New FIFA rankings

[L3thal Veteran]

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?

Hmm, not to start any debates, but I can make the same argument with Portugal. Lets see take a look at a few things.

Here is the table for the rankings this year between both Portugal and England -

Now, the rankings look pretty much good overall until we get to June and July. Lets keep in mind that beginning in 2003, Portugal went to the final of the Euro 2004 and lost 0 games during World Cup qualifying. On top of that, Portugal lost no friendly games on their way to the World Cup and they were semi-finalists in the cup as well. It is just as comparable as England's, but Portugal should have the edge due to their victory over England in 2004 and their finals appearance.

See those rankings from May to July 2006? Can you explain to me how is it possible for England to move up 5 spots and Portugal moved down 1 spot when Portugal eliminated England from the cup and reached the semi-finals. To me, it seems like Portugal was punished for making it to the semis and England was rewarded for getting kicked out of the Quarters. They were rewarded 5 spots, one of the biggest jumps in the top 15 and they didn't even get past the Quarters :blink:

It just doesn't make sense to me :blink:

[deuz]

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

AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE ! OI OI OI !

well thats great n all but how come Ghana got like a huge *** push up and Aus got only 9 places...how very lame... :whistle:

[TokyoKiller]

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.

I agree with L3thal here, England has gone down in performance substantially in the past years, and Portugal is rising as a good football team. England doesn't deserve their position, they should be in the 11th or so position IMO and Germany should be at 5.

Portugal is a good team without Ronaldo, but hey I hate that guy so don't take my opinion for it :whistle:.

[virgo89]

I dont think italy should be second in THE WORLD, i mean they had a hard time beating Australia and USA.

[Robert Demoore]

Germany just beat Argentine during the world cup!

How can Argentine move up and Germany move down???

[dreamthief]

Germany just beat Argentine during the world cup!

How can Argentine move up and Germany move down???

As stated in the news article, Germany ranking suffered cause since they are the host nation, they dont play through the qualifying rounds.

Anyway, goes to show the ranking system is greatly flawed.

[Guest]

England 5th!? What a joke.

[wutang01]

Go the Socceroos! 33rd now! On top of the Asian rankings lol! :D

"I wanna jump and scream in a stadium, full of Australians!!"

[BroChaos Veteran]

the US got dropped from the 5th spot!? you've got to be kidding me....

:p

[PiracyX]

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?

Agreed :)

[mz_]

Germany just beat Argentine during the world cup!

How can Argentine move up and Germany move down???

Did you read the article?

Germany, which finished third in the World Cup and was the host nation, moved up 10 spots from 19 to No. 9.

As stated in the news article, Germany ranking suffered cause since they are the host nation, they dont play through the qualifying rounds.

Anyway, goes to show the ranking system is greatly flawed.

As stated in the news article, their ranking suffered under the old system, not with this new one.

And Germany didn't beat Argentina, they drew. :p

[DiEMOS]

great Ukraine moved up!!! :)

yay

[profets]

I dont think italy should be second in THE WORLD, i mean they had a hard time beating Australia and USA.

As stated in the news article, Germany ranking suffered cause since they are the host nation, they dont play through the qualifying rounds.

Anyway, goes to show the ranking system is greatly flawed.

if you want to see a history of all national team games, they are clearly listed here, along with different ranking system: www.eloratings.net

i was shocked about germany in 9th too, but i looked through their past year of games, and theyve had several losses, including 2 alone this year to italy

pS-, why dont you think italy should be 2nd? maybe they should be 1st instead? anyway, they tied usa 1-1 by giving them an own goal, while usa had 0 shots on net, and italy played horrible too, but it comes down to winning, tying or losing. australia was playing good game, but italy had several more scoring chances in teh 1st half, and were handicapped by poor red card decision, which obviously influenced the pk decision near the end.

to everyone complaining about england and portugal, the rankings are not random, its not some fifa exec's who just write up a list based on their opinions. its based on all their games from the past 4 years.

