ICC news

England rise to No.1 in ODIs

ESPNcricinfo staff

August 8, 2012

Comments: 122 | Text size: A | A

England celebrate their 4-0 series victory, England v Australia, 5th ODI, Old Trafford, July 10, 2012
England have achieved top spot in the ICC rankings for the first time © Getty Images
Related Links

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.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by torsha on (August 11, 2012, 2:19 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!

Posted by EnglishCricket on (August 10, 2012, 18:14 GMT)

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

Posted by Meety on (August 10, 2012, 11:54 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!

Posted by   on (August 10, 2012, 10:29 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

Posted by   on (August 10, 2012, 8:12 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!

Posted by Pachaiappan on (August 10, 2012, 6:34 GMT)

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

Posted by Shan156 on (August 10, 2012, 1:37 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?

Posted by Shan156 on (August 10, 2012, 1:35 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.

Posted by Bruisers on (August 9, 2012, 23:43 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.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 22:30 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.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 22:30 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.

Posted by criclover19 on (August 9, 2012, 20:55 GMT)

Its ok if England stays no 1 in the test matches, but to rank them as no 1 in the odi, I don't think they deserve it, they have not even won a single odi in India in their last two outings , and I think either SA or even India deserve to be the no 1 sides.

Posted by Shan156 on (August 9, 2012, 18:54 GMT)

@GodOfTheOffside, thank you. I very well remember Sachin's two centuries in SA in 2010-2011. That was a reply to an Indian fan who questioned when was the last time Ian Bell scored a century outside England. Instead of replying 2010-2011 (in Australia), I simply asked him this question. If he knows this answer, he would know the answer to his question as well.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 18:32 GMT)

@Verrakannadiga, you opportunist! Just joking. Perhaps , you too.

Posted by Aussasinator on (August 9, 2012, 18:31 GMT)

England has been lucky. But Australian cricket has been shown its true place. its buried.

Posted by Muhtasim13 on (August 9, 2012, 15:51 GMT)

@Rob Kemp, the tri series in Zimbabwe was unofficial so the results of that series does not affect the rankings

Posted by ashish514 on (August 9, 2012, 14:31 GMT)

@Pachaiappan- According to this article "The updated tables only include results from matches played after August 2010, with older results from between August 2009 and July 2010 being discarded." Read Para 2

Posted by veerakannadiga on (August 9, 2012, 13:05 GMT)

Good time to be an English sports fan. They are doing well in the 2012 games, good rankings in all formats of cricket.Period. But honestly I feel that the English themselves cannot believe that they are #1 in ODI's.In the bottom of their hearts they themselves are doubting the ranking system and thanking God for their good luck.

Posted by Pachaiappan on (August 9, 2012, 12:55 GMT)

@ashish514 Rankings are from 01Aug2011 to 08Aug2012.... India:31 played...1 washed out

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 12:07 GMT)

How have South Africa climbed up the T20 rankings after that Triangular Zimbabwe comp? They were terrible. Lost 3 of there 5 games

Posted by ashish514 on (August 9, 2012, 11:56 GMT)

@DylanAu- Please read the complete post. I've already mentioned the performance of England and India against top teams (Australia, South Africa, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and against each other). What I had not considered though is home and away factor. Now, as per statsguru- the performance of England in away and neutral ODIs against the top teams mentioned above is 6 wins and 12 losses in 19 matches in last 2 years while India's performance is 12 won and 13 lost in 28 ODIs against the same teams. So if you take that into account, the difference is even wider. But for a moment, leave it all aside and just answer this if you can- why does ranking table say that India have played 30 and Eng 21 ODIs while statsguru has different nos.- 61 ODIs played by India and 45 by England in last 2 years?

Posted by M_Rakibul_Islam on (August 9, 2012, 11:32 GMT)

ICC rankings have loopholes, specially in T20s. Lot of people screamed few days back that why BD was at 4 over Aus, Ind, Pak. But now Aus dropped to 9 below 8 ranked BD. ICC should leave their 2 years matches policy & should count Ratings considering matches of at least last 3/4 yrs in T20. The no. of T20 matches played per year is low. So the current system of ratings makes T20 Ranking too hilarious. It's a concern for ICC. Otherwise, strong teams will b ranked below the associates if they don't play enough T20 games in last 2 yrs.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 11:29 GMT)

the useless Australian team gets its true ranking...but England as number 1 ODI team...they havent won anything outside England...have they ?...i would say India & South Africa are number 1 & 2 or 2 or 1

Posted by TheIndiaRockers on (August 9, 2012, 11:26 GMT)

Here comes the fact india won the worldcup in 1983 at england(your land), Worldcup runner up in 2003(at south africa) &T20 worldcup winner(at southafrica). Is it southafrica & england is a part of india???? oh come on man india as done for better than england...This is the fact ......I know eng fans stomach starts burn....What ever u say india is great. Past AUS & WI team is greatest.

