Fosse Fox Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 OK here's the latest wet dream from Zurich's toss pots: P Team Pts P+/- Pts+/- 1 Brazil 1611 0 0 2 Spain 1565 0 0 3 Portugal 1249 0 0 4 Netherlands 1231 0 10 5 Italy 1184 0 0 6 Germany 1082 0 -25 7 Argentina 1076 0 -8 8 England 1068 0 0 9 France 1044 1 0 10 Croatia 1041 -1 -11 11 Russia 1015 0 12 12 Egypt 967 1 0 13 Greece 964 -1 -4 14 USA 957 0 7 15 Serbia 947 1 3 16 Uruguay 899 2 -3 17 Mexico 895 0 -41 18 Chile 888 -3 -60 19 Cameroon 887 0 0 20 Australia 886 0 3 21 Nigeria 883 -1 0 22 Norway 882 0 3 23 Ukraine 875 2 20 24 Switzerland 866 2 12 25 Slovenia 860 -2 0 26 Israel 857 -2 0 27 Côte d'Ivoire 856 0 10 28 Romania 853 0 10 29 Turkey 830 4 32 30 Algeria 821 1 0 31 Paraguay 820 -1 -2 32 Ghana 800 0 -2 33 Czech Republic 793 -4 -34 34 Slovakia 777 4 35 35 Colombia 776 -1 -1 36 Denmark 767 -1 0 37 Sweden 761 0 4 38 Honduras 734 2 7 39 Bulgaria 711 0 -29 40 Costa Rica 710 2 4 41 Republic of Ireland 709 2 19 42 Gabon 700 -1 -7 43 Scotland 699 1 15 44 Ecuador 694 -8 -69 45 Japan 682 0 8 46 Latvia 652 0 0 47 Korea Republic 632 0 13 48 Burkina Faso 611 4 22 49 Venezuela 608 0 3 49 Lithuania 608 -1 -8 NB Algeria up one place England and USA no change and Slovenia down two...
Cat Burger Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 Seen where Norway are compared to Denmark and Sweden? How.the.frig.
Asha Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 How on earth are Poland not in the top 49, when the likes of Gabon, Burkina Faso and Venezuela all are? And Portugal third?
Fosse Fox Posted 26 May 2010 Author Posted 26 May 2010 Looks like this fantasy has you all creamin' yourselves. More stat porn soon...
dandannieldanok Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 Does anyone really give a stuff about these? We have the World Cup to show us who's the best and who isn't.
shen Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 Czechs down four places after defeating USA only yesterday? Good to know the rankings are up to date!! @Catburger: That is indeed an indication of how stupid these rankings are. They didn't win a single game in 2008, and the only win against higher-ranking opposition last year was against Germany in a friendly (that must've given them a ridiculous amount of 'points' for them to rank 22nd!).
Guest Bilo Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 How have they worked out that Croatia, who shipped 9 goals to England alone in qualifying and finished below 23rd placed Ukraine in a failed attempt to qualify, are better than Serbia who embarrassed France in the qualifiers to win the group? How are Israel, who came nowhere near qualification, better than an Ivory Coast side featuring Drogba, Kalou and the Toure brothers? How are Egypt 18 places above Algeria when they were exactly equal in their qualification group and lost the subsequent play-off? How are England 7 places behind a Portugal side that finished 2nd in a group behind 36th placed Denmark, only narrowly beat 51st placed Bosnia to qualify and recently drew 0-0 with 117th placed Cape Verde? I'd love to meet the people who make these decisions.
Fosse Fox Posted 26 May 2010 Author Posted 26 May 2010 Czechs down four places after defeating USA only yesterday? Good to know the rankings are up to date!! @Catburger: That is indeed an indication of how stupid these rankings are. They didn't win a single game in 2008, and the only win against higher-ranking opposition last year was against Germany in a friendly (that must've given them a ridiculous amount of 'points' for them to rank 22nd!). Though released today current rankings are based on performances up to the 10th May. Got to give those gnomes time to whip their slide rules out...
shen Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 Though released today current rankings are based on performances up to the 10th May. Got to give those gnomes time to whip their slide rules out... If only they were gnomes! Alas they are real
MC Prussian Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 The calculation is somewhat royally complicated and is relative only in regional terms - that's why you'll still find Uruguay, Greece, the US or Australia that high up - they're just that good because everyone else in their respective qualifying group/qualification region is so damn weak and/or they're still profitting from a European/World Cup Winners' bonus. Russia, Croatia, Norway the other odd ones for me.
