ICC Cricket Rankings - Page 4

Archimandrite Herring · 22nd April 2007, 16:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1000yardstare

ICC Cricket ODI Rankings 21 April 2007

Batting
1 (-) - Pietersen
25 (-2) - Collingwood
29 (+1) - Bell
36 (-1) - Trescothick
37 (-2) - Flintoff
38 (-1) - Strauss
68 (+7) - Vaughan
79 (-4) - Jones
83 (-) - Solanki
97 (-7) - Joyce

When the tournament started, Flintoff was in 29th place, ahead of Trescothick (33rd). Now, despite Tres not having played, he has moved ahead in the rankings. What does that tell you about your batting Freddie?

beefy · 22nd April 2007, 16:26

I think it is a joke if the players get to select the side, the players are there to play, the management and selectors are there to choose the side that will be out there playing.

1000yardstare · 29th April 2007, 04:10

ICC Cricket ODI Rankings 28 April 2007

Batting
1 (-) - Pietersen
25 (-) - Collingwood
29 (-) - Bell
36 (-) - Trescothick
37 (-) - Flintoff
38 (-) - Strauss
66 (+2) - Vaughan
78 (+1) - Jones
83 (-) - Solanki
97 (-) - Joyce

Bowling
17 (-1) - Flintoff
33 (-) - Anderson
54 (+1) - Gough
58 (+2) - Collingwood
61 (-) - Lewis
65 (+2) - Plunkett
72 (+1) - Mahmood
88 (+1) - Panesar
91 (-) - Ian Blackwell

zxb · 29th April 2007, 04:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1000yardstare

ICC Cricket ODI Rankings 28 April 2007
Bowling
1 (-1) - Flintoff
33 (-) - Anderson
54 (+1) - Gough
58 (+2) - Collingwood
61 (-) - Lewis
65 (+2) - Plunkett
72 (+1) - Mahmood
88 (+1) - Panesar
91 (-) - Ian Blackwell

Flintoff 1st in bowling? Despite going down a ranking?

**stevieh** · 29th April 2007, 06:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by zxb

Flintoff 1st in bowling? Despite going down a ranking?

I think that is a typo and that Flintoff is around 17 in the bowling rankings.

1000yardstare · 29th April 2007, 10:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by zxb

Flintoff 1st in bowling? Despite going down a ranking?

Wishful thinking

- now corrected.

Silly Deep Cover · 29th April 2007, 22:21

One batsman in the top 20. One bowler in the top 20 and heading on his way out of it.

They say stats don't give you the full story, but...

Fatslogger · 29th April 2007, 23:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silly Deep Cover

One batsman in the top 20. One bowler in the top 20 and heading on his way out of it.

They say stats don't give you the full story, but...

You can make it sound worse by saying top 24 too. I doubt that Flintoff is really on the way out though. If anything, actually playing a few consecutive ODIs should improve his bowling rating. I haven't actually checked though.

Right, I've now checked. Flintoff's rating (not quite the same as ranking but very similar) hasn't really gone down since the end of 2004. What does surprise me is that his ODI bowling peak was as far back as late 2003.

Aidan11 · 30th April 2007, 11:37

I don't need stats to tell us how rubbish we are.

KT1 · 30th April 2007, 12:48

Mahmood and Plunkett are both ranked above Panesar, and I think it is widely considered that the best course of action is to send them back to domestic cricket to "learn their trade". The same for Monty?

Fatslogger · 30th April 2007, 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by KT1

Mahmood and Plunkett are both ranked above Panesar, and I think it is widely considered that the best course of action is to send them back to domestic cricket to "learn their trade". The same for Monty?

He has played fewer games so his ranking is a bit less representative, although of course neither of Mahmood or Plunkett has played anything like enough games to have a full ranking either. Having said all that, they can both bat and field a fair bit better than Monty too so it does have to be seriously considered as to whether he offers the side enough. Vaughan's bowling figures in the World Cup were superior (okay, small sample size) and he's probably still a bit ahead of Monty with the bat and in the field.

MPT · 30th April 2007, 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fatslogger

...and he's probably still a bit ahead of Monty with the bat and in the field.

Not by much I would imagine

Fatslogger · 30th April 2007, 18:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by MPT

Not by much I would imagine

No, not by much, particularly in the field.

Actually, I do have a bit to say about Monty's batting. People talk about how hard he's worked on it and the improvements he's made but actually, he did reasonably well in his first test innings and has had the odd small score since but essentially remains a rabbit of such a rabbity variety that it's not entirely clear that he should bat ahead of Hoggard. He didn't get much chance in the WC but he did nothing with the willow when he did get a bat. So, in summary, a little bit worse than Vaughan.

Silly Deep Cover · 30th April 2007, 18:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fatslogger

People talk about how hard he's worked on it and the improvements he's made but actually, he did reasonably well in his first test innings and has had the odd small score since but essentially remains a rabbit of such a rabbity variety that it's not entirely clear that he should bat ahead of Hoggard.