Posted by ats78 on (August 9, 2012, 11:22 GMT)

i meant @ Athar Hameed not aftar... FYI..

Posted by ats78 on (August 9, 2012, 11:17 GMT)

@ Aftar .. Dude why you guys are always so negative about india.. India when they were no.1 they beat NZ , WI and England at respective their home grounds, just after the world cup they had couple of bad series doesnt mean they are a bad team. Pakistan on the other hand lost against SL (without Murali) and we have no bad things to say for that, SL were just the better team. So respect each and every country and its better if people focus and comment respectfully and with dignity for other countries, period. England no doubt were the no.1 team but it looks the saffers are gonna beat them so the ranking will change again. so be it. RESPECT.

Posted by Shamvill on (August 9, 2012, 11:07 GMT)

Each match win provide 2 points (need to evaluate) so number of total points earned dived by numbers of matches played equals to team ranking....

Total Points/No.of matches played = Ranking.

quite fair calculation, well this is my opinion cant force others to follow.

Posted by DylanAu on (August 9, 2012, 10:45 GMT)

@ashish514 LOL my dear ashish, let me explain this to you. The ICC rankings take in to account the ranking of the opposition played and whether the game was at home or away.

Playing a multitude of home games against second rate teams and winning doesn't guarantee you a position as number 1. That is why india is langushing at number 3. Maybe if India could actually win a game outside of India on decent pitches, they might move up the rankings. I don't see that happening though :)

Posted by Marcio on (August 9, 2012, 10:30 GMT)

Strange. Australia hadn't lost an ODI series for nearly two years before the most recent one, and 75% of the games have been played away from home during that period. So how does the system work? AUS beat SL, SA and BANG away, and drew with WI away - beat IND and SL at home. Clearly there is something amiss with how this works.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 10:05 GMT)

I think people are not understanding the ranking system here, actually what happens is that if you beat a top ranked side by a good margin, you get plenty of points for it. For example-When India came to ENG,they were highly ranked, beating them fetched ENG many points,they lost 5-0 away then but India was still ranked higher than them.When England beat PAk 4-0 & then Aus 4-0,so as AUS were No.1, it fetched ENG many points & when results were counted of just the last 2 years-ENG had more points & so they are no.1, SA lost ODIs at home to Aus+they won against SL by just 3-2. It depends against whom you win & from how much margin you win.England have done exceptionally well in T20s since 2009,still they are ranked 2nd because SA beat oppositions who were above them recently which helped them.I think while calculating home/away factor should be considered too,then I think AUS may still will be on the top in ODIs. I am an English cricket fan,but ENG being no.1 in "ODIs" is rubbish.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 9:47 GMT)

India never won outside India but they were no.1. I don't follow ranking any more. ICC will do anything to put India back on top.

Posted by applethief on (August 9, 2012, 9:39 GMT)

This has a bit more meat to it than the other rankings. Honestly, how you create a ranking system for a roulette wheel format like T20 is beyond me. And the test format is subject to too many statistical anomalies, and doesn't accurately reflect current performance (as well as favouring sides that play more test cricket, and scheduling that favours playing declining sides that are high-ranked). The ODI ranking makes more sense though, England have bee winning consistently by good margins, and the rest of the teams seem to be where they should. Not sure about South Africa though, they've played far fewer games than other sides....

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (August 9, 2012, 9:36 GMT)

Number 1 in tests, Number 1 in ODI's & T20 Champions. Simply the best England & dominating in London 12....England til i die.

Posted by TheIndiaRockers on (August 9, 2012, 9:09 GMT)

I am a indian fan. Its very difficult to digest aus at the botton in T20 & Useless Eng at the top of all three format. Yo man its really funny to see this rubbish ranking system . No1 team in ODI never won a worldcup.lol... when did they won the odi series in india against india .. i think my grandfather's father will know.....hahahahahaha

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 8:53 GMT)

I read a funny comment here that English fans just care for Ashes and no other tournament is important for them and even rankings are a joke for them. LOl. Thats true since england is quite incompetent in the subcontinent. They can only play monotonous cricket and do well only in English like conditions.

