Latest updates

Check the Important info page for latest updates! (12 September 2014)
Twitter Linked In

Friday, June 24, 2011

FIFA Ranking: June 2011 final preview

FIFA will publish the ranking on June 29th.

The deadline for matches was yesterday, but I'm sure FIFA will include at least one match - the Gold Cup final between USA and Mexico.

This is how the totals can change for these two teams:

Mexico (Loss: 913, PSO loss: 944, PSO win: 976, Win: 1007)
USA (Loss: 799, PSO loss: 834, PSO win: 869, Win: 904)

In the table below, the values displayed for these two teams are the lowest possible - even if they lose their totals won't drop.

Lots of movement in the top 10:

CONMEBOL teams lose places (Brazil -2, Argentina -4), with Uruguay out of the top 10 - replaced by Norway. Italy, England, Croatia climb 2 or more places.

Best movers:

39 - Zimbabwe
33 - Liechtenstein
32 - Liberia

Worst movers:

-37 - New Zealand
-20 - Cuba
-19 - Grenada

Best movers in the top 50:

17 - Jamaica
13 - Belarus
11 - Mexico

Mexico can still improve.

Worst movers in the top 50:

-18 - Ghana
-14 - Chile
-11 - Uruguay, Romania and Lithuania

Côte d'Ivoire replace Ghana as the top team in Africa. Burkina Faso replace South Africa in the African top 5.

Mexico replace USA as the top team in CONCACAF. Jamaica overtake Honduras for 3rd. Panama replace Costa Rica in the top 5.

Fiji overtake New Caledonia for 2nd place in OFC.

Italy replace Portugal in the European top 5.

Five teams will improve their best ever ranking

Côte d'Ivoire (13th - 16th in November 2009)
Montenegro (15th - 24th in April 2011)
Central African Republic (91st - 111th in December 2010)
Belize (154th - 157th in May 2002)
Comoros (164th - 171st in May 2010)

Two teams will return to their best ever ranking:

England (4th - first achieved in December 1997)
Burkina Faso (37th - first achieved in October 2010)

Four teams will return to their worst ever ranking:

Bahamas (197th - first happened in March 1999)
Timor-Leste (202nd - first happened in February 2008)
Papua New Guinea (203rd - first happened in July 2009)
San Marino (203rd - first happened in July 2009)

Six teams will have their worst ever ranking:

Colombia (54th - 51st in February 2009)
Saudi Arabia (92nd - 88th in April 2011)
Iceland (122nd - 117th in August 2007)
Lesotho (178th - 177th in April 2011)
Mauritania (183rd - 182nd in May 2003)
Andorra (203rd - 202nd in November 2009)

