ICC news

De Villiers joins Amla at the top of ODI rankings

ESPNcricinfo staff

March 25, 2013

Comments: 28 | Text size: A | A

Shakib back as No. 1 ODI allrounder

  • Shakib Al Hasan has regained his position as the No. 1 ODI allrounder in the world in the latest ICC rankings. He takes over from Mohammad Hafeez who had risen to the top spot in January.
  • The most interesting aspect of this change in rankings is that Shakib hasn't played an ODI since May 22, 2012 in the Asia Cup final. He missed the West Indies ODIs at home in December through a stress fracture on his shin, and isn't playing in the ODI series in Sri Lanka either.

AB de Villiers has joined Hashim Amla at the top of the ICC ODI batting rankings following an excellent series with the bat against Pakistan, which South Africa won 3-2. De Villiers scored three half-centuries and a century in five games, averaging 91.75. Both he and Amla are now tied on 882 points in the rankings.

De Villiers, who scored 367 runs in that series, had previously reached the top of the ODI rankings in May 2010. Tillakaratne Dilshan, who scored a century against Bangladesh in the first ODI in Hambantota, has moved up three places to No.7 and Virat Kohli is currently at No.3.

There's only one more ODI remaining before the April 1 cut-off date, and India have retained their position at the top of the table. England are No.2, and could have been displaced by South Africa had the latter beaten Pakistan 4-1 in the recently-concluded series. But a 3-2 win meant England kept their place.

India, being No.1, will collect a cheque of US$175,000 together with the shield at the next ICC awards, and England will receive US$75,000 for taking the second place.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by AllroundCricketFan on (March 27, 2013, 14:40 GMT)

AB and Amla - 2 of the games greatest batsmen. We have been witnessing history from these 2 great cricketers. Never in the modern history of the sport has 2 batsmen from the same team performed teh way these 2 are. Maybe India in the 90's. Anyone can guess other pairings as amazing as these 2?

Posted by adidvlliers on (March 27, 2013, 11:42 GMT)

ab u r d best n u deserve it.....d best batsman from 2008 n still going on ........ gr8 show AB.wish u all d best

Posted by ----LoveTheWayLionsPlay--- on (March 27, 2013, 8:54 GMT)

totally agree with @ KallisTheGreatest

Posted by   on (March 27, 2013, 7:31 GMT)

India build up their ratings from the worldcup win and were probably a lot of points in front. Thats why after loosing some games and series did not change their no 1 spot. Lets say if SA lost to india in india SA will stil be ranked the no 1 team as their rating points will still be better than india's and the rest.

Posted by shovwar on (March 26, 2013, 18:53 GMT)

@romanticstud.....Bro...Pak lost the series to an unsettled SA (baring the last odi) team. The games SA won where pretty comprehensive. The SA batsmen did not get away they demolished Pak bowling when got their chances. Show some respect to the best batsmen of the world Amla and Devilliers. They snatched the victory when got the chance and nullified Ajmal. They did not get away like a fish they attacked the pak bowlers like Lions and succeeded in 3 out of 5 times which is the major portion. You could have said Pak got away with 2 victories somehow. But unlike u I would respect the 2 victories by pak. They deserved those 2 victories. But SA was the Better team in both TEST and ODI.

Posted by half_blood-prince on (March 26, 2013, 17:30 GMT)

if we consider playing more matches would lead to higher rank..then pakistani team,bowlers.,batsmen should top t20 ranking..bt they are behind india and no batsman in top 10.plus..while preparing the rankings winnings are taken into account over which team it has come..india#1 in odi and missed 2 in test..on which spots sl and pak are?

Posted by akc5247 on (March 26, 2013, 17:01 GMT)

@Altaf - as @VermaAjay says, ratings is decided by match points based on the # of matches played by that team.

While I respect your opinions, it is to be remembered that ANY team can only play against based on who their opposition is, on a given day. You cannot say BD is bad, or WI is bad, because on a given day, ANY team can be great, or bad, or mediocre, and still win their game.

That is the beauty of the game, and if not for that, there would be no charm, heart breaks and surge of emotions.

Posted by Nadeem1976 on (March 26, 2013, 16:53 GMT)

AB deserve to be at top of the world. He is anti chock and i believe that SA has great chance under AB to win Champions trophy and WC . AB is really innovative player.

Posted by AltafPatel on (March 26, 2013, 15:42 GMT)

India got advantage of winning against poor Westindies, Newzealand. Their 3-0 lost in England and winning 1 of 8 ODIs in Australia are overshadowed. Theoretically they are No. 1 but we know how much they deserve.

Posted by Romanticstud on (March 26, 2013, 6:54 GMT)

It is a strange game cricket ... If you win the toss ... you can decide to bat or bowl ... If the game gets away from you ... You find it hard to come back ... If it is your day and get off to a flyer the other team find it hard to come back ... Pakistan were placed in the situation where their bowlers won them the game on two occasions ... The other times the batsmen of South Africa got away ... like that fish on the end of the line ... just to reel it in to see nothing ...

Posted by   on (March 26, 2013, 4:08 GMT)

@ all who are thinking india has played more so they got more ratings..dudes rating point is dicided by total match point / no. of match.. So it does not matter which team has played more or less matches..and there is some qualification in terms of no. of matches by team to be eligible to get a rank..

