Sunday, July 22, 2012

Is Bangladesh really the 4th best T20 side?

By Adrian Meredith
 
 
 
By beating Ireland 3-0, Bangladesh are now the 4th best team in Twenty20 cricket. This headline says it all, and just adds to the absurdity of it. Bangladesh are now, according to official ICC rankings, the 4th best team in the world in Twenty20 cricket.







They were previously unranked, it should be noted, as, per ICC rules, a team needs to have played 8 games before they get a ranking and, before the 3 match series against Ireland, Bangladesh had only played 6 games. They have now played 9 in the 3-year ranking period.

For the record, these are the 9 results:

1) Lost to West Indies by 5 wickets.
2) Lost to New Zealand by 10 wickets.
3) Lost to Pakistan by 21 runs.
4) Lost to Australia by 27 runs.
5) Defeated West Indies by 3 wickets.
6) Lost to Pakistan by 50 runs.
7) Defeated Ireland by 71 runs.
8) Defeated Ireland by 1 run.
9) Defeated Ireland by 2 wickets.

So, let's get this straight. Bangladesh have a 4-5 record in 9 matches and manage to be ranked 4th? They haven't defeated any of the top 3 teams, and, other than Ireland (ranked 11th), their only other victory was against West Indies, who are currently ranked 9th.

So, in other words, they manage to be ranked 4th by defeating a team ranked 9th once (and also losing to them once) and defeating another team ranked 11th three times. In between time, they lost to teams ranks 5th (Pakistan, twice), 6th (Australia, once) and 7th (New Zealand, once).

So let's sum this up a bit.

Bangladesh, ranked 4th:

Has never played a team ranked 1-3 (i.e. never faced a team ranked above them).
0-2 versus team ranked 5th (Pakistan)
0-1 versus team ranked 6th (Australia)
0-1 versus team ranked 7th (New Zealand)
1-1 versus team ranked 9th (West Indies)
3-0 versus team ranked 11th (Ireland)

And this gives them a ranking of 4th? I think that most people would agree that it should give them a ranking of somewhere between 8th-10th!

It isn't just that they have never faced any teams who are ranked ahead of them (at least not in the ranking period, in the past 3 years) but they haven't beaten any teams ranked just a bit below them either. If they were to legitimately be ranked 4th, they should at least be above the teams ranked 5th-7th, you'd think.

Perhaps with a 1-1 record they are on par with West Indies. So perhaps they should be ranked 9th. Or even 8th. But not 4th.

A 4-5 record also should mean that they are below parity. They should be below the average team, under 100, or around about 9th or 10th.

Except that the ICC rankings formula encourages scores in the last year ahead of scores from 2 years ago or 3 years ago. So Bangladesh win 3-0 and these 3 results are given much greater rating than their results from 2 years ago.

It is encouraging for Bangladesh to be ranked so highly but I hardly think that it is deserved. When they can beat the top three teams, then perhaps we can take this ranking more seriously.

No comments:

Related Posts