ICC news August 8, 2012

England rise to No.1 in ODIs

ESPNcricinfo staff

England have replaced Australia as the top ODI side in the ICC rankings after the annual update of the tables, while Australia have slipped to No. 4. It is the first time that England have achieved the top spot since the inception of team-ranking tables in 2002.

England lead the table with 121 rating points, closely followed by South Africa, while world champions India are placed third with 120 points. Australia, who are eight points behind India, dropped to their lowest-ever ranking, after being the top ranked one-day side since September 2009. The change in the rankings has not affected the positions of teams below Australia.

The ICC ranking tables are updated annually in August to reflect teams' recent form. The updated tables only include results from matches played after August 2010, with older results from between August 2009 and July 2010 being discarded. The drop in case of Australia is significant as their successful run of 30 wins from 40 matches in 2009-10 is excluded from the updated tables.

England, however, lost their top T20 ranking to South Africa to be placed a close second with only one rating-point difference between the two. The teams are followed by Sri Lanka, India and West Indies. Australia, who were sixth before the update, have dropped to ninth with 93 rating points - 2 below eighth placed Bangladesh.

Like the Test championships tables, the ODI and T20 tables could also see a new leader when South Africa complete the limited-overs leg of their England tour.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Torsha on August 11, 2012, 1:19 GMT

    What a joke. SA and India certainly must be ahead of England. What's up with that whitewashed England got in India? India moved to 5th place in test when they were whitewashed? Nonsense!

  • Joe on August 10, 2012, 17:14 GMT

    England have played the best Cricket overall that's why we're WORLD NUMBER 1 :)

  • Andrew on August 10, 2012, 10:54 GMT

    @Peter WalTROLL - btw - there is no "flaw" in my rankings as it was based purely on win/loss during the ratings period. So it is MY ratings, using some facts. @Ahmed Hussain - pls bear in mind, that as long as you play a minimum amount of tests, your ranking won't be adversely affected. Meaning, if Bangladesh play 4 tests a yr & everyone else plays 12, if Bangladesh win say 3 out of 4 tests every year - they will climb up the rankings because the ranking points are averaged by the tests played. @raj_24 - good comments, although as an Ozzy I can cope with being #3 in tests, there's only a slither of difference between Oz/Eng & Saffas & not much more between India/Pak & SL with even the WIndies closing!

  • Dummy4 on August 10, 2012, 9:29 GMT

    There is a rift between english test team .. I would love to see England ODI team VS RSA ODI Team, Want to see Cook, Morgan , Bopara and Trott batting and similarly there bowling. I love KP But, what is going on between him and board is not clear to me so don't want to comment on it. But, if he is no handled with care then this is bad. He is an asset

  • Dummy4 on August 10, 2012, 7:12 GMT

    Who wrote this report? I see an English bias. In ODI, it says that though England had fallen below RSA, who is No 1 now, the difference is only just one point. But conveniently ignore/s the fact that in ODI, the top three are bunched together at 121, 121, & 120. May be,that fact is making him/them uncomfortable. Even the distant 4th is highlighted, but not the fact that any of the top three could be No 1 in ODI, any time. Frankly I don't care much about these rankings; but couldn't resist from pointing out the glaring bias, which may not be intentional though! To me, true test is in International Tests, played among countries using their "national" players!

  • Pachaiappan on August 10, 2012, 5:34 GMT

    @ashish514 ...Its a mistake in the above article...ICC have changed rules to include min 1Yr and max 2yrs results of ODI...

  • Shanmugam on August 10, 2012, 0:37 GMT

    @criclover19, at least with India there is a case since they won the world cup. But, why do RSA "deserve" to be #1 in ODIs? What have they done so great in ODIs in the last 2 years?

  • Shanmugam on August 10, 2012, 0:35 GMT

    @Bruisers, when did India won a series in SL? They haven't won a series there since the early 90s. England lost the two test series 0-1 in 2008-2009 in India. They lost the first test by 5 wickets as India successfully chased a stiff target of 387 and secured a comfortable draw in the second test. That is not getting whipped. Getting whipped would be what India suffered in their last 8 away tests.

  • Deepak on August 9, 2012, 22:43 GMT

    To those who think India did not achieve anything when they were No.1 in Tests - India beat England 1-0 in England in 2007, lost 1-2 in Australia in 2008 (thanks to the controversial Sydney Test), drew 1-1 in South Africa in 2011. In the same period, India also won series against NZ in NZ, SL in SL, WI in WI and did not lose a single home series and handed a whitewash to Australia in 2010 and whipping to England in 2008/09. That justified their No.1 ranking as they were clearly dominating the Test arena. Fair enough, they lost it after whitewashes in Australia and England. But a couple of bad series does not make them a bad team. I'm sure they will reclaim the No.1 spot soon.

  • Dummy4 on August 9, 2012, 21:30 GMT

    I really don't get the point of having a ranking system for Tests because Number 1 very few teams 8 play Test Cricket the other 2 Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are just there to fill up the ranks so its looks organised. Number 2 the matches played is clearly unevenly distributed for example, both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh between them have played only 1 Tests so far in 2012 and we're almost 3/4 of this year whereas England have played 10 Tests this year so you see the problem guys? Test Cricket has massive problems not just in terms of matches but also the lack of crowd and results ending in too many draws.

  • No featured comments at the moment.