Cummins Overrated?

Leeda

Talons B Sharp
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Posts
4,437
Likes
751
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Roger, Serena, Rafa, Novak
ah well Mr Cummins deserves nothing less than total infatuation for his indomitable performance. ..
Git on with it little horsey..
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kram

I'll brik u
Joined
May 2, 2007
Posts
52,872
Likes
66,041
Location
WA
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Chicago Bears, de Boer, Arsenal
Yes it is.
I hold that to a higher standard and won’t budge from it
https://https://www.foxsports.com.a...k=5184ba40713f81bab59e452ce649edc7-1550398405

Pat Cummins becomes first Aussie ranked #1 Test bowler in the world since Glenn McGrath
Australia


Pat Cummins has become the first Australian since February 2006 to be ranked as the world’s top Test bowler.
The 25-year-old moves past South African Kagiso Rabada into the number one spot on the latest ICC rankings update, following strong showings against India and Sri Lanka in recent months.
Rabada drops to third in the charts, with Englishman James Anderson also surpassing the young gun who returned figures of 3-145 in the first Test against Sri Lanka in Durban.
 

Xtreme

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Posts
31,418
Likes
23,214
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
He is actually suspended by our own admin. If ICC had their way he would have missed maybe one Test at most, just like Holder.
Still cheated and got what he deserved.

If they reset every year, a player who has scored 2000 runs in 2018 but started 2019 with a couple of globes could be ranked 100th.
But that makes the climb back to number 1 more exciting.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

PhatBoy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2016
Posts
15,945
Likes
16,359
AFL Club
Geelong
Still cheated and got what he deserved.



But that makes the climb back to number 1 more exciting.
No it doesn’t.

If Rafa Nadal or Roger Federer took a sabbatical from the game it got injured for a year they can return with a protected ranking.

Missing a bunch of games doesn’t make you shit all of a sudden. So why should he have a ranking that would make him appear shit?
 

Xtreme

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Posts
31,418
Likes
23,214
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
If they reset every year, a player who has scored 2000 runs in 2018 but started 2019 with a couple of globes could be ranked 100th.
No it doesn’t.

If Rafa Nadal or Roger Federer took a sabbatical from the game it got injured for a year they can return with a protected ranking.

Missing a bunch of games doesn’t make you shit all of a sudden. So why should he have a ranking that would make him appear shit?
Because he hasn't played due to serving a suspension for being a bad boy ;)
 

footyfan78

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Posts
17,969
Likes
17,222
Location
spacetime
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
there are no other teams worthy
The rankings are not about being a bad boy. If it was Rabada, Warner and a zillion of them would never be on it. It is simply about whatever the system works out what it considers one at any point in time in a role of the game. Be in batting, bowling or whatever rankings system covers for roles. I probably would have banned Steve Smith for longer. Does not change fact still consider him one of best bats in world. To take him off rankings just stupid unless out of game for good.
 

big_e

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
4,308
Likes
10,572
Location
Your Wi-Fi
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers, 76ers
Wonder how many people actually know how the rankings work. Have bolded the but relevant to Smith and Warner. From http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/about.php
The ICC Player Rankings are a sophisticated moving average. Players are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000 points. If a player’s performance is improving on his past record, his points increase; if his performance is declining his points will go down.

The value of each player’s performance within a match is calculated using an algorithm, a series of calculations (all pre-programmed) based on various circumstances in the match.

All of the calculations are carried out using pre-programmed formulae, using the information published in a Test match scorecard. There is no human intervention in this calculation process, and no subjective assessment is made.
Test Match Rankings

For a batsman, the factors are:

  • Runs scored
  • Ratings of the opposing bowling attack; the higher the combined ratings of the attack, the more value is given to the batsman’s innings (in proportion)
  • The level of run-scoring in the match, and the team’s innings total; an innings of 100 runs in a match where all teams scored 500 is worth less than 100 runs in a match where all teams were bowled out for 200. And if a team scores 500 in the first innings and 200 in the second innings, a century in the second innings will get more credit than in the first innings (because the general level of run scoring was higher in the first innings)
  • Out or not out (a not out innings receives a bonus)
  • The result. Batsmen who score highly in victories receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams (i.e. win bonus against the current Australia team is higher than the bonus against Bangladesh.)

