Jump to content

Canada up to 56 in the FIFA Rankings


Guest Can. in UK

Recommended Posts

quote:Originally posted by FootieFool

Anyone know if/how the Guadeloupe lose affect the rankings? They aren't recognized by FIFA, so does that lose count?

No, it doesn't count. It's impossible to calculate the points loss against an unranked team, pretty much like a scimmage against a club team for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We were not the biggest movers Read below.

Fifa rankings blow for Scotland

Scotland face the world's top two sides in Euro 2008 qualifying now that France have moved up to second place behind Italy in the Fifa rankings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/6748667.stm

The World Cup finalists occupy the top spots after Brazil and Argentina slipped down the standings.

And the Scots have dropped nine places to 23rd despite recent victories against Austria and Faroe Islands.

Northern Ireland are up four places to 29th, while England remain in eighth spot and Wales stay in 75th position.

But the Republic of Ireland have dropped six places to 38th in the standings.

Armenia were the biggest climbers, moving 48 positions to 80th thanks to a surprise 1-0 victory over Poland on 6 June.

Latest Fifa world rankings:

1. Italy (1), 1,653 points.

2. France (4), 1,585.

3. Brazil (2), 1,484.

4. Germany (5) 1,467.

5. Argentina (3), 1,373.

6. Portugal (7) 1,323.

7. Spain (9) 1,273.

8. England (8) 1,240.

9. Netherlands (6) 1,220.

10. Czech Republic (10) 1,096.

11. Croatia (12), 1,080.

12. Romania (15), 1,068.

13. Ukraine (11), 1,044.

14. Cameroon (13), 1,019.

15. Greece (16), 1,011.

16. United States (29), 978.

17. Sweden (22), 957.

18. Poland (18), 933.

19. Ghana (28), 917.

20. Ivory Coast (25), 906.

21. Turkey (19), 904.

22. Serbia (31), 902.

23. Scotland (14), 895.

24. Russia (17), 893.

25. Switzerland (21), 869.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jeffery S.
quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack

The interesting thing about this is I believe this doesn't include the Haiti game.

I think if we can pull off a win over Guatemala and an upset over the US to reach the Gold Cup finals, we could be pushing into the Top 40.

You are right, it does not include Haiti, so we are even higher potentially now:

http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/ranking/schedule/men.html

Here it indicates that the release date for the ranking was today, the 13th and that the cut-off point is the previous Thursday, meaning our CR win just got counted.

I think drawing Venezuela away and scoring there got us quite a few points as well, apart from beating CR with goals in a regional tournament, which are weighed more as well. Any result with goals against a higher ranked side will always get you points. Problem now is that our result against Haiti, to be calculated on the basis of the new ranking, will be a result against a lower ranked team and will count for less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the rankings are up to June 7th. Funny thing is, as mentioned, that the victory over Haiti won't be worth as much now since the rankings came out just before then as Haiti have dropped another 10 spots. So we may have thought we were beating a team that was ranked a few spots ahead of us at the time, but actually they were 40 spots below us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We made the HEX, sort of!

This ranking makes better sense, but we don't truly deserve to hold a decent rating if we do not play more games throughout the year. A team is not improving if it does not play together frequently.

Still, with that said, it shows fairly clearly that there are two giants in CONCACAF--though both beatable--and then there is a second tier. That second tier includes Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama etc., and it is where we must do battle for a third qualifying spot. This isn't to say we cannot beat the US and Mexico, but realistically our battle is in the second tier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

any ranking system that moves a team 40 spots because of a couple of games is totally bogus...it needs to be far more hollistic when evaluating national team performance because so few games are played...we have gone from 104 to 56 in only a few months, when we only played what 3 games?...how is that possible?

we jumped 40 spots a few months ago, only to drop back the next month...the whole thing is stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by N-A

Was just about to post that. I am shocked to see Canada in at 56th. I was searching for them around the 70th to 100th places. I even looked at 100 + :D. Thats made my day. Top 20 here we come.

I've always maintained that the 50s are about right....

But the important question is...are we ahead of Togo (the country that is seemingly always used to support arguments about how bad Canada is)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

how can a team's ranking do this in a single 12 month period, when they played only 6 games during that time?...twice ranked in the mid 50's and dropping below one hundred in between?....it seems to based on nothing.....it certainly can not be an indication of the teams quality if such wild variation can occur in such a short time?....is this team really 50 spots better today than it was 8 weeks ago?

untitled1oc6.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by trueviking

how can a team's ranking do this in a single 12 month period, when they played only 6 games during that time?...twice ranked in the mid 50's and dropping below one hundred in between?....it seems to based on nothing.....it certainly can not be an indication of the teams quality if such wild variation can occur in such a short time?....is this team really 50 spots better today than it was 8 weeks ago?

untitled1oc6.jpg

Well, an away tie against Venezuela and a neutral win against #46 Costa Rica seems to suggest that we're somewhere between 50 and 70 at the moment. The fact that we were 100 at some point was due to our lack of games and if you aren't trusting this ranking that should work both ways (when we're #50 and when we're #100).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just in case people believe that I am an absolute apologists for everything media members do in regards to soccer (and in the context of these board, I am. Someone has to provide a different perspective, I think)...

This is an e-mail I wrote a couple months back after the tired old Canada is so bad at soccer its ranked behind Togo was trotted out in a column. I actually got a nice response back from the e-mail, so there ya go...

quote:

Garth,

Before I begin, let me say that I appreciate your ongoing efforts to write about sports and athletes that fall outside the mainstream. Certainly, you should be commended for drawing attention to the women's soccer team today, which deserves far more support from the public and the media than it currently receives.

I have one small quibble about the column. In it, you mention the Canadian men's world ranking as a point of comparison. As often is the case when that ranking gets written about, you bring out a list of developing countries that are ranked above Canada. What you fail to do--and you are far from alone in this--is put the rankings in full context. As I'm sure you know, the rankings are designed to reward countries that play a lot of games, rather than place a country into a legitimate position relative to its actual talent/potential. In the ranking system, England would get more benefit from beating Albania 5-0 than Canada would benefit from losing a hard-fought 1-0 game to Brazil. The rankings are pretty much universally understood to be flawed the world over.

Teams that simply play a lot--say the Africans, that are constantly qualifying for the African Cup of Nations, which is held annually--shoot above the Canadians because Canada rarely plays. You will see Canada's ranking go up this summer after the Gold Cup, simply because the team will get a chance to beat a few Caribbean minnows.

I appreciate that you can't go into a full explanation of the ranking system every time you mention Canada's rank. However, an occasional mention of its flaws and the reasons that a country like Canada struggles in the system would help casual observers understand that, although Canada is ranked below Oman, its likely not worse than Oman.

As it stands now, it makes a nice punch line in many a column, but only at the expense of full context and accuracy.

Thank you,

me

And I guess it's Oman, not Togo that ws used in this case. Kinda the same thing...

He wrote back: "You're right, of course. It is a cheap shot that gets over used and I'm guilty."

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by trueviking

how can a team's ranking do this in a single 12 month period, when they played only 6 games during that time?...

Because the FIFA rankings use a goofy ranking system. The elo system is acknowledged by most as a superior formula.

The FIFA system was revised in July 06 and was even worse before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...