DS Forums

 
 

Predicted that England will drop to No.20 in the FIFA rankings


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15-07-2014, 19:52
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,620

The FIFA rankings will be announced on Thursday, but several websites are using the official methodology and have calculated that England will be ranked at No.20 (from the current No.10) - this will be the worst drop in England's history : they dropped six places after Euro 2008.

The official top 4 is expected to be 1. Germany 2.Argentina 3. Netherlands 4. Colombia
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 15-07-2014, 21:16
NiteOwl12
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,105
This would not be surprising considering how many of the teams currently ranked immediately below England out-performed England in the world cup,

11 Belgium
12 Greece
13 USA
14 Chile
15 Netherlands
17 France
20 Mexico
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina
22 Algeria
NiteOwl12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2014, 21:21
Xela M
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,578
Is Brazil not no.4?
Xela M is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2014, 21:32
DUNDEEBOY
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 56,295
I suppose they have a year to get back into a seeded European spot for the next World Cup qualifying draw in about a years time.

They wouldn't want a qualifying group with the likes of Germany, Netherlands
DUNDEEBOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2014, 21:52
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,620
Is Brazil not no.4?
Brazil's projected ranking is No.8 in fact
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2014, 21:57
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,620
This is certainly pretty poor stuff from England. Their lowest ever ranking was No.24 in May 1996.

Not that we Irish are in any position to crow. The Republic of Ireland have slumped to a disastrous No.70 after failing to win a single one of their six matches in 2014.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2014, 23:06
Flat Matt
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 6,436
This would not be surprising considering how many of the teams currently ranked immediately below England out-performed England in the world cup,

11 Belgium
12 Greece
13 USA
14 Chile
15 Netherlands
17 France
20 Mexico
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina
22 Algeria
Those rankings show just how bizarre the FIFA system is.

I really don't understand why England generally rank in the top 10 when we haven't beaten a top side in a competitive match since 2002.
Flat Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2014, 23:59
Steveaustin316
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15,746
This is certainly pretty poor stuff from England. Their lowest ever ranking was No.24 in May 1996.
At least then we had the excuse of no competitive matches for 2 years due to not needing to qualify for Euro 96. No such excuse this time.
Steveaustin316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 00:59
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,620
At least then we had the excuse of no competitive matches for 2 years due to not needing to qualify for Euro 96. No such excuse this time.
Yes, in real terms it's the worst ever placing as it comes after a run of competitive matches.

England would want to be very careful or they could end up being second seeds for WC 2018 and could find themselves in a group containing Germany or the Netherlands, which would probably mean having to go through the play offs at best to qualify.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 08:38
Philip Wales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,866
Rankings are very weird full stop. In rugby Argentina are usually ranked around 5 or so even though they never beat a team placed higher than them (1-4 etc) and rarely beat a team placed lower then them (5-10 etc) But it's only by beating the higher placed teams do you actually get any decent points.
Philip Wales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 09:05
Mark F
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,251
We'll probably play a few "winnable" friendlies now to boost our position starting with Norway...

Cannot really complain!
Mark F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 10:53
Tiggywink
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,543
Perhaps England should just not bother to take part at all. If they are more fussed about League games, then OK.
Tiggywink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 12:44
gemma-the-husky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
Struggle for england if they arent seeded in the top rank. If theyre lucky, they get switzerland.
gemma-the-husky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 13:12
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
Those rankings show just how bizarre the FIFA system is.

I really don't understand why England generally rank in the top 10 when we haven't beaten a top side in a competitive match since 2002.
Because we qualify for every tournament fairly easily that's why.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 18:02
Steveaustin316
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15,746
Because we qualify for every tournament fairly easily that's why.
We usually qualify, but i wouldn't say we do it easily. It usually involves a stressful final game where we just about do what's required to qualify.
Steveaustin316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 18:28
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,620
We usually qualify, but i wouldn't say we do it easily. It usually involves a stressful final game where we just about do what's required to qualify.
And they've been very lucky with qualifying groups in recent years. Ukraine (twice) and Russia are the only sides of note they've been paired with, neither of whom are any great shakes in the general scheme of things.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2014, 23:40
Flat Matt
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 6,436
Because we qualify for every tournament fairly easily that's why.
And how many decent sides do we ever beat during qualifying?

Our top ten status is totally undeserved.
Flat Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 02:05
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,620
And how many decent sides do we ever beat during qualifying?

Our top ten status is totally undeserved.
I think England have been flattered by ending up in a series of straightforward qualifying groups. You pick up more points in competitive matches than in friendlies and it's probably this that lifted them into the top 10.

The top ten status is gone anyway.....looks like they'll be No.20 when the rankings are announced later today.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 07:30
Wallasey Saint
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Up the creak without a paddle
Posts: 5,542
This is certainly pretty poor stuff from England. Their lowest ever ranking was No.24 in May 1996.

Not that we Irish are in any position to crow. The Republic of Ireland have slumped to a disastrous No.70 after failing to win a single one of their six matches in 2014.
Mitigating circumstances as England didn't play a competitive match between November 93 & June 96 due to hosting Euro 96 & failing to qualify for the 94 World Cup.
Wallasey Saint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 10:23
tiger2000
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Stoke-On-Trent
Posts: 7,158
And how many decent sides do we ever beat during qualifying?

Our top ten status is totally undeserved.
Since 2000....

Greece
Germany
Turkey
Poland
Austria
Poland
Russia
Croatia
Croatia
Bulgaria
Switzerland
Poland

All of these are decent but not great teams with the exception of Croatia, but then again you can only beat the teams you are drawn against, When England have been drawn against good teams like Germany and Italy they have won the group!
tiger2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 11:13
pixel_pixel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,683
I think the top 20 position is still very generous. Any business and the directors had not performed since 2002 would have been fired, and shut down.
pixel_pixel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 12:41
DangerBrother
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,575
I do think 20 is okay, maybe a bit generous.

Out of the 32 teams at the World Cup we weren't the worst, but came bottom of a group in which the top two teams didn't get that much further in the end.

Going by this we came approx 25-30th in the World Cup.
DangerBrother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 13:01
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
We usually qualify, but i wouldn't say we do it easily. It usually involves a stressful final game where we just about do what's required to qualify.
No we usually qualify pretty easily.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 13:02
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,729
And how many decent sides do we ever beat during qualifying?

Our top ten status is totally undeserved.
So using a complex mathematical formula where would you suggest we should be ranked? Thats what FIFA use, so unless you have a similar model then it's difficult to argue.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2014, 13:25
Xela M
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,578
But doesn't England usually make the quarter finals at major tournaments? So the top 10 rating wasn't so way off. Obviously they were terrible this year and deserve the drop to 20th.
Xela M is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:03.