June 2011 rank - Team - June 2011 points - +/- Ranking - +/- Points


1 Spain 1871 0 14
2 Netherlands 1661 0 -41
3 Germany 1417 1 4
4 England 1146 2 -17
5 Brazil 1130 -2 -295
6 Italy 1059 3 40
7 Portugal 1046 1 -6
8 Croatia 1033 2 42
9 Argentina 979 -4 -288
10 Norway 972 1 -15
11 Greece 959 1 -26
12 Japan 925 2 -36
13 Côte d'Ivoire 922 8 55
14 France 920 5 37
15 Montenegro 915 9 95
16 Russia 914 2 18
17 Mexico 913 11 111
18 Uruguay 909 -11 -185
19 Sweden 884 9 82
20 Denmark 857 7 49
21 Slovenia 833 -4 -70
22 Australia 829 -2 -47
23 Turkey 820 7 25
24 USA 799 -2 -56
25 Serbia 797 -9 -110
26 Korea Republic 787 5 33
27 Chile 782 -14 -185
28 Slovakia 779 -2 -30
29 Switzerland 778 -4 -41
30 Israel 771 3 62
31 Republic of Ireland 752 3 71
32 Paraguay 743 -9 -104
33 Ghana 735 -18 -183
34 Egypt 727 2 51
35 Belgium 691 2 37
36 Czech Republic 670 -4 -52
37 Burkina Faso 661 7 61
38 Jamaica 656 17 110
39 Bosnia-Herzegovina 642 6 48
40 Belarus 636 13 79
41 Nigeria 635 -2 -2
42 Ukraine 620 -7 -58
43 Senegal 619 -3 6
44 Honduras 613 -1 10
45 Hungary 603 7 44
46 Bulgaria 599 0 7
47 South Africa 597 -9 -56
48 Cameroon 595 1 23
49 Peru 583 5 35
50 Iran 578 -2 3
51 Algeria 575 -10 -34
52 Panama 574 15 81
53 Romania 571 -11 -36
54 Colombia 564 -4 0
55 Costa Rica 561 1 20
56 Georgia 530 1 -6
57 Tunisia 527 4 0
58 Lithuania 526 -11 -51
59 Albania 524 -9 -40
60 Gabon 517 -1 -12
61 Scotland 513 5 -4
62 Northern Ireland 498 3 -22
63 Libya 494 -5 -40
63 Morocco 494 10 49
65 Austria 479 9 36
66 Guinea 475 -4 -49
67 Poland 474 4 25
68 Ecuador 473 -4 -50
69 Venezuela 471 -1 -18
70 Armenia 462 -8 -62
71 Malawi 454 1 8
72 El Salvador 434 15 43
73 Zambia 433 16 50
74 Botswana 431 -5 -48
75 China PR 426 2 -12
76 Finland 419 5 3
77 Uganda 417 7 15
78 Mali 416 -8 -35
79 Estonia 399 -4 -41
80 Cyprus 398 9 15
81 Cape Verde Islands 397 -2 -24
82 Latvia 388 -5 -50
83 Canada 386 -7 -53
84 Jordan 385 9 7
85 Moldova 383 1 -11
86 Uzbekistan 381 -3 -22
87 Benin 380 -7 -38
87 Zimbabwe 380 39 161
89 Haiti 377 7 29
90 Trinidad and Tobago 374 5 21
91 Central African Republic 370 22 107
92 Saudi Arabia 366 -4 -20
93 Bolivia 356 9 44
94 Qatar 355 -2 -25
95 Sierra Leone 348 23 102
96 Iraq 346 -7 -37
97 New Zealand 345 -37 -183
98 FYR Macedonia 338 -13 -60
99 Sudan 337 5 42
100 Niger 331 -1 -4
101 Cuba 330 -20 -86
102 Angola 329 2 34
102 Bahrain 329 -5 -9
102 Gambia 329 1 21
102 Kuwait 329 -1 9
106 Mozambique 327 -12 -31
107 Oman 298 0 4
108 Suriname 296 4 29
109 Syria 290 -5 -5
110 United Arab Emirates 288 1 15
111 Antigua and Barbuda 286 -11 -36
112 Azerbaijan 282 -4 -6
113 Togo 279 -4 -6
114 Faroe Islands 273 22 105
114 Wales 273 0 15
116 Guyana 267 -6 -17
117 Grenada 265 -19 -72
118 Guatemala 262 6 40
119 Korea DPR 255 -4 0
120 Liechtenstein 253 33 137
121 St. Kitts and Nevis 248 -2 3
122 Iceland 244 -6 -10
123 Thailand 239 -3 -3
124 Congo DR 238 2 19
125 Liberia 232 32 139
126 Kazakhstan 231 13 80
126 Tanzania 231 -9 -21
128 Luxembourg 213 -3 -8
129 Kenya 209 -6 -18
130 Congo 206 -9 -26
131 Yemen 199 -2 -4
132 Indonesia 195 -2 -5
133 Dominica 193 -2 0
134 Rwanda 189 -12 -39
135 Tajikistan 180 0 9
136 Ethiopia 169 -8 -49
137 Puerto Rico 167 -5 -13
138 Madagascar 166 0 2
139 Burundi 164 10 37
140 Vietnam 159 -6 -13
141 Barbados 156 -9 -24
142 Singapore 155 2 15
143 Turkmenistan 147 -2 -2
144 Malaysia 146 -1 2
145 Guinea-Bissau 142 -9 -26
146 Hong Kong 141 0 3
147 India 137 -2 -2
148 Nepal 136 -1 1
149 Equatorial Guinea 131 -7 -15
150 Curacao 128 2 7
151 Maldives 126 -3 -7
152 Chad 123 -3 -4
153 Namibia 117 -13 -33
154 Belize 112 18 46
154 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 112 -1 -4
156 Fiji 103 -1 0
157 Swaziland 101 2 12
158 New Caledonia 97 -7 -26
159 Philippines 96 -3 0
160 Cayman Islands 90 -2 0
161 Malta 83 0 -1
161 Nicaragua 83 5 8
163 Bangladesh 81 0 2
164 Comoros 80 24 61
165 Chinese Taipei 77 -5 -9
166 Afghanistan 75 -2 -2
167 Myanmar 72 0 -2
167 Palestine 72 4 5
169 Kyrgyzstan 70 0 0
169 Pakistan 70 -1 -2
171 Sri Lanka 69 -2 -1
172 Dominican Republic 66 0 0
173 Vanuatu 64 -8 -12
174 Cambodia 57 2 1
174 Laos 57 0 0
174 Tahiti 57 0 0
177 Lebanon 55 1 4
178 Lesotho 46 -2 -10
179 Mongolia 41 0 -7
180 Bermuda 40 -18 -40
180 Solomon Islands 40 2 0
182 British Virgin Islands 38 1 0
183 Macau 32 1 0
183 Mauritania 32 -3 -13
185 St. Lucia 31 0 0
186 Eritrea 29 -5 -13
187 Samoa 26 -1 0
188 Somalia 23 -1 0
189 Mauritius 17 0 -1
190 Seychelles 15 4 4
190 Tonga 15 0 -2
192 Turks and Caicos Islands 13 1 0
193 Djibouti 12 -1 -3
193 US Virgin Islands 12 7 9
195 Cook Islands 10 -5 -7
195 Guam 10 0 0
197 Anguilla 9 5 9
197 Bahamas 9 -1 0
197 Brunei Darussalam 9 -1 0
200 Aruba 7 -1 0
201 Bhutan 6 -5 -3
202 Timor-Leste 3 -2 0
203 American Samoa 0 -1 0
203 Andorra 0 -1 0
203 Montserrat 0 -1 0
203 Papua New Guinea 0 -1 0
203 San Marino 0 -1 0

