World Ranking

[Dawn_Run]

...level with Iran

Read Here (http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/07/20/story212521.html)

[terry9]

its a joke!

usa 6th! :eek:

[Metrostars]

its a joke!

usa 6th! :eek:

Plus the US will probably leap-frog Mexico to 5th when the next rankings come out if they win the Concacaf Gold Cup this week. I'm sure they will drop down in a few months when the remaining Euro qualifiers will be played. But this does have implications in that if Mexico or the USA are still in the top 6 by the time the World Cup finals groups are decided in December and other teams such as France do not qualify, by FIFA's rules one of them will be a top seed. But I'm sure the Euros plus Blatter will do everything in the power to change the rules so this doesnt happen.

I think these rankings are more accurate:

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index/0,2548,108551,00.html?articleid=108551

[sligoman]

How in the name of Jesus are Iran level with us? :confused:

[Peadar]

How in the name of Jesus are Iran level with us? :confused:

They don't play in the UEFA section.

[Metrostars]

They don't play in the UEFA section.

Plus, Iran are actually a pretty good team. They have already qualified for the World Cup and have a number of players playing in Germany and other european countries. Plus we didnt exactly blow them away in the World Cup playoff a few years ago.
Ya'know, the world doesnt revolve around the English Premier League and Europe.
Also, if we cannot beat the likes of Israel and Switzerland, we shouldnt have any complaints.

[dancinpants]

I don't think there are too many in here who can complain with Irelands position in fairness. As Metro said we can't put away Switzerland or Israel (twice). The States and Mexico are so highly ranked because they seem to play an international every friggin' week!!! ... while we pox around giving it our best against teams in poxy friendlies.

Also TBH the list is poo, I think we can all say that the US aren't better than Germany, England, Italy, France and the like. I would however suggest that they may be on a par with ourselves.

[Donal81]

The USA are not the 6th best team on the planet, simple as that, so these ratings are obviously spurious. I wouldn't bother with them, to be honest.

[Stuttgart88]

I wouldn't bother with them, to be honest.

The only position I'm interested in maintaining is first place in Group 4!

[Qwerty]

I don't think there are too many in here who can complain with Irelands position in fairness. As Metro said we can't put away Switzerland or Israel (twice). The States and Mexico are so highly ranked because they seem to play an international every friggin' week!!! ... while we pox around giving it our best against teams in poxy friendlies.

Also TBH the list is poo, I think we can all say that the US aren't better than Germany, England, Italy, France and the like. I would however suggest that they may be on a par with ourselves.

The US is better than Ireland, they had a good run in the last World Cup - they have done well when invited to play in the Copa America and usually do well in the Gold cup as well. They are making rapid progress.

[Metrostars]

I'd say right now that Ireland and the US are pretty even. But there is a lot of young talent coming through in the US and are improving all the time.

[Fergie's Son]

I'd say right now that Ireland and the US are pretty even. But there is a lot of young talent coming through in the US and are improving all the time.

The US is an improving team but I would not rate them against Ireland. Most of their games are played against incredibly weak opposition and event their games against Mexico are mostly meaningless as both countries always qualify.

[Metrostars]

The US is an improving team but I would not rate them against Ireland. Most of their games are played against incredibly weak opposition
When was the last time you saw the US play?


even their games against Mexico are mostly meaningless as both countries always qualify.

Meaningless? Really?

From Sports Illustrated:


Yes, Hard Feelings
In a continuation of a bitter rivalry, the U.S. travels to Mexico for a World Cup qualifier this week and attempts to do what it has never done: win at the dreaded Azteca
By Grant Wahl

Landon Donovan doesn't know what's coming this Sunday. He can't know. Not until you've played for the U.S. at Estadio Azteca in Mexico City can you understand what it's like to face your nation's most bitter soccer rival in that 115,000-seat caldron, a place where the Americans have never won a game. U.S. veterans of the Azteca speak in evocative terms about sensory overload. The sound of the hostile fans? "Like playing inside a beehive," says midfielder Cobi Jones. The towering, almost vertical grandstands? "Like Mad Max's Thunderdome," says retired defender Alexi Lalas. The choking smog and 7,200-foot altitude? "I once saw Cobi cough up something that looked like a brownie," says former forward Eric Wynalda. "It's like never smoking your whole life, then being told to smoke a pack of cigarettes and try to function normally. You get sick."
The Yanks will get another taste of the Azteca -- site of Pelé's exploits in the 1970 World Cup and Diego Maradona's in '86 -- when they face Mexico during the final stage of World Cup qualifying. Each side won its first of 10 qualifiers, placing them at the top of the six-team group from North and Central America and the Caribbean. Only three of those teams are assured a berth next year in Germany. Donovan, the 23-year-old U.S. captain, is preparing for the worst. "I've never played in front of 100,000," he says. "From what I hear, every condition you can imagine is as bad as it gets: the crowd, the noise, the altitude, the smog, the field, the heat. That's what Mexico counts on, and you have to take it out of play."