For a bowler, the factors are:

  • Wickets taken and runs conceded
  • Ratings of the batsmen dismissed (at present, the wicket of Kumar Sangakkara is worth more than that of Makhaya Ntini – but if Ntini's rating improves, the value of his wicket will increase accordingly)
  • The level of run-scoring in the match; bowling figures of 3-50 in a high-scoring match will boost a bowler’s rating more than the same figures in a low-scoring match
  • Heavy workload; bowlers who bowl a large number of overs in the match get some credit, even if they take no wickets;
  • The result. Bowlers who take a lot of wickets in a victory receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams

Bowlers who do not bowl in a high-scoring innings are penalized.

The players’ ratings are calculated by combining their weighted performance in the latest match with their previous rating. This new ‘weighted average’ is then converted into points. Recent performances have more impact on a player’s rating than those earlier in his career, but all his performances are taken into account. A great player who has had a lean run of form will still have a respectable rating.

Players who miss a Test match for their country, for whatever reason, lose one per cent of their points.

New players start at zero points, and need to establish themselves before they get full ratings. There is a scale for calculating qualifications. For example, a batsman who has played 10 Test innings gets 70 per cent of his rating (i.e. his rating will be between 0 and 700 points). He doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has played 40 Test innings. A bowler who has taken 30 wickets also gets 70 per cent of his full rating. He doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has taken 100 Test wickets. This means that successful new players can enter the top 30 after just a few Tests, but are unlikely to reach the world top five until they have many Test matches under their belts.
 

Oaktree

Club Legend
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Posts
1,396
Likes
768
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Wonder how many people actually know how the rankings work. Have bolded the but relevant to Smith and Warner. From http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/about.php
Quite a good read.

I was thinking why is Kusal Perera ranked 40 after his incredible innings. But he mustn't be able to get full points for his performance based on his career stats.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Hamingja

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 20, 2014
Posts
9,494
Likes
10,956
AFL Club
Geelong
No it doesn’t.

If Rafa Nadal or Roger Federer took a sabbatical from the game it got injured for a year they can return with a protected ranking.

Missing a bunch of games doesn’t make you shit all of a sudden. So why should he have a ranking that would make him appear shit?
In tennis it is only for injury, and post Serena it now covers pregnancy more extensively, everything else doesn't count towards a protected ranking. If they choose to take time off that is their own decision. If they are banned (Sharapova & Cilic) then they start from scratch.
 

big_e

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
4,308
Likes
10,572
Location
Your Wi-Fi
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers, 76ers
I actually think the ratings system is one of the better ones out there. Is usually pretty close to the mark I feel.
My only criticism, and this is purely in hindsight, is that there should be a bigger deduction for not playing. As good as Smith and Warner were, that they can be out for almost a year and still be two of the top seven just doesn't sit right. Mind you the top players are a way ahead of the rest so you could probably double or triple the deduction and they'd still be near the top.
 

Leeda

Talons B Sharp
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Posts
4,437
Likes
751
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Roger, Serena, Rafa, Novak
alrighty let me say that Mr cummins is a ripper bowler but he doesn't need the hyperbole of a total undeniable leg spin.. fast bowlers..

just putting that out there. non of them deserve accolades because they are not good enough on their own, but do well all together...

TOGETHER.... that is the point.. learn the lesson dudes..
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2019
Posts
256
Likes
203
AFL Club
Collingwood
alrighty let me say that Mr cummins is a ripper bowler but he doesn't need the hyperbole of a total undeniable leg spin.. fast bowlers..

just putting that out there. non of them deserve accolades because they are not good enough on their own, but do well all together...

TOGETHER.... that is the point.. learn the lesson dudes..
Is this guy trolling? Wtf is this shit??? I thought there were rules against spamming the boards?
 
Top Bottom