Posted by aryan_ab on (August 9, 2012, 8:41 GMT)

I cant understand the ICC ranking system......so I dont care about it...!! I could not understand how India reached no. 1 in tests and now how england reached no. 1 in ODIs

Posted by Porky_PigTheToon on (August 9, 2012, 8:36 GMT)

@ Last'deadly Vampie'e Honey: See yourself how many times you used "England won at HOME" in your comment. Okay, they beat Pakisatn in UAE. But got thrashed by India in India and by Ireland and BD too in WC played in sub-continent. It shows they are just Green Pitch Bullies and deserve to be No. 1 only @ HOME.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 8:23 GMT)

There was no mention of Pakistan. Have they quit cricket

Posted by raj_24 on (August 9, 2012, 8:08 GMT)

Those commenting on australia:

1.Aus won Test series in SL 1-0 , Drew in SA 1-1(after the 47 all out),beat india 4-0 and beat WI (2-0) .they deserve No.2 in Tests 2.T20 Rankings are unreliable as teams play only 4-5 t20 max in a yr , rnakings based on the small no.of t20 played are useless 3.Aus won odi series in SL(3-2), Sa(2-1) CB tri series and Draw in WI 2-2 since WC 2011 , before WC2011 they beat Eng 6-1 ,despite this aus ranked 4th is not really a true reflection. 4. Aus just lost their first odi series since WC 2011 5.@Peter Walcott Aus annihilated by WI ? Do u really follow cricket Series in WI was 2-2 in odi 1-1 in t20 and 2-0 in tests check facts before posting

Posted by Haleos on (August 9, 2012, 8:08 GMT)

Current situation of world cricket is much better when no one team is dominant. There are top 4-5 teams. Keeps the competition healthy. Unlike when WI and Aus were winning whatever was thrown at them when they were dominent.

Posted by mihir_nam on (August 9, 2012, 7:59 GMT)

@sachinkhairnar5983 India mostly win on flat pitches. Sub Continent conditions. India Test future looks bad ..except Kholi. after Laxman and Sachin departure its difficult to replace them. Pujara,Badrinath not upto the mark. nor Raina,yuvraj. Well lets see series between Australia and Pakistan

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 7:28 GMT)

I am a paki fan but have to say that england deserves this one as since august 2010 they have eben a dominant side except for the world cup and that one series against india.lets review their record since august 2010

they defeated pak in august 2010 by 3-2 at home then they defeated srilanka 3-2 at home then they defeated inda 4-0 at home then they defeated pakistan at abudhabi 4-0 then they defeated australia 4-0 at home and then they defeated westindes at home 2-0 so thats pretty good record for a side in 2 years to be at the number 1 spot

Posted by Rishabh.Mehta on (August 9, 2012, 7:19 GMT)

Can anyone just let me know how is the ranking calculated. What utter rubbish non sense is this?from the cutoff date till today the win loss ratio of england is just 1.33 which is the fifth highest with SAF at 2.1 and Indian at 2.0 How can england be No 1? Please justify the same....This is absolute bullshit.......

Posted by zimmby on (August 9, 2012, 6:57 GMT)

What is this annual update of the ranking table? Isn't this the case that the ranks are updated after every match? Why is there sudden change in ranks even when there are no matches are played? Can anyone explain this to me?

Posted by rahulcricket007 on (August 9, 2012, 6:55 GMT)


Posted by Chris_P on (August 9, 2012, 6:54 GMT)

About right Meety, re: rankings. The World Cup should be worth more points (like Grand Slams in tennis), but the thing many here don't realize is that the rankings are based over a period of time not a particular series. No team is dominant & will lose series, so why quote England lost so & so, or whatever. It is close to about right as there isn't a dominant team & we will be seeing new #1's many times in the next few years. Sustained excellence seems, in the ODI format at least, seems a thing of the past. On another note, had our first training hit on the weekend. Cannot wait for the season to start.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 6:45 GMT)

@Meety -There is a big flaw in your reasoning. Aus were just annihilated by WI recently therefore if you think WI should be ranked No8 then Aus should be ranked No 10 or lower.

Posted by love_4_the_game on (August 9, 2012, 6:28 GMT)

england's true colours will be known only when they start touring away and playing away series. Rite now they are playin at thr comfort zone tat is playin series at home . so its obvious tat they are winning so many matches and No doubt they have a decent record at home in last one half year. i think this england team will not be in the top 4 wen they start touring to sub continents , or Saf or even to Aus.

Posted by MinusZero on (August 9, 2012, 6:03 GMT)

The update is supposed to reflect recent form which is fine for ODI and T20 but Australia second in the test table?

Posted by cricket-is-best on (August 9, 2012, 5:59 GMT)

england no1 in ODIs...statistically might be true..on d outlook its real funny..hahaha..looking back at their pathetic perfomance in world cup..although they did manage the tie against india due to a strauss spcl ! Dint hav any prblem with them being no 1 in tests for a while.d side looks gud despite recent results.bt in oneday, a bit difficult to digest.

Posted by joseyesu on (August 9, 2012, 5:09 GMT)

I don't remember Eng winning outside. Peoples calling Ind as Home winners, but what about Eng. It is fooling peoples.

