I think its any where between 9th-15th. The time à while ago when we third was ridiculous.
Its pretty random where you end up and can not argue with 15th. Its very possible we are 15th in the world. Its possible we could be ninth. Without à full international league we will never know.
"Third was ridiculous", "cannot argue with 15th"? Either you accept the rankings or you don't, you can't just choose to use the ones that agree with your opinion SWP. That is not logical, captain...
If you read Tom and Randy Andy's posts above I think they are more or less right, and they are using logic and facts to explain their theories.
Here is some logic.
A team who fails to beat Ukraine, Montenegro, republic of ireland is more likely to be way closer to 15th than 3rd regardless of Brazil results. That was my point.
Why "regardless of the Brazil results"?
Had we lost them games we would have been correctly lower in the rankings. With the results we have had since the euros i am not surprised where we sit.
We beat italy and Brazil. Good results.
But losing to sweden, and drawing with poland,Brazil, Ukraine and Montenegro who are below us in the rankings and our only competitive wins coming against minnows i am not surprised nor am i that bothered.
Its just an opinion, its not that illogical or controversal as others said.
Anyone got any idea what they mean by "points outside ranking calculation"?
Can't seem to find an explanation for it?
The England games listed are Andorra and Kazakhstan. Both of those were June 2009 so can only presume they are the games that have dropped out of the four year calculation.
Good old FIFA rankings at it again. Belgium (the most over-rated team in world football) are now second. We lose a place and move down to 15th.
Despite us having won every one of our Qualifiers whilst Costa Rica (Who are now ahead of us) only managed a draw against Paraguay and a loss against Panama in two March Friendlies whilst Belgium themselves currently have 11pts in the Euro Qualifiying whilst we have 15pts with us also having two results in March... a draw in a Friendly against Italy and a win in a Euro Qualifier (Which surely gets more points that a friendly match) against Lithuania... Yup all seems legit
It's because CR had decent results at the world cup, and we didn't. Next month when those results (partially) drop off the scale I expect they will fall down the table a bit.
It's because CR had decent results at the world cup, and we didn't. Next month when those results (partially) drop off the scale I expect they will fall down the table a bit.
The Rankings are updated on a monthly basis though so back in July / August could understand them being above us.
Have just done some research and the Country below is who has been ranked higher for the relevant months
July - October: Costa Rica November - January: England February - March: Costa Rica April - May: England June: Costa Rica
I just dont understand it... the below links show that neither England nor Costa Rica played a match between May / June so how can there be changes between the two?
Does the weight of results from past years not count too? Maybe we had better results in 2012/13 than they did, which now counts for less than it did last month?
It's because they have some kind of formula that takes into account results over the past 4 years but with results over the past 12 months counting for more "points". So if in May 2011 CR had lost to San Marino and American Samoa, and England had beaten Germany and Brazil, those results drop out of the equation altogether in June 2015 i.e. today. So that alters the average, whether games have been played or not. Last June's results are still in the main part of the calculation (being within the past 12 months). They will count for less in July, as they will be over 12 months old then. It's pretty complicated, but I think I get the gist of it...
Portugal meeting the criteria for 7th best team in the world. Crashing of the World Cup in the group stages, and losing to the footballing giants of Albania and the Cape Verde Islands in recent months.
I still can't work out Belgium ranked 2nd. Have their results been that impressive in the last 12 months??
After the World Cup finished their results have been as follows:
Australia (63: W. 2-0) ... Andorra (204: W. 6-0) ... Bosnia (32: D. 1-1) ... Iceland (38: W. 3-1) ... Wales (21: D. 1-1) ... Cyprus (96: W: 5-0) ... Israel (46: W. 1-0)
I still can't work out Belgium ranked 2nd. Have their results been that impressive in the last 12 months??
They won 4 games at the world cup, points gained there count four times more than points in friendlies, and 1.6 times more than Euro 2016 qualifiers. Again the significance of those 4 games will decrease next month.
I still can't work out Belgium ranked 2nd. Have their results been that impressive in the last 12 months??
