Colonel Kurtz
New Member
Man Utd getting a dubious penalty at old trafford!! imagine that.
The footy !!
- Thread starter weloveliam@space
- Start date
Ranking Team Pts
Jan 11 +/- Ranking
Dec 10 +/- Pts
Dec 10
1 Spain 1887 0 0
2 Netherlands 1723 0 0
3 Germany 1485 0 0
4 Brazil 1446 0 0
5 Argentina 1338 0 0
6 England 1195 0 0
7 Uruguay 1152 0 0
8 Portugal 1090 0 0
9 Croatia 1075 1 0
10 Egypt 1036 -1 -42
11 Greece 1016 0 0
12 Norway 995 0 0
13 Russia 982 0 0
14 Italy 965 0 0
15 Chile 950 0 0
16 Ghana 924 0 16
17 Slovenia 897 0 0
18 USA 867 0 0
18 France 867 0 0
20 Slovakia 854 0 0
21 Côte d'Ivoire 845 0 -1
22 Switzerland 841 0 0
23 Serbia 837 0 0
24 Paraguay 832 0 0
25 Montenegro 824 0 0
26 Australia 796 0 -19
27 Mexico 795 0 0
28 Denmark 790 0 0
29 Japan 776 0 0
30 Czech Republic 751 0 0
Top 30 world rankings no surprises here
Jan 11 +/- Ranking
Dec 10 +/- Pts
Dec 10
1 Spain 1887 0 0
2 Netherlands 1723 0 0
3 Germany 1485 0 0
4 Brazil 1446 0 0
5 Argentina 1338 0 0
6 England 1195 0 0
7 Uruguay 1152 0 0
8 Portugal 1090 0 0
9 Croatia 1075 1 0
10 Egypt 1036 -1 -42
11 Greece 1016 0 0
12 Norway 995 0 0
13 Russia 982 0 0
14 Italy 965 0 0
15 Chile 950 0 0
16 Ghana 924 0 16
17 Slovenia 897 0 0
18 USA 867 0 0
18 France 867 0 0
20 Slovakia 854 0 0
21 Côte d'Ivoire 845 0 -1
22 Switzerland 841 0 0
23 Serbia 837 0 0
24 Paraguay 832 0 0
25 Montenegro 824 0 0
26 Australia 796 0 -19
27 Mexico 795 0 0
28 Denmark 790 0 0
29 Japan 776 0 0
30 Czech Republic 751 0 0
Top 30 world rankings no surprises here
Colonel Kurtz
New Member
My beloved arsenal were f***ing terrible last night, bendtner was a disgrace and arshavin is a shadow of 1 year ago.Ipswich wanted it more and deservd the win.
so Egypt are better than Italy? ok.
Morbyd
Moderator
African champions, aren't they?
I'm trying to figure out how Slovenia ranked above the US when they only made the World Cup in a playoff and in S.A. they didn't qualify from the group, which we won
how are England in 6th?
and Mexico in 27th?
it's all meaningless, when some of these countries will face each other in combat maybe once every 50 years
but it keeps the statisticians in business. I did get interviewed for a job on the spanish team at opta who do all the sports stats a few years back but I fell down on my knowledge of La Liga statistics. I didn't know who the pichichi (top scorer) was in 2002 and therefore failed
and Mexico in 27th?
it's all meaningless, when some of these countries will face each other in combat maybe once every 50 years
but it keeps the statisticians in business. I did get interviewed for a job on the spanish team at opta who do all the sports stats a few years back but I fell down on my knowledge of La Liga statistics. I didn't know who the pichichi (top scorer) was in 2002 and therefore failed
Last edited by a moderator:
Morbyd
Moderator
You got rejected by Opta too?
Buckley
Well-Known Member
http://football365.com/mailbox/story/0,17033,8744_6660440,00.html
Love the suggestion that Liverpool should get The Beatles to manage their team!
Love the suggestion that Liverpool should get The Beatles to manage their team!