So debilitating are conditions at the Azteca, says U.S. Soccer Federation executive vice president Sunil Gulati, that the USSF has tried to strike a deal with its Mexican counterpart on the sites for their home-and-home World Cup qualifiers: If you host your game in some other city -- say, low-altitude Monterrey -- we'll stage ours in heavily Hispanic Los Angeles, where Mexico's supporters normally outnumber U.S. fans by a factor of 10. The Tricolores have never accepted, prompting the USSF to schedule two straight qualifiers with Mexico during frigid weather in Columbus, Ohio. Mexican journos dubbed the most recent one, a 2-0 U.S. victory on a 29° day in February 2001, La Guerra Fría. The Cold War.

That's typical for the most heated international rivalry in North American sports. Since 1934 the U.S. and Mexico have clashed 49 times on the soccer pitch, and though the Mexicans have dominated the series, 28-11-10, the Yanks have gained the upper hand in recent years with six wins in the last eight matches. Their most stunning victory came at the 2002 World Cup in Jeonju, South Korea: With the stakes the highest and the stage the largest, the U.S. eliminated Mexico 2-0 in the second round. For Mexican-Americans whose fútbol loyalty lies with their native land, the agony of that loss remains vividly painful. "I have cried three times in my life," said Regelio Ruiz, a 36-year-old used-car salesman from Las Vegas, while attending a Mexico-Argentina game in L.A. this month. "That day was one of them."

As with any worthwhile rivalry, U.S.-Mexico has had its excruciating moments. Like the time in 1997 when Mexico's Ramón Ramirez karate-kicked Lalas in the groin ("a full-frontal assault on my manhood," as the recipient put it). Or the manifold occasions on which Wynalda lashed out at Mexico fans in the U.S. ("The more people I had rooting against me," he says, "the more people I flipped off.") Or the 2004 Olympic qualifying tournament in Guadalajara, when the crowd chanted Osama, Osama. Or that epic '02 World Cup match, during which, Donovan says, Mexican forward Luis Hernández turned to him after an on-field tangle and snarled, "I will find your mother and kill her."

"To say things like that is pretty evil," Donovan says. "I'm sure it's something he's forgotten, but I never will."

Though the Tricolores don't deny the intensity of the competition, not all of them take it personally. "The U.S. has grown so much in its soccer, because it has a league now and many players in Europe," says longtime Mexico goalkeeper Jorge Campos, now a national team assistant coach. "But that doesn't mean we hate the Americans. Cobi Jones is a very good friend of mine."

Yet much more than soccer fuels many Mexican fans' animus toward the U.S. team, says Rodolfo de la Garza, a Columbia professor who specializes in immigration studies. "There are very few instances in the history of the two countries where Mexico has either been dealt with fairly or has won when there were differences," he explains. "Central to Mexican nationalism is anti-Americanism. The U.S. invaded Mexico on various occasions, and by their judgment the Mexicans lost half their land. There's a built-in structure of resentment, a built-in rivalry.

"Mexicans have one big sport. They invest completely in it, and it is deeply resented that the U.S. beat them at the World Cup. That sticks in their craw. It should be their game. But the power and the money of the U.S. has denied them even that."

The U.S.'s recent domination has led to extensive soul-searching in the Mexican soccer community -- as well as numerous theories to explain the change in fortunes. "For me it's easy," says Javier Aguirre, who coached Mexico's 2002 World Cup team and now runs Osasuna in Spain's La Liga. "In the last 10 years the Americans have had 30 to 40 players in Europe. We have two or three players in Europe, and that is the great difference. Mexico doesn't have that type of competition." In other words, the comfort of staying at home and playing in the relatively lucrative (but insular) Mexican Football League might be stunting the Tricolores' development as soccer players. (Though that doesn't account for the fact that three of the four U.S. goal scorers in World Cup 2002 represented the supposedly inferior MLS.)

