Jump to content

New Fifa Rankings


Recommended Posts

The new rankings are coming out this Wednesday and FIFA is introducing a new system for calculating the rankings. They are taking into account the last 4 years of competition rather than the 8 years used previously. Under the new system, results will be counted over a four-year period, with weight given to the strength of opponents and calibre of tournaments. Every match will count as three points will be given for a win, one point for a draw and nothing for a loss. Of course they will be factoring in the tournament level and the standard of regional competitions. Also another interesting fact about the new system is that all points from all matches will lose half their value after 12 months. This is supposed to make the rankings more relevant.

Brazil is expected to remain #1 even with the Italian WC victory according to a FIFA specialist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well lets predict the rankings seeing that it is based on four years...using 2002 WC 2006WC and euro champs as the major tournaments

1.brazil (2002 W 2006 QF)

2. germany (2002 F 2006 SF)

3. italy (2006 W 2002 QF)

4. France (2006 F )

5. portugal (euro finalists and 2006 SF)

czech republic, holland, england...?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well lets predict the rankings seeing that it is based on four years...using 2002 WC 2006WC and euro champs as the major tournaments

1.brazil (2002 W 2006 QF)

2. germany (2002 F 2006 SF)

3. italy (2006 W 2002 QF)

4. France (2006 F )

5. portugal (euro finalists and 2006 SF)

czech republic, holland, england...?

Germany will not be thatz high since the didn´t had any real matches in the past 2 years

since the did´nt need to qualify for the WC as Host-nation

an friendlies dosn´t bring much points for the ranking

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well lets predict the rankings seeing that it is based on four years...using 2002 WC 2006WC and euro champs as the major tournaments

1.brazil (2002 W 2006 QF)

2. germany (2002 F 2006 SF)

3. italy (2006 W 2002 QF)

4. France (2006 F )

5. portugal (euro finalists and 2006 SF)

czech republic, holland, england...?

Shouldn't more recent accomplishments carry more weight in the rankings than older accomplishments in the total 4 years? Reason I ask is look at Brazil and Italy, both were champions and QFinalists the past 4 years. So shouldn't the current victory by Italy carry more weight in the rankings and therefore bring Italy a higher rank? Just wondering ... :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brazil and Italy in the top two places... the rest... I don't know... but I hope it will be a better ranking. The only thing I care is Chile be over the 40 teams (it's unbeliveable that we are under Iraq or Canada)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The new ranking is out. Brazil keeps topspot with Italy moving into second:

1 Brazil 1630 0 803

2 Italy 1550 11 822

3 Argentina 1472 6 726

4 France 1462 4 713

5 England 1434 5 693

6 Netherlands 1322 -3 554

7 Spain 1309 -2 553

8 Portugal 1301 -1 551

9 Germany 1229 10 533

10 Czech Republic 1223 -8 451

11 Nigeria 1149 0 413

12 Cameroon 1109 3 387

13 Switzerland 1028 22 380

14 Uruguay 985 8 296

15 Ukraine 961 30 352

16 USA 933 -11 177

17 Denmark 927 -6 191

18 Mexico 924 -14 166

19 Paraguay 915 14 262

20 Côte d'Ivoire 909 12 240

21 Colombia 902 6 221

22 Sweden 886 -6 177

23 Croatia 854 0 168

24 Guinea 850 27 253

25 Ghana 839 23 239

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/ind...rticleid=118178

Link to post
Share on other sites
The new ranking is out. Brazil keeps topspot with Italy moving into second:

1 Brazil 1630 0 803

2 Italy 1550 11 822

3 Argentina 1472 6 726

4 France 1462 4 713

5 England 1434 5 693

6 Netherlands 1322 -3 554

7 Spain 1309 -2 553

8 Portugal 1301 -1 551

9 Germany 1229 10 533

10 Czech Republic 1223 -8 451

11 Nigeria 1149 0 413

12 Cameroon 1109 3 387

13 Switzerland 1028 22 380

14 Uruguay 985 8 296

15 Ukraine 961 30 352

16 USA 933 -11 177

17 Denmark 927 -6 191

18 Mexico 924 -14 166

19 Paraguay 915 14 262

20 Côte d'Ivoire 909 12 240

21 Colombia 902 6 221

22 Sweden 886 -6 177

23 Croatia 854 0 168

24 Guinea 850 27 253

25 Ghana 839 23 239

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/ind...rticleid=118178

Thats much better and more realistic than the old version with USA and Mexico being over-rated due to points gained against poor teams in CONCAFE tournaments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats much better and more realistic than the old version with USA and Mexico being over-rated due to points gained against poor teams in CONCAFE tournaments.