The rankings are subjective, The USA was ahead of england's group should be ahead of England in rankings. I think not, The rankings are weighted towards European teams. The golden rule "He who hast the gold makes the rules"
This isn't the whole truth. There is a weighting that favours europe but IMO it still doesn't reflect the strength of European football. I think Europe gets a weighting of x 1.5 per match whereas USA/Mexico zone gets 1.25.
Thinking of all the ****e central america teams that are a given for Mexico/USA, is part of the reason they always rank so high.
As an aside I also think it's a joke that Europe is so disproportionately represented at world cups. It'd be like not letting tennis players in the world top 30 not play an event at the expense of a lesser player. Make sure each continent is rep'd for sure but Asia and others have an unfair chance of qualifying in relation to ability. Just because they come from a younger footballing region, shouldn't mean they have more chance to qualify, it should always be about ability, with minor safeguards to ensure global representation.
Morbyd
Moderator
It's the World Cup, not the European Championships.
I think they've got the numbers about right... although Oceania is a bit of an issue now that Australia's moved on to Asia. New Zealand? Really?
Look at some of the european teams that did not make it out of group stage. It is the world cup and Asia has the largest population on the planet. All regions have weak teams, If you look at Concaaf we send 2 teams and 1 other has a chance with a playoff win. If you look at population density is that fair.
you're both missing the point and contradicting yourselves.
it is the world cup, the pinnacle of football. it should always, always be about footballing excellence, not how many people live in a place or money or anything else.
it should be about the ability of the teams.
i agree that it has to include all continents so it is truly a world competition but the truth is some ****e teams from asia/conacaf get in at the expense of top european ones.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#Qualification_spots_by_continent
the new zealand thing is a joke and the conacaf thing ain't much better as mexico and usa are almost guaranteed qualification thanks to the 3.5 places. by contrast, none of the teams in europe or s.america could look to the same level of safety in qualifying as mexico/usa
it is the world cup, the pinnacle of football. it should always, always be about footballing excellence, not how many people live in a place or money or anything else.
it should be about the ability of the teams.
i agree that it has to include all continents so it is truly a world competition but the truth is some ****e teams from asia/conacaf get in at the expense of top european ones.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#Qualification_spots_by_continent
the new zealand thing is a joke and the conacaf thing ain't much better as mexico and usa are almost guaranteed qualification thanks to the 3.5 places. by contrast, none of the teams in europe or s.america could look to the same level of safety in qualifying as mexico/usa
You have proved my point. Europe gets 4 times as many places as the other federations. Europe has teams that are road kill also. If you look at results all federations team perform respectfully at the world cup.
matt collins
Active Member
The rankings are subjective, The USA was ahead of england's group should be ahead of England in rankings. I think not, The rankings are weighted towards European teams. The golden rule "He who hast the gold makes the rules"
The thing I find most amusing is that the only people I have EVER come across who care about the FIFA rankings are Americans
but that's not THE point.
europe is unfairly represented IMO. of course they have more teams in the finals for lots of reasons, but mainly because those teams are better.
the point is that no region has such an imbalance between representation and quality as europe does.
of the top 32 teams in the world, europe easily would have at least 20 teams in there. on a 1v1 basis who else has a sniff, 3-4 south american teams, usa/mexico, couple of african teams. you could easily make a case for europe getting half the places they actually merit.
whereas, asia/oceania get 6 teams in the finals, but other than one or two for representation, probably deserve none. how is that fair?
also there is a big difference between team's performing poorly, like france/italy, etc and being roadkill, like north korea or honduras.
Morbyd
Moderator
I haven't contradicted myself at all
I accept your apology.
Europe already get 40% of the spots, so it has little to do with population or money. The system already takes into account the points you've made. 40%!
10% of slots for Concacaf is hardly unjustified.
Edit:
Might have to agree about Asia/Oceania.... although Fifa's presumed logic (expanding the game where half the world's population lives) has some merit too.
Honduras has had some decent teams in the past!
Last edited by a moderator:
agentundercover
Active Member
Would FIFA agree or would they argue its a vehicle also to spread the footy family love?
Morbyd
Moderator
I think they see it as both. Competition first, spreading the love second... thus an attempt to put in some balance but (with 40% of teams in Europe) still keeping it competitive.