Before proceeding, go through part one and two of the three part series of the flawed ICC ranking system
Test Ranking
Ever since the ranking system was introduced, West Indies, Australia, India, England, South Africa & Pakistan have been ranked as the best team but not necessarily in the same order. As discussed before, South Africa, West Indies (when they were in their peak) & Australia certainly deserved that exalted status. There are quite a few misgivings whenever England were ranked as the best though I do think they deserve every bit. The other two teams, India & Pakistan, do they really deserve to be ranked as the best? Pakistan certainly not.
If the ranking system is applied to the teams who were ranked at the top, we can easily find that except for South Africa, Australia & England, none of the other teams even deserve to be considered for the top ranking. India are yet to win in South Africa despite more than 6 series. Pakistan are yet to win in Australia & South Africa. Their first series win in West Indies was recent and infact it was achieved against a poor West Indian side and not against the excellent teams of the 70s, 80s & 90s. Pakistan have lost 12 consecutive tests in Australia. Sri Lanka, New Zealand, West Indies & the rest have to win in multiple countries.
Australia, South Africa & England remain the only teams to have won atleast one series in every country over the last 25 years. If their series and test wins outside their home country were given due importance, one of them would have been the top ranked team over the last 25 years. Shouldn’t that be the aim of any ranking system that only the best is ranked at the top?
Present performance
Questions will arise. What about the present performance of the teams? South Africa who were exceptional until a few years ago have notw lost 5 consecutive tests against Sri Lanka including a couple in their own country. England keep losing to the West Indies consistently. Australia lost their most recent series in Sri Lanka 3-0. They have also lost their last couple of series in India including a 4-0 humiliation. How is that fair if these teams are ranked as the top team despite so many failures? It does make a fair point. However, the challengers to the top position, India, Pakistan & New Zealand, were humiliated in a lot of series as well.
India are consistently thrashed by England over the last three series. About Pakistan, the less said the better. New Zealand will have to be even more consistent. All of these brings us back to the basic criteria. Has the team who has been ranked at the top have won one series in every country they have ever played? If the answer is no, then that top cannot be ranked at the top. This will be a much fairer representation of the ranking system.
One Day Ranking
The flawed ICC ranking system in One Day is even more glaring. Cricket is a game that gives lot of importance to number 3. Number 3 batsman is considered is pivot of a batting order. Three consecutive fours or 3 consecutive sixes are talked about. Hattrick which is so special in the game that it is given a lot of importance. Hence, it is only natural that three consecutive World Cup wins is also considered special and recognised appropriately. On the contrary, the exact opposite is the case currently.
Australia over a period of 12 years won three consecutive World Cups between 1999 & 2007. The second significant factor is that all these wins were achieved in different continents in wildly different playing conditions. 1999 in England, 2003 in South Africa & 2007 in West Indies. It was a hattrick. Not only that they won three consecutive World Cups, in two of them, they remained unbeaten throughout. These are statistics that cannot be replicated by other teams. For the rest, even winning one World Cup is a pipedream and on the otherhand, Australia goes onto win three. It was the pinnacle of achievements.
Hard to replicate Australia’s success
It just isn’t possible to achieve more unless another team wins four consecutive World Cups. These wins must have ensured that Australia remain the top ranked one day team for another 10 years post 2007. Every World Cup win must carry an additional 5-10 points with consecutive wins carrying another 15 points. Unfortunately, it wasn’t. After a few years, just by losing a few games, Australia lost their pre-eminent position. This is not only unfair but totally unjust because it essentially means that the number of World Cup wins does not really matter. When it comes to One Day Cricket, it is only World Cup that every team and most of the watching population cares about. Gone are the days when bi-lateral series used to carry a lot of importance.
Nowadays, every team prepares their strategy right at the end of one World Cup. India’s quest for Number 4 starting from the end of the 2015 World Cup is a case in point. If such an important event does not have additional points, what is the point in having such tournament?
South Africa, England, India, Pakistan & New Zealand can easily qualify for the top spot because all of them have won atleast one One Day series in every country. However, Australia’s unprecedented success at the World Cups must matter a lot more than just series wins.
Conclusion
An ideal ranking system must satisfy a lot of criteria. The ones who are ranked below the top ranked team must look upto them, try to win as many games and as many series in as many countries as the top ranked team have achieved and aspire to dethrone the current number one team. The ICC will have to invest into designing and implementing a system that is if not perfect, should atleast be nearer to the perfect system.
What do you think of the flawed ICC ranking system? Is there a scope for improvement? Do you agree with the views?