Richard Heathcote/Getty Images
Every statistical algorithm has its limitations and this one is no exception.
However, it's important to outline the limitations that are inherent in this objective ranking system.
1. The formula can't account for the match situation. Therefore, runs and wickets compiled in pressured situations don't carry more significance than those accumulated at other times.
2. In using par-adjusted strikes rates, the algorithm cannot determine if a player was forced to operate in a defensive manner following the loss of wickets.
3. The system can't account for the varying degrees of scoring that occur in different conditions and venues.
4. The formula can't factor in the added weight that is inherent in certain series. For instance, these rankings can't evaluate the added significance that is evident in a series between India and Australia.
5. By using the ICC's ODI Rankings as they stood at the conclusion of 2013, the formula can't factor in the changes to the ODI Rankings that will inevitably occur in the early stages of 2014.
6. A further limitation of using the ICC's ODI Rankings as they were at the end of 2013 is that players are measured on their opponent's end-of-year strength, rather than the rating of their strength when the meeting occurred.
7. The system can only judge a player on accumulated statistics. For example, a bowler who goes wicketless in an impressive spell will receive fewer points than a bowler who claims two fortunate wickets in an otherwise loose spell.
8. Statistical evaluations such as this will also favour all-rounders, given their ability to accumulate points in both of cricket's major disciplines.
9. By judging players on a per-match basis, this system will inherently favour those who have competed in fewer matches, as it's easier to maintain higher levels of performance across shorter time periods.
10. Another downfall of evaluating players on a per-match basis is that batsman who either finished an innings not out or didn't get a chance to bat are somewhat punished.