Recent Results

3rd Test	England	v	India
Pre-rating	1280.06		1164.66
Form	+53.25		-44.80
Expected Margin	England by 108 runs
Actual Margin	England by an innings and 242 runs
Post-rating	1310.97		1133.86

There is a certain amount of irony that the conclusion of this test occured immediately prior to the release of the Argus Review into Australian cricket. The former result was the third comprehensive one in succession for India, and one of the largest victories in cricket history. In ratings terms, the best game by England in the post-war period. The Australian review, highlighting weak techniques and thoughtless, ineffective bowling against England could just as easily apply to India. Which raises the interesting question:

Are India (and Australia) actually playing poorly, or are England making them play poorly, through the sustained excellence of their cricket.

Because England don't look like a great side; their bowling is only a touch over medium-pace, their fielding solid, but not brilliant, their batting boring, if still fast-scoring once the opposition are exhausted. But they give nothing away. In fact, they probably give less away than possibly any team that has ever played the game; and over the course of four innings, that adds up to a lot of runs.

India, suffering still with injuries, and bereft of confidence, played (with one or two exceptions) as if they'd been beaten before the game began. Which in a sense, they had, by their failure to prepare, and by England's meticulous training and near perfect execution. Traditionally, great players who thrive on the back of technical excellence and careful execution are under-valued: Dravid, Barrington, Flower in his playing days, and even McGrath. We may find out soon whether a side of talented but not exceptional individuals can dominate cricket like modern baseliners did tennis: by making very few mistakes.

Rankings at 18th August 2011
1.	England	1310.97
2.	South Africa	1180.15
3.	India	1133.86
4.	Australia	1125.02
5.	Sri Lanka	1070.23
6.	West Indies	922.70
7.	New Zealand	885.38
8.	Bangladesh	617.01
9.	Zimbabwe	552.33
10.	Ireland	556.46
11.	Afghanistan	518.44
12.	Scotland	436.06
13.	Namibia	400.40
14.	Kenya	338.92
15.	U.S.A.	296.99
16.	Uganda	268.44
17.	U.A.E.	204.63
18.	Netherlands	202.55
19.	Nepal	196.51
20.	Canada	164.19
21.	Hong Kong	148.65
22.	Cayman Is	134.24
23.	Malaysia	123.90
24.	Bermuda	105.40

Shaded teams have played fewer than 2 games per season. Non-test team ratings are not comparable to test ratings as they don't play each other.

Cricket - Ratings - Test 21st August, 2011 19:13:27   [#] 

Comments

Ratings - 18th August 2011
Hi Russel, I was looking over your posts and saw that you have a completed cricket database posted an year back. I have been looking for a such a database for a long time now and was wondering if you would be willing to share an updated one. Would be really helpful for my analysis.
Ganesh  30th August, 2011 06:24:52  

Ratings - 18th August 2011
Ganesh, I periodically do updates to the file in question. At the moment it is correct to the World Cup. I will do another one shortly, as part of my summer season rollover. Instructions on the post also tell you how to update it yourself, if that is easier.
Russ  22nd October, 2011 08:45:19