New FIFA rankings

[Martyn]

ZURICH, Switzerland -- Brazil remained No. 1 on Wednesday in FIFA's redesigned world soccer rankings, with World Cup champion Italy moving up to No. 2. The United States dropped from fifth to 16th.

Under the new ranking system, which changes the criteria for rating the world's top teams, Argentina moved into third place with France No. 4 and England No. 5. ...

Rounding out the top 10 were: the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Germany and the Czech Republic.

The new system takes into account games played over the last four years instead of the last eight. It also changes the weighting system, with more importance given to World Cup games vs. exhibitions. Regional strength also is considered, as are opponents, goals scored and conceded, and home or away venues.

The U.S. and Mexico were two of the biggest losers.

The United States, knocked out in the first round of the World Cup, dropped 11 places. Mexico, which reached the second round, fell from No. 4 to 18.

The United States reached No. 4 in FIFA's April rankings, which drew attention to the inequity in FIFA's old ranking system. Both teams play in CONCACAF -- the North American and Caribbean region -- which is one of world soccer's weakest areas.

Making up the second 10 in the rankings were: Nigeria, Cameroon, Switzerland, Uruguay, Ukraine, United States, Denmark, Mexico, Paraguay and Ivory Coast.

Germany, which finished third in the World Cup and was the host nation, moved up 10 spots from 19 to No. 9. Germany's ranking suffered under the old system because, as host nation, it played no qualifying games.

Ukraine was another big mover, jumping 30 places to 15 thanks to its quarterfinal appearance. Ghana, which reached the second round, also took a big jump, going from 48 to 25.

Seem's more accurate to me now! Good move FIFA (Y).

[snyper]

ENGLAND no. 5!!!

Gimme a friggin break!

[cpu killer]

Brazil is No. 1, as per usual ;p

[profets]

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/ran...,2540,3,00.html

you're right, it is about time that they changed it. i think there is mistake in the article you posted, as goals scored/conceided & homey/away venues no longer are considered.

italy has jumped to 2nd, but being WC winners, true rankings should have them listed as 1st. not only have they won the WC, they havent lost a game in nearly 2 years, including several wins in qualifying, and friendlies with holland, germany recently.

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/ind...rticleid=118178

[snyper]

^^^ true

[qdave]

ahh germany is just 9t? :( not fair..it should be 1st :D

[dL]

About time. US should be last.

dL

[ThePitt]

damn I cant enter to the fifa site :(

[leesmithg]

ENGLAND no. 5!!!

Gimme a friggin break!

England should be @4 not 5.

Italy should be #1, how they grade Brasil @1 is a joke. Brasil should be 3 or 4.

[snyper]

Hey, look i supported england in the WC, but theres no way they are in the world top 5.

[profets]

http://www.eloratings.net/

i've always found this to be much more accurate rating system.. scroll to the bottom to see the list of rankings.

they have full history of all games played, and show how the points and rankings change from game to game

[L3thal Veteran]

England is 5th? :huh: :laugh:

The rankings look ok. Even though Brazil was kicked out in the Quarters, they still remain #1 due to that being their only loss in some time.

Everything looks fine except England in fifth. I have nothing against England, but their poor performance in the World Cup doesn't warrant a 5th place ranking :pinch:

[Martyn]

England is 5th? :huh: :laugh:

The rankings look ok. Even though Brazil was kicked out in the Quarters, they still remain #1 due to that being their only loss in some time.

Everything looks fine except England in fifth. I have nothing against England, but their poor performance in the World Cup doesn't warrant a 5th place ranking :pinch:

Your just upset because England are above Portugal, you are also forgetting that the ranking's are not drawn up completely based on World Cup performances.

[User6060]

Brazil shouldn't still be number 1, but I guess this last World Cup doesn't tell all.

[L3thal Veteran]

Your just upset because England are above Portugal, you are also forgetting that the ranking's are not drawn up completely based on World Cup performances.

Yes, they are now based on performances from up to two years ago. Shall we review? Hmm, I still remember England getting kicked out in the Euro as well.

I don't really care what Portugal is ranked, honestly. The rankings to me look accurate except England being 5th. They haven't achieved anything in over what, 6 years?

[xfodder]

Australia is 33rd ! :D up 9 places :D

AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE ! OI OI OI !

[Martyn]

Yes, they are now based on performances from up to two years ago. Shall we review? Hmm, I still remember England getting kicked out in the Euro as well.

I don't really care what Portugal is ranked, honestly. The rankings to me look accurate except England being 5th. They haven't achieved anything in over what, 6 years?

It's based on performances up to four years ago I think. England have gone out of the last two major tournaments on penalities, in the quarter finals, but we came top of both of our qualifying groups. We have also won the majority of our friendlys.

So to me it seem's about right.

[Matrix XII]

And Canada is!!! ...... yah..... :pinch:

[L3thal Veteran]

It's based on performances up to four years ago I think. England have gone out of the last two major tournaments on penalities, in the quarter finals, but we came top of both of our qualifying groups. We have also won the majority of our friendlys.

So to me it seem's about right.

Whatever floats your boat ;)

[Krpano]

England should be @4 not 5.

Italy should be #1, how they grade Brasil @1 is a joke. Brasil should be 3 or 4.

Dont be silly man...

England shouldnt be between the 10 first. What titles have they won in the last 10 years ?

Do you have any ideas about how many major competitions Brazil won since 94 ?

Just in case you want to compare BRA / ENG / ITA

FIFA comparison since 93

go there and select these team and you will have a nice graphic.

:whistle:

But i agree, these new ranking system is much better.

[planetik]

And Canada is!!! ...... yah..... :pinch:

:laugh: Ownt

[Martyn]

Whatever floats your boat ;)

Well it's because you know I am right, or at least you understood my points.

I am not trying to say that England are great, because we played crap at the World Cup. But what I am trying to say is that England deserve to be ranked somewhere between 5th to 7th.

If you think about it, England have got into the top eight of the last two tournaments, we have also come top of both of the qualifying groups and won the majority of our friendly's. So where else are FIFA meant to put us?

[Shibby]

Seems about right to me.

England would be higher if we was able to push for those semis and final spots.

I can't see how you can argue against these new ratings people. Sure brazil didn't do well in this world cup but over what the last 4 years they have been a good side that got results.

"The new system takes into account games played over the last four years instead of the last eight. It also changes the weighting system, with more importance given to World Cup games vs. exhibitions. Regional strength also is considered, as are opponents, goals scored and conceded, and home or away venues."

That basicly tells you why teams are ranked the way they are.

[MGS4-SS]

The US is too close to number 10, they should move the US to 68 or something.

[Matrix XII]

:laugh: Ownt

hehe, owned ourselves :p