If that is true and if rediff "considers a much wider window", isn't the ICC formula better? Rankings reflect the current form of teams, why does rediff need to consider history of 1 or 2 yrs. In that case they can go back even 20-30 yrs and say West Indies are still number 1.
Totally messed article. Rating has to be on latest games and not based on longer span which rediff claims. You don't merit 12th grad student as first based on his first rank in 10th grad
Re: Worthless Article
by sachin shetty on Dec 29, 2009 11:00 PM
Australia lost home series against India and South Africa defeated them in their Home, Lost the Ashes in England only two series win in a year,India and South Africa is far better such a poor article. cut this Crap
I don't see any logic behind Rediff's own Rating System...Because nobody is going to bother what Rediff's test rating is. It is utter waste of time and Rediff can spend the time and energy in some other useful things.
Zimbabwe played its last official test 4 years ago, they do not feature in ICC Test Ratings, where as Bangladesh won a series against West Indies (although depleted) this season, so how can Zimbabwe be placed above Bangladesh ?
So whats your point by following a different rating system than the one which is considered as Standard for anything official. Is Rediff going to give award to Australia for this fantastic achievement being Numero Uno Test Team...
If you had not had the time to calculate the ratings correctly just publish what ICC says, don't have to bring and idea and a reason for this...
Its the ICC ODI ranking where india is on the 2nd position, If you click on the Test ranking, India is still on the First Place. CHECK YOUR EYES FIRST BEFORE POSTING YOU BLIND REDIFF