42 comments:

  1. Well now! Let's see who got screwed in CONCACAF by the use of the March Rankings for World Cup qualifying seeding.

    In brackets is the difference between March and this ranking for pot movement.

    Pot A: Mexico, USA, Jamaica (+1)
    Pot B: Honduras (-1), Panama (+1), Costa Rica
    Pot C: El Salvador, Canada, Haiti, Trinidad and Tobago, Cuba (-1) Suriname (+1)
    Pot D: Antigua and Barbuda, Guyana, Grenada (-1), Guatemala, St. Kitts and Nevis, Dominica.

    The rest don't matter much. Wow, I thought Guatemala would have done enough to get to Pot C, guess not. I certainly wouldn't begrudge Jamaica getting to Pot A, they were desperately unlucky to get stuck with the US in the quarter finals, and performed well before then, beating the team they replaced, Honduras. Panama clearly deserve to replace Cuba. Grenada out of Pot C, despite their joke of a Gold Cup, seems a bit unfair to me, so I'm glad they stay where they are in the real thing, but the other changes seem good, and a shame they're not real. Especially Panama replacing Cuba. Wonder what Suriname did to move up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ah, I didn't think England would keep the 4th place after failing to beat Switzerland! I'm going to enjoy the reaction on the FIFA site and enjoy England's 4th place, as after the Copa America is done, I'm sure it will be back down to 6th where we belong again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What would be the US point total as well as Panama and Canada if CONCACAF did what it should and had Trinidad and Tobago or Antigua and Barbuda compete in the confederation championship instead of the non FIFA member Guadeloupe.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Change in OFC qualifying format; bottom 4 according to this ranking will play qualifying for Nations Cup where they'll join the top 7 teams.

    http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/01/44/46/41/2014fwc_drawprocedures_oceania.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  5. @ Soccer-db.Net

    That's very interesting. Just two days ago I looked into the OFC qualifying format and it was the old way. I thought to myself with the Pacific games going to a format involving quarter finals, that it was much more likely weaker teams would make it to the final four. Even though New Zealand would surely win anyway no matter who was opposing them, I thought the system was flawed. So they have changed it! And much for the better, now, Oceania's top teams (and 8th best team), and New Zealand, will have many more qualifiers to play, while the weakest will be eliminated to avoid ridiculous scores. And OFC now the nations cup and final stage of WCQ seperate from each other, which allows for the thrill of KO football and a seperate trophy togo for. Also, it would be interesting if a team not called New Zealand got to host the OFC Nations Cup. I don't expect anything from that region, but this should at least give it a chance to improve the standard of football played there with the minnows getting so many more competitive matches, and maybe give it a little more credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @ Soccer-db.Net

    Edit - I see Fiji will host the 2012 OFC Nations Cup. Great!