Posted by g.narsimha on (August 9, 2012, 4:58 GMT)

zaheerhussain - yaa for very short term as we are real no-i in odis , the top 3 teams are seperated just by one point , very shortly .we will be no-i in odis no body can stop us

Posted by QingdaoXI on (August 9, 2012, 4:49 GMT)

@mihr_nam ya it can happen if ICC not control this things and by the way England palyed 38 Matches in this period 20 win 16 loss and 2 tie While India played 35 (Sorry by mistake i wrote 34 in first comment) win 22 loss 10 and 3 tie. Still England goes to the top. This is utter non-sense England should be somewhere down the five Top ODI Team are India, South Africa, Sri lanka, Australia and Pakistan than there is England Joining West Indies, Bangladesh, New Zealand, Ireland and Zimbabwe in another half. There is no quality in England ODI team in Test they do have upto some limit. But if they ditch KP, they are digging there own grave and will back to old pattern soon. Only Cook and too some extent Trott are the quality batsmen in England side in test. In ODis Morgan is one man show, while Swann, broad and Anderson are overrated, Finn is better than them.

Posted by ashish514 on (August 9, 2012, 4:46 GMT)

Ok, some explanation is required here. According to statsguru, since 1st August 2010 India have played 61 ODIs won 38 and lost 19. In the same period England has played 45 ODIs won 24 and lost 18. Among top teams (England, India, Australia, Pakistan, South Africa and Sri Lanka) England have played 38 won 19 and lost 16 and India have played 39 won 21 and lost 14. That means overall W/L ratio is 2 for India and 1.33 for England. Against top teams W/L ratio is 1.5 and 1.18 respectively. How, then England is placed at no. 1. I haven't seen figures for other teams and I agree that they may be even better. Not saying India should be no.1 but it should definitely be above England in ODIs.

First of all, the ranking table says that India have played 30 and Eng 21 ODIs while statsguru has different nos. as stated above. Somebody is making a mistake here. Is it Cricinfo, ICC or me?

Posted by satish619chandar on (August 9, 2012, 4:40 GMT)

What sort of news is this? England and Australia play with England needing 5-0 to become a No.1 team and they win 4-0 to stay second.. Australia are still the top team.. India-SL play and India needing to win by 5-0 to become top team.. And, win by 4-1 to be close second now.. Australia should still be the top team.. Suddenly, new ranking comes up with England as No.1 team a week after without anyone playing any game.. Does this make any sense? England do deserve the No.1 rank in ODI after beating India, Pakistan, Australia and SL last year but this is not the way they should have got it..

Posted by QingdaoXI on (August 9, 2012, 4:38 GMT)

Just trying to remmember last year Aus-thrash Eng 6-1 in world cup Pommies Loose to Irleand and Bangladehs too, than Sri lanka throw them out of quarter final by 10 wickets than they had white wash from world champions 5-0. and Sri Lanka also fighted well in ODI series but loose3-2 . So From 2011 Jan Englands record 1)vs Australia 1-6 2) World cup 3 wins 1 tie 3 loss 3) Vs Sri lanka 3-2 4) vs India 3-0-1(tie) 5)vs India 0-5 6) VS Pakistan 4-0 7) vs West Indies 2-0 8) vs Australia 4-0. Total: Matches 38 Win: 20 loss; 16 tie 2

Posted by mihir_nam on (August 9, 2012, 4:28 GMT)

Good Congratulations to ECB...Good hiring of south Africans and Irish .helped them reach the status in ODI where they wanted..I remember England in Late 90's early 2000's with Micheal Atherthon and Butcher they were always playing for a Draw in ODI's.. Well when will true team made of XI English born will be playing for England or just South African imports are waiting, I understand Irish as they don't get much exposure or have test status they switch to England..What about South Africans. What if tomorrow.. China or USA. take 2 players from each full member country , Good players..will they be playing test if all players qualify under immigration and ICC criteria

Posted by QingdaoXI on (August 9, 2012, 3:30 GMT)

During the ranking Period India has played 55 matches and it shows just 30 matches on table anything wrong: See India Record during this period 1) Vs Australia 1-0 2) New Zealand 5-0 3) South Africa 2-3 4) World cup 7 wins, 1 tie 1 loss 5) 3-2 vs West Indies 4) 0-3 vs England (1 tie), 5) 5-0 England 6)4-1 West Indies 7) Tri nation in Aus: 3Win 4 loss 1 tie 8) Asia Cup 2-1 9) Sri Lanka 4-1 So in total Matches 55 Won 36 Loss 16 Tie 3.In this period India loss 4 vs South Africa, 3 vs West Indies 3 vs Australia, 3 vs England, 2 vs Sri Lanka and 1 vs Bangladesh.On this basis whatever the rank India got that is not the problem for me, but the problem is how come they calculate the rankings saying only 30 matches from last 2 years. If we Calculate from last year Aug still India played: 34 Won 22 Loss 10 Tie 2. So how they calculated 30matches in two year?