Posted by karthikramnatarajan on (March 25, 2013, 22:46 GMT)

People commenting here need to understand that the number of matches do not matter, as the rating points is an average over the number of matches played... Please know how things are calculated before commenting on it...

Posted by LordKratos on (March 25, 2013, 20:54 GMT)

In Rugby we have Dan Carter in Soccer we have Messi and in Cricket we have AB de villiers

Posted by   on (March 25, 2013, 20:12 GMT)

crickeet you must be asleep or something india lost to england back in 2011 india won the series this year 3-2 asia cup was back in march of 2012, india and pakistan had a 3 match series it was 2-1 which india lost,then india beat srilanka couple of months ago in srilanka 4-1 in odi series, india also beat england 4-0 in 2012 in india,they won the series against west indies which was just last year and recently

Posted by   on (March 25, 2013, 19:56 GMT)

One day cricket performances tend to be erratic given the nature of the game. You lose a few early wickets and you always on the back foot. Hence world cups are much of a lottery- one blasting performance from Samuels handed Windies the world cup but they are clearly not the best team around. On the day any of the top 5/6 teams can win...thats what makes cricket exciting...lets hope it stays that way...makes for much more interesting viewing!

Posted by Warm_Coffee on (March 25, 2013, 19:47 GMT)

Its pretty funny they award money for teams being ranked 1 and 2 when really its because they played far more matches than anybody else meaning the matches teams like Pakistan, New Zealand, Bangladesh etc play these days, no matter if they win their small amount still struggle to claim third or fourth place. No doubt South Africa are clear number 1 in tests but teams like England and India even Australia play far too much Cricket than any other team. But I do agree with those about the player rankings which is perfectly fine as you earn points for based on how well you played over a particular period of time.

Posted by AKS286 on (March 25, 2013, 18:58 GMT)

NO comments & no formula They simply deserve this.

Posted by coolguypavan on (March 25, 2013, 18:35 GMT)

@ CrICkeeet: India won matches whenever it was Important to win... not like pak loosing in decider, or WI completing whitewash against minnows or S.L. showing superiority against low ranked team or Aussies wining against W.I. India defeated teams those at that point of time were ranked higher or lost to those who ranked below.

Posted by   on (March 25, 2013, 17:31 GMT)

Dear all we don't live in a perfect world as the point system, we also need to look at who play's more home and away matches it does make a diffrence which we just find out on Ind-Aus Series . For me in last 3-4 years England is the most improve side to be able to be in top of all 3 formats

Posted by dariuscorny on (March 25, 2013, 17:12 GMT)

so who shud be no.1 pak, who lost hands down to SA or just winning aginst Ind makes them no 1...that too was a narrow one and also they faltered chasing mere 167

Posted by srinu92 on (March 25, 2013, 16:49 GMT)

India hasn't done well but the same goes with others also. India is no.1 only because all others didn't do well.

Posted by   on (March 25, 2013, 16:33 GMT)

Obviously people hate this stupid ranking system, which is heavily weighted in favor of the biggies: England, Australia and India. Since all of the teams don't have the same opportunities to play one another, and some teams hardly even get scheduled to play, it is unfair and therefore meaningless. Remember when England scheduled West Indies to play them in England in the winter? Did anyone really think that Windies had a chance. Teams like Bangla and Zim are not given any games against the biggies. And good teams like Ireland and Afghanistan are not even considered for anything other than second class play. Let's face it, this old boys club cricket is a big joke!

Posted by   on (March 25, 2013, 16:30 GMT)

Looking to see AB back to the top of test batting rating.Best cricketer.Another brilliant performance.

Posted by KallisTheGreatest on (March 25, 2013, 16:22 GMT)

This ranking system is a joke. How can Sunil Narine earn 78 rating points after two ordinary t20 perfomances against lowly ranked Zimbabwe??? btw Kumar Sangakkara only earned 8 rating points after hitting two hundreds in 1st test against Bangladesh.

Posted by CrICkeeet on (March 25, 2013, 16:08 GMT)

I dont knw hw can india rnkng 1 in odi..... lost in ASIA cup 4m d group stage (including low ranked Ban defeat), lost d tri series in aus, lost against pak nd beat eng by 3-2 minimum distance........ so?

Posted by KingAjmal on (March 25, 2013, 16:07 GMT)

I agree as well, there is no way India ranked that high in those formats just play more matches than anybody else. Number 1 in one-day Cricket but they got knocked out of CB and Asia Cup plus lost the ODI series to Pakistan at home. Player rankings are fine as they based it on recent performances but team rankings don't tell the whole story.

Posted by arkkrish on (March 25, 2013, 15:40 GMT)

India lost the tri series in Aus, Asia Cup, bi-lateral series to Pak, won 3-2 against Eng, how come they are no.1?

Posted by The_Ashes on (March 25, 2013, 15:37 GMT)

I don't understand team rankings because the matches greatly varies from top to bottom. Teams like Pakistan and West Indies with the amount of Cricket they got coming along with others like New Zealand, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, no matter if they win them all, still not good enough to achieve 2nd position let alone 1st. I'm not a Pakistan fan but they are definitely much better than India in any format but yet India because of the matches they have played are ranked above them this is just one example.

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
Related Links
Players/Officials: AB de Villiers
Series/Tournaments: Pakistan tour of South Africa
Teams: South Africa
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days