Martín Vasquez, a Mexican-American and the only player ever to compete for both countries, says the rise of U.S. soccer is tied to the type of players being drawn to the sport these days, ones who might once have chosen baseball, basketball or football. "In Mexico maybe some of the players are more gifted," says Vasquez, who's now an assistant for the MLS team Chivas USA, "but I think the American players are catching up because they have something the Mexican players don't have: athleticism."

Yet perhaps the most fascinating explanation is that the Tricolores have somehow lost the confidence they once had when facing their northern neighbor. Rare is the discussion that doesn't included the word mentalidad. "I think it's a psychological game now," says Guillermo Cantú, a former player for Mexico who now directs its national teams. "The mentality is on the American side, and we have to steal it."

Rafael Ramos, who covers the Mexican team for the Spanish-language newspaper La Opinión in Los Angeles, takes the notion a step further. "The Mexican writer Octavio Paz once said, Mexicans have more fear of victory than of defeat," he explains. "The fans are the same way. Just watch this next game against the U.S. No matter how much confidence they have in their team -- in the altitude, in the smog, in the pressure they'll bring against the U.S. -- they will grow worried. There will be total euphoria the first 10 to 15 minutes, but if a goal doesn't come, there will be complete silence. The doubt kills you. It's a very Mexican idiosyncrasy."

More than any other U.S. player, Donovan inspires mixed emotions from the Mexican fans. On the one hand they appreciate his fluency in Spanish and his fast-but-precise playing style, which some observers consider vaguely Mexican. Not for nothing did Donovan receive a third-place vote from the Mexican federation in the 2002 FIFA World Player of the Year balloting. On the other hand Donovan offended his hosts at the '04 Olympic qualifying tournament in Guadalajara, where he was caught relieving himself discreetly on a training-field shrub. Caught on video, the incident got huge play in the Mexican media. "To me it was never a big deal," he says. "I would say chanting, 'Osama, Osama,' carries a lot more weight than me going to the bathroom on the side of their field."

Ultimately, Donovan's best response might be the one that translates into any language: Scoreboard, baby. "If you're a Mexican soccer fan, it must be incredibly disheartening at this point," says Lalas. "Because that one thing that you could pin your hopes on was, At least we're going to kick your ass on the soccer field. When that's taken away, it must be depressing. But I'll tell you what: We've taken it away, and we're not giving it back. It's up to them to come and get it. And I hope that we keep kicking their ass, time and time again."

But it's one thing for that to happen in a U.S. stadium, quite another if it took place in the vaunted Azteca. "If Mexico loses at home against the United States," says Ramos, "only God can say what might happen."

On Sunday he may find out.

Issue date: March 28, 2005

[dancinpants]

Qwerty it aint hard to do well in the Gold Cup FFS!!. Here's the opposition: Honduras, Colombia, Panama, Trinidad & Tobago, Canada, Costa Rica, Cuba, South Africa, Mexico, Guatemala, Jamaica. Aside from Mexico, Colombia and South Africa it reads like a "who's who" of half assed footie nations!!

Then when your world cup qualification involves getting past Panama, Costa Rica, Guatamala, T&T. THIS is why the Yanks are ranked 6th in the world. The get full ranking points for beating sh!te teams in "competitive" competition!!!. They are certainly NOT better than Ireland, they are at best on a par.

I heard on the news last night that their semi-final against Honduras pulled a crowd of 42,000 to Giants Stadium - 10% were there to support the States :eek:

[geysir]

These fifa rankings do have no weight when it comes to what matters. seedings in WCQ and WCF groups
It is ignorant to slag off the USA. If you don't rate their achievements in WCQ games then judge them by their performances in the 2002 WCF, they compare favourably to Ireland but definitly not 6th best in the world.

Metrostars, how did the game go in the beehive?

[Metrostars]

These fifa rankings do have no weight when it comes to what matters. seedings in WCQ and WCF groups
It is ignorant to slag off the USA. If you don't rate their achievements in WCQ games then judge them by their performances in the 2002 WCF, they compare favourably to Ireland but definitly not 6th best in the world.

Metrostars, how did the game go in the beehive?

The US lost 2-1 at the Azteca, they didnt perform that well on the day but it was only the second time in 12 meetings they've lost to El Tri since 2000.

Listen, I'm not saying they are number 6 in the world, in reality they are in the 15-20 range. But ranking teams can be subjective or objective. FIFA goes with this rankings procedure that is complicated, taking into account the type of games played, the opposition, where the game is played, number of goals scored and when the game is played. The points gained from winning games are weighted depending on the opposition e.g. if the USA beats Panama 1-0 in a World Cup and Argentina beats Brazil 1-0, Argentina will get more points. It's not the USA's fault that the competition in the region is not keeping up with their progress. They have made huge progress in the last 5 years mainly due to the success of player development with MLS.

In the Central American countries such as Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama, and also Mexico, footie is their number one sport. Here in the US, it ranks behind NFL, NBA, Ice Hockey, Nascar, Baseball, College Basketball and College Football in terms of fan popularity. Plus there is the somewhat typical old-type american view that soccer is a foreign game and it's for pussies. But that is slowly changing. Thats why a lot of time when they play games at home US fans are outnumbered by immigrants who support their team.

It's easy for people to slag off the US due to the fact that it us not the number 1 sport here and for past poor performances. But as I said before, great strides have been made in the last few years and the rest of the world is taking notice.

[Closed Account 2]

A pretty much full strength Iran side just lost 3-0 to QPR tonight... so I'm not sure theyre that good.

[Superhoops]

A pretty much full strength Iran side just lost 3-0 to QPR tonight... so I'm not sure theyre that good.
That game was played on Saturday. Iran are also playing Millwall and Portsmouth. Their squad is made up almost entirely of reserves, all drawn from the local Iranian league. They did not have any of their overseas players, mainly German based, in the squad.

Iran have already qualified for Germany next year, even though they still have to play Japan away, next month.

From an Ireland point of view, the main interest in Saturday's game was Wayne Henderson, playing in goal for QPR. He is on trial from Villa. A clean sheet wont have done him any harm.

[TheBoss]

http://www.irishfootballonline.com/news_story.php?newsid=6090

We are now 51st, North still better than us :eek:

[John83]

Redundant thread: http://foot.ie/showthread.php?t=55406

[citizenerased]

what a shock............

[gspain]

We're 31st in the world now according to the latest rankings

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index/0,2548,135896,00.html?articleid=135896

We're ahead of Slovakia but behind powerhouses of Ecuador and the U.S.

Back ahead of Northern Ireland too.

[Poor Student]

We're ahead of Slovakia but behind powerhouses of Ecuador and the U.S.



Why the disparaging sarcastic remark about Ecuador? They acquitted themselves quite well in the last World Cup.

[RogerMilla]

in fairness the US should be ahead of us with the population they've got , the superior quality of facilites and at least equal qulaity of coaching etc etc

[EalingGreen]

Why the disparaging sarcastic remark about Ecuador? They acquitted themselves quite well in the last World Cup.

Indeed, their results were respectable - victories over Poland and Costa Rica and defeats by England and Germany.

That said, their high ranking can be accounted for by another factor (aside from the fact that S.America is arguably weighted higher vis a vis Europe than it should be).

Ecuador's home record is formidable. In the last World Cup Qualifying campaign (a drawn-out affair in S.America), their home results were as follows:
Venezuela: 2-0
Peru: 0-0
Columbia: 2-1
Bolivia: 3-2
Chile: 2-0
Brazil: 1-0
Paraguay: 5-2
Argentina: 2-0
Uruguay: 0-0

Of course, it may just be coincidence that at 9,300 ft. (2,850m.), Quito is the second highest Capital city in the world! (The highest is La Paz in neighbouring Bolivia, at 11,800 ft. = 3,600m, where Ecuador won their away game 2-1!)

Anyhow, congratulations to the ROI for their recent recovery in the rankings.

A win in NI's next game in August (home to Liechtenstein) should narrow the points gap a little, ready for September, when ROI are away to Slovakia/Czechs and we're away to Latvia/Iceland.

And whilst it doesn't count for anything in the scheme of things, it's still a bit of fun (at least when the team you support is still climbing! ;) )

[gspain]

Why the disparaging sarcastic remark about Ecuador? They acquitted themselves quite well in the last World Cup.

Fair comment. Actually it was the dizzy heights of 31st that muddled my brain.:o

They have done well i nthe last 2 World Cups. The U.S. deserve to be ahead of us too.

[Cymro]

And a 3-0 win against the might of San Marino moves us up to the lofty position of...............74th. :rolleyes:

Bet you're really jealous eh? :o

[RogerMilla]

in fairness its our place in the seedings that are most important

[shakermaker1982]

more respectable. Scotland and England do not deserve such lofty positions and are sure to keep tumbling.

[Cymro]

more respectable. Scotland and England do not deserve such lofty positions and are sure to keep tumbling.

Scotland deserve their position based on recent results. England don't, I'll give you that. Rankings are rigged to make sure the same teams stay in the top 10 though.

[livehead1]

it merely demonstrates what a joke the rankings are. 2 wins against average opposition at home and we leap 20 places!

[carloz]

Scotland deserve their position based on recent results.
Do they really though, the only good result they have had recently that springs to mind is the victory over France. Other than that they have had very little.

[Kivlehan]

in fairness the US should be ahead of us with the population they've got , the superior quality of facilites and at least equal qulaity of coaching etc etc

Soccer is such a minor sport here though. Our best athletes are in American Football, Basketball, Baseball, our 3 major sports. Then you have Hockey and the Olympic sports (track, swimming, skating, etc).

Soccer is below those, really a niche thing, to the extent where when I share that I am a soccer fan people look at me like I've got something wrong with me (which may be true is completely irrelevant to my being a soccer fan). When I find another soccer fan to talk to over here, it is like a little cult is formed.

We may have a population 100x Ireland, but it's far down the rung of activities our best athletes are interested in. Our best athletes have the opportunity to make $100 million contracts here in the USA in American Football, Basketball and Baseball. In Ireland you are competing with Gaelic Football and Hurling, but I'm not sure if the monetary incentive is the same detterent against soccer. I would expect a great athlete could make a lot more money in the English leagues just across the water as a soccer player than he could domestically as a Gaelic footballer or Hurler, correct?

I think based on the interest level, we're (the USA) ranked at about the right place. I'm surprised we've been ranked higher. Our population is only one factor.

PS - Having watched the two recent matches of both USA (on ESPN2) and Ireland (via Setanta delayed broadcasts), USA has looked the better team, mainly because Landon Donovan has been on fire. I'd love to see a friendly between the two though.

[eirebhoy]

it merely demonstrates what a joke the rankings are. 2 wins against average opposition at home and we leap 20 places!
In fairness we jumped to 31st which is still mediocre territory. I'll give the new ranking system a chance. It looks pretty accurate to me.

Here's how the system works:
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1871529,00.html

And here's Europe's top 20 teams from the rankings:

1 Italy
2 Germany
3 Netherlands
4 Portugal
5 England
6 Spain
7 Czech Republic
8 Ukraine
9 Croatia
10 Romania
11 Greece
12 Russia
13 Turkey
14 Scotland
15 Switzerland
16 Poland
17 Denmark
18 Sweden
19 Republic of Ireland
20 Serbia

One thing that sticks out to me is Sweden are 4th in the UEFA Seedings for the next WC but the 18th highest European team in the FIFA rankings.

[Closed Account 2]

In fairness we jumped to 31st which is still mediocre territory. I'll give the new ranking system a chance. It looks pretty accurate to me.

Here's how the system works:
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1871529,00.html

And here's Europe's top 20 teams from the rankings:

1 Italy
2 Germany
3 Netherlands
4 Portugal
5 England
6 Spain
7 Czech Republic
8 Ukraine
9 Croatia
10 Romania
11 Greece
12 Russia
13 Turkey
14 Scotland
15 Switzerland
16 Poland
17 Denmark
18 Uruguay
19 Sweden
20 Republic of Ireland

One thing that sticks out to me is Sweden are 4th in the UEFA Seedings for the next WC but the 19th highest European team in the FIFA rankings.

:eek: :confused:


I must have missed that tectonic event, which saw Uruguay leave Latin America for Europe ;)

[citizenerased]

hate to break it to ya but uruguay arnt from europe

[eirebhoy]

:eek:


I must have missed that tectonic event, which saw Uruguay leave Latin America for Europe ;)
haha, edited.:o

[ollie]

I would expect a great athlete could make a lot more money in the English leagues just across the water as a soccer player than he could domestically as a Gaelic footballer or Hurler, correct?


GAA intercounty players only get expenses.They aren't 'paid'.They are amateur-for now

[NeilMcD]

Do they really though, the only good result they have had recently that springs to mind is the victory over France. Other than that they have had very little.

Away wins to Slovenia and Norway and Lithuania are not bad either.

[EalingGreen]

One thing that sticks out for me is Sweden are 4th in the UEFA Seedings for the next WC but the 18th highest European team in the FIFA rankings.

