South Africa Tour of Bangladesh

First topic message reminder :

Might as well.

We won the T20s 2-0. Neither game was even close, and are now playing the 50 overs. Kagiso Rabada took a sixfer on debut. He's come a long way in the last two years, because he really wasn't a wicket taker in 2012-13. Bangladesh all out for 160. Bit of a comedown for them after their world cup and post world cup ODIs.

246-8, having opted to bat first is a disappointing return. Still its a position from which the match is not already lost. Been real impressed with Bangla.

As for Steyn... What can you say? Only 99 away from 500, and with a reasonably busy next 15 months, (4 tests vs India, 4 vs Eng, 2 vs NZ, 4 vs AUS) he could find himself tantalizingly close come summer 2016-2017.

If he plays all those games, he should be pretty close to the landmark. A remarkable bowler indeed, the best of his times, among alltime greats already. At 32, there would hopefully be another 2 to 3 years more at least at the top level for him.

Also, Dale is currently ranked as the seventh best all rounder in Test cricket. Even ranked one above Shane Watson. This makes me very happy.

you know BD will win a lost of ICC ranking points ( and SA will lose them) if BD earns two draws against a top side like SA
and 3 draws in a row including the test vs India

It's a gaping flaw in the planning of a series during Monsoon in subconitnent...that has allowed BD to get away

^http://www.espncricinfo.com/bangladesh-v-south-africa-2015/content/story/905943.html

now Amla makes this point

I agree its not great and maybe a flaw in the rankings system to some extent (should they amke it more lilke County Cricket and weight the points system to encourage results? but then a lot of people blame that for ruining the the quality of cricket played)

...but they are making a mountain out of a molehill here just to fill some column inches.
The great thing about ranking points is they even out over time. If SA have "unfairly" been "penalised" for drawing a series due to weather then they will be underatted next time they play. That means whatever result they get they will do better in terms of gaining/losing points than they wouldve done had they not been "penalised" from this series. The reverse is true for Bangladesh. Unless they go round drawing every series by strom chasing round the world it wiont have a significant long term effect on either teams rating/rankings.
Its not even like rankings matter that much to SA anyway, they arent in much danger of dropping out of the top 2 (or 1 for that matter since Aus are likley to lose the ashes series and drop even further behind) any time soon ...and if they do it will be because of serious decline not a bit of rain in Bangladesh. Nor are Bangladesh anywhere near the teams ranked above or below them.
Lets also not forget that in the first test Bangladesh were marginally ahead when it was called. In all likliehood SA probably wouldve gone on to win, but maybe not as comfortably as you might expect a side rated 70 points higher should. Nor were they dominating Bangladesh when the second test was rained off. So maybe there is some vague evidence that SA and Balngaldeshes relative ratinsg were slightly askew.

If SA are that concerned about it then maybe they should start playing more tests at sensible times against decent sides. Of course the big issue there is that they werent included in the Big 3 for protected regular long tours. A decision that looks more shabby given they are so comfortably the highest ranked test team.

Gooseberry wrote:I agree its not great and maybe a flaw in the rankings system to some extent (should they amke it more lilke County Cricket and weight the points system to encourage results? but then a lot of people blame that for ruining the the quality of cricket played)

...but they are making a mountain out of a molehill here just to fill some column inches.
The great thing about ranking points is they even out over time. If SA have "unfairly" been "penalised" for drawing a series due to weather then they will be underatted next time they play. That means whatever result they get they will do better in terms of gaining/losing points than they wouldve done had they not been "penalised" from this series. The reverse is true for Bangladesh. Unless they go round drawing every series by strom chasing round the world it wiont have a significant long term effect on either teams rating/rankings.
Its not even like rankings matter that much to SA anyway, they arent in much danger of dropping out of the top 2 (or 1 for that matter since Aus are likley to lose the ashes series and drop even further behind) any time soon ...and if they do it will be because of serious decline not a bit of rain in Bangladesh. Nor are Bangladesh anywhere near the teams ranked above or below them.
Lets also not forget that in the first test Bangladesh were marginally ahead when it was called. In all likliehood SA probably wouldve gone on to win, but maybe not as comfortably as you might expect a side rated 70 points higher should. Nor were they dominating Bangladesh when the second test was rained off. So maybe there is some vague evidence that SA and Balngaldeshes relative ratinsg were slightly askew.

If SA are that concerned about it then maybe they should start playing more tests at sensible times against decent sides. Of course the big issue there is that they werent included in the Big 3 for protected regular long tours. A decision that looks more shabby given they are so comfortably the highest ranked test team.

I agree. Lets not pretend this is the first game that has been rained off, and it was no ones fault, not like the terrible ground england played on few years back in WI, where only 2 overs were played.

Also to be fair, both games were still evenly balanced, SA were still in defecit in the first test match, and the second they maybe marginally ahead, as the commentators said par score is about 300, i've seen the pitch, it was uncovered, so 250 odd with a batsman left, was anything but a complete disaster, and with Mustafizur - who managed correctly can be a great - and a leg spinner in the side, SA would have had a tough time batting on that pitch, I watched a bit and Duminy of all people was getting great turn and awkward bounce.

But I still can't figure out why SA would lose points for a draw, especially in series that finished 0-0 with second match being played didn't last 90 overs, if they finished 1-1, losing points makes sense. ICC maybe need to adjust the rule, so a match that hasn't featured 180 overs/2 innings, the higher ranked side, doesnt lose points

ko king wrote:Also to be fair, both games were still evenly balanced,

let's not pretend that the games were in balance

Can afford to be bothered about the Rankings really. One series loss in seven years says enough. I long gave up on the ranking system when Australia got to #1 having beaten us. Yep, we'd lost five games in the three year period. They lost 4-0 to India, 3-0 to Australia, 1-0 to us. Lost a test vs NZ. Lost a test vs Sri Lanka. But their defeats weren't as heavy points wise because they sucked at the time. And their wins were more profitable because they sucked at the time

*3-0 to England