ICC Test Ratings.

[Donny]

Labu (215 & a half ton) will move up but won't crack the 900, yet. Go close.

Smith (63) will probably stay on 912.

Will be interesting to see how many ratings points Williamson drops, through missing the third Test.

[K]

'People' don't do the ratings. It's a formula, not someone's opinion.

The people who make up the formula...

It's their opinion that their formula is better than it is. (Well, we don't know who they are, so it's a bit of a guess about their opinions, but a good guess.) In the world, there are "real" formulas and "made-up" formulas. This stuff is very much in the made-up category. Psychologically, humans are too susceptible to believing a formula that we don't see and have no reason to believe. My guess is that this is because they don't distinguish enough between the "real" and the "made-up", so the "made-up" undeservedly get an aura of truth through association with the "real".

[Donny]

You never give an inch.

All players are painted with the same brush, in the ratings.

[K]

I'm just saying the ratings formula is an unseen artifice that should not be taken too seriously. Clearly the bloke rated 100 is almost certainly worse than the bloke rated 10, but we already knew that without ratings. The guys rated 10 or 15? No, I don't think we know 10 is better than 15, or whatever.

[Donny]

Lyon's 10 wickets will gain him good points, esp. as it was against the #2 ranked team.

ie. Players get more for wickets/runs against teams rated higher than them.

[Donny]

Ratings in.

Batsmen.

3 Aussies in the top 5.

1 Virat Kohli 928
2 Steve Smith 911
3 Marnus Labuschagne 827
4 Kane Williamson 814
5 David Warner 793
6 Cheteshwar Pujara 791
7 Babar Azam 767
8 Joe Root 761
9 Ajinkya Rahane 759
10 Ben Stokes 708

21 Travis Head AUS 643

33 Usman Khawaja AUS 584

49 Tim Paine AUS 516

56 Joe Burns AUS 491
58 Matthew Wade, Shaun Marsh AUS 488

[Donny]

Bowlers.


1 Pat Cummins 904
2 Neil Wagner 852
3 Jason Holder 830
4 Kagiso Rabada 821
5 Mitchell Starc 796
6 Jasprit Bumrah 794
7 James Anderson 791
8 Vernon Philander 786
9 Ravichandran Ashwin 772
10 Mohammad Shami 771

11 Josh Hazlewood AUS 769

14 Nathan Lyon AUS 742
39 Peter Siddle AUS 425

51 James Pattinson AUS 333

[K]

ICC Team of the year:

Mayank Agarwal, Tom Latham, Marnus Labuschagne, Virat Kohli (captain), Steve Smith, Ben Stokes, BJ Watling (wicketkeeper), Pat Cummins, Mitchell Starc, Neil Wagner, Nathan Lyon.


[Where is Agarwal in the ICC ratings?]

[Donny]

13th.

He's only played 9 Tests.

[Donny]

Batsmen.

1 Steve Smith 911
2 Virat Kohli 906
3 Kane Williamson 853
4 Marnus Labuschagne 827
5 Babar Azam 800
6 David Warner 793
7 Joe Root 764
8 Ajinkya Rahane 760
9 Cheteshwar Pujara 757
10 Mayank Agarwal 727

11 Ben Stokes 718

21 Travis Head 643

31 Usman Khawaja 584

46 Tim Paine 516

56 Joe Burns 491
57 Matthew Wade 488

[Donny]

Bowlers.

1 Pat Cummins 904
2 Neil Wagner 843
3 Jason Holder 830
4 Kagiso Rabada 802
5 Mitchell Starc 796
6 Tim Southee 794
7 James Anderson 775
8 Josh Hazlewood 769
9 Ravichandran Ashwin 765
10 Kemar Roach 763

16 Nathan Lyon 742

37 Peter Siddle 425

45 James Pattinson 333

[Pies4shaw]

It’s really amazing how Smith keeps coming in number 1 in the World on this ranking, despite his allegedly hopeless batting. It must be some some stupid numerical assessment based on his runs, with complete disregard for style and elegance points.

[Donny]

Yes. Interesting.

His 6 over covers, in the last over, was called as the shot of the day. Pure style. Batsmen can hoik a six over cow corner or square leg, but to put one over point or covers requires exquisite technique.

[Donny]

Unless he has a big second dig, Kohli will lose points after the 2nd. New Zealand Test where he was out for 3.

There's a fair gap to Williamson, in third, but that could close right up with a substantial innings from the NZ skip.

[K]

It’s really amazing how Smith keeps coming in number 1 in the World on this ranking, despite his allegedly hopeless batting. ... complete disregard for style and elegance points. ...

FTB! FTB! FTB!

The tracks are too flat (especially, sad to say, in Oz, where once there would be bouncy WACA pitches, etc., but now every pitch is slow and flat). As I said elsewhere, at the moment, Marnus looks like being a good "par score", because his Sheffield Shield average continues to be around 38, and he's been playing long enough that that probably means something. If you do worse than Marnus in the Oz side, where you (roughly) play the same bowlers at (roughly) the same time, then you have failed. That means everyone in the Oz side has failed as a batsman compared with Marnus (whose Test average in the 60s is higher than anyone else's, including FTB Smith's). I reckon Marnus is a decent batsman, but not some batting genius. A batting genius would not have a Shield average of around 38 after all these years.

It would be fine fans desperately trying to maintain the Myth of Smith, if not for the fact that Test cricket is facing an existential crisis, linked to the Death of Test Batting and the ultra-flat pitches. Just look at Marnus's scores in Tests vs. Sheffield Shield this season. It's damning of Test batting conditions.


This has nothing, nothing, absolutely nothing to do with "elegance". That is just your straw man argument that you have clung on to like a drowning man for ages. For example, people seem to think Khawaja's batting is "elegant". Presumably he also thinks it's elegant, or he wouldn't be batting like that. It's clearly defective technique, because he can't help nicking off all the time. That's why he's not in the Oz side any more, even though there's hardly any competition. (Look at the pathetic scores in the Oz A game vs. the English Lions.) It's not about "elegance", just as goal-kicking technique in AFL is not about elegance. There's nothing to say that some foot movement is more elegant than standing there like a tree with no knee bend and swishing at the ball with your supposedly elegant wrists. There's just the cold hard fact that Khawaja is a nicker, and while his technique remains like that, will always be one.