Fosse Fox Posted 27 May 2010 Author Posted 27 May 2010 OK listen up. Here's the semi official, unweighted historical index of the top World Cup performers. The more observant will note that England's all time standing corresponds with the latest FIFA ranking (ranking/wanking oh I get it now! doh!). WINNERS 1 Brazil 5 W ('58, '62, '70, '94, '02) 2 RU ('50*, '98) 2 3RD ('38, '78) 1 4TH ('74) 2 Italy 4 W ('34*,'38, '82, '06) 2 RU ('70, '94) 1 ('90*) 1 3RD ('78) 3 Germany^ 3 W ('54, '74*,'90) 4 RU ('66, '82, '86, '02) 3 3RD ('34, '70, '06*) 1 4TH ('58) 4 Argentina 2 W ('78*,'86) 2 RU ('30, '90) 5 Uruguay 2 W ('30*,'50) 2 4TH ('54, '70) 6 France 1 W ('98*) 1RU ('06) 2 3RD ('58, '86) 1 4TH ('82) 7 England 1 W ('66*) 1 4TH ('90) RUNNERS-UP 8 Holland 2RU ('74, '78) 1 4TH ('98) 9 Czechoslovakia# 2RU ('34, '62) 10 Hungary 2RU ('38, '54) 11 Sweden 1RU ('58*) 2 3RD ('50, '94) 1 4TH ('38) THIRD PLACE 12 Poland 2 3RD ('74, '82) 13 Austria 1 3RD ('54) 1 4TH ('34) 14 Portugal 1 3RD ('66) 1 4TH ('06) 15 Chile 1 3RD ('62*) 16 Croatia 1 3RD ('98) 17 Turkey 1 3RD ('02) 18 United States 1 3RD ('30) FOURTH PLACE 19 Yugoslavia# 2 4TH ('30, '62) 20 Belgium 1 4TH ('86) 21 Bulgaria 1 4TH ('94) 22 Korea Republic 1 4TH ('02*) 23 Soviet Union# 1 4TH ('66) 24 Spain 1 4TH ('50) * = hosts ^ = includes results representing West Germany between 1954 and 1990 # = states that have since split into two or more independent nations
Mee Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Agree with most of that i think. Anything can happen it the World Cup though.
Guest Bilo Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Elo Rankings seem a bit more realistic to me. 1 Brazil 2085 CONMEBOL 1 2 Spain 2078 UEFA 2 3 Netherlands 2011 UEFA 4 4 England 1972 UEFA 8 5 Italy 1922 UEFA 5 6 Germany 1919 UEFA 6 7 Argentina 1899 CONMEBOL 7 8 Mexico 1870 CONCACAF 17 9 Croatia 1866 UEFA 10 10 France 1855 UEFA 9 11 Chile 1851 CONMEBOL 18 12 Portugal 1838 UEFA 3 13 Serbia 1833 UEFA 15 14 Egypt 1827 CAF 12 15 Uruguay 1819 CONMEBOL 16 16 Russia 1818 UEFA 11 17 Turkey 1782 UEFA 29 18 Australia 1766 AFC 20 Korea Republic 1766 AFC 47 20 Ukraine 1762 UEFA 23 EDIT: First number denotes Elo points, second denotes Confederation and third denotes FIFA ranking. Some dramatic differences there.
Webbo Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 OK listen up. Here's the semi official, unweighted historical index of the top World Cup performers. The more observant will note that England's all time standing corresponds with the latest FIFA ranking (ranking/wanking oh I get it now! doh!). WINNERS 1 Brazil 5 W ('58, '62, '70, '94, '02) 2 RU ('50*, '98) 2 3RD ('38, '78) 1 4TH ('74) 2 Italy 4 W ('34*,'38, '82, '06) 2 RU ('70, '94) 1 ('90*) 1 3RD ('78) 3 Germany^ 3 W ('54, '74*,'90) 4 RU ('66, '82, '86, '02) 3 3RD ('34, '70, '06*) 1 4TH ('58) 4 Argentina 2 W ('78*,'86) 2 RU ('30, '90) 5 Uruguay 2 W ('30*,'50) 2 4TH ('54, '70) 6 France 1 W ('98*) 1RU ('06) 2 3RD ('58, '86) 1 4TH ('82) 7 England 1 W ('66*) 1 4TH ('90) What does that prove?Are you seriously saying that Uruguay and Germany deserve to be above us?