Not really it still has Cameroon and Nigeria at 11 and 12. Not really. Germany's ranking is also low, considering they finished ahead of 6 of the teams in front of them and had more wins than any country in the tournament than everyone but Portugal and Italy. Though Germany not playing competitive matches might be the problem but still.

AND OMG WTF, WHY THE HELL DID CANDADA JOB 30 SPOTS FROM THE HIGH 80's TO THE MID-50'S??? :blink::blink::lol::lol::blink::blink: ???

Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been some massive gains but also some massives losses for some of the teams.

Italy have moved up 11 places to second spot, Germany have moved up ten places but are still only ranked the ninth best team in the world (perhaps because all their World Cup matches were at home). Switzerland and the Ukraine both have have big moves up the table - the Swiss moving up 22 places and the Ukraine a huge 30 places. Some of the African teams see their rankings increase significantly too Ghana and Guinea moving into the top 25 from just making the top 50 before. The America's see the US and Mexico dropping like stones, even Trinidad and Tobago drop 17 places despite holding Sweden in Germany, although Canada's ranking rises 29 places.

....some interesting talking points!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't like that ranking system. The ranks should rather be calculated with the results of the past 12 months and not those of the past four years. In four years, so much can change about the strength of a team (just see Brazil or the Czech Republic, for example) that it's simply not appropriate to rely on out-dated data and rank it much higher than it actually is.

That's why I'll rely on my personal impressions instead on those artificial rankings also in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AND OMG WTF, WHY THE HELL DID CANDADA JOB 30 SPOTS FROM THE HIGH 80's TO THE MID-50'S??? :blink::blink::lol::lol::blink::blink: ???

Becose the new calculation system works bether for Canada that the old one. The fact that Canada is in the top 60 is not sureprising, tought: the ELO football ranking system ranked Canada as 58.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmm... Chile at place 46º. Not that bad

At least, over Japan, Iran, S. Korea and Togo.

But I don't get how we could Honduras be in 38th place and Peru in 42th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fifa cant count. full stop...rankings shud reflect the best team over the last four years excl. WC 2002...a team ranked 5th shud on paper at this moment be able to beat a team ranked 10th..fifa has some way to go to correct the system but they are moving in the right direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I still don't like that ranking system. The ranks should rather be calculated with the results of the past 12 months and not those of the past four years. In four years, so much can change about the strength of a team (just see Brazil or the Czech Republic, for example) that it's simply not appropriate to rely on out-dated data and rank it much higher than it actually is.

That's why I'll rely on my personal impressions instead on those artificial rankings also in the future.

I totally agree with you Olympian. I have the same thoughts on this. Whilst I guess I am pleased with England being 5th, it seems ironic that when we have played better we have struggled in the rankings and now we play crap, we go up to 5th. Go figure...

Link to post
Share on other sites
i see australia is up 9 places to 33rd

Well, that puts Oz now as the highest-ranked Asian side. It'll be interesting to see if we can maintain that now through the Asian Confederation qualifiers and Asian Cup. There's been some dummy spitting in Oz about how some think we should be ranked higher, but I reckon it's just about right _ it's not like beating the Solomon Islands or Tahiti should automatically qualify us for a top 10 placing!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that puts Oz now as the highest-ranked Asian side. It'll be interesting to see if we can maintain that now through the Asian Confederation qualifiers and Asian Cup. There's been some dummy spitting in Oz about how some think we should be ranked higher, but I reckon it's just about right _ it's not like beating the Solomon Islands or Tahiti should automatically qualify us for a top 10 placing!

I think that both Korea's and especially Japan's ranking does not reflect there actually standing. It will be a three-way battle for the Asian Cup between those three with Australia and Japan probably fighting it out for the top spot. I would give it to Australia just because.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that puts Oz now as the highest-ranked Asian side. It'll be interesting to see if we can maintain that now through the Asian Confederation qualifiers and Asian Cup. There's been some dummy spitting in Oz about how some think we should be ranked higher, but I reckon it's just about right _ it's not like beating the Solomon Islands or Tahiti should automatically qualify us for a top 10 placing!

na i think australias ranking is about right! Poor old new zealand is ranked about 116 up 1 place from last time lol. We just dont get enough game time!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the last three tournaments (knocked out in the quarters in all three) England should really be 8th as that's where we always finish!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on the last three tournaments (knocked out in the quarters in all three) England should really be 8th as that's where we always finish!

So you see: Those rankings are still the same old sh*t they used to be. Maybe with some rank changes, but the calculation method is still senseless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...