    So now, the minnows have the Pacific Games, the OFC Nations Cup and World Cup qualifying, when before, all three were rolled into one.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Edgar, what kind of impact do you think these sweeping changes will have on the FIFA Rankings of Oceania's teams? Suddenly, there's a huge increase in points available. The Pacific Games will be reduced to friendlies now I expect, but the 6 games involving the 4 lowest minnows should be rated as qualifiers, and see some of those teams rocket up the rankings. Then comes the Nations Cup, which should have the higher weighting of Continental Championship. And finally the best, their rankings already inflated by good performances in the Nations Cup, will play each other in home and away World Cup qualifiers, and be taking more points from each other than before with their new inflated rankings.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I believe the OFC Nations Cup matches will be rated as WC qualifiers; just as in 2008. I don't see any separate stages as was the case in 2004.

    ReplyDelete
  9. what place would be mexico after the win over USA

    ReplyDelete
  10. @ Anonymous

    Ninth, I believe.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I heard (don't have source) that the Colombia-Mexico and Ecuador-Mexico friendlies in preparation for Copa America won't count for the rankings since the Mexico "A" team was simultaneously playing the Gold Cup. Has anyone else heard this?

    Edgar-how did you count those friendlies in your calculations?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yes, Mexico will be 9th with 1007 points, as stated at the top of the post.

    -------

    Edgar, I haven't commented for a while, but I try to check this blog somewhat regularly. Your new weekly schedule you've adopted is a great idea. I just want to say thanks and keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  13. @dave:

    Guadeloupe are not FIFA members, but they are full members of CONCACAF. Why shouldn't they get the chance to win their own confederation's championship?

    @Joel:

    Those Mexico friendlies have been removed from the fifa.com results list, so I think it's safe to assume they won't count.

    ReplyDelete
  14. How the hell does Italy end up in 6th? Yeah they beat Estonia in a qualifier but they're ranked 75th so they would only gain a couple points...and then they should've lost a couple hundred after losing to Ireland who's ranked 35th to Italy's 9th. Somebody fucked up the math...

    ReplyDelete
  15. The FIFA World Ranking list has now been released:

    http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/ranking/lastranking/gender=m/fullranking.html#confederation=27275&rank=205

    According to the official list are Wales and Faroe Islands both on 273 points. But in difference to Edgar prediction is Wales in front of Faroe Islands.

    I wonder who has been miscalculating here, or has there been some manipulation of the figures?

    ReplyDelete
  16. As a Wales fan I'm interested too, as it's not as if they've just blindly put the teams there in alphabetical order (as W is after F). Interesting times to be a Wales fan.

    (Whatever happens I hope that Wales draw Faroes in WC qualifying, let's decide who is 114th in the world after all!!!)

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Anonymous June 29, 2001 12:09 AM:

    It's not a matter of big achievements on Italy's part, but much more the devaluation of the first matches of the FIFA 2010 World Cup and the results of the Copa America 2007 being removed, which causes Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay to loose a conciderable amount of points.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Wales-Faroes situation is very strange.

    Can the rounding change in the July ranking...

    ... meaning they will swap places?

    Or has FIFA manipulated it to keep Wales Pot 5?

    Being Pot 5 was a great opportunity for Faroes.

    ReplyDelete
  19. As I have understood it, the seeding for the preliminary competition for the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Europe, will be based on the FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking of July 2011. The next ranking list will be released on the 27th of July. Correct me if I am wrong.

    Is it then correct that all results in May and June in the following years: 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 will either drop out or devaluate in value when the next ranking list will be released?

    I have been checking on Wales’ results the last 4 years.
    26.05.2007 Wales got a draw against New Zealand.
    02.06.2007 Wales got a draw against Czech Republic.
    28.05.2008 Wales won over Iceland.
    29.05.2009 Wales won over Estonia.
    06.06.2009 Wales won over Azerbaijan.
    Faroe Islands on the opposite have not got any draw or win in May and June in the following years: 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010.
    Will the effect not be that Wales will lose some points when the next ranking list will be released on the 27th of July?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Re Faroes

    Good spot. Both teams have 114th next to them. I would guess the reason Faroes are beneath Wales is simply because that's where they were before. If they're not counting the extra decimal places, then Faroes would come up but not pass Wales. So yes, now we need Edgar to tell us if they'll split in the July ranking, or stay together. FIFA might end up splitting them with a draw if they don't use the unrounded total.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Just a quick shoutout in defence of England to anyone who'll listen.

