ray Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 #11 for Canada - a bit dissapointing but I guess over time our older results will be dropped and we'll move up. http://www.fifa.com/en/rank/w/index.html 1 Germany (GER) 2201 3 +2 2 USA (USA) 2166 1 -1 3 Norway (NOR) 2131 2 -1 4 Sweden (SWE) 2095 5 +1 5 China PR (CHN) 2064 4 -1 6 Brazil (BRA) 2042 6 0 7 Korea DPR (PRK) 1994 7 0 8 Denmark (DEN) 1981 8 0 9 France (FRA) 1967 9 0 10 Italy (ITA) 1947 10 0 11 Canada (CAN) 1911 14 +1 12 Russia (RUS) 1897 11 -1 13 England (ENG) 1861 12 0 14 Japan (JPN) 1841 13 0 15 Netherlands (NED) 1815 15 +1 16 Australia (AUS) 1810 15 -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Observer Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 Does seem a bit surprising that we are still ranked behind a team (Italy) that didn't even qualify for the World Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 So, its not just the men's rankings that are determined bizarrely. I'm sorry, but if you get to 4th in the World Cup, regardless of the amount of possession you had in order to get there, you should be ranked higher than 11th - especially when before the tournament you were ranked 12th - a massive increase of one spot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtlfan Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 Upon investigation into the calculations it is obvious that the system used by FIFA is designed to reflect a team's performance over more than just recent success. For example as of June 30 Canada was 76 points behind Italy. They added or subtracted points for these matches: CANADA 11.10.03 USA (USA) A 1-3 WFW 1911 -1 05.10.03 Sweden (SWE) N 1-2 WFW 1912 -4 02.10.03 China PR (CHN) N 1-0 WFW 1916 +24 27.09.03 Japan (JPN) N 3-1 WFW 1892 +16 24.09.03 Argentina (ARG) N 3-0 WFW 1876 +5 20.09.03 Germany (GER) N 1-4 WFW 1871 -4 14.09.03 Australia (AUS) H 2-0 FW 1875 +2 04.09.03 Mexico (MEX) H 6-0 FW 1873 +2 31.08.03 Mexico (MEX) H 8-0 FW 1871 +1 16.08.03 Ghana (GHA) N 1-1 FW 1870 -4 14.08.03 Brazil (BRA) N 1-2AET FW 1874 0 11.08.03 Mexico (MEX) N 3-2 FW 1874 +1 08.08.03 Brazil (BRA) N 0-5 FW 1873 -3 05.08.03 Haiti (HAI) N 4-1 FW 1876 0 20.07.03 Brazil (BRA) H 2-1 FW 1876 +5 ITALY 27.09.03 Switzerland (SUI) A 1-0 CQW 1947 +3 09.09.03 Scotland (SCO) A 4-0 FW 1944 +3 19.07.03 Finland (FIN) A 1-1 CQW 1941 -2 As you can see it is difficult to move up many spots especially that they included the Pan-Am games which the A team did not play. If we understand how the system works there are no surprises it is simple arithmetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 quote:Originally posted by mtlfan Upon investigation into the calculations it is obvious that the system used by FIFA is designed to reflect a team's performance over more than just recent success. The ranking system for the women is explained at http://www.fifa.com/en/rank/w/procedures.html. (It is different from the men's system (http://www.fifa.com/en/rank/procedures.html).) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 quote:Originally posted by An Observer Does seem a bit surprising that we are still ranked behind a team (Italy) that didn't even qualify for the World Cup. Right, but its harder to qualify from Europe.... Actually Italy’s last game was 2-2 against the USA. Not sure if that game was included in these rankings or not!? I have to admit I watched that game and the Italians looked to be light-years ahead of Canada in terms of skill. Heck, they showed more skill than the USA too. If not for a garbage goal by the States, Italy wins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamiltonfan Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 were better then 11. we came top 4 in the world cup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auger9 Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 quote:Originally posted by hamiltonfan were better then 11. we came top 4 in the world cup yeah, but the only real team we beat in the WC was China. We beat two other teams ranked lower than us, so they don't matter as much, and we lost to two teams ranked higher than us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 quote:Originally posted by mtlfan Upon investigation into the calculations it is obvious that the system used by FIFA is designed to reflect a team's performance over more than just recent success. For example as of June 30 Canada was 76 points behind Italy. They added or subtracted points for these matches: CANADA 11.10.03 USA (USA) A 1-3 WFW 1911 -1 05.10.03 Sweden (SWE) N 1-2 WFW 1912 -4 02.10.03 China PR (CHN) N 1-0 WFW 1916 +24 27.09.03 Japan (JPN) N 3-1 WFW 1892 +16 24.09.03 Argentina (ARG) N 3-0 WFW 1876 +5 If we understand how the system works there are no surprises it is simple arithmetic. Stupid arithmetic that is! According to the above numbers, ONE meaningless, unimpressive, narrow victory over Argentina would offset FIVE defeats to the U.S.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franky Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 this FIFA ranking system continues to prove that their ranking system is terribly flawed. I would throw in the men's ranking system but men's nat'l team play like they deserve that present position. All i have to say is never rely on these bloody ranking systems, they are useless and do not dictate the true nature of a team at its present time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.