Who’s who in the world of cricket
It is a formidable challenge for cricket fans to agree on who are the best teams in the world and who are the best current and past players. You might think that a sport that generates so many statistics could easily provide the facts and figures to solve this challenge, but it’s not that easy. The nations that play the test do not play the same number of games; opponents vary in strength, and there is no set representative period for calculating ranking points.
For example, a strong team like South Africa could easily beat a developing team like Bangladesh in a 5 match test series. But how should that compare to a very close series between, say, India and Pakistan? Sir Donald Bradman had a batting average of over 99 in Test matches, but how is this to be compared with the current stars of world cricket who play far more Tests but where a batting average of over 50 is considered outstanding?
A number of dedicated fans have developed rating systems to solve these problems. These rank individual players by awarding points or calculating batting/bowling averages. Ranking periods range from 18 months to an entire career. Neither is perfect, but the best known system was developed by Price Waterhouse Coopers (accountants) and is now used by the ICC.
The ICC rankings rate players on a scale of 0 to 1000 points, separately for Tests and ODIs. They consider runs scored or wickets taken, the ratings of their opponents, the total runs scored in a game, and the result of the match. These ratings are a moving average, so if a player’s performance improves his previous record, his rating increases. But, it is reduced if the form of it declines.
This is great for comparing current and past players. The calculations are quite complex, but ICC’s player comparison tool does all the work for us. Try comparing Sir Len Hutton and Brian Lara, and see if it settles your after-dinner debate over who’s the best. It’s a smart thing, but of course it’s only as good as the rules for awarding rating points.
Team ranking systems are just as complicated. The first system for test teams was devised in 1995 by Wisden and awarded points for a team’s performance in recent test series. This was used by the ICC from 2001 when the world trials championship was inaugurated. But the system did not take into account the relative strength of the opponents, and a new test championship system was adopted in 2005.
This was devised by David Kendix, a cricket scorer and actuary. It works like a batting average: a winning team improves its average/ranking while a losing team sees its ranking drop. Tests and ODIs use different variations of this system.
The “official” ICC-Kendix system is comprehensive, but there are still several others that are based on points, grades, averages, or some combination of these. They show that cricket records are a statistician’s dream, but what do they all prove?
The bottom line is that Australia are currently at the top of all the different rankings for Tests and ODIs. South Africa are second in all ODI rankings, and England are second in all but one of the Test match rankings. The official ICC rankings give definitive league tables.
So much for the rankings, but there is much more to the world of cricket than number crunching. The “premier league” of world cricket includes ten nations that play each other in test matches, ODIs, the Cricket World Cup, and the ICC Champions Trophy. However, the ICC World Cricket League includes 87 other nations that do not have Test status, but play ODI cricket. These form five global divisions and participate in five regional ODI tournaments.
Kenya is the reigning WCL champion, and all six members of the WCL top tier have qualified for the 2007 Cricket World Cup, along with the Test nations. There are financial benefits to achieving Test match status and playing in the world cup, which in turn helps the development of cricket. Thus, the WCL promotes the development of cricket and offers non-Test playing nations a route into cricket’s “major league”.
Test cricket world championship, ODI rankings, world cricket league and player ratings are relatively new. Whether you love them or hate them, they give cricket real global interest, which is great for the sport. But despite all this science, will fans ever agree on who is the best?