    The mass hysteria (not on here, but elsewhere) is amusing because most people don't understand why England are fourth, and it's merely an anomoly which will be put right next month. However, everyone trotting out all the names and saying they're better or even way better than England annoy me. And these are mostly English pessimists too. Spain, Netherlands, Germany, Brazil, yeah, they're superior. But the rest? France deserve to be where they are, in 15th, and pot 2 for the World Cup. Why? sure they beat England at Wembley facing the most injury crippled England team of the Capello era and probably the McLaren era and maybe even the SvEngland era. But they scraped into the World Cup while England strode through the front door. They humiliated themselves against weak opponents in friendlies while England were beating much better teams. They crashed out in the group stage and humiliated themselves while England went through, and even now, England have a superior record in qualifying for Euro 2012 to France. We are still ahead of France, and significanlty so, although that team is as kryptonite to superman when they actually play England, but not against the rest. Italy? They qualified with an inferior record to England in WCQ, and finished bottom of their group. They're doing a little better than England in qualifying, but I'd fancy England vs Italy. I saw the match where they lost 2-0 against Ireland in what was essentially a home game for Italy, and I was not impressed. Portugal, another team which scraped into the World Cup. And they didn't do any better than England. They finished 2nd in their group and went out in the last 16 just the same. And again, England are currently surpassing them in Euro qualifying. Argentina I want to reserve judgement until after the Copa America, but they have been a joke recently, and they had to fight all the way just to get into the World Cup. They got a round further, then they got CRUSHED, and they've been really bad ever since. I do not fear Argentina, though I do fear Messi and Tevez. In my gut, I think it's a coin toss if England were to play Argentina right now. And Uruguay? I've seen them a few times said by people too, yeah they made the semis, but Uruguay were on the easy side of the draw, and everyone's forgetting how they scraped into the World Cup in the first place. If they perform in the Copa America, I might change my tune, but otherwise, no, Uruguay are probably the weakest of all these. Forlan basically carried them on his back, they're nothing to be feared without him, just an above average team without him. Uruguay just took the place of the usual Turkey/Sweden/Croatia type European team which normally makes it into the semis of the World Cup.

    ReplyDelete
  22. @Lorric
    I have just been looking at some old ranking lists to see how FIFA places the teams when they have the same amount of points. If you look at the ranking list for February 2011, both Costa Rica and Tunisia had 48th next to them. In the ranking list for January 2011 Tunisia was number 44 while Costa Rica was number 69, so I guess FIFA usually counts in the decimal. The Faroe Islands-Wales situation is therefore still very strange... FIFA or Edgar has some explaining to do.

    ReplyDelete
  23. @ Jakup

    Hmmm...

    I wondered if the rising team overtook the falling one (Costa Rica's points score was down while Tunisia's was up, while with the Faroes, they rise, but Wales stay the same.) But I checked, and it is not so.

    There's a four way at 102nd in this month's ranking that disproves that. Again, there's alpha order or anything, it's Kuwait/Bahrain/Angola/Gambia all tied at 102nd.

    Edgar has them lined up in alpha order, whether that's for convenience or because they are truly ranked that way, I don't know.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I'm not sure, but I think that when two or more teams have the same number of total rounded points, the decimals come into action.

    If my calculations are correct, Wales has 273,33 points and Faroe 273,28 points which gives Wales a slight upperhand. Nothing changes for the July ranking, so that would put Wales in pot 4 and the Faroe in pot 5.

    ReplyDelete
  25. @Tobcoach
    Well if that is the case then it’s just tough luck for the Faroe Islands. But in my opinion the only right thing for FIFA to do is to document in full transparency the calculation of Wales and the Faroe Islands points. But sadly I don’t believe that is going to happen.
    Anyway I’m look forward to hear what Edgar have to say about this.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Is it possible Wales have the decimal advantage in June ranking but it'll be Faroese in July...?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Whats causing Norway to be ranked so high? 5W 5D 3L in recently qualifying (2010 WC and 2012 Euro) is enough to put them that high?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Edger, you still have not answered my question. About what would happen if TNT or Antigua and Barbuda played instead of Guadeloupe. I feel Guadeloupe or other associate members of CONCACAF or OFC or other confederations should not be allowed to compete in open official FIFA matches; it hurts FIFA members who win against them because of no FIFA ranking points. If a FIFA member loses to a Guadeloupe then they are not hurt and their rankings are higher than it should be.

    ReplyDelete
  29. @Anonymous
    No it's not possible. There are no matches in July, and neither Wales nor Faroe Islands have been playing matches in July the last 4 years. This means there are no points to devaluate, so there will be no change for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wales should play game with Curacao or San Marino in July then they will be sure to be in 4 pot. If Faroe Islands win friendly game with San Marino in July, they will be in 5 pot. :)

    ReplyDelete
  31. Playing a friendly against that bad of a team would probably drop their average, not raise it.