Posted by Meety on (August 9, 2012, 3:27 GMT)

@Ahmed Hussain - I've seen your posts & agree, you are an honest & reliable commenter, just want to know, what method did you use to come up with your rankings???? @Trickstar - the problem is, like when India became #1 in tests, nobody really thought they'd done much to earn it. I've just done an analysis where 75% of Oz ODI series in the ratings period were overseas. Except in the W/Cup, we've only had 3 games against Bangladesh (away), that could be described loosely as "easy", (Ireland game was washed out). No other top contender has had that quirk of scheduling, the ratings at the moment are meaningless, on win/loss ratios - India are #1 & deserve a bonus for being the cureent W/Cup holders, although they've played a lot in familiar conditions & performed poorly/(or below par), in foreign conditions. Sth Africa have played 3 games against Zimbabwe in the ratings period! Head to head between Oz & Eng - it's still 6-5 to Oz!

Posted by Meety on (August 9, 2012, 3:19 GMT)

By rights, the Rankings should be 1. India, 2. Sth Africa, 3. Pakistan, 4. Australia, 5. England, 6. Sri Lanka, 7. Bangladesh, 8. WIndies, 9. Ireland, 10. NZ. That is on a win/loss ratio SINCE August 2010 (the ratings period). Oz have lost 3 series in that time including a 1-0 loss in India, but won the tri-nations which included 2 of the best ranked sides at the time. These adjustments do nothing for the integrity of the rankings. In the ranking period - whilst England recently trounced Oz 4-0, the 1-6 result in Oz is still rated. 9 out of the 12 series Oz have competed in during this period were overseas, India were away 6/11 series, Sth Africa had 4/7 at HOME, including 3 matches (10%) of their games v Zimbabwe, England played 5/10 series (1 of their "away" series was v Ireland, they lost matches in the W/Cup to Ireland & Bangladesh). Pakistan has of course no home games, & whilst having done well in the W/Cup have played NINE games against Bang, Zim, Ireland & Afghanistan!

Posted by Vivekaks on (August 9, 2012, 3:10 GMT)

@Trickstar...England lost the t20 ranking the same way they rose to the ODI summit....so dont lament about anything!!! Everyone knows how POMS are in ODIs...

Posted by pulkit10 on (August 9, 2012, 3:08 GMT)

Meh. That's my reaction. Hardly a dominant side away from home. They were demolished in India - literally. Sure, they won a couple of series at home but if that's the measure we are using then surely both India and Australia have a claim to the #1 spot too, no? Personally, I think both SA and India are more talented than this ODI side. India may be strictly average in tests (now) but they are a formidable ODI outfit.

As for T20s & tests, they look very good there and are about where I would rate them based on recent performances (2nd in tests however). They've done amazingly well in the T20 format and that's remarkable when you factor in the volatile nature of that game.

Posted by chatha2011 on (August 9, 2012, 2:46 GMT)

To all the England disparagers, Australia and Pakistan have been whitewashed in One day Internationals by England this year.

Posted by   on (August 9, 2012, 2:11 GMT)

Well, that was a short stint for India at number 2.

Posted by Badgerofdoom on (August 9, 2012, 1:05 GMT)

Englands recent ODI form is very good having recently beat Aus 4-0, WI 2-0 and Pak 4-0, this is not so surprising if you've actually been paying attention to the results.

Posted by ThePieChucker on (August 9, 2012, 0:46 GMT)

@Shan156: If you were paying attention to world cricket, Sachin Tendulkar scored two Test centuries during India's 2010/2011 tour of South Africa. But at any rate, how did this comment thread degenerate into a debate over Tendulkar? Let's all keep it to England, and whether they deserve or don't deserve the No. 1 ODI ranking.

Posted by Shan156 on (August 9, 2012, 0:38 GMT)

How come Indian fans claim that SA should be ranked #1 in ODIs? Their recent ODI record is not better than either England's or India's. @svenkat02, how did you work out that Australia deserve to be at the top of the rankings? Based on what? And, if England deserve to be ranked below India because we lost 0-5 in India, how come you rank Pakistan above England even though we beat them 4-0 in UAE. Thank goodness, you don't determine these rankings. Of course, you need to be given some credit for not ranking England below Bangladesh and Ireland just because we lost to these two nations in the world cup.

Posted by svenkat02 on (August 8, 2012, 23:57 GMT)

Funny to see a team that doesn't regard the ODI format to be of any importance, being called the No.1 ODI side in the world!!! England are just lucky to be there at the top now, and pretty soon they will be dethroned by someone (either SA or India depending on who plays more ODI's in upcoming months). Right now in ODI's, its Australia, South Africa, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and then England....

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 23:31 GMT)

@Sitanshu Shekhar...Yeah I agree with you as well but I only put England in 1st position for Tests only just mainly because they have been playing far more games than South Africa and results overall showed England still pretty competitive which is why I just about placed them as Number 1 but nevertheless, they're still pretty poor away in whatever format but South Africa should if not this Test Series but the next Test Series against Australia will finally show the Cricketing World whether they're the best team in the World. Ideally for ODIs and T20s, the ranking system should include at least upto 16 teams so that it would be a good way to develop the Associate nations and look good for Crickets sake. Everyone knows England are Number 1 because of player exports and I'm sure had it been all English born players, they would've been around 3-5 where they usually belong instead of 1-3.

