World Ranking

[SuperDave]

[QUOTE=Metrostars;672463]"Jacques Santini...will be greeted in every dugout of the country by "one-nil, one-nil" - Clive Tyldsley, 89th minute of France-England June 13, 2004.
"Ooooohhhh Nooooooo" Bobby Robson 91st minute.
QUOTE]

I remember I was working that day in a pub. Before the game, I had a break and was about to go down to the bookies to place a bet on a 28-1 shot with the £10 (northerner) I had in my pocket, but I was called away and had to work. One of the bouncers went down and placed the same bet I was going to place, but I never got down. Three-ish hours later he came back with his money, the best part of £300. What happened? England were up at half time, and lost the game. My bet was England half time/France full time. I'm still bitter. Nick Barmby let me down for a fortune on Saturday too.

[Rasher]

The Republic of Ireland have slipped six places in the new FIFA world rankings to 38th after the recent friendly draws against Bolivia and Ecuador.

Scotland are down nine to 23rd while England remain eighth following recent results.

After making a strong start to their Euro 2008 qualifying Group B campaign the Scots rose as high as 14th in the governing body's ratings.

But despite a 2-0 away win against the Faroe Islands last week, Alex McLeish's side have been overtaken by the likes of Serbia, Ghana, Ivory Coast and the USA.

England held their position after drawing at home to Brazil in a friendly and winning their latest qualifier in Estonia last week.

Northern Ireland, who recently appointed Nigel Worthington as Lawrie Sanchez's successor, moved up four to 29th despite not having played since March.

Wales remain 75th after a friendly draw with New Zealand and the Euro 2008 stalemate against Czech Republic in Cardiff.

World champions Italy remain top while France have overtaken Brazil to go second. Argentina are down to fifth, now behind Germany who now occupy their highest position in four years

[Sligo Hornet]

Despite "reasonable" performances in our friendlies in USA, we have slipped down the rankings (again!) to 38th!!

[Paddy Garcia]

Quality of the opposition, Bolivia are around the 97 mark. Understandably no credit for a draw there.

[Schumi]

Who cares? These world rankings are meaningless, they don't affect entry into competitions or seedings for anything. Our position in our qualifying group is the only statistic that matters.

[Cymro]

Armenia moved up 48 places last month, after winning 1-0 against Poland.

Now that's a decent result but not worth a 48 place jump surely?

These rankings are even more meaningless than the old system, and I'm not just saying that because we're 75th.

[youngirish]

Armenia moved up 48 places last month, after winning 1-0 against Poland.

Now that's a decent result but not worth a 48 place jump surely?

These rankings are even more meaningless than the old system, and I'm not just saying that because we're 75th.

They are meaningless rubbish. They are updated far too regularly and the fact that they now take friendly results into account makes them all the more ridiculous. No doubt EalingGreen is wetting himself since the North have jumped above us in the rankings even though they haven't played since the last update and we put out our C team against Ecuador and Bolivia in a pointless trip to the States.

[Bald Student]

But how can they be meaningless? Our drop to 24th place was a major factor in the old manager loosing his job! Unless..........

[youngirish]

But how can they be meaningless? Our drop to 24th place was a major factor in the old manager loosing his job! Unless..........

I think that main reason he lost his job was our poor finishes in the two qualifying campaigns he overseen. The rankings would have mattered nowt if we'd qualified for anything in his time in charge and he'd still have his job.

[eirebhoy]

I think they're fairly accurate anyway and the new system is decent. People have to remember that every month we're also losing points from results 12, 24, 32 and 48 months ago. It's all averaged.

Armenia moved up so much by beating Poland because that result improves their average so much. Last month they had 180 points. That's the average of all their points using the system. They get 1638 points for beating Poland. That's no more than Italy would get for beating Poland but it's not going to do much to Italys average obviously.

On top of that Armenia haven't even got a draw in June in the last 4 years so they won't lose any points. What that means is, say we beat Brazil last June. The points for that match would be halved because the match will then be outside the 12 month period. We're losing points for wins against Georgia, Albania, Jamaica, Holland, Faroes and a draw against Israel. No defeats in June in the last 4 years.

It's hard to explain. Read the guardian link:
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comme...871529,00.html

They are still meaningless though.

[Cymro]

If they got 1638 points for beating Poland surely they'd be top of the rankings?

The new system sees too many sharp changes either way. Armenia haven't suddenly become a team 48 places better after beating Poland, respectable result though it may have been.

[as_i_say]

havent seen EG around these parts lately-probably fears the worst for nordies after sanxhez departure. if a team as low as armenia beats a team as high as the polskis a huge jump in rankings is only fair.

San marino probably would have jumped 100 places if they got a draw with us

[RogerMilla]

EG must be on his hols or his mum pulled the plug on the internet !

[OneRedArmy]

I think they're fairly accurate anyway and the new system is decent. People have to remember that every month we're also losing points from results 12, 24, 32 and 48 months ago. It's all averaged.

Armenia moved up so much by beating Poland because that result improves their average so much. Last month they had 180 points. That's the average of all their points using the system. They get 1638 points for beating Poland. That's no more than Italy would get for beating Poland but it's not going to do much to Italys average obviously.

On top of that Armenia haven't even got a draw in June in the last 4 years so they won't lose any points. What that means is, say we beat Brazil last June. The points for that match would be halved because the match will then be outside the 12 month period. We're losing points for wins against Georgia, Albania, Jamaica, Holland, Faroes and a draw against Israel. No defeats in June in the last 4 years.

It's hard to explain. Read the guardian link:
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comme...871529,00.html

They are still meaningless though.

You've said the system is decent, and then proceeded not to back up why its decent, but to explain how it works.

Its fairly clear how it works, but it doesn't make it any more relevant and accurate (mainly for the reasons outlined in the posts above, principly the fact that friendlies aren't worth toffee anymore).

[Steve Bruce]

I would wind up a few different members about the rankings, but really they should be taken with a pinch of salt.

The rankings are based on results over the past 4 years. So if you had good results 4 years ago but bad results recently, then you'll be losing points from before and replacing them with none now. So that is why rankings fluctuate greatly.

Before it was over 7 or 8 years, which in my opinion was very silly as there could be a breed of 11 superstars replacing a breed of 11 wooden ones.(unlikely but you know my point)

These rankings are only a guideline and to me a bit of fun to use as banter.(which some people take very seriously and decide to be insulting)

People know in there heads which teams are the best in the world.

IMO Brazil is still the best team in the world, even if the rankings don't reflect that.

[OneRedArmy]

IMO Brazil is still the best team in the world, even if the rankings don't reflect that.

They actually have a tournament to decide the best team in the world and from memory Brazil aren't the champions.

[youngirish]

They actually have a tournament to decide the best team in the world and from memory Brazil aren't the champions.

They are nowhere near the best at the moment. I wouldn't even have them in third. They are sh*te defensively.

[Steve Bruce]

They actually have a tournament to decide the best team in the world and from memory Brazil aren't the champions.

Greece won the European championships, does that make them the best in Europe? And if that is the case how can Greece be the Best in Europe and Italy be the best in the World yet not the best in Europe?

That doesn't make any sense at all.

And if England/Germany/France etc win the European Championships next year, does that mean Italy are best team in the world bar Europe?

A very flawed arguement.

[Steve Bruce]

They are nowhere near the best at the moment. I wouldn't even have them in third. They are sh*te defensively.

It's all opinions.

I wouldn't have Germany being in the top 5. But they are.

[RogerMilla]

italy are far better than brazil , steve bruce , brazil should be the best with their personnel but they are nowhere near. to my mind they peaked in that confed cup tournament