Cricket 24/7  

Welcome to the Cricket 24/7.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   Cricket 24/7 > Cricket Discussion Forums > International Cricket
Register FAQDonate Members List Calendar Casino Articles Terms of Use Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28th May 2007, 21:34   #101
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 793 Wagner 118 TCurran 7 SCurran 0 Cummins 101
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazntfc View Post
Trescothick still 23. How on earth does that work?

Each time he doesn't play he would drop a point for two.
644 - Cook
609 - Trescothick
598 - Sehwag
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 21:36   #102
slop
Posting God
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): South Africa
Age: 41
Posts: 18,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly Deep Cover View Post
KP must be wondering what on earth more he has to do to get the No. 1 spot back.
Back?
slop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 21:37   #103
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff_boycotts_grandmother View Post
Score some runs against a decent attack? Although, Collymore is rated 10.
Odd that isn't it? I suppose the issue is covered in your bowling thread. Pietersen is now at his highest ever rating and only 6 points behind MoYo. Ponting is a bit further ahead.

Vaughan has returned to the bowling rankings not through having increased his rating (not having bowled his actual rating will have declined very marginally) but through having played again and hence having his rating reinstated in the list.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 21:49   #104
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 41,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000yardstare View Post
ICC Cricket Rankings at 28th May 2007

Batsmen

3 (-) - Pietersen
13 (-) - Collingwood
17 (-2) - Strauss
19 (-5) - Bell
22 (-) - Cook
23 (-) - Trescothick
28 (-1) - Flintoff
38 (+10) - Vaughan
60 (+15) - Prior
80 (-2) - Jones
85 (-3) - Giles
98 (-2) - Shah
Collingwood is shown as going up a place but he was 13th last time. And may I say that these latest rankings are very harsh on Bell. He went up 3 points last time with his unbeaten century, but having made only 24 runs fewer than Collingwood in just the one innings he's slid down 5 points and is back below Strauss who scored only 15 in this match and has scored just one half-century (exactly 50) in the last seven matches. The snakes cerrtainly move a lot faster than the ladders. What is the explanation?
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 21:52   #105
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer View Post
Collingwood is shown as going up a place but he was 13th last time. And may I say that these latest rankings are very harsh on Bell. He went up 3 points last time with his unbeaten century, but having made only 24 runs fewer than Collingwood in just the one innings he's slid down 5 points and is back below Strauss who scored only 15 in this match and has scored just one half-century (exactly 50) in the last seven matches. The snakes cerrtainly move a lot faster than the ladders. What is the explanation?
Bell has far fewer total test innings than Strauss so he is more prone to significant fluctuations in ranking based on a single innings. Also, 5 runs is fewer than 15. Position is dependent on how many players there are around you and what their ratings are.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 22:01   #106
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 41,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
Bell has far fewer total test innings than Strauss so he is more prone to significant fluctuations in ranking based on a single innings. Also, 5 runs is fewer than 15. Position is dependent on how many players there are around you and what their ratings are.
I know that really. It takes longer to climb up and longer to drop down. However, both batsmen failed, I don't think 10 runs makes much difference. Also, Collingwood made only 29 compared to the 111 and 34 at Lord's but he stays the same.
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 22:07   #107
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer View Post
I know that really. It takes longer to climb up and longer to drop down. However, both batsmen failed, I don't think 10 runs makes much difference. Also, Collingwood made only 29 compared to the 111 and 34 at Lord's but he stays the same.
10 runs doesn't make much difference but it does make some. Collingwood wouldn't have lost too many points based on a modest score of 29 (by comparison with a score of 5, it's not too bad is it?) and his place is also based on who is near him in the rakings. There was and still isn't anyone that close to him. Fleming is the next man down at 674 while Collingwood is at 694, which does represent a fall from 706 after Lords. Bell has gone from 679 to 658 so he's not dropped all that many more points but that brings him below Fleming, Smith, Tendulkar, Strauss and Gilchrist.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 22:10   #108
daz
Posting God
 
daz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Team(s): Northamptonshire
Posts: 11,288
Bell drops 5 places yet Trescothick doesn't and he isnt even playing
daz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 22:14   #109
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazntfc View Post
Bell drops 5 places yet Trescothick doesn't and he isnt even playing
Please read. Essentially, playing and doing badly is going to have a more dramatic impact than not playing. Of course not playing can't possibly do other than reduce a player's rating whereas playing can.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 22:49   #110
1000yardstare
Posting Goddess
 
1000yardstare's Avatar
JA 793 Wagner 118 TCurran 7 SCurran 0 Cummins 101
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 20,192
'bowlers who bowl a large number of overs in the match get some credit, even if they take no wickets'

I don't agree with that at all.
1000yardstare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 22:54   #111
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000yardstare View Post
'bowlers who bowl a large number of overs in the match get some credit, even if they take no wickets'

I don't agree with that at all.
They are contributing to their side's efforts. They do still lose plenty of points by going for runs without using wickets. It's just a minor correction. Think of it as credit from the bowler's captain wanting him to bowl despite not taking wickets.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 23:30   #112
Rey
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Castleford
Team(s): Yorkshire
Posts: 14,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelle Fivefer View Post
And may I say that these latest rankings are very harsh on Bell....What is the explanation?
Everyone is against Bell. Everyone
__________________
"He has sat on the fence so long that the iron has entered his soul."
Rey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 23:46   #113
Michelle Fivefer
Posting Goddess
 
Michelle Fivefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North West England
Team(s): England, Lancashire
Posts: 41,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by °Rey° View Post
Everyone is against Bell. Everyone
Michelle Fivefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2007, 23:47   #114
Fatslogger
Self Confessed Mentalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hitchin
Team(s): England and Liverpool
Age: 41
Posts: 43,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by °Rey° View Post
Everyone is against Bell. Everyone
Don't forget Jimmy.
__________________
Work is the curse of the drinking classes - Wilde
Fatslogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 00:02   #115
stevieh
World Class
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Team(s): England, Kent, Canada
Posts: 6,668
I'd recommend the FAQs also, for a greater understanding of the rankings.

Also, if you check out an individual player's graph, you can hover over the line at any point to see the match which influenced a significant move (up or down). The ratings invariably make some sense whenever I have looked at them.

What is not always intuitive are moves in the rankings relative to other players, since other matches - India vs Bangla in this case can affect how much a player goes up or down. Tendulkar, feasting off the Bangladesh bowling, went back above Bell in today's version of the batting rankings, for instance.
stevieh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 08:52   #116
Silly Deep Cover
Returning Officer
 
Silly Deep Cover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Leafy West London
Team(s): Wales
Posts: 22,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by °Rey° View Post
He never was first. You're confusing ODI rankings with Test rankings
I stand corrected.
__________________
"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes." (Walt Whitman)
Silly Deep Cover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 09:21   #117
Baron Shakattak Greenback
International Cricketer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London
Team(s): Notts, England, Shakib-al-Hasan
Posts: 2,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatslogger View Post
I have very few expectations of his batting. It's more that a few people had commented on how much he'd improved which suggests that he must have been getting out for less than a duck fairly often before.
It's all about the multi-dimensional thing though. If no-one had ever mentioned that he needed to bat and field better to justify a place you wouldn't have heard a peep. But Fletcher did mention it and all of a sudden everyone and his dog was reporting sightings of Monty batting at 3 in his school team and hitting sixes out of the ground at the Gabba*. This immediately became a perceived "improvement" in his test batting.

If Monty continues to develop his bowling he will be picked regardless of his batting, especially as his fielding certainly has improved. Of course he should keep working but I think the odd entertaining 20-odd, like his innings against SL and Murali, are as much as we can expect.

*One of these may not actually have been reported
Baron Shakattak Greenback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 09:27   #118
beefy
World Class
 
beefy's Avatar
Bulldog spirit
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London Town
Team(s): England & Arsenal
Posts: 7,352
I think it is a change in peoples perceptions through clever media influence which has lead to the belief Monty has improved as a batter, as opposed to an actual genuine improvement. Whenever i watch him he still looks clueless and will be a no11 for some time to come. To me that matters little as long as he can keep improving his bowling. We also have young pace bowlers who offer alot more promise with the bat, hence alleviating the pressure on Monty to score runs i.e Mahmood, Plunkett and Broad.

I also hope Moores does not hold the same almost obsessive fetish for having bowlers who can bat as opposed who ones who can bowl that Fletcher possessed.
__________________
ENGLAND; Ashes holders, World Champions and the Number One cricket team in World Cricket.
beefy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 09:30   #119
beefy
World Class
 
beefy's Avatar
Bulldog spirit
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London Town
Team(s): England & Arsenal
Posts: 7,352
I would love for Pietersen to reach number 1 in both Test and ODI rankings, does anyone have any idea how possible it will be for him to reach no1 in the Test arena any time soon? Would a few more big scores this series bump him up to no1? Or is Ponting too far ahead at the current time.
Also, incidently, how safe is he at no1 in the ODI ratings?

I personally don't pay much attention to ratings, hence why i am asking someone more in the know how viable it will be for him to reach both the no1's! Although i don't trust the ratings, it would be very nice to see an England player dominating all forms. Has that ever happened before?
__________________
ENGLAND; Ashes holders, World Champions and the Number One cricket team in World Cricket.
beefy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 09:50   #120
Jock McTuffnell2
Club Cricketer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cambridge
Team(s): Scotland, England
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefy View Post
I would love for Pietersen to reach number 1 in both Test and ODI rankings, does anyone have any idea how possible it will be for him to reach no1 in the Test arena any time soon? Would a few more big scores this series bump him up to no1? Or is Ponting too far ahead at the current time.
Also, incidently, how safe is he at no1 in the ODI ratings?

I personally don't pay much attention to ratings, hence why i am asking someone more in the know how viable it will be for him to reach both the no1's! Although i don't trust the ratings, it would be very nice to see an England player dominating all forms. Has that ever happened before?
Depends on the Indian bowlers rankings and how many runs he gets vs them (lots is my prediction).
Jock McTuffnell2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:57.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Cricket247.org