Yup, let someone else get to no. 1 and then let's talk, cant see that happening in near future

Seriously,...why is there so much dispute just because India is No. 1? We are playing by the same rules as anyone else. Further, India has beaten Australia more often than Australia has beaten India in the last 10 years. It's time for Aussies to just accept the fact that the rules are what they are and play hard to dislodge India from No. 1

Its a good talk really.. But at this stage,no one team is disputed or undisputed No.1 at a Stretched period of time, like WI did in 70-80's or Aussies on late 90's and last decade.. India is good.. But can't be consistent.. The way Australia have that quality of keeping the pressure on alll sides, they wil prevail for long time, no matter that they are fresh inexperienced side.

Take India for example, if Sachin, Dravid, Laxman goes out, then India have a tough tme ahead.. i'd Say SA and Aussies have the bext chance..

@Jay, but you see the Aus side that you are talking about were the best at bowling and probably only 2nd to SA in fielding even b-4 they eventually beat Ind in Ind. They also had several strings of winning streaks, not drawing streaks, winning streaks. Ind may have been able to get away with the tag of #1 if they could boast top fielding and top bowling but they just simply cannot. @Gopal, again u are making the argument of #1 RANK and #1, don't mix them up. When u look at Ind's win-loss ratio, is it that much better than some others? SA only lost ONE series to Aus in recent times, 2x drawing series in Ind. Aus only lost TWO in recent times and Eng similarly only lost 3. In the time space Ind lost ONE in Sri Lanka. So looking at it u have Ind losing 1, SA losing 1, Aus 2 and Eng 3. So Ind have the #1 RANK but can u say they are truly better than the other close contenders, especially when they haven't beaten SA anywhere, nor won in Aus. Its too close to say for sure, very disputable.

the chase for Number 1 is sumthin will be seein for sum time in the future n its good for the game if v look at it as a cricket lover. the closest i think that can be Number 1 at present is South Africa. its a shame that they didnt continue as expected from them after late 2008, bt their failure to be consistent has actually opened doors for teams like India, Sri Lanka, England, and even Australia isnt too far away. i think the next 2yrs will be very interestin for Test Cricket, with India havin to go through wat Australia is going through now (rebuilding process) and a chance for teams like Sri Lanka and England to prove whether they r consistent or no. n 2ndly being a Pakistani as well as cricket lover, i would dearly want Pakistan team to do well also, though alot will be mockin me for wat i have said n rightly so coz the chances r low. bt really a settled Pakistani team, free from ne on or off field controversies, would always add alot of spice into cricket.

Completely agree with u anoopshameed, India's the best of the lot end of story. At least India didnt get to no. 1 by default (For eg. SA went to no 1 after losing to Aus at home and only after Aus lost the ashes). The last series India lost was to Sri Lanka in 2008!! Cmon ppl its one thing to say there's no one dominating yet, but another to demean the team which is the best. India would've been no 1 even earlier if not for Sydneygate. Anyways lets see what happens in the next few series, hope its all clear and puts an end to this nonsense

One thing I'd like to ask is when OZ's were on top they were also missing test series win in India and that did not come through till 2005. None really said OZ's are the disputed no. 1 Test Side (make no mistakes - they were a great test side) The point I'm making is when you're no. 1 side it means you've been consistent enough during the time period and you have a high win ratio compare to the others.

In the process, if you beat every other team in their backyard - that's a wonderful achievement (one should look to do that) but by missing out on it should not trigger everyone to say you're no.1 spot doesn't make much of a sense and you're a most disputed no.1 test side.

Indian Cricket still requires paramount time to become unarguably the no 1 team in the world...their ranking at the top of the icc table can exist only if they become the best bowling & fielding side.....& it is this combination that has to win us matches rather than the mighty bat in the hands of our batsmen that sends the ball sailing inti the crowd.....if these three can coexist then we can walk with our heads held high as the champions......

The panel for the most part do present the points clearly. It is OBVIOUS there is no clear cut #1. I always say the #1 rank and the undisputed #1 tag are 2 completely different things. The FTP is not good 1st of all. The reason why very few (outside Ind of course) see Ind as the #1 team is due to the fact that they are no where close to how Aus 1995-2006/7 and W.I 70's-95 were. These 2 teams were almost unbeatable in ANY conditions. Ind, who remain poor in the field and very inconsistent with bowling, twice fought to draw series vs SA in Ind and still failed to beat Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka (very close to Ind conditions) in recent times. SA you will have to say most flattered to deceive because after winning a string of tough away series and claiming strong batting, the best bowling and by far the best fielding, they lost to Aus in SA and then only drew with Eng (although the foolishly prepped batting wkts which suited Eng). I disagree they have an aging prob, most their side is U30!

I cannot understand the question saying " Other teams have caught up" .This is totally wrong. Australia and West Indies were Up and Up compared to other test teams when they dominated. Other teams were more or less even. Once Australia and WI lost their generation of class players the strength of these teams came down to levels of other teams.