba Bavuma
40	550	JP Duminy
41	545	Rohit Sharma
42	535	Dimuth Karunaratne
43	517	Ravichandran Ashwin
44	514	Shikhar Dhawan
45	513	Mushfiqur Rahim
46	512	Jermaine Blackwood
47	506	Kaushal Silva
48	503	Mahmudullah
49	499	Ian Bell
50	497	Marlon Samuels
51	490	Hamilton Masakadza
52	478	Imrul Kayes
53	474	Luke Ronchi
54	465	Gary Ballance
55	461	Joe Burns
56	454	Craig Ervine
57	446	Upul Tharanga
58	445	Wriddhiman Saha
59	442	Kusal Perera
60	439	Shane Dowrich
61	435	Sami Aslam
62	431	Jason Holder
63	428	Martin Guptill
64	413	Haseeb Hameed
65	412	Vernon Philander
66	410	Lokesh Rahul
67	410	Milinda Siriwardana
68	401	Denesh Ramdin
69	399	Corey Anderson
70	394	Chris Woakes
71	390	Sean Williams
72	384	Mark Craig
73	384	Jimmy Neesham
74	383	Sikandar Sikandar Raza
75	381	Gautam Gambhir
76	378	Stephen Cook
77	372	Regis Chakabva
78	372	Ravindra Jadeja
79	370	Tino Mawoyo
80	363	Alex Hales
81	360	Mitchell Santner
82	347	Henry Nicholls
83	345	Roston Chase
84	340	Lahiru Thirimanne
85	339	Carlos Brathwaite
86	328	Asela Gunaratne
87	327	Mitchell Marsh
88	324	Peter Moor
89	324	Peter Nevill
90	323	Jos Buttler
91	323	Nick Compton
92	309	Graeme Cremer
93	309	Stiaan van Zyl
94	307	Shan Masood
95	307	Mitchell Starc
96	306	Leon Johnson
97	296	Stuart Broad
98	260	Malcolm Waller
99	258	Shai Hope
100	257	Rangana Herath

 

[jeetu]

Bowling (Till 16 Nov 2016)

Position	Points	Player
1	881	Ravichandran Ashwin
2	867	Rangana Herath
3	852	Dale Steyn
4	844	James Anderson
5	820	Yasir Shah
6	805	Stuart Broad
7	796	Ravindra Jadeja
8	775	Mitchell Starc
9	770	Josh Hazlewood
10	761	Vernon Philander
11	731	Neil Wagner
12	715	Trent Boult
13	695	Morne Morkel
14	672	Dilruwan Perera
15	672	Shakib Al Hasan
16	639	Kagiso Rabada
17	637	Tim Southee
18	617	Nathan Lyon
19	601	Peter Siddle
20	594	Chris Woakes
21	579	Ben Stokes
22	572	Dhammika Prasad
23	562	James Pattinson
24	562	Ishant Sharma
25	552	Wahab Riaz
26	551	Mohammad Shami
27	550	Moeen Ali
28	535	Kemar Roach
29	512	Devendra Bishoo
30	509	Steven Finn
31	491	Bhuvneshwar Kumar
32	468	Rahat Ali
33	463	Mehedi Hasan
34	456	Umesh Yadav
35	455	Zulfiqar Babar
36	447	Kyle Abbott
37	440	Nuwan Pradeep
38	436	Taijul Islam
39	427	Shannon Gabriel
40	401	Suranga Lakmal
41	399	Amit Mishra
42	394	Doug Bracewell
43	388	Imran Tahir
44	384	Shaminda Eranga
45	380	Mark Craig
46	351	Dushmantha Chameera
47	343	Imran Khan
48	342	Jason Holder
49	340	Sohail Khan
50	317	Mark Wood
51	311	Mitchell Marsh
52	308	Milinda Siriwardana
53	301	Ish Sodhi
54	300	Jackson Bird
55	299	Dane Piedt
56	295	JP Duminy
57	290	Mitchell Santner
58	278	Simon Harmer
59	263	Mahmudullah
60	256	Mohammad Amir
61	249	Adil Rashid
62	249	Malcolm Waller
63	231	Tharindu Kaushal
64	230	Hamilton Masakadza
65	223	Carl Mumba
66	221	Graeme Cremer
67	214	Lakshan Sandakan
68	209	Matt Henry
69	207	Angelo Mathews
70	207	Steve O'Keefe
71	190	Miguel Cummins
72	182	Corey Anderson
73	182	Jimmy Neesham
74	180	Marlon Samuels
75	168	Varun Aaron
76	168	Jomel Warrican
77	167	Dean Elgar
78	167	Kane Williamson
79	162	Roston Chase
80	153	Kraigg Brathwaite
81	150	Shafiul Islam
82	144	Donald Tiripano
83	144	Stiaan van Zyl
84	127	Shuvagata Hom
85	126	Jeetan Patel
86	124	Mohammad Nawaz
87	120	Steve Smith
88	113	Gareth Batty
89	105	Dasun Shanaka
90	103	Joe Root
91	96	Zafar Ansari
92	87	Alzarri Joseph
93	87	Keshav Maharaj
94	74	Sean Williams
95	72	Christopher Mpofu
96	72	Dhananjaya de Silva
97	71	Chris Morris
98	71	Sikandar Sikandar Raza
99	68	Younus Khan
100	66	Martin Guptill

