QuoteJust having a closer look and I see Wales are just two spots behind us in 46th. That surprised me. I'd casually assumed they were destined to remain ranked around the 80-mark forever.
We're down three places to 44th in the latest rankings update: http://www.goal.com/en-ie/news/3942/...-world-ranking
Ireland's World Cup qualification rivals Austria have also risen by 22 places to 54 in the table, but Sweden have fallen four places to 31.
Just having a closer look and I see Wales are just two spots behind us in 46th. That surprised me. I'd casually assumed they were destined to remain ranked around the 80-mark forever.
Ever get the feeling that the rankings are stacked against us.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
A certain senile Italian doesn't help...
Too many draws!
Anyway, besides the unfortunate (major) effect of qualifying draws, don't care where we're ranked. It's how we perform. We need to win a few games.
Long-term our target should be to get back into Pot 2 for the next World Cup or two (albeit they are likely to be two of the ones more worth missing for various reasons if they remain in their present venues)...
Heavyweights Panama and the Cape Verde Islands have frog-leaped us as we remain in 44th position in the rankings as of today's update: http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/ran...ble/index.html
Aye, but it helps your ranking when your games are against Martinique, Sierra Leone and Equatorial Guinea, instead of Spain, England and Sweden. (Although Panama deserve credit for some great results such as beating Mexico at the Azteca, Cape Verde's recent opposition have been absolute pish!)Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Was taken aback today when I heard Wales are now 2 behind us in 46th place..... regardless of Bale they have something like 6 points in qualifying......
You could see a manager like Coleman using the world ranking as a bargaining chip when looking for a contract..... frankly I think Wales have under performed under Coleman for the most part...
Anyone know what ranking we had before pass it back to the keeper coach took over
See our ranking evolution on the top-right there: http://www.fifa.com/associations/ass...r=m/index.html
I think we were 41st when Trap took over but we've both risen and fallen significantly since.
I honestly think that we could win the world cup and Someone like Honduras would go on a good run and end up in the top-10.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
41st. Incidentally, the current ranking of 44th is the worst we've been ranked under Trap. Our average ranking under him is 34th, and we've been as high as 18th.
http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/ran...8&tm=8&ty=2013
By way of comparison, Stan began his reign ranked 26th, finished ranked 32nd, and had an average ranking of 38th, with the highest position being the 26th he inherited from Kerr, and the lowest 51st.
http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/ran...&tm=10&ty=2007
Kerr took over with Ireland ranked 14th, finished with us ranked 21st, our lowest ranking under him, and had us as high as 12th with an average ranking of 14th.
http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/ran...&tm=10&ty=2005
Mick Mac took over with us ranked 37th, had us as high as 13th and as low as 57th, with an average of 35th, and left us ranked 14th:
http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/ran...&tm=11&ty=2002
Which all proves pretty much nothing. World ranking is very subjective, and depends an awful lot on whether Liberia have played a string of friendlies against Burkina Faso and Lesotho, or Iran have put 19 goals past the Maldives. Overall competitive record is a far better measure of the success of a manager, especially when you look at it taking into account the quality of opposition played (due to qualifying for major finals etc.)
Our ranking would probably be better now if we hadn't qualified for the Euros, and played three friendlies against Liechtenstein, Andorra and San Marino. Would people really have preferred that?
We've done OK under Coleman. We have 6 points but are in with a decent chance of finishing 3rd in our group which would be progress. Also bear in mind it's a really tough group with no whipping boys so 6 points from as many games is not great but OK. The two wins against Scotland were good results and we've also beaten Austria in a friendly. We were also very unlucky not to get something at home to Croatia having led for most of the game. On the other hand Coleman has it all to prove, he's lost more than he's won and we've had some embarrassing performances (Bosnia 0-2 friendly home & Serbia 1-5 defeat away). We have Macedonia home and away and Serbia at home yet to play in this group, we would be looking at at least 5 points from those games.
The ranking is irrelevant. Most of the points have come from wins under Gary Speed, like the 4-1 win at home to Norway who were ranked in the top 10 at the time. Frankly the rankings are ridiculous now, that Cape Verde Islands can be near the top 30 is ludicrous when they haven't qualified for a World Cup ever. If I werwe FIFA I'd review the weighting system for certain confederations and consider going back to an 8-year or 6-year system.
"Life is like a hair on a toilet seat. Sooner or later you are bound to get pi$$ed off."
"In this league, a draw is sometimes as good as a win" - Steve Morison
I totally agree with the message behind your post — I just wanted to mention one thing that's often misunderstood, and that's the number of goals scored in a game. The only thing that matters is the result when it comes to ranking points. A 10-0 win vs Spain counts for the same as a 1-0 win.
It's laughable that a team like The Cape Verde islands is ranked ahead of us. They got one decent result against South Africa in a competitive game and they jump 13 places. But that's just the way the system works. African and South American teams tend to peak around now as they play all their qualifying games in quick succession, so any result is worth a lot more than a friendly result (e.g. Cape Verde have played 7 competitive internationals in the past 6 months).
As of today's update, we've fallen to 59th position in the FIFA rankings; our lowest position ever.
If we beat Germany and Kazakhstan next month we will rise to around 47th!
A more realistic prediction follows. Viewer discretion is advised.
SPOILER: Forecast is if we beat Kazakhstan and lose to Germany we will drop to around 66th.
Well that worked nicely. Grin and bear it.
Last edited by Irwin3; 12/09/2013 at 5:24 PM.
Fuggin' 'ell. Can you delete that post, Irwin? I can't bear reading it.
At least we only field eligible players.
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
Work this one out, Wales are 52nd 7 places higher than us... what a load of baloney!
We know.
WR are a an even bigger waste of space than the Trap book of Flexible Tactics...
No point in getting too worked up about rankings and seedings I don't think at this point. We finished ahead of the second seeds in the previous two campaigns... I reckon there's a good chance that would have still happened if we were seeded 4th instead of 3rd. It's probably a more important factor to get some way lucky with the draw. Just looking at this qualifying campaign for example...
Group A
1. Croatia
2. Serbia
3. Belgium
4. Scotland
5. Macedonia
6. Wales
Group E
1. Norway
2. Slovenia
3. Switzerland
4. Albania
5. Cyprus
6. Iceland
I would prefer to have been the 6th seeds and got Group E than 4th (maybe even 3rd) seeds and have got Group A.
I know the higher you're ranked/seeded the better chance you're giving yourself, but it's not the be-all and end-all.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks