Yousuf's first game back and he's already the Test #1

[angryangy]

The ratings are designed to accommodate the sporadic nature of international cricket, so it's not sensitive to players having spells away from a particular form of the game, which is very common. That means that the Pakistan players pick up where they left off. In the case of Mohammad Yousuf, it's important to note that players never lose their rating, it just gets taken off the board, because the rating is about past achievement as well as form. If zombie Bradman came back and played a Test, he'd no doubt go straight to the top as well, as his rating at his last game was well clear of the current pack.

So Yousuf's rating appends his old rating from the end of 2007. In spite of the hundred, MoYo's rating has actually dropped since his last game, as they have since his peak rating in late 2006, such was that run glut. Of course, for him, that peak was only 7 matches ago.

One thing I think is important to note is how close the top 5 are. From match to match, that top 5 will probably reshuffle and by the end of the Ashes, the whole top 10 will have changed.

I think the most telling part of the ratings is in the bowling. 10 years ago, there were 13 bowlers who rated over 700. Today, there are 6. This correlates with common opinion that the balance between bat and ball is weighted towards the bat in today's game.

 

[Insomniac]

The ratings are designed to accommodate the sporadic nature of international cricket, so it's not sensitive to players having spells away from a particular form of the game, which is very common. That means that the Pakistan players pick up where they left off. In the case of Mohammad Yousuf, it's important to note that players never lose their rating, it just gets taken off the board, because the rating is about past achievement as well as form. If zombie Bradman came back and played a Test, he'd no doubt go straight to the top as well, as his rating at his last game was well clear of the current pack.

So Yousuf's rating appends his old rating from the end of 2007. In spite of the hundred, MoYo's rating has actually dropped since his last game, as they have since his peak rating in late 2006, such was that run glut. Of course, for him, that peak was only 7 matches ago.

One thing I think is important to note is how close the top 5 are. From match to match, that top 5 will probably reshuffle and by the end of the Ashes, the whole top 10 will have changed.

I think the most telling part of the ratings is in the bowling. 10 years ago, there were 13 bowlers who rated over 700. Today, there are 6. This correlates with common opinion that the balance between bat and ball is weighted towards the bat in today's game.

But Zombie Bradman missed so many tests for Australia, so would he really go to the top?

 

[sohum]

Surely ratings should have a decay rate that is tied into time as well as number of matches played. Time is as much a factor in loss of form as missing matches.

 

[Insomniac]

Surely ratings should have a decay rate that is tied into time as well as number of matches played. Time is as much a factor in loss of form as missing matches.

It's not really anyone's fault if Pakistan's not able to play matches. I'm glad the PCB is taking a stand now against the new FTP, especially against the BCCI's proposed FTP.

I think the system is fine as it is - Yousuf only missed 2 tests for Pakistan, and thus was deducted points for that. However, he is still good enough to be #1.

If Yousuf is not good enough to be #1, he will gradually drop down. Jeez, everyone is acting like the India media when Tendulkar wasn't in that list of top cricketers/batsmen by the ICC.

 

[shravi]

I'm pretty sure Sri Lanka is considered part of the Indian Subcontinent.

Sorry, don't know what I was thinking there. Sort of misread this page.

 

[Insomniac]

Uhm shravi?

The phrase the Subcontinent, used on its own in English, commonly refers to South Asia.[citation needed] The term subcontinent includes India, some parts of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka.

 

[shravi]

Uhm shravi?

I can swear it wasn't there yesterday! I was surprised myself and did CTRL+F and looked for 'Sri Lanka'. Couldn't find it. I'm not stupid . That sentence was there, it just didn't have Sri Lanka at the end of it. Of that I'm 100% sure.

Anyways, umm back on topic... Yousuf. #1. Discuss.

 

[Insomniac]

Right then, I'm going to go change the wikipedia page back to how it originally was.

 

[Gurjot95]

I agree with shravi. It isn't there.

 

[Insomniac]

I agree with shravi. It isn't there.

I just changed the wikipedia page back to what it originally was.

Check the edit log

 

[Gurjot95]

It again says

The term subcontinent includes India, some parts of Pakistan, and Bangladesh.

I have refresh 3 times. I think Wikipedia dont want Sri Lanka to be in subcontinent

 

[Insomniac]

It again says
I have refresh 3 times. I think Wikipedia dont want Sri Lanka to be in subcontinent

No, you're misunderstanding. Shravi believes that Sri Lanka should not be considered as part of the subcontinent because that's what wikipedia says.

I decided to go in, and change the wikipedia page, to include Sri Lanka as part of the subcontinent.

Then, shravi looks embarassed (as he should, for using wikipedia as a source), and then we laugh, and I change the page back to what it originally was.

Now its not as funny.

 

[Gurjot95]

Any other user will clear it:cool:

friend863 added 4 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...

Here's the screnshot btw

 

[Insomniac]

Any other user will clear it:cool:

friend863 added 4 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...

Here's the screnshot btw

OMG. I have ALREADY changed it back to normal. I WILL NOT CHANGE IT AGAIN TO INCLUDE SRI LANKA. That is how it was originally written, so I am leaving it like that.

I would normally consider Sri Lanka as part of the subcontinent, but I am leaving it as what it originally was.

 

[Gurjot95]

It's fine now as I have edited it now and I can see Sri Lanka clearly.

So get back to topic now.