 

[Mamoon]

Seems like Pujara is carrying too many points from 2013-14 because in the last couple of years, he has been nowhere near Azhar in terms of performance.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Seems like Pujara is carrying too many points from 2013-14 because in the last couple of years, he has been nowhere near Azhar in terms of performance.

That's cos Pujara is an insane beast in Asia.

Averages 61 for India (in Asia) from Jan 2015. Overall 57.

Even scored crucial runs on rank turners against SA when he was out of zone. When in zone, he was supreme against Swann, Monty in heavy spin tracks/rank turners. Slowly getting back to his old self in Asia.

He has his issues outside Asia but he is shaping up to be probably the greatest Test batsman in Asia. Doesn't just score big but also gets those impact runs in the toughest of conditions.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Let's see if Ashwin even bowls somewhere near to what he is ranked in the remaining tests.

I expected him to lose more points.

As an AR, he is a gun. Has a sensor in his brain where his batting skills get activated when his bowling goes garbage.

 

[Buffet]

Seems like Pujara is carrying too many points from 2013-14 because in the last couple of years, he has been nowhere near Azhar in terms of performance.

You don't get too much weight for older years. Last two years carry more weight. You get more points for scoring against bigger teams.

Azhar played 3 bigger teams( Eng, NZ, SL) and two teams ranked 8th and 9th in the last two years. Azhar scored high against 8th and 9th rank teams, but scored very little against bigger teams. His combined average against teams ranked higher than 8th is in 30s in the last 2 years.

In the same time period, in 12 matches against bigger teams, Pujara averaged 53. So you have a combined average of 30s for Ali vs combined average of 50s for Pujara against bigger teams in the last 2 years. That explains it.

 

[soso_killer]

JP is ranked higher than Amir? LOL
Our bats really need to push for the top 15 position.
If QdK can be a top 10 bat and Elgar around 15-20, with AB and Amla around (barring injuries) we could have a good side. With Faf and Bavuma contributing here and there too.

I'll have a clear view of this team once they've completed the tours of NZ and Eng.
Hopefully without any injuries. Should we escape without a series defeat in both tours, then I'll be looking forward to going to Asia again. However Dale is such a crucial figure for us, we have no spinners, so we desperately need him there. I hope he gets over this persistent shoulder injury.

We seem to produce one great bowler per generation.
90's Donald and Pollock, 2000's Steyn, 2010's Rabada?
What's so upsetting is their careers intertwine rather than play together for 4-5 years. It would be nice to see Steyn and Rabada play together for at least 3 years with Steyn still as effective as his peak years.

Australia were so lucky everything came together. Warne-McGrath, Hayden-Langer whereas when we discovered Smith, Kirsten was on his last legs.
We discovered Steyn ,Pollock wasn't as effective in terms of being a strike bowler. So it was Ntini and Steyn. Even then, Steyn came on his own around 07, Ntini was declining. As with the trident of Pollock, Ntini and Donald.

