ICC ODI Championship

The ICC ODI Championship is an international One Day International (ODI) cricket competition run by the International Cricket Council (ICC). The competition is notional in that it is simply a ranking scheme overlaid on the regular ODI match schedule. After every ODI match, the two teams involved receive points based on a mathematical formula. Each team's points total is divided by their total number of matches played to give a rating, and all the teams are ranked in a table in order of rating.[1]

ICC ODI Championship
AdministratorInternational Cricket Council
FormatOne Day International
First edition2002
Latest editionOngoing
Tournament formatNotional (ongoing points accumulation through all matches played)
Number of teams20
Current champion England (127 rating)
Most successful Australia (141 months)
Longest continuous champion Australia (52 months)
Highest rating Australia (140 rating)

By analogy to cricket batting averages, the points for winning an ODI match are always greater than the team's rating, increasing the rating, and the points for losing an ODI match are always less than the rating, reducing the rating. A drawn match between higher and lower rated teams will benefit the lower-rated team at the expense of the higher-rated team. An "average" team that wins as often as it loses while playing a mix of stronger and weaker teams should have a rating of 100.[2]

As of 1 May 2020, England lead the ICC ODI Championship with a rating of 127 from 38 weighted matches, while the lowest rated team, Papua New Guinea, has a rating of 0 from 14 weighted matches.[3]

Current

ICC ODI Rankings
RankTeamMatchesPointsRating
1  England384,820127
2  India495,819119
3  New Zealand323,716116
4  South Africa313,385108
5  Australia333,518107
6  Pakistan323,254102
7  Bangladesh342,98988
8  Sri Lanka393,29785
9  West Indies433,28576
10  Afghanistan281,54955
11  Ireland211,03949
12  Netherlands522244
13  Oman1247940
14  Zimbabwe2493539
15  Scotland1641926
16    Nepal916118
17  United Arab Emirates1525917
18  Namibia915217
19  United States1418513
20  Papua New Guinea1400
Reference: Cricinfo Rankings page,ICC ODI rankings 1 May 2020
Matches is the number of matches played in the 12–24 months since the May before last, plus half the number in the 24 months before that. See points calculations for more details.

Associate rankings

In late 2005, the International Cricket Council ranked the top non-Test nations from 11–30 to complement the Test nations' rankings in the ICC ODI Championship. The ICC used the results from the 2005 ICC Trophy and WCQS Division 2 competition (i.e. the primary qualification mechanisms for the 2007 Cricket World Cup) to rank the nations.

These rankings were used to seed the initial stage of the global World Cricket League. Teams ranked 11–16 were placed into Division 1; teams 17–20 were placed into Division 2; teams 21–24 were placed into Division 3; the remaining teams were placed into the upper divisions of their respective regional qualifiers.

As of 19 April 2009 the top six associates gained one day status. Kenya and Ireland have both qualified to appear on the main rating table, Kenya from its existing status and Ireland for its two victories in the 2007 World Cup. Following their victory over Bangladesh in July 2010, the Netherlands joined the main table. Afghanistan, Canada and Scotland remain on the secondary table. In May 2009, the ICC added a rankings table for all associate members. This contained both global and regional placings. In June 2018, the four associates with ODI status were moved to the main ranking list.[4]

Associate rankings according to ICC:

Rank Nation Region
21  Canada Americas
22  Hong Kong Asia
23  Singapore Asia
24  Kenya Africa
25  Denmark Europe
26  Uganda Africa
27  Malaysia Asia
28  Jersey Europe
29  Vanuatu EAP
30  Bermuda Americas
31  Qatar Asia
32  Italy Europe
Reference: Associate Rankings updated to 9 March 2018

Historical ICC ODI Champions

The ICC provides ratings for the end of each month back to October 2002. This table lists the teams that have successively held the highest rating since that date, by whole month periods.

Team Start End Total Months Cumulative Months Highest Rating
 AustraliaOctober 2002January 20075252140
 South AfricaFebruary 2007February 200711128
 AustraliaMarch 2007February 20081264130
 South AfricaMarch 2008May 200834127
 AustraliaJune 2008December 2008771131
 South AfricaJanuary 2009August 2009812127
 AustraliaSeptember 2009August 201235106134
 EnglandAugust 2012December 201255121
 IndiaJanuary 2013January 20141212124
 AustraliaJanuary 2014August 20148114117
 IndiaSeptember 2014September 2014113113
 AustraliaOctober 2014October 20141115114
 South AfricaOctober 2014[5]November 2014½13115
 IndiaNovember 2014November 2014½14117
 AustraliaNovember 2014February 201726141129
 South AfricaFebruary 2017February 2017114119
 AustraliaMarch 2017March 20174 days141118
 South AfricaMarch 2017September 2017620123
 India24 September 201727 September 20174 days14120
 South Africa28 September 201731 September 20174 days20119
 India1 October 201717 October 201717 days15120
 South Africa18 October 20171 February 2018424120
 India2 February 20181 May 2018318123
 England2 May 201824 June 20191419127
 India25 June 201929 June 20195 days18123
 England30 June 2019present1029127

In 2011, the ICC applied its rating system to results since 1981, providing ratings for the end of each month back to 1981, further indicating Australia's historical dominance in ODI Cricket with the highest number of months ranked first (198 months). The table only begins from 1981 as, prior to this date, there is not enough data available due to the infrequency of matches and the small number of competing teams in the earlier periods.

