New ICC Format

[Nige_Bix]

First this ...

1. ICC to re-launch Test Championship tomorrow

By A Special Correspondent

London, May 20, 2003

The International Cricket Council (ICC) has decided to re-launch the Test Championship in a new avatar and the new format is to be announced at the Lord's ground in London tomorrow.

ICC's Chief Executive Malcolm Speed will be holding a press conference at 10.30 a m (local time) to announce the new standings in the re-launched ICC Test Championship with a new system of calculation, the world governing body has said in a statement.

A new format for the ICC Test Championship which recognises the rewards and result of each Test match played was agreed by the ICC Board in Johannesburg on March 22, the release said .

The npower Test series between England and Zimbabwe will be the first new series to be calculated using the formula which has been developed by David Kendix, the release added.

Last year Australia were displaced by SA, who had been beaten 5-1 by the former in two back-to-back series, at the top of the Test Championship Table because of the existing points system that drew widespread criticism from several quarters.

--------------------------

and now this...

2. ICC Media Release - 21 May 2003

Australia has strengthened its position at the top of the ICC Test Championship table under the new system launched today at Lord's cricket ground.

Australia leads the way with a rating of 129, 14 ahead of South Africa. The other side to benefit most from the new system is Pakistan which has overtaken West Indies to move to seventh position, behind India only by virtue of fewer matches played.

The ICC Test Championship table, 21st May 2003

Team Rating
1 (1) Australia 129

2 (2) South Africa 115

3 (3) New Zealand 103

4 (4) Sri Lanka 101

5 (5) England 97

6 (6) India 91

7 (8) Pakistan 91

8 (7) West Indies 79

9 (9) Zimbabwe 59

10 (10) Bangladesh 4

------------------------------------------------------------

What do people make of the ICC Table? I wonder if SA would have dispalced us under this scheme.

 

[red+black]

Originally posted by dezzmo
10 (10) Bangladesh 4

How on earth did Bangladesh go from 0 points in the old system to 4 in the new system? Oh that's right, they drew one of their 17 tests rather than getting flogged as usual!

i agree that every test should have merit. the main (temporary) problem with either system is that South Africa have capitalised by ensuring they played all the bunny teams while Australia has been a little lax in that regard. It's still going to be hard to play every country regularly when we have to play 5 or 6 tests every 18 to 30 months against crap like England.

 

[red+black]

Oh, this also re the new system :

1. New table and explanation of positional changes

The main reason why Australia is so far clear under the new method, yet was so close to South Africa on the previous table, is because Australia's average series winning margin is far greater. Eight of their ten series victories in the previous table were by margins of at least three Tests, whereas only one of South Africa's 14 series wins was by such a margin. Since the new system reflects each Test result and consequentially series winning margins, this is a major factor in the change in the size of lead enjoyed by Australia.

A second reason is that the average strength of South Africa's opponents is lower than that of Australia's. This is largely on account of South Africa having already played rated series home and away against the bottom two rated countries, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Pakistan moves above West Indies and level with India

The previous table included the result of a number of series that were played prior to August 1999. These series, played between four and seven years ago, are no longer rated under the new system.

Pakistan had four such 'old' series but won none of them (drawing two and losing two). Meanwhile West Indies won two of their three old series. The combined effect of Pakistan dropping some poorer old results and West Indies no longer receiving credit for some older victories has had the effect of the two teams exchanging places in the rankings.

5. Comparing the new system with the previous ICC Test Championship system

The four main differences between the previous system and the new system can be summarised as follows:

- it reflects performances in all Test Matches, including (a) 'dead rubbers' where the result of the series is already decided and (b) any one-off Tests that do not qualify for a series bonus

- it reflects performances in all Test series completed since a given date (currently 1st August 1999), in contrast to the previous system which included some series played in 1996/97 yet excluded some more recent series

- in any series, both teams always have the opportunity to improve or worsen their rating; in the previous system, the side winning the previous corresponding series could not improve its rating, while their opponent's rating could not fall

- it recognises the different strength of opponents faced by different teams so that, for example, a side that has played recent series against the lowest rated countries would not have any inherent rating advantage over a side that has not yet played them

Appendix B: Historical analysis of the new ICC Test Championship system

It is possible to apply this model retrospectively to see how leadership of the ICC Test Championship would have changed over the last ten years had the new model been in operation.

West Indies' status as Test champions would have lasted until August 1995. Their defeat at home to Australia in May that year would have left their leadership in jeopardy and it would have been finally lost when they drew their subsequent series in England. Australia would have assumed first place and would have remained there until March 2001 when defeat in India allowed South Africa to edge ahead.

The South African leadership would have lasted just five months until a 4-1 series victory in England would have pulled the Australians back to the summit. Australia then only drew a series with New Zealand in December 2001, so when the top two sides met for the first of two back-to-back series, South Africa would have been just one point behind Australia. The 3-0 Australian series win would have gained them five rating points and cost South Africa the same number – so a one point lead would have become 11 and has remained in double figures ever since.

 

[DaveW]

So its more like the one they use for the one-day championship? I don't like it personally, its more complicated. I gather from the above that its now based on Tests matches and not Test series, and the relative strengths of opponents is taken into account.

The old simpler system would have sorted itself out once all teams had played each other on each other's soil, e.g. once Australia had played the likes of Zim and Bang at home and away.

My main problem is that teams don't play equal Tests against each other. e.g. England get five tests against Australia in Australia; Bangladesh get two tests. Whereas under the old plan every team would have exactly one home and one away series counted against every opponent. And on this point, will Australia still be obliged to host all nations or will they go back to ignoring the likes of SL, Zim and Bang?

(edit) Oh one more point, by counting individual tests will the nature of draws be taken into account? e.g. those drawn due to rain or stupid flat roads? Probably not.

 

[The Passenger]

Looks at alot better at the moment, but why in ****s name did it take them so long to realize how flawed the old one was that South Africa were so close to us.

At the moment, without trying to sound arrogant we are SO far in front of the world of cricket is pathetic.

 

[Nige_Bix]

Originally posted by DaveW
My main problem is that teams don't play equal Tests against each other. e.g. England get five tests against Australia in Australia; Bangladesh get two tests. Whereas under the old plan every team would have exactly one home and one away series counted against every opponent. And on this point, will Australia still be obliged to host all nations or will they go back to ignoring the likes of SL, Zim and Bang?

I think that's what is trying to be addressed - there will NEVER be the ideal solution.

Thought! - Given the uneven AFL structure -re away games, travel, uneven draw - perhaps thet could come up with a similar system!

 

[The Passenger]

I don't think that each test needs to be waited evenly, E.G. all worth 1 point, rather each test series needs to be waited evenly.

So what I mean.

You win a test series. You automatically get 2 points for the win. If its a draw you get 1 each.

And then there is also a total of 2 points to be gained for the series.

So if its a 1 test series, then that test is worth 2 points.
a 2 test series - 1 point for each test
3 test series - 0.66 points for each test
4 test series - 0.5 points for each test
5 test series - 0.4 points for each test
6 test series - 0.33 points for each test.

So each test series is worth 4 points.

Each team should be treated equally (I'm not a fan of weighting systems like that - in other competitions such as the AFL, you get 4 points for beating Geelong at home, and you get 4 points for beating Brisbane away).

Only your last series against each team counts.

Points are tallied up and divided by the amount of series a test team has played.

Those points are then times by 10 to give a nice roundish figure.