It is so frustrating that we can't glue it together in either ODI's or Tests and have a dominant side. In the 90's we batted so deep but our top order wasn't as good and diverse as this current side. Yet we have a glaring need for an all rounder and a finisher today. We had that in abundance from the previous generation. Hell I'd take an Andrew Hall, never mind a Pollock or a Klusner.

Sorry for the rant but I'm so frustrated, it's either or with us. We've produced greats in both departments every decade but still we aren't far and away the best side. We've been borrowed a world class spinner in Tahir but still.
90's Kallis, 2000's Smith, AB and Amla, 2010's QdK (potentially)?
Why can't we glue it together?
I'm not even asking for Windies/Australia type of dominance. Just a good side capable of beating/destroying at home and while being competitive away. We had a good team recently however, they still couldn't beat Australia and England at home which sort of destroyed their legacy.

 

[Buffet]

JP is ranked higher than Amir? LOL
Our bats really need to push for the top 15 position.
If QdK can be a top 10 bat and Elgar around 15-20, with AB and Amla around (barring injuries) we could have a good side. With Faf and Bavuma contributing here and there too.

I'll have a clear view of this team once they've completed the tours of NZ and Eng.
Hopefully without any injuries. Should we escape without a series defeat in both tours, then I'll be looking forward to going to Asia again. However Dale is such a crucial figure for us, we have no spinners, so we desperately need him there. I hope he gets over this persistent shoulder injury.

We seem to produce one great bowler per generation.
90's Donald and Pollock, 2000's Steyn, 2010's Rabada?
What's so upsetting is their careers intertwine rather than play together for 4-5 years. It would be nice to see Steyn and Rabada play together for at least 3 years with Steyn still as effective as his peak years.

Australia were so lucky everything came together. Warne-McGrath, Hayden-Langer whereas when we discovered Smith, Kirsten was on his last legs.
We discovered Steyn ,Pollock wasn't as effective in terms of being a strike bowler. So it was Ntini and Steyn. Even then, Steyn came on his own around 07, Ntini was declining. As with the trident of Pollock, Ntini and Donald.

It is so frustrating that we can't glue it together in either ODI's or Tests and have a dominant side. In the 90's we batted so deep but our top order wasn't as good and diverse as this current side. Yet we have a glaring need for an all rounder and a finisher today. We had that in abundance from the previous generation. Hell I'd take an Andrew Hall, never mind a Pollock or a Klusner.

Sorry for the rant but I'm so frustrated, it's either or with us. We've produced greats in both departments every decade but still we aren't far and away the best side. We've been borrowed a world class spinner in Tahir but still.
90's Kallis, 2000's Smith, AB and Amla, 2010's QdK (potentially)?
Why can't we glue it together?
I'm not even asking for Windies/Australia type of dominance. Just a good side capable of beating/destroying at home and while being competitive away. We had a good team recently however, they still couldn't beat Australia and England at home which sort of destroyed their legacy.

Eh, you are being too modest here. SA had a very good good team since re-admission. In test series wins, we are right up there with Aus despite not being s dominant at home. Away, we have done very well in the last 25 years despite having some poor series. I will say we have been more than competent away. We have not been as dominant as Aus or India at home, but still did pretty well.

I agree about not having many ATG bowlers at one time in their peak, but we did get a good run with Kallis, Smith, Steyn, Amla, AB coming together at the same time and it reflects in test performance in that period. In India, we always did well before this last series.

 

[soso_killer]

Eh, you are being too modest here. SA had a very good good team since re-admission. In test series wins, we are right up there with Aus despite not being s dominant at home. Away, we have done very well in the last 25 years despite having some poor series. I will say we have been more than competent away. We have not been as dominant as Aus or India at home, but still did pretty well.

I agree about not having many ATG bowlers at one time in their peak, but we did get a good run with Kallis, Smith, Steyn, Amla, AB coming together at the same time and it reflects in test performance in that period. In India, we always did well before this last series.

But why can't we glue it together?
Where was QdK when Kallis and Smith was around?
Australia not only had an ATG pacer in McGrath but had a world class spinner in Warne. And a very very good Gillespie.