Basically, everyone assumed he would be absolute sh1t. Then he had a surprisingly good knock and suddenly everyone assumed he would be pretty good. I imagine the pendulum will swing towards reality eventually, but for now he's as much a victim of expectations with his batting as he is with his bowling.

Fatslogger · 30th April 2007, 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silly Deep Cover

Basically, everyone assumed he would be absolute sh1t. Then he had a surprisingly good knock and suddenly everyone assumed he would be pretty good. I imagine the pendulum will swing towards reality eventually, but for now he's as much a victim of expectations with his batting as he is with his bowling.

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.

1000yardstare · 22nd May 2007, 02:30

Well the Test rankings haven't been updated but I thought it would put them on as they stand as at 26th January, 2007.

Batsmen

3 - Pietersen
13 - Strauss
14 - Collingwood
17 - Bell
22 - Trescothick
23 - Cook
27 - Flintoff
68 - Shah
78 - GJones
80 - Giles
99 - Read

Bowlers

5 - Hoggard
9 - Flintoff
17 - Harmison
33 - Panesar
36 - Giles
47 - Anderson
57 - Mahmood
58 - Plunkett
72 - Udal
83 - Lewis

I think Read will be disappearing soon. Vaughan was at 48 but has vanished as he hasn't played for so long.

**stevieh** · 22nd May 2007, 16:12

The new rankings should be published very soon, now that India and Bangladesh have finished the test match. LG states they publish within 12 hours of the finish of a match, but they were probably waiting until both of the overlapping tests were in the books.

I was opining the other day that there seems a lot of mystery surrounding the computing of the Ratings, based on wihch the rankings are listed. In the interests of removing some of that mystery, I read through their FAQ's.

Interestingly, they don't use anything that is not in the standard scorecard listing of a Test match, although they do have formulae to account for various factors, which are not revealed.

**stevieh** · 22nd May 2007, 17:37

As of Today:

Batsmen

3 - Pietersen (-)
13 - Collingwood (+1)
14 - Bell (+3)
15 - Strauss (-2)
22 - Cook (+1)
23 - Trescothick (-1)
27 - Flintoff (-)
75 - Prior
78 - GJones (-)
82 - Giles (-2)
96 - Shah (-28)
100 - Read (-1)

Bowlers

7 - Hoggard (-2)
9 - Flintoff (-)
18 - Harmison (-1)
26 - Panesar (+7)
37 - Giles (-1)
48 - Anderson (-1)
59 - Mahmood (-2)
60 - Plunkett (-2)
72 - Udal
85 - Lewis (-2)
99 - Collingwood

Notes:
Despite his hundred, KP's rating score declined a few points (-6), though he remains ranked in 3rd.
Collingwood and Bell have leapfrogged Strauss, based on their performances with the bat.
Cook made a healthy gain in ratings points (+33) moving him ahead of Trescothick.
Prior enters the rankings at 75, 3 places ahead of GoJo.

Hoggy dropped two places, with his wicketless performance - a bit unlucky, but the ratings have no place for sentimentality.
Monty has moved up significantly, as expected with 66 ratings points - he could soon overtake Steve Harmison at the rate he is climbing the ladder.

Michelle Fivefer · 22nd May 2007, 17:40

Prior already ahead of Read and Jones.

Vaughansashes2009 · 22nd May 2007, 17:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by StevieH

As of Today:

Batsmen

3 - Pietersen (-)
13 - Collingwood (+1)
14 - Bell (+3)
15 - Strauss (-2)
22 - Cook (+1)
23 - Trescothick (-1)
27 - Flintoff (-)
75 - Prior
78 - GJones (-)
82 - Giles (-2)
96 - Shah (-28)
100 - Read (-1)

Bowlers

7 - Hoggard (-2)
9 - Flintoff (-)
18 - Harmison (-1)
26 - Panesar (+7)
37 - Giles (-1)
48 - Anderson (-1)
59 - Mahmood (-2)
60 - Plunkett (-2)
72 - Udal
85 - Lewis (-2)
99 - Collingwood

Notes: Despite his hundred, KP's rating score declined a few points (-6), though he remains ranked in 3rd.
Collingwood and Bell have leapfrogged Strauss, based on their performances with the bat.
Cook made a health gain in ratings points (+33) moving him ahead of Trescothick.
Prior enters the rankings at 75, 3 places ahead of GoJo.

Hoggy dropped two places, with his wicketless performance - a bit unlucky, but the ratings have no place for sentimentality.
Monty has moved up significantly, as expected with 66 ratings points - he could soon overtake Steve Harmison at the rate he is climbing the ladder.[/quote]

I know the ratings reflect past performance too, but is there a rose tinted glasses function in there. How the **** is Giles the 37th best bowler in the world?

