Route 1 football - England's future?

[Corky]

4 star   That's the same as Ireland and USA 

 

We reached the same stage of the last World Cup as USA.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

We reached the same stage of the last World Cup as USA.

 

We also got further than Italy and France.

[purpleronnie]

Have to say I do like Pride_Of_The_Midlands optimism.

[Corky]

We also got further than Italy and France.

 

So we should be rated higher than them on FIFA, which is all important.

[Dan]

4 star   That's the same as Ireland and USA 

 

Who should both be about 3 star. You really are the most hollow-headed prat I have ever come across.

[Manwell Pablo]

We also got further than Italy and France.

 

Pointless fact of the day is back, YES! We also went out at the same stage as Slovakia, Mexico, South Korea, Chile, and Japan, and Uruguay, Ghana, and Paraguay all got further. Add that to the fact that Italy and France both totally failed to turn up and failed to beat the likes of South Africa and New Zealand, it sort of makes your point totally irrelevant  

 

EDIT: Are we really discussing fcking FIFA, it's a computer game and it's star ratings are bollocks, please see FIFA 14, relegation fodder Bolton Wanderers AKA Leicester City Reserves being rated higher than us!

[kingcarr21]

I look forward to this thread every morning. Really is comedy gold.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

Pointless fact of the day is back, YES! We also went out at the same stage as Slovakia, Mexico, South Korea, Chile, and Japan, and Uruguay, Ghana, and Paraguay all got further. Add that to the fact that Italy and France both totally failed to turn up and failed to beat the likes of South Africa and New Zealand, it sort of makes your point totally irrelevant  

 

EDIT: Are we really discussing fcking FIFA, it's a computer game and it's star ratings are bollocks, please see FIFA 14, relegation fodder Bolton Wanderers AKA Leicester City Reserves being rated higher than us!

 

Thanks to Corky.

[Corky]

Thanks to Corky.

 

I think you'll find that was a 5 star pointless fact.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

Who should both be about 3 star. You really are the most hollow-headed prat I have ever come across.

 

Canada are 3 stars.

 

Costa Rica 3.5 stars.

[Stadt]

Man U are 5 stars, Everton aren't.

Bolton 3.5, us 3 star.

Loads of flawed examples.

[The Doctor]

Canada are 3 stars.

 

Costa Rica 3.5 stars.

 

And have you considered that maybe they're ridiculously over-rated?

 

I don't know why I'm taking you remotely seriously when you judge quality on FIFA ratings, but England are not a world-class team. They're good, but if you consider 5 stars as the best, they're not that. 4 would be about fair. In the top 20% of world teams, certainly, but not in the top 5%

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

And have you considered that maybe they're ridiculously over-rated?

 

I don't know why I'm taking you remotely seriously when you judge quality on FIFA ratings, but England are not a world-class team. They're good, but if you consider 5 stars as the best, they're not that. 4 would be about fair. In the top 20% of world teams, certainly, but not in the top 5%

 

We are arguably in the top 5% because the top 5% is basically top 10 in the world (there are over 200 countries in FIFA)

[The Doctor]

We are arguably in the top 5% because the top 5% is basically top 10 in the world (there are over 200 countries in FIFA)

 

And how many of those countries actually appear on the game. If you want to take all 200 countries onto it then 5 stars should be reserved for the top one or two percent - Spain, Brazil, Germany, Argentina & maybe Holland. 

 

Look, England aren't a bad side by any stretch of the imagination, but you are not world beaters - it's been 20 years since you got further than the quarter-finals in anything: that a top team does not make...

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

And how many of those countries actually appear on the game. If you want to take all 200 countries onto it then 5 stars should be reserved for the top one or two percent - Spain, Brazil, Germany, Argentina & maybe Holland. 

 

Look, England aren't a bad side by any stretch of the imagination, but you are not world beaters - it's been 20 years since you got further than the quarter-finals in anything: that a top team does not make...

 

Remind me of the last time Argentina got past the World Cup quarter-finals...

 

On normal FIFA I think there are only about 30 national teams but on the World Cup game there are over 200.

 

Why should 5 stars be reserved for the top 1 or 2%

 

5* - Top 10%

4.5* - Top 20%

4* - Top 30%

3.5* - Top 40%

3* - Top 50%

2.5* - Top 60%

2* - Top 70%

1.5* - Top 80%

1* - Top 90%

0.5* - Top 100%

 

Fair way of doing it.

[Guest Col city fan]

I've hoped for quite some time that young Ross Barkley is on the plane. He's a superb player and is definately not a long ball merchant.