We are likely to discover an all rounder again when AB and Amla are gone, meaning we have a weak top order which would prevent the middle lower order hitting the gas at full throttle due to the damaged caused up front.

We always lack balance, a complete team.
I'm aware of our good record and win/loss ratio but we've never been dominant and ruthless.
Would you say the SA side of 2007-2014 were a dominant side?

Take a look at our ODI side, we have about 4-5 players averaging 40+ two of those 45+ (capable of playing in tough conditions in terms of swing or spin).
We also have a world class spinner.
Yet Australia have no one averaging above 45, most of their bats average in the low 40's. They are so vulnerable against a moving ball, be it spin, seam movement or swing. However it cannot be argued, they are the best ODI side in the world. Their record over the last two/three years suggests that. Why?

This is the lack of ruthlessness I'm talking about. We have a better side, at least on paper, whilst Australia are winning matches on the cricket field which is it all matters.

Do you see the pattern I'm eluding to? Lack of ruthlessness to seize the opportunity and be the best side in the world.
We should be more than just a good side.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

JP is ranked higher than Amir? LOL
Our bats really need to push for the top 15 position.
If QdK can be a top 10 bat and Elgar around 15-20, with AB and Amla around (barring injuries) we could have a good side. With Faf and Bavuma contributing here and there too.

I'll have a clear view of this team once they've completed the tours of NZ and Eng.
Hopefully without any injuries. Should we escape without a series defeat in both tours, then I'll be looking forward to going to Asia again. However Dale is such a crucial figure for us, we have no spinners, so we desperately need him there. I hope he gets over this persistent shoulder injury.

We seem to produce one great bowler per generation.
90's Donald and Pollock, 2000's Steyn, 2010's Rabada?
What's so upsetting is their careers intertwine rather than play together for 4-5 years. It would be nice to see Steyn and Rabada play together for at least 3 years with Steyn still as effective as his peak years.

Australia were so lucky everything came together. Warne-McGrath, Hayden-Langer whereas when we discovered Smith, Kirsten was on his last legs.
We discovered Steyn ,Pollock wasn't as effective in terms of being a strike bowler. So it was Ntini and Steyn. Even then, Steyn came on his own around 07, Ntini was declining. As with the trident of Pollock, Ntini and Donald.

It is so frustrating that we can't glue it together in either ODI's or Tests and have a dominant side. In the 90's we batted so deep but our top order wasn't as good and diverse as this current side. Yet we have a glaring need for an all rounder and a finisher today. We had that in abundance from the previous generation. Hell I'd take an Andrew Hall, never mind a Pollock or a Klusner.

Sorry for the rant but I'm so frustrated, it's either or with us. We've produced greats in both departments every decade but still we aren't far and away the best side. We've been borrowed a world class spinner in Tahir but still.
90's Kallis, 2000's Smith, AB and Amla, 2010's QdK (potentially)?
Why can't we glue it together?
I'm not even asking for Windies/Australia type of dominance. Just a good side capable of beating/destroying at home and while being competitive away. We had a good team recently however, they still couldn't beat Australia and England at home which sort of destroyed their legacy.

lol bro...this is like a topper crying cos he got only 95/100 and didn't beat the all time record of 99/100 in front of other classmates who managed to get only 75/100.

You know what we do to those guys?

We kill them.

 

[Buffet]

But why can't we glue it together?
Where was QdK when Kallis and Smith was around?
Australia not only had an ATG pacer in McGrath but had a world class spinner in Warne. And a very very good Gillespie.

We are likely to discover an all rounder again when AB and Amla are gone, meaning we have a weak top order which would prevent the middle lower order hitting the gas at full throttle due to the damaged caused up front.

We always lack balance, a complete team.
I'm aware of our good record and win/loss ratio but we've never been dominant and ruthless.
Would you say the SA side of 2007-2014 were a dominant side?

Take a look at our ODI side, we have about 4-5 players averaging 40+ two of those 45+ (capable of playing in tough conditions in terms of swing or spin).
We also have a world class spinner.
Yet Australia have no one averaging above 45, most of their bats average in the low 40's. They are so vulnerable against a moving ball, be it spin, seam movement or swing. However it cannot be argued, they are the best ODI side in the world. Their record over the last two/three years suggests that. Why?