The teams that have successively held the highest rating since January 1981 till September 2002, by whole month periods, are:

Team Start End Total Months Cumulative Months
 EnglandJanuary 1981February 198122
 West IndiesJune 1981November 198166
 EnglandDecember 1981December 198113
 West IndiesJanuary 1982May 19876571
 EnglandAugust 1987March 1988811
 West IndiesApril 1988May 1988273
 EnglandAugust 1988May 19891021
 West IndiesAugust 1989December 1989578
 AustraliaJanuary 1990March 199033
 West IndiesApril 1990April 1990179
 AustraliaMay 1990May 199014
 West IndiesJuly 1990July 1990180
 AustraliaAugust 1990November 199048
 PakistanDecember 1990January 199122
 AustraliaFebruary 1991May 1991412
 PakistanAugust 1991August 199113
 AustraliaOctober 1991May 1992820
 EnglandAugust 1992March 1993829
 West IndiesApril 1993April 1993181
 AustraliaMay 1993July 1993323
 West IndiesAugust 1993November 19941697
 IndiaDecember 1994March 199544
 West IndiesApril 1995May 1995299
 IndiaAugust 1995October 199537
 EnglandNovember 1995December 1995231
 AustraliaJanuary 1996April 1996427
 South AfricaMay 1996February 20004646
 AustraliaMarch 2000January 20022350
 South AfricaFebruary 2002February 2002147
 AustraliaMarch 2002September 2002757
Reference: Historical Rankings

The summary of teams that have held the highest rating since 1981 till present by whole month periods, are:

Team Total Months Highest Rating
 Australia198140
 West Indies99141
 South Africa71134
 England60135
 India25127
 Pakistan3131
Reference: Historical Rankings updated to 2/03/2019

Trophy

The team at the top of the ICC ODI Championship has been awarded the ICC ODI Championship shield. Like a 2 euro coin, the shield features an inner circle of gold-coloured metal and is surrounded by a ring of silver-coloured metal. It was first presented in December 2002, when Australia's captain Ricky Ponting received the trophy.[6]

Points calculations

Each team scores points based on the results of their matches over the last 3–4 years − all matches played in the 12–24 months since the May before last, plus all the matches played in the 24 months before that, for which the matches played and points earned both count half.[7] Each May, the matches and points earned between 3 and 4 years ago are removed, and the matches and points earned between 1 and 2 years ago switch from 100% weighting to 50% weighting. For example, at May 2014, the matches played between May 2010 and May 2011 were removed, and the matches played between May 2012 and May 2013 switched to 50% weighting. This happens overnight, so can result in teams changing positions in the ranking table despite not playing.

Each time two teams play another match, the rankings table is updated as follows, based on the ratings of the teams immediately before they played. To determine the teams' new ratings after a particular match, first calculate the points earned from the match:

If the gap between the ratings of the two teams before the match was less than 40 points, then:

Match result Points earned
WinOpponent's rating + 50
TieOpponent's rating
LoseOpponent's rating − 50

If the gap between the ratings of the two teams before the match was at least 40 points, then:

Match result Points earned
Stronger team winsOwn rating + 10
Weaker team losesOwn rating − 10
Stronger team tiesOwn rating − 40
Weaker team tiesOwn rating + 40
Stronger team losesOwn rating − 90
Weaker team winsOwn rating + 90
  • Each team's rating is equal to its total points scored divided by the total matches played. (Series are not significant in these calculations).
  • Add the match points scored to the points already scored (in previous matches as reflected by the Table), add one to the number of matches played, and determine the new rating.[2]
  • Points earned by teams depend on the opponent's ratings, therefore this system needed to assign base ratings to teams when it started.

See also: Detailed example

gollark: Yes, and I'm saying that I don't like that they're called "organic".
gollark: Not using antibiotics on farm animals is very sensible though. I want to hoard all antibiotics for human or cool-animal use. Mwahahahaha.
gollark: I'm not really against *those*, I'm against the "organic" labelling.
gollark: Cancer is natural because nature bad because nature has insufficient checksums.
gollark: Nature is bad at its job sometimes, and also bad at providing for humans and also to some extent non-humans.

See also

References

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.