[The Doctor]

Remind me of the last time Argentina got past the World Cup quarter-finals...

 

On normal FIFA I think there are only about 30 national teams but on the World Cup game there are over 200.

 

Why should 5 stars be reserved for the top 1 or 2%

 

5* - Top 10%

4.5* - Top 20%

4* - Top 30%

3.5* - Top 40%

3* - Top 50%

2.5* - Top 60%

2* - Top 70%

1.5* - Top 80%

1* - Top 90%

0.5* - Top 100%

 

Fair way of doing it.

 

Not just the world cup, Argentina have been in 4 copa america finals in the past 20 years (won 2, lost 2), while England haven't made it past the quarters of the euros.

 

Because making a ridiculous amount of teams 5 star would completely make a mockery of the ranking system. If 5 star is supposed to be the creme de la creme, then it should be given to the creme de la creme, not just any big name team.

[Fox92]

You can't judge any game on real life, come on!

 

I mean, Yaya Toure. 79 shooting. FIFA is some sort of sick joke, always has been, they get 9/10 things wrong.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

Not just the world cup, Argentina have been in 4 copa america finals in the past 20 years (won 2, lost 2), while England haven't made it past the quarters of the euros.

 

Because making a ridiculous amount of teams 5 star would completely make a mockery of the ranking system. If 5 star is supposed to be the creme de la creme, then it should be given to the creme de la creme, not just any big name team.

 

You can't compare the Copa America to the Euros. The Euros is much harder to win and we got to the semi-finals of Euro 96 which was less than 20 years ago.

 

The top 10% is the creme de la creme though.

[The Doctor]

You can't compare the Copa America to the Euros. The Euros is much harder to win and we got to the semi-finals of Euro 96 which was less than 20 years ago.

 

The top 10% is the creme de la creme though.

How is the euros much harder to win?

Well I'd certainly disagree there, 20 odd teams cannot stake a claim to be the absolute best in the world and furthermore, what has this generation of players done as a team to warrant being considered a top team?

[Dan]

Not just the world cup, Argentina have been in 4 copa america finals in the past 20 years (won 2, lost 2), while England haven't made it past the quarters of the euros.

 

Because making a ridiculous amount of teams 5 star would completely make a mockery of the ranking system. If 5 star is supposed to be the creme de la creme, then it should be given to the creme de la creme, not just any big name team.

 

I've said this for a while although it's an argument for FIFA, it doesn't really belong in here.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

How is the euros much harder to win?

Well I'd certainly disagree there, 20 odd teams cannot stake a claim to be the absolute best in the world and furthermore, what has this generation of players done as a team to warrant being considered a top team?

 

Paraguay got the final of the 2011 Copa America.

 

They wouldn't even be able to qualify for the Euros.

 

Okay maybe top 5% is the creme de la creme.

[The Doctor]

Paraguay got the final of the 2011 Copa America.

 

They wouldn't even be able to qualify for the Euros.

 

Okay maybe top 5% is the creme de la creme.

 

By the same logic - Greece won Euro 2004, they wouldn't be able to qualify for the copa america. (As an aside, what makes you so sure that Paraguay couldn't qualify for the euros?)

 

And my question still - what has the current generation of england players done to be considered one of the worlds best sides like you are suggesting?

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

By the same logic - Greece won Euro 2004, they wouldn't be able to qualify for the copa america. (As an aside, what makes you so sure that Paraguay couldn't qualify for the euros?)

 

And my question still - what has the current generation of england players done to be considered one of the worlds best sides like you are suggesting?

 

Believe me, Greece would be able to qualify for the Copa America if they were South American 

 

I doubt Paraguay would qualify. Maybe they would but no way would they get to the final.

 

What has the current generation of Argentina players done to be considered one of the world's best sides?

[The Doctor]

Believe me, Greece would be able to qualify for the Copa America if they were South American 

 

I doubt Paraguay would qualify. Maybe they would but no way would they get to the final.

 

What has the current generation of Argentina players done to be considered one of the world's best sides?

 

And you are certain of that because? And paraguay are no mugs - bear in mind they won their group in the last world cup, held italy to a 1-1 draw, got to the quarters and only just lost to Spain. Stranger things have happened - e.g. Greece winning the euros. Your arrogance and ignorance is outstanding.

 

Well they've only lost 3 games in all competitions in the last 3 years and have arguably one of the worlds greatest ever players in their ranks (Messi). England meanwhile have lost 2 of their last 3 games, just scraped a win vs Denmark and arguably their best player hasn't really shone or looked world class in many a year (Rooney)