This is the lack of ruthlessness I'm talking about. We have a better side, at least on paper, whilst Australia are winning matches on the cricket field which is it all matters.

Do you see the pattern I'm eluding to? Lack of ruthlessness to seize the opportunity and be the best side in the world.
We should be more than just a good side.

No, we never looked to dominate each test and we were not a dominant side even in 2007-2014. Safety first to not lose was surely a factor in that.

I would say that Aus got lucky with so many ATG players coming in the same generational and then their approach of trying to win each game made them very dominant side. That approach won't do much without good players, but they got lucky to have pretty much every aspect covered.

Current Aus ODI side is not that impressive despite winning WC. I think on flat wickets, they have cracked the code of batting big and deep. So credit is due, but ODI side is not that great if surface has something to offer.

Let me put it this way. Even if you have many ATG players, but if you always play with safety first then you can never be as dominant as great Aus side. I am not saying that trying to win every game is the way to go for every team, but you get the gist.

You have to get extremely lucky to have all aspects covered at the same time. I am sure we will get a good all rounder sooner or later. We have produced the most number of good all rounders in history. But, some of the current gun players will be gone by then. Same thing with having more than one gun pacer.

Safety first mindset is probably having some impact when we play global ODI tournaments as well. Just my guess here. Then there is eternal rain with SA games.

 

[ahmadharis1]

Younis at 99 hahaha

 

[soso_killer]

lol bro...this is like a topper crying cos he got only 95/100 and didn't beat the all time record of 99/100 in front of other classmates who managed to get only 75/100.

You know what we do to those guys?

We kill them.

You guys don't get my point or the entirety of it.
Buffet has made good points below i guess, I'll get to those.
I want a balanced side, not necessarily superstars or "gun" players. Those gun players are a part of the reason I'm frustrated in the first place. Lesser sides have defeated us without having gun players of their own.
Namely the Aussie side that won here in SA 2014, to some extent 2009.
England managed to escape with a draw 2009, and when we were vulnerable they took full advantage 2015.
And then there are WC chokes, which in part happen to a lack of balance. Then again other teams have had balance issues of their own and managed to win.
[MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] states below Australia were lucky to have all those guys in one team. Maybe, maybe not.
It could be argued Australia had two ATG bats after the retirement of S. Waugh in Ponting and Gilly. Two ATG bowlers in McGrath and Warne.
That's roughly 4 ATG. However what made them so strong was the players who were not great. They were very good, some excelled in certain conditions were they were utterly dominant (Hayden) and others were all rounded players (D Martyn, Langer). This is not luck, good players are a result of a good cricket system. As for great players? I don't know.

When you Look at SA we had Kallis, Smith, Amla maybe AB (due to being an all rounded player) and Steyn those guys could be argued to being greats of the game one day. If that is the case, then SA would have/had 5 great players without anywhere near the level of success Australia had, this is despite them being good players of spin and swing.
SA have more passengers than Australia, that's what really hinders us from achieving our true potential.

Similar to our ODI squad we have better players on paper than most teams but we aren't far and away. Yes we have weaknesses (all rounder to fill the 10 overs and a good finisher), but so does everyone.
AB, Amla average 50+ and can play on any surface in the world. Yet our results are underwhelming and poor than this current Aussie side which is not even special. We can't take our game to the next level despite having great players.

 

[Buffet]

I used ATG players in my argument, but I meant simply very good players to cover all aspects. They even had a guy in Martyn who could play well on different conditions and change things. It's kind of hard to happen at any one time and I think luck does play some part in it.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

You guys don't get my point or the entirety of it.
Buffet has made good points below i guess, I'll get to those.
I want a balanced side, not necessarily superstars or "gun" players. Those gun players are a part of the reason I'm frustrated in the first place. Lesser sides have defeated us without having gun players of their own.
Namely the Aussie side that won here in SA 2014, to some extent 2009.
England managed to escape with a draw 2009, and when we were vulnerable they took full advantage 2015.
And then there are WC chokes, which in part happen to a lack of balance. Then again other teams have had balance issues of their own and managed to win.
[MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] states below Australia were lucky to have all those guys in one team. Maybe, maybe not.
It could be argued Australia had two ATG bats after the retirement of S. Waugh in Ponting and Gilly. Two ATG bowlers in McGrath and Warne.
That's roughly 4 ATG. However what made them so strong was the players who were not great. They were very good, some excelled in certain conditions were they were utterly dominant (Hayden) and others were all rounded players (D Martyn, Langer). This is not luck, good players are a result of a good cricket system. As for great players? I don't know.