The seedings are worked out from competitive games (World and Euros) from the current and last series only. Sweden's record in those games is very good.
Whereas, the FIFA rankings cover four years and include friendlies.

I'm not sure about this, but I have a feeling Sweden play a number of friendlies "out of season" i.e. featuring their domestic (Summer) players, where the teams selected are weaker (hence less successful?) than the teams they pick for competitive matches, where they include their stars who play outside of Sweden.

[Stuttgart88]

Did they get the dates wrong when they went to Windsor Park then? :)

[youngirish]

PS - Having watched the two recent matches of both USA (on ESPN2) and Ireland (via Setanta delayed broadcasts), USA has looked the better team, mainly because Landon Donovan has been on fire. I'd love to see a friendly between the two though.
USA don't or ever have had the calibre of players we have had though with our current management setup you might be right in your assumption that they may have looked better in recent years.

We should still beat them comfortably though in a game on neutral territory (we might struggle in the USA). The Czechs walked all over the USA at the World Cup and I'd rank them as similar to us at the moment (they are possibly slightly a better team overall though we IMO have better players to choose from).

I wouldn't consider the USA to be too much better than Wales though their ranking might indicate otherwise (mainly because they generally only play against very poor opposition in ranked matches). If the USA joined UEFA tomorrow and had to play in the Euro qualifiers they wouldn't qualify for any finals and would float far down the rankings (harsh but true).

[citizenerased]

in fairness we have a far better team than USA, Yet the USA always preform well in tournaments, and generally well as a team.

[eirebhoy]

I wouldn't consider the USA to be too much better than Wales though their ranking might indicate otherwise (mainly because they generally only play against very poor opposition in ranked matches).
I think that's a bit unfair. USA get the exact same amount of points for beating 52nd placed Costa Rica in a qualifier as we'd get for beating Wales or Austria (74/75th). A win for them against Canada would be the equivalent of a win for us against Estonia or Malta.

Even a win for USA against Mexico will get them the same amount of points as a win for us over Finland.

[DmanDmythDledge]

When FIFA changed the ranking calculation were all matches in the 4 year period before that changed to reflect the new system or did it only count for games from then on?

[eirebhoy]

When FIFA changed the ranking calculation were all matches in the 4 year period before that changed to reflect the new system or did it only count for games from then on?
Yeah all previous matches were used.

[Cymro]

Do they really though, the only good result they have had recently that springs to mind is the victory over France. Other than that they have had very little.

Still, they are near the top of their group and were top until last month after which they have fallen. The new rankings system tends to give priority to more recent results and Scotland have done well this campaign. 19th does not seem wrong to me, especially when you consider where England are.



I wouldn't consider the USA to be too much better than Wales though their ranking might indicate otherwise (mainly because they generally only play against very poor opposition in ranked matches). If the USA joined UEFA tomorrow and had to play in the Euro qualifiers they wouldn't qualify for any finals and would float far down the rankings (harsh but true).

USA really gave us a thrashing last time we played them. Admittedly we were under strength that day (when aren't we?) but I think they are often underrated. They weren't under-rated by the old rankings that had them in 4th though, rather the opposite.


We should still beat them comfortably though in a game on neutral territory (we might struggle in the USA). The Czechs walked all over the USA at the World Cup and I'd rank them as similar to us at the moment (they are possibly slightly a better team overall though we IMO have better players to choose from).

Also, you say this but the Czechs are a much different side since the World Cup and even now I'd have them as a better side than you. The side that beat USA 3-0 in the World Cup was in much better form and Jan Koller was fully fit, a key player for them.

[kingdom hoop]

GAA intercounty players only get expenses.They aren't 'paid'.They are amateur-for now

Saying around my way that there's no such thing as a poor Kerry footballer!

Oh, and that's poor financially, though it rings true for sport too of course!

[EalingGreen]

Did they get the dates wrong when they went to Windsor Park then? :)

Well that might explain what went wrong on their previous visit to Ireland (Lansdowne, 01/03/06 ;) ), but I doubt whether the Swedes would make the same mistake twice! :)

[Qwerty]

in fairness we have a far better team than USA, Yet the USA always preform well in tournaments, and generally well as a team.

Well they finished 32 out of 32 teams in WC2002 having gone into the tourney as 'dark horses'. They got to the semis of a Copa America but that tournament is up and down. They also have done OK in the Gold Cup but really haven't shone in the WC. Player for player we are better but they are good athletes and have an excellent attitude as you would expect. They continue to improve.