Steyn Number 1, But Are the Ratings Fair?
3 days ago I asked you "How Good is Dale Steyn?"
Last evening the ICC answered that question when they released the latest international cricketer ratings after the conclusion of the West Indies - Sri Lanka test match.
Dale Steyn is the new number 1 in the test bowler ratings and he jointly leads the table with Muttiah Muralitharan; both having a rating of 897.
Steyn took only 22 matches to reach the top of the ratings, which I reckon is one of the fastest if the not the fastest time to number 1. Please share any facts and figures of bowlers who have gotten to the top of the rankings faster than Steyn.
I believe that the ICC Player Rankings uses the best ratings system around to rank players. Better than ESPN, Samsung, and all the other useless ones that have come up. But even the ICC Rankings seem to function absurdly at times.
Kumar Sangakkara's disappointing performance in the tests against the Windies pushed him down from the number 1 spot to 4 in the batsmen's ratings. Fair enough, that understandable.
But what I find absurd is that Micheal Hussey, without having played a test match for 3 months, is suddenly number 1. Is that right only because Sangakkara slipped down?
How can a player become number 1 without playing a test? Is it fair for someone to be number 1 only because others have not done well enough?
Last evening the ICC answered that question when they released the latest international cricketer ratings after the conclusion of the West Indies - Sri Lanka test match.
Dale Steyn is the new number 1 in the test bowler ratings and he jointly leads the table with Muttiah Muralitharan; both having a rating of 897.
Steyn took only 22 matches to reach the top of the ratings, which I reckon is one of the fastest if the not the fastest time to number 1. Please share any facts and figures of bowlers who have gotten to the top of the rankings faster than Steyn.
I believe that the ICC Player Rankings uses the best ratings system around to rank players. Better than ESPN, Samsung, and all the other useless ones that have come up. But even the ICC Rankings seem to function absurdly at times.
Kumar Sangakkara's disappointing performance in the tests against the Windies pushed him down from the number 1 spot to 4 in the batsmen's ratings. Fair enough, that understandable.
But what I find absurd is that Micheal Hussey, without having played a test match for 3 months, is suddenly number 1. Is that right only because Sangakkara slipped down?
How can a player become number 1 without playing a test? Is it fair for someone to be number 1 only because others have not done well enough?
Labels: Cricket Ratings, Dale Steyn, ICC, Kallis, Kumar Sangakkara, Micheal Hussey, Muralitharan, Q