When you Look at SA we had Kallis, Smith, Amla maybe AB (due to being an all rounded player) and Steyn those guys could be argued to being greats of the game one day. If that is the case, then SA would have/had 5 great players without anywhere near the level of success Australia had, this is despite them being good players of spin and swing.
SA have more passengers than Australia, that's what really hinders us from achieving our true potential.

Similar to our ODI squad we have better players on paper than most teams but we aren't far and away. Yes we have weaknesses (all rounder to fill the 10 overs and a good finisher), but so does everyone.
AB, Amla average 50+ and can play on any surface in the world. Yet our results are underwhelming and poor than this current Aussie side which is not even special. We can't take our game to the next level despite having great players.

I just found your earlier post funny but yeah...I agree with you.

Great post.

 

[Buffet]

If we pick the weakest 3 players in Aus side then they will walk into pretty much every test team right now. I think having that kind of coverage with few ATG players is going to propel any team to the next level. You are right about us never having that kind of balance and we always had few useless players to finish the team which was detrimental in dominating. But I still think that Aus got lucky to have all of them at the same time. Cricket system surely played it's part to have all of them, but I think luck played it's part in having all of them at the same time. Timing part is due to luck in my opinion.

 

[soso_killer]

No, we never looked to dominate each test and we were not a dominant side even in 2007-2014. Safety first to not lose was surely a factor in that.

I would say that Aus got lucky with so many ATG players coming in the same generational and then their approach of trying to win each game made them very dominant side. That approach won't do much without good players, but they got lucky to have pretty much every aspect covered.

Current Aus ODI side is not that impressive despite winning WC. I think on flat wickets, they have cracked the code of batting big and deep. So credit is due, but ODI side is not that great if surface has something to offer.

Let me put it this way. Even if you have many ATG players, but if you always play with safety first then you can never be as dominant as great Aus side. I am not saying that trying to win every game is the way to go for every team, but you get the gist.

You have to get extremely lucky to have all aspects covered at the same time. I am sure we will get a good all rounder sooner or later. We have produced the most number of good all rounders in history. But, some of the current gun players will be gone by then. Same thing with having more than one gun pacer.

Safety first mindset is probably having some impact when we play global ODI tournaments as well. Just my guess here. Then there is eternal rain with SA games.

I think you've got really good points.
However that still doesn't explain our lack of ruthlessness. We dominated England in 09 and let it slip. Lost and drew with mediocre Aussie side at home.
Drew with India at home (OK maybe Steyn was alone that series)
Remember I'm not comparing us to the Aussie side or expecting that type of dominance. Taking into account that we always have three great players in a team, despite the good results and W/L ratio wouldn't you say we're underachieving slightly?

 

[Abdullah719]

No coincidence that South Africa's performances are looking up with these two heavily contributing, couple of great long-term prospects for SA with amazing potential to improve.

 

[HitWicket]

If we pick the weakest 3 players in Aus side then they will walk into pretty much every test team right now.

Maybe I've missed something, but are you talking about right now here .

Edit : Oh wait, were you discussing the old Aussie team perhaps? Consequences of trying to join a convo halfway through.

 

[soso_killer]

If we pick the weakest 3 players in Aus side then they will walk into pretty much every test team right now. I think having that kind of coverage with few ATG players is going to propel any team to the next level. You are right about us never having that kind of balance and we always had few useless players to finish the team which was detrimental in dominating. But I still think that Aus got lucky to have all of them at the same time. Cricket system surely played it's part to have all of them, but I think luck played it's part in having all of them at the same time. Timing part is due to luck in my opinion.