Posted by Vilander on (August 8, 2012, 23:13 GMT)


Test - 1 ODI - 1 T20 - 2 by a whisker

England = Dominant.

bad time to be an Ind or Aussie cric fan :'(

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 22:47 GMT)

@ Ahmed Hussain, absolutely spot on. I would only swap England and South Africa for the Test Rankings. I believe the saffas are a better test side overall.

Posted by Trickstar on (August 8, 2012, 22:44 GMT)

How can a team that got beat by India 5-0 be No1, well let me see, they beat the same team INDIA 3-0, PAKISTAN 4-0, AUSTRALIA 4-0, SL 3-2, WI 2-0 they beat SA in their own back yard 2-1 not that long before, when was the last time SA beat England in one day cricket anyway. So England have played 26, won 17 and lost 7 and a tie. Some people are calling for SA to be No1 , why what have they done in the last year, played 11 won 7 lost 4, not even close. It's amazing how many cricket fans don't seem to follow cricket and then moan because of their own lack of knowledge, it is funny though. The biggest joke is how have England been moved off the top of the twenty20 rankings, when they've hardly lost the game since being made WC, in the last 3 years they've only lost 7 games out of 25, that is some record.

Posted by Trickstar on (August 8, 2012, 22:29 GMT)

These replies are hilarious and to the guy who said this is the team that lost to India 5-0, yes but it's also the same team that beat India 4-0 LOL and Aus 4-0 and SL 3-2 and Pakistan 4-0, the facst are there for all to see, no matter how more crying you Indians do, England have played 20 won 15 and only lost 5, some record that, anyone get close the last 12 months. the bleating is beyond pathetic, if England don't deserve it, then who SA have played 11 won 7 lost 4 the past 12 months, no where near as good as England.

Posted by Shan156 on (August 8, 2012, 22:20 GMT)

@Sayantan Bhattacharya, when was the last time Sachin Tendulkar scored a century outside the sub-continent?

Posted by Shan156 on (August 8, 2012, 22:19 GMT)

@Praveen Kannan Chakravarthy, perhaps if you follow cricket outside India, you will know that England also beat Pakistan 4-0 in the UAE. ok England is not the best ODI side since they lost 0-5 to India. Please explain how India can be the best ODI side when they lost 0-3 to England and in Australia and also lost the Asia cup. If I remember correctly, they did not even qualify for the finals in the tri-nation series in Australia and the Asia cup.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 22:14 GMT)

As an honest and reliable Cricket fan, this is how I think the rankings should be based on the performances since 2010 till now - ODIs 1.South Africa, 2.India, 3.England, 4.Australia, 5.Pakistan, 6.Sri Lanka, 7.West Indies, 8.Bangladesh, 9.New Zealand, 10.Ireland, 11.Zimbabwe, 12.Netherlands, 13.Kenya. For Tests - 1.England, 2.South Africa, 3.Australia, 4.Pakistan, 5.India, 6.Sri Lanka, 7.West Indies, 8.New Zealand, 9.Zimbabwe, 10.Bangladesh. As for T20s, there's really no point in arguing over those rankings as of yet because if you still remember, that ranking system is new and was only in place at the end of last year but the World T20 Championship will show where everyone is at that format for sure.

Posted by frozendilemma on (August 8, 2012, 21:59 GMT)

I`m sure If India would`ve gotten on the top of these rankings there wouldn't have been any backlash but folks cant stand England`s rise in Cricket...Give it a rest guys...The article clearly states that the two years where Australia was good are discarded therefore England rose up...simple as that...

Posted by 360review on (August 8, 2012, 21:50 GMT)

This article is a perfect fit for Page2

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 21:48 GMT)

This is totally scrap. On what basis ICC decides ranking excluding all matches between Aug-July

Posted by Natesan333 on (August 8, 2012, 21:39 GMT)

@ashes61 What is ashes? Did they name a trophy after you or something?!!

Posted by bigwonder on (August 8, 2012, 21:39 GMT)

@ashes61, you are one of those fans that lives in Fantasy Cricket. Thanks for saying what Indian fans would have taken 20+ comments to say. ICC continues to disappoint in disclosing how they come up with weird rankings - just like their push for DRS. If you feel England deserves #1 in ODI - even after getting white-washed in India within last 12 months, then India still deserves to have #1 in Test. Anyway, #1 status is like a religion to England.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 21:17 GMT)

I think people have forgotten that England have so far not lost a one day game this year since the 5-0 whitewash against India last year. They won 4-0 against PAK, 2-0 against WI and 4-0 against AUS. That's 10 straight wins with 2 games being abandoned without a ball being bowled. People think those matches count for very little.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 20:55 GMT)

utter rubbish. very difficult to understand on what basis england is number one team in the world.