They won 4 games at the world cup, points gained there count four times more than points in friendlies, and 1.6 times more than Euro 2016 qualifiers. Again the significance of those 4 games will decrease next month.
But they've moved above Argentina, who reached the WC Final. Both teams have played the same amount of games in the previous month....exactly none.
How can the rankings change?
Edit: Just read 'As none of the teams in the top 20 played a match last month, all movements in terms of points and positions are down to a devaluation of past results.'...which probably means Argentina played a game in May 4 years ago that no longer counts to their overall score.
I still can't work out Belgium ranked 2nd. Have their results been that impressive in the last 12 months??
They won 4 games at the world cup, points gained there count four times more than points in friendlies, and 1.6 times more than Euro 2016 qualifiers. Again the significance of those 4 games will decrease next month.
But they've moved above Argentina, who reached the WC Final. Both teams have played the same amount of games in the previous month....exactly none.
How can the rankings change?
Edit: Just read 'As none of the teams in the top 20 played a match last month, all movements in terms of points and positions are down to a devaluation of past results.'...which probably means Argentina played a game in May 4 years ago that no longer counts to their overall score.
Yes - I think that's about right Gary. Strange but true.
Recent performances have been a great achievement by Wales, precisely because ethey are nowhere near being the 10th best team in the World. It was the same at the world cup when Switzerland were seeded. It only makes FIFA a laughing stock…..Oh hang on…. It probably doesn’t make much odds really given that they are already such a laughing stock.
Norway were top seeds for a recent qualifying (either 2012 euros or 2014 wc) despite not even qualifying for a recent tournament. At least the Welsh are likely to be at the euros.
Edit- it was 2014 world cup, they finished 4th behind Switzerland, Iceland and Slovenia.
Comments
But this is what really counts. Unlucky Guatamala missing out on being world champions
http://www.ufwc.co.uk/
http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtable/index.html
Anyone got any idea what they mean by "points outside ranking calculation"?
Can't seem to find an explanation for it?
Had we lost them games we would have been correctly lower in the rankings. With the results we have had since the euros i am not surprised where we sit.
We beat italy and Brazil. Good results.
But losing to sweden, and drawing with poland,Brazil, Ukraine and Montenegro who are below us in the rankings and our only competitive wins coming against minnows i am not surprised nor am i that bothered.
Its just an opinion, its not that illogical or controversal as others said.
Good old FIFA rankings at it again. Belgium (the most over-rated team in world football) are now second. We lose a place and move down to 15th.
Have just done some research and the Country below is who has been ranked higher for the relevant months
July - October: Costa Rica
November - January: England
February - March: Costa Rica
April - May: England
June: Costa Rica
I just dont understand it... the below links show that neither England nor Costa Rica played a match between May / June so how can there be changes between the two?
Costa Rica: http://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/associations/association=crc/men/index.html
England: http://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/associations/association=eng/men/index.html
Maybe we had better results in 2012/13 than they did, which now counts for less than it did last month?
Crashing of the World Cup in the group stages, and losing to the footballing giants of Albania and the Cape Verde Islands in recent months.
Australia (63: W. 2-0) ... Andorra (204: W. 6-0) ... Bosnia (32: D. 1-1) ... Iceland (38: W. 3-1) ... Wales (21: D. 1-1) ... Cyprus (96: W: 5-0) ... Israel (46: W. 1-0)
How can the rankings change?
Edit: Just read 'As none of the teams in the top 20 played a match last month, all movements in terms of points and positions are down to a devaluation of past results.'...which probably means Argentina played a game in May 4 years ago that no longer counts to their overall score.
Ladies and gentlemen I give you the footballing powerhouse that is...Romania!
" Wales' 1-0 Euro 2016 qualifying win over Belgium will see Chris Coleman's side enter the top 10 in the Fifa rankings for the first time.
It will also place Wales among the top seeds when the 2018 World Cup qualifying draw is made in July."
bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33129142
bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33122183
Edit- it was 2014 world cup, they finished 4th behind Switzerland, Iceland and Slovenia.