Discussion in 'football' started by editor, Jul 4, 2012.
Suggest the ranking to the fans and see what they say.
I'd put England about tenth in the world.
Perhaps they should do it like the Eurovision song contest. I bet that would take us down a peg or 200.
I'm going to guess that it would include Brazil and Argentina. I'm also going to guess you've not seen either of them play in the last couple of years. Would that be accurate?
That'd be interesting, but not exactly unbiased. Smaller countries lose out simply by having fewer people who could vote, and then the general 'Eurovision' voting as alluded to my Maltin.
The rankings are obvious bollocks, and tenth sounds about right, but how can they be made to reflect that accurately?
If I was a gambling man, I'd wager good money that England would fail to beat both those teams. How about you?
Come on, man! Answer the question!
So everyone votes on the top 205 teams in the world? How do you determine if Bhutan are better than Timor-Leste? Clearly the rankings are pointless but if you are going to do them for everyone in FIFA, you can only do them on performance rather than judgement.
I think the tournaments are the best judge of how good teams are. Based on the last two of those, England are between the fifth and 16th best team in the world. anything more specific than that is hard to judge. I would say somewhere between eighth and eleventh sounds about right currently.
Don't ask me for details. I'm making this up as I go along.
OK, on the basis we've established that I was right, I'll have a go. I'll even ignore that you've changed it to 'England would fail to win' and so ignored the possibility of a ground out 0-0.
I'd be inclined to bet on Brazil or Argentina over England. I'd instinctively be more inclined to back England against Uruguay though, even though they've recently won the Copa America, and the same for Brazil or Argentina against Uruguay even though they've failed to beat them recently. That's because like most people here I assume Brazil will always be good even though I haven't seen them in years. Which is why I wouldn't be much use in assessing rankings.
And you just fell for a really obvious troll
The self pwning continues!
Way to go, backfire boy!
what part of the posts made by those posters makes you think either of those votes are genuine? Are you really this fucking thick?
LOL. I can almost feel your anger and frustration.
Ah, poor Editor, reads the posts concerned, realises he's made a tit of himself, tries to front it out. Post more grinning faces, go on! "LOL"
I think you'll find the person on the delusional ale is you if you think the votes for england are better than 4th are serious ones.
Out of interest, what would be a better system? Or should the whole thing be done away with? There is no best, any team can beat any other team, football's a funny old game, at the end of the day.
The whole thing should be done away with, because ultimately these rankings serve little or no valid purpose.
it will determine seeds for world cup qualifying, which is quite a useful purpose if you want to make sure* all the big teams get to the world cup
*by not having a group of Spain, Germany, Italy , Portugal etc. in
I'd say England are probably joint fourth or fifth best in Europe with France possibly Netherlands too. They'd be more like 8th or 9th best worldwide.
Spain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Netherlands - all better than England. France about the same, with Russia, Sweden, and maybe Croatia not far behind. Add in Uruguay, either Argentina or Brazil, and quite possibly Cote d'Ivoire... makes England about 7th in Europe and 10th worldwide.
We're third now
As is only right.
Even having read this http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/aug/08/england-third-fifa-world-rankings
which refers to the criteria, I'm still nonplussed how England get 3rd. Wonder if they count eliminations on penalties as draws? If so, I suppose, we left the Euros undefeated. They want to get messrs Duckworth and Lewis in - otherwise the Eurovison Song Contest judging will have more credibility.
We did alright in the Olympics, that's got to count right?
Yes, another top 8 spot - men and women (though no, don't know if they include anything other than main internationals - probably not).
It does yeah. Where there's a penalty shoot out the winning team gets two points and the losing team one (otherwise three for a win and one for a draw.)
Seems reasonable enough to me. Imagine the frothing at the mouth if England had won the shootout and got three points.
What do we have to do to go up to second? This is much more easy than actually having to win anything!
every time Ingerland go up a place, John terry smiles. just bear that in mind
...........and bitter people grimace
Separate names with a comma.