Posted by Chapel on (August 8, 2012, 20:54 GMT)

Biggest joke of the year so far.ICC doing everything to keep England at the top in all formats

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 20:52 GMT)

I wonder how in the name of Mary Poppins did England manage to go to 1st spot... In the last 1 year, England played 15 ODIs in total. They won 8, lost 5 and tied 1 overall. I definitely don't understand how they became No.1 though other teams such as SA have better record than them...

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (August 8, 2012, 20:50 GMT)

@AndyZaltzmannshair: hahahahah !! Your comment brought a big smile across my face. Cute little penguins !!! Awwww.... LOL.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 20:46 GMT)

I think No1 ODI ranking isn't accurate, the rankings are a bit messed up, apart from the series in UAE against Pakistan, England win most of their ODI's at home. However, they did beat India and Australia at home convincingly. Won T20 WC and only 2 South Africans. Winning a WC at home was fairly impressive, but nothing more than that if you are going to dismiss what SA and England have achieved.

England win a lot at home granted, but they won a test match SL and the Ashes away. I think its a great time in international cricket, little between Eng, SA, India ,SL Pakistan and Aus - on their day and (especially at home) they can all beat each other with some great players. We should be celebrating that, rather making slightly immature and inacurrate digs at each other.

Posted by Anil_m on (August 8, 2012, 20:41 GMT)

instead of doing an annual update why aren't the rankings calculated on a running basis for matches dating back to 2 years at any given time?

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 20:40 GMT)

This foolish team doesn't even deserve to be in the rankings table....i don't know how come this blunders can happen in icc as well ???

Posted by ashes61 on (August 8, 2012, 20:21 GMT)

Oh dear ... that's torn it! Cue for next deluge of posts from our Indian friends. "The rankings are flawed, ENG don't deserve this position, they can't win away, will be toppled by S Africa, buried by India this winter, India are the real No 1." Our Indian friends may not believe this, but I reckon 99% of ENG cricket fans have no interest whatsoever in the rankings, were utterly unaware of them until recently (about the time we heard shrill noises here amanating from the sub-continent a year or so ago) and would prefer to win a series against S Africa or India just for the sake of winning it. These so-called "world rankings" (Test, ODI or T20) are never going to replace the importance of the Ashes in a hundred years, and nor is any cricket World Cup - ODI or T20 version. It's great to see ENG & SA tussle for the d'Oliveira Trophy - a very worthwhile & aptly named trophy - but the effect the series has on the supposed rankings is irrelevant to most of us.

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (August 8, 2012, 20:21 GMT)

Absolute FARCE is what the ICC rankings are. I know England beat Australia recently but that shouldn't be enough by any means to propel them to a no.1 spot. Absolutely outrageous by the ICC. I have lost my belief in these guys ages back. I can only laugh at all this. Anyway I hope England stick to this rank at least for a while cause the their test status is not guaranteed to be no.1 for long.

Posted by kalyanbk on (August 8, 2012, 20:18 GMT)

Was this not the team that not too long ago lost to Ireland?

Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (August 8, 2012, 20:15 GMT)

"Annual update" indeed... that's about as much use as a glass cricket bat against a lead cricket ball. Are these the same tables that have the likes of Steyn and Siddle listed as all-rounders? Players/teams that have not played for AGES are still there, and sometimes higher placed than those that have played a lot? Fantastic! Let's break out the champagne eh?

Posted by akpy on (August 8, 2012, 20:06 GMT)

Green track bullies who can't play outside, never won a world cup and 50% team made of south Africans, Irish, etc....hahaha...this rubbish view of mine is only for those English fans always pulling down Indian team...

Posted by sachin_vvsfan on (August 8, 2012, 20:05 GMT)

These rankings are funny. ENG becomes num 1 from no where (oh please no bashing here) When was the last time they played ODIs ? After one T20 IND jumped from num 8 to 3rd and Aus slipped to 9th without playing any t20 in recent times.

Posted by warneneverchuck on (August 8, 2012, 20:03 GMT)

Very soon ENG wil be at the bottom of the table

Posted by crindo77 on (August 8, 2012, 20:01 GMT)

ICC rankings are hilarious and ultimately inconsequential in the current context ( unless you are a fan of any team starved of any major international cricketing success since the, say, 1900s). The team which won most Tests at home, and lost non-stop away for the last year is still no 1 ( well for a few more days at least), and the ODI World champions are no 4. Partly the fluid nature of current team performances is to blame, and its more a case of first among equals. Only SA stand out, as they win consistently away. ICC could make some money out magic 8 ball toys. It would be thrilling to see your 8ball predict the rankings; as it stands now, it appears ICC are using a few themselves.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 19:58 GMT)

Always nice to win at home. When was the last time Ian Bell scored a Century outside England?

