Voinjama Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) In the qualification for Euro 2012, Belgium were in Germany's group. As good a group of players they have, they are not on Germanys level yet. Edited June 7, 2013 by Voinjama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRS-T Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 I have noticed in the build up to the Croatia-Scotland game a lot of people mentioning that they are ranked 4th in the world, are a world-class team and have players who played in the Champions League final. However I haven't noticed many people saying that the FIFA world rankings are a joke, there's is no way that Croatia are better Holland, Portugal, Italy, France and Brazil and how Croatia didn't qualify for the last World Cup and didn't get past the group stage at Euro 2012. Maybe it only applies when England are ranked 4th... rankings are a joke but Croatia are a top team and 3rd best in Europe. as said before only didnt get out of group as 2 finalists was in same group. from the 3 teams that beat Ireland they were the most impressive Lost 1-0 at home to Scotland. Awkward... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 not really. Isnt that the beauty of football, anybody can beat anybody on their day. Celtic beat barcelona this year nobody would say that Barcelona arent 3rd or 4th best team in Europe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted June 8, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted June 8, 2013 It says in the OP. The Copa America results have dropped out so countries with those have lost out.People being 'surprised' by how the FIFA rankings work is really starting to piss me off now. We all know they dont say who the best teams in the world are, they say who has collected the most ranking points over a given time are. Collecting a lot of ranking points does not necessarily make you a better team than somebody who hasnt has the opportunity to collect many at all.Quite.It's a mathematical system that rewards consistency of results over a given time period with greater weight given to results in competitive matches.Obviously FIFA is going to want a rankings system of some sort. Anyone got a better suggestion of how to do it?Elo ratings (which FIFA uses for the women's ranking). I'd recommend assessing actual results based on Jamesian sine, too. Every result going back to that first international between England and Scotland counts in this rating; the number of points awarded or deducted depends on how poorly the result was predicted by the ratings coming in.Example:Spain (rating 2125) defeats Germany (rating 2029) in Germany. With home-advantage of 100 rating points, the expectation for Spain is (1/(10^(4/400) + 1) = 0.494. Since Spain won (result value of 1.000), they would have (1-.494)*K (where K is used to assess the importance of the match: if it's at the World Cup finals, K=60, so Spain would take 30 points from Germany; for Euro finals, K=50, so 25 points are exchanged; for World Cup or Euro qualifying, K=40, so 20 points are exchanged; for a friendly, K=20, so 10 points).Meanwhile, if Spain (rating 2125) defeat Palau (the bottom team in the rankings; rating 488) in Spain, the expectation is 0.999955, so even if it was in a World Cup final, with K=60, Spain would get no credit in the rating (and if Palau won, that would result in 60 points going from Spain to Palau).Current base Elo ratings1. Spain - 21252. Germany - 20293. Brazil - 20124. Argentina - 19915. Netherlands - 19776. England - 19227. Italy - 18968. Croatia - 18859. Russia - 186810. Colombia - 186711. Portugal - 186012. Mexico - 185713. Ecuador - 185414. Sweden - 185215. France - 183716. Ivory Coast - 182317. Belgium - 1803 (Belgium are the most improved over the past year, picking up 26 places and 148 points)18. Uruguay - 1799 (biggest decliner: down 13 places and 146 points)19. Chile - 179620. Switzerland - 178921. Denmark - 177222. Greece - 176923. Bosnia - 176224. Japan - 175125. USA - 174526. Peru - 174127. Czech Rep - 173928. Australia - 173929. Ukraine - 173530. South Korea - 172631. Ireland - 172432. Nigeria - 1715Giving New Zealand a pass, but otherwise giving the top 31 countries entry into the World Cup, this would, incidentally, imply this is about the most balanced, geographically and competitively, World Cup draw from the current ratingsBrazil - Ivory Coast - Belgium - UkraineSpain - Ecuador - Bosnia - AustraliaGermany - Mexico - Uruguay - IrelandArgentina - France - Switzerland - PeruNetherlands - Colombia - Japan - Czech RepEngland - Russia - Greece - New ZealandItaly - Portugal - Denmark - South KoreaCroatia - Sweden - Chile - USA 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted June 8, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted June 8, 2013 I do love how, just days before we bought Benteke, in a discussion of good players on the Belgium team, Benteke wasn't once mentioned. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 Levi Complicated Math time! (rubs hands) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I do love how, just days before we bought Benteke, in a discussion of good players on the Belgium team, Benteke wasn't once mentioned. To be fair, this was his breakthrough season at international level, all his goals for his country have been scored in 2012/13. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRS-T Posted June 9, 2013 Author Share Posted June 9, 2013 BBC Sport Scotland gave their best performance in several years to beat the worlds's fourth best team on their own turf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 I'd take the Belgium squad over the England squad every day if the week. The fact that Belgium ranks so far behind England makes a bit of a mockery of the rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRS-T Posted June 10, 2013 Author Share Posted June 10, 2013 I'd take the Belgium squad over the England squad every day if the week. The fact that Belgium ranks so far behind England makes a bit of a mockery of the rankings. Not really. They haven't qualified for a tournament in 10 years. It's only natural that they'd be behind us in the rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 (edited) I'd take the Belgium squad over the England squad every day if the week. The fact that Belgium ranks so far behind England makes a bit of a mockery of the rankings. Not really. They haven't qualified for a tournament in 10 years. It's only natural that they'd be behind us in the rankings. I agree with your first sentence but not the second. England's ranking is too high but as yet Belgium don't merit a higher ranking, although I think they'll go further than us in the world cup. Edited June 10, 2013 by PaulC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRS-T Posted September 12, 2013 Author Share Posted September 12, 2013 (edited) Down to 17th. Lowest position for 12 years. Edited September 12, 2013 by TRS-T 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post The_Rev Posted September 12, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted September 12, 2013 Means about as much as being 3rd did in all honesty. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I'd say England were about 12-14th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 With the world cup draw in December, they might look at world ranking as one of the seeding criteria, so even though I think the world rankings are a load of bollox, they still might be important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I expect FIFA to look at predicted TV ratings and advertising revenue before world ranking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 I'd say that England are shit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted September 12, 2013 Moderator Share Posted September 12, 2013 With the world cup draw in December, they might look at world ranking as one of the seeding criteria, so even though I think the world rankings are a load of bollox, they still might be important. Only if you consider it important which nation knocks us out in the 2nd round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRS-T Posted September 12, 2013 Author Share Posted September 12, 2013 With the world cup draw in December, they might look at world ranking as one of the seeding criteria, so even though I think the world rankings are a load of bollox, they still might be important. Only if you consider it important which nation knocks us out in the 2nd round. Could be the difference between the Last 16 and the quarter-finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted September 12, 2013 Share Posted September 12, 2013 don't they look at your last 3 tournaments and qualifying rounds? and im sure we were excellent in the last qualifying round so there every danger we might be top seeds brazil, spain, Italy, Germany, argentina will be certs then you'll have us, france, Holland, Portugal, Uruguay maybe Croatia as the potential other 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts