FIFA/ Coca-Cola World Ranking

dats_right

Republic of Ireland have dropped to a record low ranking of 67.

To put this in Perspective:

Panama are ranked 37 (pop. 3.6m)
Scotland are ranked 33 (pop. 5.3m)
Iceland are ranked 50 (pop. 325,000)
Cape Verde Islands are ranked 39 (pop. 500,000)
Wales are ranked 56 (pop. 3m)

Other footballing powerhouses of Burkina Faso, Libya, Tunisia and Honduras are all statistically better footballing teams than us!

SureYWouldntYa

Any ranking system that has the likes of Switzerland ahead of Brazil should be ignored completely

dats_right

SureYWouldntYa wrote: »

Any ranking system that has the likes of Switzerland ahead of Brazil should be ignored completely

Switzerland are ranked two places above Brazil but the likes of Cape Verde Islands are ranked nearly 30 places higher than us.

Hangballlouie

dats_right wrote: »

Switzerland are ranked two places above Brazil but the likes of Cape Verde Islands are ranked nearly 30 places higher than us.

The gulf in class is probably the same tbh.

EuropeanSon

Brazil have played few competitive games. Switzerland have played many, and done well. It's not illogical.

You can't just judge teams on reputation, it would be chaotic and easily manipulated. It has to be statistically based, and such a system is tough to devise. Clearly the current one has many flaws, but it wouldn't be easy to come up with a new one.

Diabhal Beag

"Panama haven't distractions like ruggers or bogball though"

Soups123

Yet we are second seeds for the euro draw, all a load of ****e really

bohsboy

Coca cola?

GTR63

bohsboy wrote: »

Coca cola?

RC Cola



Switzerland high up doesn`t bother me as much as Scotland in 33rd, who haven`t qualified for anything in 15 years is it?

A_Sober_Paddy

The rankings aren't entirely accurate with regards to overall quality...

Europe is a fairly competitive confederation whereas Africa not as much, same can be said of North American/Caribbean...

Brazil are dropping as friendlies aren't weighted the same as comeptitive games, in the build up to major tournaments the hosts will nearly always drop in the rankings and in most cases quit a good bit.

What we should really look at...Is where we place amongst other European nations...

Ranked 34th out of 53 which isn't great but Poland are ranked below use, a nation with a professional league which has had a number of their domestic clubs playing in the group stage of European competitions in recent years...Also they have some seriously talented players, more so than us.

People will say things like Iceland are ahead of us...They made the playoffs this time around.

Think our ranking amoung the European nations is a fair enough reflection of how "good" we are.

batistuta9

how have ireland dropped from 19th (was that right?) to 34 in UEFA after a round of qualifying games?

ArmaniJeanss

batistuta9 wrote: »

how have ireland dropped from 19th (was that right?) to 34 in UEFA after a round of qualifying games?

I think you are confusing the FIFA World Rankings with the UEFA co-efficient ranking (which is what media/people have been referring to when they talk of us being second seeds).

We haven't been in the European Top 20 in the FIFA World Rankings for about 12 months, however we are 18th in the UEFA co-efficent rankings.

The latter is whats important to us in the immediate future as its whats used for the Euro 2016 draw. The FIFA rankings won't be important to us until the draw for the next WC roughly two years from now.

The discrepancy in rankings (34 v 18) is mostly that the UEFA co-eff still includes matches from our relatively successful 2010 qualifying campaign whereas those games aren't counted in our FIFA world ranking. FIFA is 4 year cycle counting all games, UEFA is 6 year cycle only counting competitive games.

dreamers75

My dream is for the league to overtake the country in the rankings.


us being **** in Europe isnt helping but we were close 2 years ago.

batistuta9

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I think you are confusing the FIFA World Rankings with the UEFA co-efficient ranking (which is what media/people have been referring to when they talk of us being second seeds).

We haven't been in the European Top 20 in the FIFA World Rankings for about 12 months, however we are 18th in the UEFA co-efficent rankings.

The latter is whats important to us in the immediate future as its whats used for the Euro 2016 draw. The FIFA rankings won't be important to us until the draw for the next WC roughly two years from now.

The discrepancy in rankings (34 v 18) is mostly that the UEFA co-eff still includes matches from our relatively successful 2010 qualifying campaign whereas those games aren't counted in our FIFA world ranking. FIFA is 4 year cycle counting all games, UEFA is 6 year cycle only counting competitive games.

yeah that's what i did, i was using the FIFA zone ranking as what UEFA were going to use.

i think i've it here now pot 3 seems decent enough & some tricky enough ones in pot 4

LiamoSail

Had holland not played, and beatn, Indonesia, they'd be ahead of the Swiss. That result brought their average ranking points per game down sufficiently to fall a few places, and hence be second seeds for the WC. Good article on the BBC site about it