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 |
Well now! Let's see who got screwed in CONCACAF by the use of the March Rankings for World Cup qualifying seeding.
ReplyDeleteIn 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.
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.
ReplyDeleteWhat 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.
ReplyDeleteChange in OFC qualifying format; bottom 4 according to this ranking will play qualifying for Nations Cup where they'll join the top 7 teams.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/01/44/46/41/2014fwc_drawprocedures_oceania.pdf
@ Soccer-db.Net
ReplyDeleteThat'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.
@ Soccer-db.Net
ReplyDeleteEdit - 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.
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.
ReplyDeleteI 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.
ReplyDeletewhat place would be mexico after the win over USA
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous
ReplyDeleteNinth, I believe.
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?
ReplyDeleteEdgar-how did you count those friendlies in your calculations?
Yes, Mexico will be 9th with 1007 points, as stated at the top of the post.
ReplyDelete-------
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!
@dave:
ReplyDeleteGuadeloupe 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.
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...
ReplyDeleteThe FIFA World Ranking list has now been released:
ReplyDeletehttp://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?
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.
ReplyDelete(Whatever happens I hope that Wales draw Faroes in WC qualifying, let's decide who is 114th in the world after all!!!)
@Anonymous June 29, 2001 12:09 AM:
ReplyDeleteIt'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.
Wales-Faroes situation is very strange.
ReplyDeleteCan 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.
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.
ReplyDeleteIs 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?
Re Faroes
ReplyDeleteGood 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.
Just a quick shoutout in defence of England to anyone who'll listen.
ReplyDeleteThe 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.
@Lorric
ReplyDeleteI 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.
@ Jakup
ReplyDeleteHmmm...
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.
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.
ReplyDeleteIf 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.
@Tobcoach
ReplyDeleteWell 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.
Is it possible Wales have the decimal advantage in June ranking but it'll be Faroese in July...?
ReplyDeleteWhats 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?
ReplyDeleteEdger, 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@Anonymous
ReplyDeleteNo 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.
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. :)
ReplyDeletePlaying a friendly against that bad of a team would probably drop their average, not raise it.
ReplyDeleteSo is there any obvious explanation why Wales = Pot 5 on the FIFA ranking but Faroes = Pot 5 in Edgar's listing?
ReplyDeleteIs 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...?
@Tobcoach
ReplyDeleteI 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.
@Lorric
ReplyDeleteSee 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!
@CWY2190
ReplyDeleteFrom 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).
@CWY2190
ReplyDeleteNow You can look at Welsh average and compare with 138,75 points from any friendly win (for example with Solomon Islands).
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@dave:
ReplyDeleteGuadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, Saint-Martin, and Sint Maarten are not associate members. They are full members of CONCACAF.
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.
ReplyDeleteIt'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.
ReplyDeleteAs I did in the other thread, I retract my claim about Guadeloupe, etc, being "full members." I was wrong. They are indeed associate members.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, I stand by my main point: they should still be fully entitled to enter confederational championships.
@dave
ReplyDeleteIt's Edgar, not Edger. Thanks!