Jump to content

Canada drops to 87th


RJB

Recommended Posts

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index/0,2548,111537,00.html?articleid=111537

I suppuse we shouldn't be too surprised. After all, our last few results have been rather poor, with a victories over Cuba and Luxemburg as the only 3 points we've gotten.

I know that these rankings mean little, but it still hurts the pride. I'd sure like to start to beat teams that are better than us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The accomplish-nothing Czechs overtake Holland in # 2 because they had to play (and just edge) an indifferent Norway after being schooled by Holland in the Group stages, and an everstrengthening USA actually loses places. Go figure, and tell me it makes sense Canada gets bumped a spot.

There are three kinds of falsehoods in this world: lies, damn lies and statistics!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually what surprises me is that we seem to have dropped by two FIFA points for beating Luxembourg in Luxembourg. We dropped two points since the last month, and it can't be because of points earned 7 years ago that no longer apply since we didn't play any matches in November 1998 (in fact, we only played one game, in May of that year). That means we were docked points for playing & winning. If that's the case, its fairly ridiculous that you can actually lose points for winning on the road, no matter how week the opponent is.

As for the Czechs, not sure we can easily say that qualifying for the World Cup is "accomplishing nothing", though granted that's a separate issue as to whether they should be 2nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem in most cases is that historical performance (going back 7 or 8 years, I believe), has far too much impact on the rankings. While less recent results are weighted less heavily, it still seems ridiculous that a match played in 1999 (with maybe one player from our current player pool involved) should have any bearing on our current perceived strength. That said, if you were to look at our performance over the last two years, we are probably ranked appropriately. I don't have the data right now, but I remember noticing that we had beaten everyone ranked below us and lost most of the matches against higher ranked opponents over that stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Actually what surprises me is that we seem to have dropped by two FIFA points for beating Luxembourg in Luxembourg. We dropped two points since the last month, and it can't be because of points earned 7 years ago that no longer apply since we didn't play any matches in November 1998 (in fact, we only played one game, in May of that year). That means we were docked points for playing & winning. If that's the case, its fairly ridiculous that you can actually lose points for winning on the road, no matter how week the opponent is.

I believe the "weighting" of each match drops year by year. Thus, it could be the devaluation of other November matches that is causing the point drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ranking works like this:

Matches from the current year (12 months): 8/8

Matches from the previous year: 7/8

Matches from 2 years ago: 6/8, etc. for eight years worth of matches.

Last November, we defeated Guatemala in WCQ on the road, that match is now worth 7/8th of what it was for the last year, whereas a 1-0 victory over Lux. is probably worth very little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by El Hombre

A decent FIFA ranking helps us get players into the English leagues. I think top 75 is what they're looking for.

Yep, look at the rankings I put in there. Also, not sure if it's top-70. But, for now, without even being close to 70-75 (and without a chance to significantly boost it before 2007), I don't think we should pay ANY attention to our current rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Daniel

Yep, look at the rankings I put in there. Also, not sure if it's top-70. But, for now, without even being close to 70-75 (and without a chance to significantly boost it before 2007), I don't think we should pay ANY attention to our current rankings.

Yeah, I caught that. You're right. My point was that there is something to strive for though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Like it or no, there is a very important threshhold by which the FA measures the suitability of non-EU citizens. FIFA rankings are a very important tool to getting some employment potential for our lads and the sooner the CSA recongnises that reality the better.

You can't just right off England for the next year and change, hoping for special approval for anyone who wants to try the UK to develop their career.

I think low 70s (or better) is very achievable looking at that list. WCQ is over so it's all down to friendlys from here on.

But it means we've got to play. And with a mind for gaining results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I think we are a team that realistically SHOULD be ranked somewhere around 90th. Look, how many teams ranked higher (better) than us could we beat in a home-and-away full international series? Perhaps, and I am being generous here, the following countries: North Korea, Albania, Uzbekistan, Panama, Cuba, Belarus and a few of the weakest African and Arab teams from that list. We certainly aren't better than twenty of those teams, even weakened sides in meaningless friendlies. I love the nats, but I wouldn't put money on them winning a home-and-away againts hardly any of those teams on that list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by nolando

To be honest, I think we are a team that realistically SHOULD be ranked somewhere around 90th. Look, how many teams ranked higher (better) than us could we beat in a home-and-away full international series? Perhaps, and I am being generous here, the following countries: North Korea, Albania, Uzbekistan, Panama, Cuba, Belarus and a few of the weakest African and Arab teams from that list. We certainly aren't better than twenty of those teams, even weakened sides in meaningless friendlies. I love the nats, but I wouldn't put money on them winning a home-and-away againts hardly any of those teams on that list.

I disagree.

85 Korea DPR - beatable although we need to be prepared for harsh conditions in the away game. MNT should watch Stalingrad a few times before trip.

85 Albania - just cause they beat Greece doesn't mean they're tough.

84 Jordan - beatable

83 - Lybia - beatable

82 - Algeria - beatable unless FIFA allows all Algerians capped by France to switch

81 - Qatar - beatable

The next 7 - Guinea, Oman, Panama, Estonia, Congo DR, Cuba and Iraq are also beatable until we get to #73 with Wales. Then it gets tough and I wouldn't bet the mortgage on anything... No reason why we can't be #74 in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what you are disagreeing with, RC. You list almost the same group of teams that we might beat in a home-and-away. My sub-topic isn't teams that are "beatable" but rather ones over which we would triumph in a qualifying type situation. If you're saying we would beat the majority of team ranked between 74th and 90th, then it is me who is doing most of the disagreeing.Most of the teams in that range play a similar style of football as we traditionally do (grinding defensive minded), but often quite a bit more successfully (ie. nearly qualifying for the WC) and with much nastier and larger home crowds with which to contend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with you in that you said we SHOULD be ranked somewhere around 90th. The teams I listed are all beatable as long as we field the strongest possible squad. The only issue I see in a home and away series is that the conditions in the away games might be too different for our guys to adequately cope with.

Then again, we don't have to play those guys to move up. We need an annual tournament and invite crappy caribbean, south/central american teams so we can pound on them. Peru, Chile, Panama, Cuba would make fine whipping boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of good it did them, finishing second from the bottom with 20 goals....

They surprised Paraguay 4-1 in the beginning of the qualifying, beat Uruguay 3-1 and whooped Bolivia 4-1. That's 11 goals in 3 games. In the other 15 games, they scored 9 goals. Low-lights include a 4-1 loss to Venezuela, a 5-0 a** rape by Colombia and a 2-1 loss to Chile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if we have our A team ready to go, and Yallop has the boys motivated, i believe we can beat anyone on any given day, but no conmebol team could be a 'whipping boy' for us, it would be tough even at home. But getting back to your original idea, i would love to see a domestic international tournament back in canada- but not to beat easy teams. i would rather have close losses against good teams, like Peru and Bolivia and Austria to get us prepared for concacaf wcq- only by doing well in WCQ will we ever significantly move up the rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...