FIFA World rankings?

[leighton]

To be honest with every major competition that is played the ranking points for those games must be huge and rightly so. The Euros has no weak teams in it normally. Well apart from Ireland lol.

 

[Carver]

Not looked at it in detail but it immediately looks as if heavily biased towards not losing games against teams of a decent standard and being consistent with it. As England have been consistently average with draws or scraping results it works in their favour.


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtable/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankin ... index.html</a>

The team you play ranking could be bottom as ranking posistion and team quality play no part. Thats why USA were ranked 4th best a few years back after spanking nations some people didn't even know existed for a couple of years

It does now but I don't know if it was worked out the same when USA had a good rating. If you beat Spain in the Euros you'll get 1800 points. If you beat Antigua in some piss pot game you'll get 627. As the ranking is based on average points won you've got to keep playing good teams to keep the average up.

If England played Andorra next in a World cup qualifier and beat them by a hat full England's ranking points would actually decrease just because of how poor San Marino are. (England's average points in 2012 is 702.5 points and we'd get 375 for the game making the average go down).

 

[sergiokun]

Spain
brazil
Germany
holand
Argintina
Italy
England
france
portagul



That's 9 top teams and in order for me based on there teams. No way are we 4th

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Not looked at it in detail but it immediately looks as if heavily biased towards not losing games against teams of a decent standard and being consistent with it. As England have been consistently average with draws or scraping results it works in their favour.


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtable/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankin ... index.html</a>

The team you play ranking could be bottom as ranking posistion and team quality play no part. Thats why USA were ranked 4th best a few years back after spanking nations some people didn't even know existed for a couple of years

It does now but I don't know if it was worked out the same when USA had a good rating. If you beat Spain in the Euros you'll get 1800 points. If you beat Antigua in some piss pot game you'll get 627. As the ranking is based on average points won you've got to keep playing good teams to keep the average up.

If England played Andorra next in a World cup qualifier and beat them by a hat full England's ranking points would actually decrease just because of how poor San Marino are. (England's average points in 2012 is 702.5 points and we'd get 375 for the game making the average go down).

Not exactly fair that we play Andorra and get punished because San Marino are poor
;)<br /><br />-- Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:40 pm --<br /><br />

Spain
brazil
Germany
holand
Argintina
Italy
England
france
portagul



That's 9 top teams and in order for me based on there teams. No way are we 4th

You would have Holland 4th, is this based on a sub reality that i dont have access to

 

[Carver]

Ah fuck it! I put San Marino in at the start then I wasn't sure if they had full membership of FIFA for all tournaments so changed it to Andorra, then missed changing the 2nd reference.

Duh!

 

[gazinho]

The team you play ranking could be bottom as ranking posistion and team quality play no part. Thats why USA were ranked 4th best a few years back after spanking nations some people didn't even know existed for a couple of years

It does now but I don't know if it was worked out the same when USA had a good rating. If you beat Spain in the Euros you'll get 1800 points. If you beat Antigua in some piss pot game you'll get 627. As the ranking is based on average points won you've got to keep playing good teams to keep the average up.

If England played Andorra next in a World cup qualifier and beat them by a hat full England's ranking points would actually decrease just because of how poor San Marino are. (England's average points in 2012 is 702.5 points and we'd get 375 for the game making the average go down).

Not exactly fair that we play Andorra and get punished because San Marino are poor
;)

-- Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:40 pm --

Spain
brazil
Germany
holand
Argintina
Italy
England
france
portagul



That's 9 top teams and in order for me based on there teams. No way are we 4th

You would have Holland 4th, is this based on a sub reality that i dont have access to

No thats not Holland in 4th thats holand they're a different entity altogether!

Just as an aside Uruguay would be in there for me.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

France as well, christ!!

 

[The_mace]

England don't deserve to be in the top 10. They are perrenial failures. These ranking needs to be completely over-hauled.

So who should be in the top 10 then as you clearly want the rankings to go on History rather than current form

Not in order but;
Spain
Germany
Italy
Portugal (based on Euro performance)
Brazil
Argentina
Uruguay
Chile (currently top of South America Qualifying)
Netherlands (Based on WC 2010 and qualifying)

That is 9 so maybe England would be 10th.

I want it to be based on current form, but there needs to be more weighting which appears to be lacking. When England have been eliminated at 2nd round in WC and Quarters at Euros they don't fall into top 8 atleast teams in the world.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

England don't deserve to be in the top 10. They are perrenial failures. These ranking needs to be completely over-hauled.

So who should be in the top 10 then as you clearly want the rankings to go on History rather than current form

Not in order but;
Spain
Germany
Italy
Portugal (based on Euro performance)
Brazil
Argentina
Uruguay
Chile (currently top of South America Qualifying)
Netherlands (Based on WC 2010 and qualifying)

That is 9 so maybe England would be 10th.

I want it to be based on current form, but there needs to be more weighting which appears to be lacking. When England have been eliminated at 2nd round in WC and Quarters at Euros they don't fall into top 8 atleast teams in the world.

England have lost 2 games in 18 months i think. Its not struggling form. Tournaments are weighted in points but its a shoot out, Liverpool won the CC this year i would hardly make them one of the top 4 based on a cup competition

 

[The_mace]

So who should be in the top 10 then as you clearly want the rankings to go on History rather than current form

Not in order but;
Spain
Germany
Italy
Portugal (based on Euro performance)
Brazil
Argentina
Uruguay
Chile (currently top of South America Qualifying)
Netherlands (Based on WC 2010 and qualifying)

That is 9 so maybe England would be 10th.

I want it to be based on current form, but there needs to be more weighting which appears to be lacking. When England have been eliminated at 2nd round in WC and Quarters at Euros they don't fall into top 8 atleast teams in the world.

England have lost 2 games in 18 months i think. Its not struggling form. Tournaments are weighted in points but its a shoot out, Liverpool won the CC this year i would hardly make them one of the top 4 based on a cup competition

I guess it's a case of you can only beat who is put in front of you. I just feel there isn't much 'value' in these rankings. Qualifying should have significantly less weighting compared to tournaments. Therefore in the last 2 competitions England have in effect finished 5-8th (probably 5th or 6th equal with France, but better than Greece and Czech Rep. in Euros and 9-16th (Officially finished 13th, but i'd say 11th) in WC.