Current World Rankings

Based on matches up to 23rd October 2016

Ranking	Flag	Team	Played	Weighted	Points	Rating
1		Australia	46	36	7,455	207
2		New Zealand	54	41	7,739	189
3		England	56	42	7,715	184
4		Jamaica	52	43	7,837	182
5		South Africa	73	51	7,819	153
6		Malawi	64	48	6,173	129
7		Uganda	57	41	5,094	124
8		Tonga	29	28	3,433	123
9		Wales	37	30	3,521	117
10		Scotland	30	26	2,751	106
11		Trinidad & Tobago	38	32	3,007	94
12		Northern Ireland	27	19	1,668	88
13		Zimbabwe	48	35	2,923	84
14		Barbados	40	33	2,440	74
15		Zambia	31	22	1,619	74
16		Samoa	28	23	1,652	72
17		St Vincent & Grenadines	17	15	1,074	72
18		Fiji	37	34	2,430	71
19		Cook Islands	13	9	593	66
20		Sri Lanka	21	18	1,137	63
21		Grenada	10	9	514	57
22		Namibia	36	24	1,308	55
23		Botswana	24	17	925	54
24		UAE	14	12	620	52
25		Ireland	33	27	1,057	39
26		Singapore	44	36	1,406	39
27		Isle of Man	27	21	763	36
28		Malaysia	14	13	440	34
29		St Lucia	13	11	366	33
30		USA	11	10	327	33
31		Gibraltar	24	20	630	32
32		Kenya	30	21	601	29
33		Antigua & Barbuda	24	16	322	20
34		Cayman Islands	23	20	387	19
35		Malta	14	12	122	10
36		Papua New Guinea	26	22	122	6
37		Israel	10	10	55	6
38		Tanzania	15	11	55	5
39		St Kitts & Nevis	11	6	19	3
40		St Maarten	11	6	0	0
40		Switzerland	14	12	0	0

This rankings system was developed for the INF by statistician David Kendix.

The first list was published on 11 February 2008. The latest list has been updated on 24th November 2016 and includes matches up to 23rd October 2016. The ranking list relates to senior teams of member countries that are playing regular international test matches. To find out more about how the system works read below and click here for Frequently Asked Questions.

A rating is a measure of the average performance of a team over a series of matches. Each team earns a certain number of points from each international match. Their rating is the total number of points earned divided by the number of matches played. The team with the highest rating is ranked first in the world. The next highest rating is ranked second and so on.

Weighting Matches played a long time ago are a poorer guide to current form than more recent results. Therefore past results are weighted, giving a lower weighting to earlier results. For the purposes of this list, matches played since July 2015 currently have a full weighting (100%). Matches played in the two previous years (July 2013-June 2015) have a weighting of 50%. Earlier matches are not directly included in the ratings at all.

Each July, the oldest year of results will drop out of the ratings and the weightings redistributed. This is the one annual occasion when the rankings list could alter other than through a match being played.

Points:

The number of points earned by a team for any match depends on two factors. The result (won, tied or lost) and the opponent against whom the result was achieved. The higher an opponent’s rating the more points are earned for beating them.

If a team wins a match they will earn 50 points more than their opponent’s rating.  But if they lose, they will earn 50 points less than their opponent’s rating. Worked numerical examples appear in the Frequently Asked Questions.

Rating Period:

It is not meaningful for a team to claim a world ranking if they have only played a small number of matches. As soon as a team has played eight International test matches over the rating period then they will have earned an official world ranking. If a team has played fewer than eight matches, they will still have a rating, but without a corresponding ranking.  To have a ranking the team must have played at least 2 games against a rated team.

The following teams currently have a rating in the system and could become ranked once they have played 8 matches:

• Bermuda
• Cayman Islands
• India
• Maldives
• Namibia
• St Maarten
• Vanuatu
• St Kitts & Nevis
• Israel
• Tonga

The INF World Rankings were reviewed at the INF Board Meeting in June 2012, with David Kendix, Statistician, who was retained by the INF to develop the ranking methodology in 2007.

Following a detailed discussion the Board was satisfied that we have a robust and reliable rankings system that presents a true reflection of the quality and standing of the performances of international teams and that this system can be used with confidence for qualification purposes.