    ReplyDelete
  32. So is there any obvious explanation why Wales = Pot 5 on the FIFA ranking but Faroes = Pot 5 in Edgar's listing?

    Is the decimal system not used as assumed?

    Has FIFA or Edgar made a mistake?

    Are FIFA hoping no-one will notice?

    Has Pot 5 been publicised in Faroes...?

    ReplyDelete
  33. @Tobcoach

    I have also made mine calculation of the Wales-the Faroe Islands situation.

    In my calculation Wales have 273,3584416 points and the Faroe Islands have 273,4821429 points.
    The devil is in the detail. Wales won a friendly against Luxembourg in the 11th of August in 2010. It’s the same date that FIFA releases a new FIFA World Ranking list. In this list Luxembourg was placed no. 117. In the list from 14th of July Luxembourg was no. 116. This means that if you put 116 instead of 117 in to the equation the total amount of points for Wales are 273,7334416.

    In my opinion there is no doubt that using the list from 11th of August is the right thing to do, because the list was released in the morning, and the match between Wales and Luxembourg was played in the evening.

    In short my calculation shows that the Faroe Islands should be in pot 5 and Wales in pot 6.

    ReplyDelete
  34. @Lorric

    See the March vs. July seeding.
    Regarding OFC's changed format - can't say more than what you've said - it will indeed help them climb in the rankings.

    @dave

    With T&T instead of Guadeloupe: USA (835), Panama (597), Canada (458). With Antigua and Barbuda: USA (832), Panama (595), Canada (454).

    I agree with Alex, they have the right to compete in their confederation's championship.

    Sorry for the delay, but I only post articles/answer to comments on Friday.

    @Soccer-db.Net

    Thanks for the info!

    @Joel

    No, I didn't include Mexico's pre-Copa America friendlies in the ranking calculation.

    @Alex

    Good to have you back!

    @Anonymous

    FIFA confirm my calculations so there's no error in my math.

    @Wales/Faroe Islands

    See this post.

    UEFA seeding: Wales vs. Faroe Islands

    @Tobcoach

    Thanks for the help!

    ReplyDelete
  35. @CWY2190

    From the 972 points Norway will have in June/July, 503 come from five matches only. Portugal (Sep 2010), Cyprus (Oct 2010), Iceland (Sep 2010), Scotland (Aug 2009) and Macedonia (Sep 2009). Portugal were 8th, Cyprus were 43rd, Iceland were 79th, Scotland were 24th, Macedonia were 56th. As you can see Norway got very lucky, playing and winning against these teams when they were almost on an all time best ranking. Norway also performed very well in friendlies in the last 4 years. See the second table in this article. As you can see, only Spain and Netherlands have performed better in the last 4 years (taking only friendlies into account).

    ReplyDelete
  36. @CWY2190

    Now You can look at Welsh average and compare with 138,75 points from any friendly win (for example with Solomon Islands).

    ReplyDelete
  37. I disagree with Edger and others on Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guyana, etc. they are associate members of CONCACAF. Canadians would rather be 71st or 72nd and 7th best CONCACAF team because certain leagues require players are from the top 75 ranked teams. Panama would be in the top 50 at 47th or 48th. The U.S. would be 21st or 22nd. The biggest victim this time of having a non FIFA member compete is Canada. In 2007 the biggest benefit happened to Canada because they lost to Guadeloupe.

    ReplyDelete
  38. @dave:

    Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, Saint-Martin, and Sint Maarten are not associate members. They are full members of CONCACAF.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I'm retracting what I said about Agentina. I no longer believe they are the equal of England. When you're struggling against teams which failed to qualify to the World Cup in your own stadium in your own tournament and you have the finest player on the planet in your team and a supporting cast of individual players comparable to the talent England has at it's disposal, you are not the equal of England. Right now, I think England are the 5th best team in the World.

    ReplyDelete
  40. It's a shame Japan couldn't be there. I reckon they would have delivered the final blow, and eliminated Argentina in the group stage of their own tournament.

    ReplyDelete
  41. As I did in the other thread, I retract my claim about Guadeloupe, etc, being "full members." I was wrong. They are indeed associate members.

    Nonetheless, I stand by my main point: they should still be fully entitled to enter confederational championships.

    ReplyDelete
  42. @dave

    It's Edgar, not Edger. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete