Ireland drop two more places

[Stuttgart88]

Just thought I'd pop another post on. I was on 1966 posts and I'd hate to see my name associated with that year! 1967 was by far a better year.

[geysir]

Of course it does call for a suspension of rationality re FIFA's ranking procedure in accepting close to a 2nd seeding from Fifa rather than a 4th seeding from Uefa's ice bath of reality.
If you took away friendlies out of the FIFA equation it might be an interesting model. (note the non-commitment)

[eirebhoy]

The depreciation has nothing to do with how many points Ireland would gain with a 2-1 victory.
Depreciation is a fixed calculation to determine the loss in value of points which were won from 1-8 years ago
Depreciation is just a mathematical calculation but it is unknown because who in their right minds would want to go to all that work when FIFA do it for you every month.

I really don't understand the need for this. We win a match in 2002 and points get taken off us in 2006? That seems a bit silly to me. We've lost 5 points since November having not even played a match. Its ridiculous.

[NeilMcD]

Lads I think we can basically see that the FIFA Ranking System is a load of ****** and the Uefa one is much better. I dont think there is anybody except Sepp Blatter who would disagree with that.

[Dublin12]

Just thought I'd pop another post on. I was on 1966 posts and I'd hate to see my name associated with that year! 1967 was by far a better year.

Aren't you lucky you weren't born in that year unlike some

[pineapple stu]

I really don't understand the need for this. We win a match in 2002 and points get taken off us in 2006? That seems a bit silly to me. We've lost 5 points since November having not even played a match. Its ridiculous.

If you get points for matches, you have to lose them sometime. Sure UCD got 33 points taken off us there a few weeks ago when we were in ninth spot in the eL rankings - ridiculous! A game now has to impact on our current ranking, but a game ten years ago can't really. There has to be a way of moving that game's strength from very important to negligible.

People who give out overly about the rankings haven't taken the time to understand how they work. No, they're not completely accurate, but they do give a good general idea of how the teams rank (though I do think they over-rate friendly games).

[eirebhoy]

If you get points for matches, you have to lose them sometime. Sure UCD got 33 points taken off us there a few weeks ago when we were in ninth spot in the eL rankings - ridiculous! A game now has to impact on our current ranking, but a game ten years ago can't really. There has to be a way of moving that game's strength from very important to negligible.

People who give out overly about the rankings haven't taken the time to understand how they work. No, they're not completely accurate, but they do give a good general idea of how the teams rank (though I do think they over-rate friendly games).

Oh right, I get it now. Its actually a silly question now that I know the answer. So the top team in the rankings will stay in or around the 840 mark?

[Tired&Emotional]

People who give out overly about the rankings haven't taken the time to understand how they work.

Sorrrry! Can't take a week out of work to study this, better things to do!! I obviously haven't got the brain NASA would be glad to have.....

[pineapple stu]

Oh right, I get it now. It's actually a silly question now that I know the answer. So the top team in the rankings will stay in or around the 840 mark?

Dunno about that, but the main point is that Ireland aren't suddenly four points weaker because we didn't play a game - the rankings are more of a trend than an exact snapshot. Take them with a pinch of salt, but they don't deserve to be dismissed entirely.

Sorrrry! Can't take a week out of work to study this, better things to do!! I obviously haven't got the brain NASA would be glad to have.....

Well you'll never understand them with that attitude!