Wiaan Mulder is key to our luck then.
As soon as he's finished with his exams he should get a contract with the Lyons effective immediately. Hopefully CSA can get a contract for him in the county championship during the winter break to accelerate his development.
Within a year he can/could be ready.
Perhaps give him his debut in the 7 ODI series against India next. We are in desperate need for an all rounder.
This guy is key.

 

[soso_killer]

No coincidence that South Africa's performances are looking up with these two heavily contributing, couple of great long-term prospects for SA with amazing potential to improve.

Wiaan Mulder needs to come good.
AB, Steyn and Amla will be gone in a few years. We need an extra youngster who can play for next 8-10 years

 

[Buffet]

Maybe I've missed something, but are you talking about right now here .

Edit : Oh wait, were you discussing the old Aussie team perhaps? Consequences of trying to join a convo halfway through.

Not the current Aus team. Discussion was about great Aus team. Why they were so dominant and SA couldn't do the same despite having few ATG players? My argument was that their weakest link was much stronger than SA weakest links and having all those players at the same time was bit of luck. If Great Aus team was carrying few useless players like we carried during 2007-2014, I think Aus couldn't have dominated that much. Sum of all parts always pays off and Aus had pretty much all basis covered. Debate was mainly about luck playing it's part in having all those players at the same time and SA never having that kind of luck.

 

[Buffet]

Wiaan Mulder is key to our luck then.
As soon as he's finished with his exams he should get a contract with the Lyons effective immediately. Hopefully CSA can get a contract for him in the county championship during the winter break to accelerate his development.
Within a year he can/could be ready.
Perhaps give him his debut in the 7 ODI series against India next. We are in desperate need for an all rounder.
This guy is key.

Hopefully, he develops quickly. I will throw few youngsters in bilateral ODI series and that may help. Identifying few young ones early can pay off big.

 

[Slog]

You guys don't get my point or the entirety of it.
Buffet has made good points below i guess, I'll get to those.
I want a balanced side, not necessarily superstars or "gun" players. Those gun players are a part of the reason I'm frustrated in the first place. Lesser sides have defeated us without having gun players of their own.
Namely the Aussie side that won here in SA 2014, to some extent 2009.
England managed to escape with a draw 2009, and when we were vulnerable they took full advantage 2015.
And then there are WC chokes, which in part happen to a lack of balance. Then again other teams have had balance issues of their own and managed to win.
[MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] states below Australia were lucky to have all those guys in one team. Maybe, maybe not.
It could be argued Australia had two ATG bats after the retirement of S. Waugh in Ponting and Gilly. Two ATG bowlers in McGrath and Warne.
That's roughly 4 ATG. However what made them so strong was the players who were not great. They were very good, some excelled in certain conditions were they were utterly dominant (Hayden) and others were all rounded players (D Martyn, Langer). This is not luck, good players are a result of a good cricket system. As for great players? I don't know.

When you Look at SA we had Kallis, Smith, Amla maybe AB (due to being an all rounded player) and Steyn those guys could be argued to being greats of the game one day. If that is the case, then SA would have/had 5 great players without anywhere near the level of success Australia had, this is despite them being good players of spin and swing.
SA have more passengers than Australia, that's what really hinders us from achieving our true potential.

Similar to our ODI squad we have better players on paper than most teams but we aren't far and away. Yes we have weaknesses (all rounder to fill the 10 overs and a good finisher), but so does everyone.
AB, Amla average 50+ and can play on any surface in the world. Yet our results are underwhelming and poor than this current Aussie side which is not even special. We can't take our game to the next level despite having great players.

you make good points

the fact is that the great Aussie/WI sides werent carrying passengers. Every player was a great or good play on his own

In the Saffer sides from 2008-15 (more or less) the problem was that there were too many meh players making up the numbers

If you compare top 4 SA players (Amla, AB, Steyn, Kallis) they are definitely in the same league as a group to the top 4 players of the other ruthless sides you refer to

But if you pick the worst 2-3 players of each side you will see that as a group, the Saffer group will be far and away the worst of the three meaning that 2 or so players in the side were never pulling their weight for the Saffers. More so in ODIs. Which is why despite beig a great side they are a rung below those 2 great sides