ICC rankings - Flawed?

[manee]

The rankings are descriptive, not prescriptive and for that job, they do fine. Of course, cricket is far too unpredictable to predict a result on rankings, but they do help you see who has been the more successful team. Regarding the Champions Trophy, and India specifically, it must be noted that we lost just the one game, something which can happen to any team.

 

[vishwa]

Rankings used to be a bit strange 2 yrs back. Michael Clarke, Ricky Ponting, Andrew Symonds, Michael Hussey would stay 1 to 4 a couple of years back despite not playing for maybe a month or going through a pretty long lean patch. The rankings have come a long way from this and I'm glad they have become pretty accurate now.

Just because India is on the verge of becoming No.1 doesn't really make the rankings rubbish. This is a wrong thing to say. "Sour grapes" Aamer needs to responsible in stating his opinion about the credibility of the ICC in a public forum.

And also, the timing of this criticism from Sohail puts his credibility in a bit of doubt. Rather than pondering on what could have been and what couldn't, he should be asking his players to make sure they don't get thrashed around by a Murali-less Sri Lanka and 2nd rate Australia in Dubai. My opinion