Fosse Fox Posted 27 May 2010 Author Posted 27 May 2010 Elo Rankings seem a bit more realistic to me. 1 Brazil 2085 CONMEBOL 1 2 Spain 2078 UEFA 2 3 Netherlands 2011 UEFA 4 4 England 1972 UEFA 8 5 Italy 1922 UEFA 5 6 Germany 1919 UEFA 6 7 Argentina 1899 CONMEBOL 7 8 Mexico 1870 CONCACAF 17 9 Croatia 1866 UEFA 10 10 France 1855 UEFA 9 11 Chile 1851 CONMEBOL 18 12 Portugal 1838 UEFA 3 13 Serbia 1833 UEFA 15 14 Egypt 1827 CAF 12 15 Uruguay 1819 CONMEBOL 16 16 Russia 1818 UEFA 11 17 Turkey 1782 UEFA 29 18 Australia 1766 AFC 20 Korea Republic 1766 AFC 47 20 Ukraine 1762 UEFA 23 EDIT: First number denotes Elo points, second denotes Confederation and third denotes FIFA ranking. Some dramatic differences there. Les Ros bifs better than the Spaghetti hoops, the current World Cup holders, and zee Argy Bargies? And the Tortillas in 8th place? In yer chilli con carne amigo!
FoxyPV Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 What does that prove?Are you seriously saying that Uruguay and Germany deserve to be above us? Definitely. They nearly always outperform England at the World Cup (and the Euros)
Guest Bilo Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Les Ros bifs better than the Spaghetti hoops, the current World Cup holders, and zee Argy Bargies? And the Tortillas in 8th place? In yer chilli con carne amigo! Of course you'll rubbish it. Your beloved Serbia are still below your Croat rivals. The Elo rankings aren't perfect but are much more realistic. Argentina qualified by the skin of their teeth and Italy are not the side they were in 2006. Not exactly ridiculous.
shen Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Of course you'll rubbish it. Your beloved Serbia are still below your Croat rivals. The Elo rankings aren't perfect but are much more realistic. Argentina qualified by the skin of their teeth and Italy are not the side they were in 2006. Not exactly ridiculous. It's still heavily Euro biased though, isn't it? Brazil, despite being the defending Copa America and Confederations Cup champions, winning the South American qualification group and having a far superior WC record than Spain, are still just 7 measly points ahead of them. And no offense, but what have England achieved that justifies a 4th place in the rankings? Denmark have achieved just about the same as them in the past few years, yet they don't even feature in the top 20?
Fosse Fox Posted 27 May 2010 Author Posted 27 May 2010 Of course you'll rubbish it. Your beloved Serbia are still below your Croat rivals. The Elo rankings aren't perfect but are much more realistic. Argentina qualified by the skin of their teeth and Italy are not the side they were in 2006. Not exactly ridiculous. The ELO should stick to what they're bog standard average at - mildly crumby mainstream '70's/80's bop-pop I seem to remember seeing Italy at Euro 2008 and that Argentina have reached the Finals of the last two Copa America's and were beaten by Brazil on both occasions. Not as hard as winning Wemberlee frienderlies against the likes of Slovenia, Egypt and Mexico of course...
Guest Bilo Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 It's still heavily Euro biased though, isn't it? Brazil, despite being the defending Copa America and Confederations Cup champions, winning the South American qualification group and having a far superior WC record than Spain, are still just 7 measly points ahead of them. And no offense, but what have England achieved that justifies a 4th place in the rankings? Denmark have achieved just about the same as them in the past few years, yet they don't even feature in the top 20? As I have said to Chandler/Radovan/Fosse, they aren't perfect. There are some really quite strange ones but still not as flawed as the FIFA rankings. Denmark are playing in their first tournament finals since 2004 so that goes some way to explaining their lowly ranking of 21st. That seems harsh on a team that beat Portugal in the qualifiers but a damned sight better than FIFA's ranking of 36th, especially when Portugal are a ridiculous 3rd.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.