Keep the ranking, it's the Proteas' record that stands out.

I was reading this article on Cricinfo, it basically tells the tale of how SA have performed in test cricket compared to the other test nations since 2006.

It makes for interesting reading, and justifies exactly why the number 1 ranking means little to me as it is but a mere "moment in time", however the record from the Proteas are incredible and something they can be very proud about.

Here is the link to the article on cricinfo.

Enjoy.

CRICINFO

I saw that article too, and it highlights South Africa's obvious credibility as a number one team.

I would add though that you could spin the stats how you liked, and find justification for India and England being just as strong a number one team.

The away record is particularly interesting, although I think there are some caveats to it - SA played a boring series in the UAE when Pakistan were still in the midst of the spot fixing crisis, whilst England faced an in-form and rampant Pakistan spin attack; SA's two away series in India have been short and inconclusive (as have England's); I can hardly remember SA going to Sri Lanka.

Of course performance in the sub-continent is the really tough away challenge for both England and South Africa - that both have won in Australia, and had a degree of success in each other's backyards shows that those series prove less of a problem in terms of adapting to conditions.

As the writer of the article points out, South Africa's batsmen have been the stars in all this. I'd suggest that Amla's technique (well suited to Asian conditions), Kallis's experience (unruffled by Asian conditions) and the panache offered by AB de Villiers make a big difference. England have he-who-should-not-be-named to fill the AB role, but nobody in the other two. Perhaps there should be hope that in time Cook and Bell will step up and fully conquer Asian conditions themselves.

Can we trust anything in cricket? or is it fixed beyond repair?

anotherworldofpain wrote:...or is it fixed beyond repair?

Difficult to get my head round the concept of "fixed beyond repair"....

You see what I did there?

SA's home record isn't the best.

GG wrote:SA's home record isn't the best.

Our home record is fine, it is our record at Durban which isn't.

GG wrote:SA's home record isn't the best.

What is it? 1 Test Series win at home since 2008.

It's actually 3 since 2008. More importantly only 1 loss.

Great ODI performance today Biltong! You must be stoked with the triple 1 rating !

Cheers AWOP, I understand we are the first country wo hold all three number one rankings, not sure whether that is true though.

It is unlikely to last though, cricket is a little more unpredictable than that.

Clearly, SA are the best team in the world right now but i have felt that they were the better team than England even whilst England held the #1 spots.

Biltong wrote:Cheers AWOP, I understand we are the first country wo hold all three number one rankings, not sure whether that is true though.

It is unlikely to last though, cricket is a little more unpredictable than that.

How did we get to be the top T20 team? I can't recall that we were ever good in it?

FerN wrote:

Biltong wrote:Cheers AWOP, I understand we are the first country wo hold all three number one rankings, not sure whether that is true though.

It is unlikely to last though, cricket is a little more unpredictable than that.

How did we get to be the top T20 team? I can't recall that we were ever good in it?

Mate we have the best win/loss ratio by quite a margin.

Since the inception of T20:

SA: played 44, won 29, lost 15 = 1.93 win/loss ratio
Pakistan: Played 55, won 33, lost 21, tied 1 = 1.57 win/loss ratio
Sri Lanka: Played 41, won 24, lost 17 = 1.41 win/loss ratio
England: Played 45, won 24, lost 19, no results 2 = 1.26 win/loss ratio
India: Played 35, won 18, lost 15, no result 1, tied 1 = 1.2 win/loss ratio

sa are the best without question. they've proven how they've left england behind of late.