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 19:55 GMT)

They inventors of the game gets due respect after a long time.....

Posted by bigdhonifan on (August 8, 2012, 19:47 GMT)

Going to lose that after their next match....

Posted by jimmy777 on (August 8, 2012, 19:29 GMT)


Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 19:29 GMT)

ridiculous.. England lost 5-0 against India... they cant be No 1... it has to be SA

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 19:26 GMT)

I dont understand what england achived in ODIs

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 19:09 GMT)

how can a team that was defeated 5-0 by India not so long ago can be No.1 ODI team ? just cant understand this ranking system... totally rubbish...

Posted by satzzz on (August 8, 2012, 19:09 GMT)

But how all of a sudden this change in places? generally test ranking updation will happen only after a series is over but ODI ranking updation will happenn on the end of each n every ODI. By changing the rankings all of a sudden is ICC communicating to us that there is some logical errors in ranking systems followed all these days. Just because India marched to 2nd rank ICC can't push England to top rank.

If this ranking system is correct then is the previous system wrong? Or if that is correct on what basis England has been given top spot?

Can someone explain me these details as i am totally confused with this sudden change in the rankings all of a sudden.

Posted by the_wallster on (August 8, 2012, 19:05 GMT)

This only confirms England's label as the 'best' team in the world. Top of the tree in all three formats, and despite being 2nd in t20 rankings, are the current World champions. And to all the jealous cynics, I'd much rather be in our position than any other country....

Posted by pawaramol22 on (August 8, 2012, 18:59 GMT)

...it all makes sense only if KP is in the team

Posted by AndyZaltzmannsHair on (August 8, 2012, 18:57 GMT)

Wait till you guys play the penguins in antarctica. They're masters of their conditions, and we know humans can't tolerate extreme cold. Those penguin flipper bowlers are awesome on ice tracks.

Posted by natmastak_so-called on (August 8, 2012, 18:50 GMT)

when was the last time they beat India in India in ODIs ? and, this is for all those who will come up with 4-0,against half fit India in English ,wet conditions .

Posted by jay_vkjay on (August 8, 2012, 18:49 GMT)

Australia,s rankings in all the 3 formats looks pathetic. India may have struggled a little bit in tests, but still they are far better in shorter formats. Australia never had a great young batsman since Clarke. All others making debut at late 20's or early 30's. They never used their fresh talents well. Callum Ferguson is one man,i think can serve the Aussie cricket for long. He is far better than Peter Forrest. Anyway tough luck Australia and well done England and SA.....

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:38 GMT)

what a joke,sometimes stats betray the true picture

Posted by xylo on (August 8, 2012, 18:35 GMT)

The No.1 spot in tests, ODIs and T20s has become a joke ever since Australia began to wane. Where is the aura of the No.1?

Posted by serious-am-i on (August 8, 2012, 18:28 GMT)

These rankings are just meaningless honestly. Don't have a clue how some teams went up & how some went down. ICC should really make rankings system more transparent, they shouldn't be as hard as D/L method to understand.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:25 GMT)

A team which lost 5-0 to India in ODIs is ranked First. The rankings just amuse me as India and South Africa have been the best ODI sides throughout last year and they fall behind England, a team which has only home success to its credit in the past year. Someone please explain the ranking systems please...

Posted by Omarrz on (August 8, 2012, 18:21 GMT)

Pakistan's rating points are 119 (same as Srilanka) whereas West Indies and India both have 111 and yet they are above Pakistan in T20I rankings?

Posted by dicky_boy on (August 8, 2012, 18:21 GMT)


Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:20 GMT)

joke of the century england higher than saf. and how big a difference can there be between 121 and 120. just wondering

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:19 GMT)

probably the joke of the year lol

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:14 GMT)

how can Pakistan be 6th in t20 rating while having 119 rating points. Pakistan should be 4th.correct it please.

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:12 GMT)

Bangladesh ranked higher than Australia HAHAHA....actually didn't expect that one bit but I'm glad they have closed the gap amongst the top 8 teams in ODIs, only 3 behind New Zealand and hopefully we can top them but really hope teams like Ireland, Zimbabwe and Kenya get to play enough ODI games so that the ranking table for ODIs means something and is structured well. Nevertheless I'm still not a fan of this ranking system and we can all see something is wrong especially in the amount of games played since August 2010 till today because the likes of India, Australia, England have played far more games than what the ranking table already suggests.

Posted by shewal on (August 8, 2012, 18:10 GMT)

I suppose there was an article saying "India moved to No 2" after series win against Sri Lanka... with no one played any ODI after that; how does ratings changed & India moved to 3...

Posted by   on (August 8, 2012, 18:04 GMT)

Aussies 9th in T20.. ever imagined they will be in rock bottom in a table a few years back when they were dominating the world of cricket!!

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days