Rankings

[Edgar]

Danny, these rankings are impossible to figure out. To my mind if a country was solely concerned with their ranking, they would only ever organise friendlies against the Faroes and San Marino, because the weighting towards a draw against a high ranked nation (say Italy) seems to be disproportionately disadvantaged against a win against the Faroes. The effort : reward ratio is not recognised by these rankings. For example in a month when Scotland only played the second best team in the world, Brazil, and lost 2-0 (no great shame), they dropped 16 places in the rankings. Particularly at a time when we attach great importance to the rankings, (around draw time), it really makes no sense to play one of the best nations in the world.

Absolutely not true. Faroe and San Marino would only bring your ranking down. It's about averages and minnows bring very few points.

That said, win lose or draw against Italy, we are too far from climbing into the second pot or falling into the 4th pot, so really the game is of no practical significance to our ranking position.

You're locked in Pot 3 now.

[shakermaker1982]

Norway, Slovenia, Norn Iron, Estonia and San Marino would be nice.

Spain, France, Romania, Poland and Kazakhstan might be tricky....

[French Toasht]

Fair enough Edgar, but I'm still baffled as to the operation of the rankings. Because its predicted that we will only rise one place in the June rankings when we have played 4 matches, won 3 and presumably lose to Italy (a predicted loss to Italy is factored into the predicted rise of one place). Now this has been a month where the majority of teams in Europe have either not played or just played one match. However we have 3 wins in the bag over most sides in Europe, yet still don't get the reward that deserves. I can only imagine that the predicted loss to Italy will be excessively punitive in terms of rankings to negate our three victories over Northern Ireland, Scotland and Macedonia.

Would it be better for us in terms of points to play and lose to Italy, than not play them at all. Basically do you get points for playing matches, even if you get beaten?

Also would a competitive victory over Macedonia not yield more points than a friendly victory over Italy?

[Edgar]

It's better to not play at all, than to play and lose. No, you don't get points just for playing matches. Look at San Marino - they play plenty of matches.
A competitive win over Macedonia brought you 862.5 points. A win against Italy would bring you only 573.

[French Toasht]

Thanks. OK, so we are predicted to rise one place to 33rd when presumably our reserve team are beaten by Italy.

So say we never played Italy (and thus, never lost that game), where would we rise to in the rankings?

[swinfordfc]

I think tomorrow game will finished 0-0 ... what would that do to our ranking?

[Torn-Ado]

Norway in Pot 1. Am I missing something here?

[Edgar]

Thanks. OK, so we are predicted to rise one place to 33rd when presumably our reserve team are beaten by Italy.

So say we never played Italy (and thus, never lost that game), where would we rise to in the rankings?

736 points (extra 24 points) than the predicted 708 (with a loss against Italy)

752 with a win.
721 with a draw.

[Charlie Darwin]

Even the alphabet is conspiring against Wales. Below San Marino

[geysir]

Wales have scraped out of the frying pan into pot 5.
Beating the whipping boys NI, saved their bacon.

[French Toasht]

Norway in Pot 1. Am I missing something here?

This is whats wrong with the rankings. One good half campaign and you can be catapulted into pot 1. Although if we were to draw them as our top seeds, I'd be delighted.

[Bottle of Tonic]

How did Montenegro acheive such a high ranking? They've only been in two campaigns right? Doing admirably but hardly setting the world alight. We've been decent for a couple of years now, yet seem to find it hard to make any significant progress upward ie out of pot flaming 3.

[Charlie Darwin]

They started from the bottom so all of the results they got (including draws against us) were against teams ranked a long way above them, so their gains were exaggerated. They'll probably find their level around 30-40 in a couple of years as their early results get discounted.

[Bottle of Tonic]

ah ya, makes sense that. Thanks to Irelands win on Saturday night I had a hangover that would kill a horse yesterday and I'm not at all back to 100% yet today.

I see Bulgaria are down to pot 4. Big fall from being pot 2 last campaign.

I actually don't follow this ranking craic at all, dunno why I'm getting involved!

[DannyInvincible]

I actually don't follow this ranking craic at all, dunno why I'm getting involved!

Get out before you can. You'll get hooked, I tell you. Hooked!

[Stuttgart88]

Edgar, do the rankings factor in whether Paul McShane was in the team or not? Our win against Scotland must have been even more valuable.

(Sorry Paul, feel guilty about that. Go get 'em cap'n.)

[BonnieShels]

I think my signature says it all, really.

If it was cricket you'd be in Pot 1.

[Cymro]

If it was cricket you'd be in Pot 1.

I know, it brings me so much joy, too. Come on England with your three Lions who represent the England (and Wales) Cricket Board under the acronym ECB! Oh, wait.....

[BonnieShels]

I know, it brings me so much joy, too. Come on England with your three Lions who represent the England (and Wales) Cricket Board under the acronym ECB! Oh, wait.....

No, the W is there... it's just really really really small.

[Montenegrin]

How did Montenegro acheive such a high ranking? They've only been in two campaigns right? Doing admirably but hardly setting the world alight. We've been decent for a couple of years now, yet seem to find it hard to make any significant progress upward ie out of pot flaming 3.

If we had beat Bulgaria,we would be in pot 1 for the next draw.Imagine that .