The Serve

The ranking period covers results dating back to August 2004, meaning South Africa’s first round exit from their home world cup means nothing, as does Australia’s 21 match win streak.

Fine then, forget the only tournament that really means something.

That leaves the Champions Trophy as the major event over the period. In 2004, Australia was knocked out in the semi finals. Disappointing. The Proteas? Didn’t even get that far. Two years later, the Aussies finally claimed the one prize that had eluded them. South Africa was pummeled in the semis.

Does this sound like the number one team to you?

Ok, what about regular matches? In the ranking period, Australia had a winning rate of 74%, the Proteas 66%. Since last August, where the weighting is more significant, the percentages are roughly the same. Even in the head to head stakes, South Africa has no advantage. They beat the Aussies 3-2 at home last year. A result cancelled out by the Proteas failure to make the VB finals two months before. The Proteas admittedly have done well of late, beating Pakistan 3-1 and whitewashing India. Both series at home. Both with little at stake. It’s hard to make a good enough case for them.

Back in 2002, South Africa briefly held the title of world test champions. Skipper Shaun Pollock at the time talked ambitiously about consistently and worthiness of such a title. His sheepish, bordering on guilty look while holding the gold stump suggested otherwise. By the middle of next week, a computer may say that they are the best. A team that’s done nothing in a big event for years. The best. The people that came up with this convoluted system should be looking sheepish and guilty.