brazil has very few losses, maybe 1 in the past 2 years, actually 2 now including that world cup game. italy hasnt lost a game in almost 24 months also, and were the only undefeated team in euro2004 (stupid, i know)

to sum it up, the rankings are purely statistical.. if you check out that eloratings.net site, they have full history of all games, and they show how many points are gained/lost after each game, and how a team's ranking changes from game to game

[Martyn]

Now, the rankings look pretty much good overall until we get to June and July. Lets keep in mind that beginning in 2003, Portugal went to the final of the Euro 2004 and lost 0 games during World Cup qualifying. On top of that, Portugal lost no friendly games on their way to the World Cup and they were semi-finalists in the cup as well. It is just as comparable as England's, but Portugal should have the edge due to their victory over England in 2004 and their finals appearance.

See those rankings from May to July 2006? Can you explain to me how is it possible for England to move up 5 spots and Portugal moved down 1 spot when Portugal eliminated England from the cup and reached the semi-finals. To me, it seems like Portugal was punished for making it to the semis and England was rewarded for getting kicked out of the Quarters. They were rewarded 5 spots, one of the biggest jumps in the top 15 and they didn't even get past the Quarters :blink:

It just doesn't make sense to me :blink:

I agree that is pretty weird. You are forgetting though that since you were the hosts of Euro 2004, you did not have to qualify so you lost a few places there due to the fact that you played less games. Maybe FIFA have secretly introduced point reductions for teams that cheat ;).

[profets]

I agree that is pretty weird. You are forgetting though that since you were the hosts of Euro 2004, you did not have to qualify so you lost a few places there due to the fact that you played less games. Maybe FIFA have secretly introduced point reductions for teams that cheat ;).

i'm pretty sure they try to look at points per game average to compensate when one team plays more games than another

the reason there was so many jumps is because there was big change in the system.. the biggest being that 4 years are taken into consideration instead of 8 years.

portugal hasnt been too bad, but they do have losses in the past few years, 2 to italy since 2003 that i remember.

also, in WC2002, did portugal not lose to both usa and korea in the group stage and not make it out? maybe in a month or so wc2002 will be farther than 4 years so all the teams who have points from 2002WC will lose them

[sn00pie]

Woo, Italy is #2! :D

[L3thal Veteran]

After reviewing the team rankings, I like the way they structured them. Changing it from 8 years to 4 years is the best thing FIFA has made to the rankings.

[RaptorX]

FIFA made a good move with the rankings but Brazil are always 1st. Good thing that USA are down by a few place s because USA don't like football. Look at 94 World Cup when USA hosted it. Calling Maradona... Madonna (When I saw a report about 94 World Cup).

[L3thal Veteran]

Speaking of the US, their coach, or lack there of, will not re-sign with the team.

That is the best thing to happen to US sports in a long time.

[snyper]

The US world ranking was always inflated.

[fascist]

Speaking of the US, their coach, or lack there of, will not re-sign with the team.

That is the best thing to happen to US sports in a long time.

Trust me I was so happy about this news :p! The US could put up a good run for the world cup if they had the right leadership and someone who could unite them during the world cup and not the just the qualifying rounds.

[Orange]

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?

Something we both agree on. England 5th... They played pretty poor.

Good to see USA down to 16th. :rolleyes:

but Germany 9th? i think England should be swapped with Germany (Germany=5th/England=9th) :yes:

[T.Barl0w]

Something we both agree on. England 5th... They played pretty poor.

Good to see USA down to 16th. :rolleyes:

but Germany 9th? i think England should be swapped with Germany (Germany=5th/England=9th) :yes:

it dosent matter if you play good or bad though its about the results. Englands results (other than the draw and loss) were all wins with no goals conceded so thats why they are there.

[Powa]

I guess the top 10 is a pretty good summary. But I would move Germany down a few places. Maybe 7th or 8th.