22nd April 2007, 16:26	#62
beefy World Class Bulldog spirit Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: London Town Team(s): England & Arsenal Posts: 7,352	I think it is a joke if the players get to select the side, the players are there to play, the management and selectors are there to choose the side that will be out there playing. __________________ ENGLAND; Ashes holders, World Champions and the Number One cricket team in World Cricket.

29th April 2007, 04:10	#63
1000yardstare Posting Goddess JA 898 Cummins 301 SCurran 58 Jhye 39 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: London Posts: 22,880	ICC Cricket ODI Rankings 28 April 2007 Batting 1 (-) - Pietersen 25 (-) - Collingwood 29 (-) - Bell 36 (-) - Trescothick 37 (-) - Flintoff 38 (-) - Strauss 66 (+2) - Vaughan 78 (+1) - Jones 83 (-) - Solanki 97 (-) - Joyce Bowling 17 (-1) - Flintoff 33 (-) - Anderson 54 (+1) - Gough 58 (+2) - Collingwood 61 (-) - Lewis 65 (+2) - Plunkett 72 (+1) - Mahmood 88 (+1) - Panesar 91 (-) - Ian Blackwell Last edited by 1000yardstare : 29th April 2007 at 10:56.

29th April 2007, 22:21	#67
Silly Deep Cover Returning Officer Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Leafy West London Team(s): Wales Posts: 22,638	One batsman in the top 20. One bowler in the top 20 and heading on his way out of it. They say stats don't give you the full story, but... __________________ "Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes." (Walt Whitman)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

30th April 2007, 11:37	#69
Aidan11 Harmisonesque Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Somewhere cold and wet Posts: 43,359	I don't need stats to tell us how rubbish we are.

30th April 2007, 12:48	#70
KT1 Bat In Hand Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 24	Mahmood and Plunkett are both ranked above Panesar, and I think it is widely considered that the best course of action is to send them back to domestic cricket to "learn their trade". The same for Monty?

22nd May 2007, 02:30	#76
1000yardstare Posting Goddess JA 898 Cummins 301 SCurran 58 Jhye 39 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: London Posts: 22,880	Well the Test rankings haven't been updated but I thought it would put them on as they stand as at 26th January, 2007. Batsmen 3 - Pietersen 13 - Strauss 14 - Collingwood 17 - Bell 22 - Trescothick 23 - Cook 27 - Flintoff 68 - Shah 78 - GJones 80 - Giles 99 - Read Bowlers 5 - Hoggard 9 - Flintoff 17 - Harmison 33 - Panesar 36 - Giles 47 - Anderson 57 - Mahmood 58 - Plunkett 72 - Udal 83 - Lewis I think Read will be disappearing soon. Vaughan was at 48 but has vanished as he hasn't played for so long.

22nd May 2007, 16:12	#77
stevieh Administrator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Team(s): England, Kent, Canada Posts: 7,145	The new rankings should be published very soon, now that India and Bangladesh have finished the test match. LG states they publish within 12 hours of the finish of a match, but they were probably waiting until both of the overlapping tests were in the books. I was opining the other day that there seems a lot of mystery surrounding the computing of the Ratings, based on wihch the rankings are listed. In the interests of removing some of that mystery, I read through their FAQ's. Interestingly, they don't use anything that is not in the standard scorecard listing of a Test match, although they do have formulae to account for various factors, which are not revealed.

22nd May 2007, 17:37	#78
stevieh Administrator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Team(s): England, Kent, Canada Posts: 7,145	As of Today: Batsmen 3 - Pietersen (-) 13 - Collingwood (+1) 14 - Bell (+3) 15 - Strauss (-2) 22 - Cook (+1) 23 - Trescothick (-1) 27 - Flintoff (-) 75 - Prior 78 - GJones (-) 82 - Giles (-2) 96 - Shah (-28) 100 - Read (-1) Bowlers 7 - Hoggard (-2) 9 - Flintoff (-) 18 - Harmison (-1) 26 - Panesar (+7) 37 - Giles (-1) 48 - Anderson (-1) 59 - Mahmood (-2) 60 - Plunkett (-2) 72 - Udal 85 - Lewis (-2) 99 - Collingwood Notes: Despite his hundred, KP's rating score declined a few points (-6), though he remains ranked in 3rd. Collingwood and Bell have leapfrogged Strauss, based on their performances with the bat. Cook made a healthy gain in ratings points (+33) moving him ahead of Trescothick. Prior enters the rankings at 75, 3 places ahead of GoJo. Hoggy dropped two places, with his wicketless performance - a bit unlucky, but the ratings have no place for sentimentality. Monty has moved up significantly, as expected with 66 ratings points - he could soon overtake Steve Harmison at the rate he is climbing the ladder.

22nd May 2007, 17:40	#79
Michelle Fivefer Posting Goddess Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: North West England Team(s): England, Lancashire Posts: 43,992	Prior already ahead of Read and Jones.