http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/statistics/pastworldcup/index.html The big 8 have all won a World Cup title now: (Well, technically Holland is 8th and Uruguay is 9th but that's just a minor technicality. If only Uruguay had won that 3rd place game ) NT............. pts....apps. 1. Brazil ........213 - 19 2. Germany ...190 - 17 3. Italy ........153 - 17 4. Argentina ..121 - 15 5. England ......97 -13 6. France .......86 -13 7. Spain .........84 -13 8. Netherlands 67 - 9 9. Uruguay .....65 - 11
its stars that count my friend.. brazil 5 italy 4 germany 3 argentina 2 uruguay 2 france 1 spain 1 england 1
brazil 5 italy 3 germany 3 uruguay 2 argentina 1,5 france 1 spain 1 england 1 looks more familiar to me
How have you computed the points? The thing is, that till 1990 WC, there were 2 points for a win and 1 for a draw. That resulted in many teams playing super defensive and aiming for a draw. That had a big impact on the final outcome of the games. Maybe you should count a win in WCs pre 90 as 2 points and re do the calculations.
That's nonsens, because it's the same state and the same FA before and after 1990. Nice contrast to the Italian titles from '34 and '38, though.
Are you from Hannover, by chance?? Anyway, Italy's titles are all more legitimate than the 1954 farce.
How did you reach this particular figure??? Is no body bothered that awarding 3 points for wins, especially for tournaments when they weren't worth 3 is not the way ahead. Also, nobody seems to take into account that points are a direct function of games played. While I admit that the more games you play means the further you go in tournaments, that isn't always the case. A losing quarter finalist in the 32 team format played as many games as the finalists in the first few WCs. That is a statistic, when corrected , will improve Italy and Uruguay's over all performance. Points/ game played is a better or more telling statistic. People are more interested in a Germany vs Italy debate here, which it is not.
If only Forlan had scored an extra goal, he would've been the golden boot and the golden ball, the first in history for a 4th place team. I think this started in 82, 78 unofficially. Golden ball winners: 78 Kempes (also won golden boot) 82 Rossi (also won golden boot) 86 Maradona 90 Schillaci (also won golden boot) 94 Romario 98 Ronaldo 02 Kahn 06 Zidane 10 Forlan (first time given after the final)
These stats sure are pretty...but in the end....trophies are all that matters. Germans...you've had many chances. You had a great chance in 2006...at home..in front of your home crowd...and you played great. Unfortunately Italy played better and scored when it counted. Again, this year, you had your chance and failed to seize it. So....like others have said already: 1. Brazil 2. Italy 3. Germany 4. Every country with 2 5. Every Country with 1 All the stats in the world will never change the order of this list. Only winning when it matters.
Or to have a fascist dictator, who forces and impends referees, officials and players. Oh.. and to win at the right time.
Agreed. The number of titles should be the first and most important criteria. Average points per game is interesting, but completely devoid of context.
True, that's the only one that matters. Sadly, this one also matters, actually: Spain: Last win 2010 Italy: Last win 2006 Brazil: Last win 2002 France: Last win 1998 Germany (West): Last win 1990 Argentina: Last win 1986 England: Last win 1966 Uruguay: Last win 1950
Final 2010 World Cup ranking: All 32 teams are ranked based on criteria which have been used by FIFA for previous tournaments.[13] R Team G P W D L GF GA GD Pts. Final 1 Spain H 7 6 0 1 8 2 +6 18 2 Netherlands E 7 6 0 1 12 6 +6 18 3rd and 4th place 3 Germany D 7 5 0 2 16 5 +11 15 4 Uruguay A 7 3 2 2 11 8 +3 11 Eliminated in the quarter-finals 5 Argentina B 5 4 0 1 10 6 +4 12 6 Brazil G 5 3 1 1 9 4 +5 10 7 Ghana D 5 2 2 1 5 4 +1 8 8 Paraguay F 5 1 3 1 3 2 +1 6 Eliminated in the round of 16 9 Japan E 4 2 1 1 4 2 +2 7 10 Chile H 4 2 0 2 3 5 −2 6 11 Portugal G 4 1 2 1 7 1 +6 5 12 United States C 4 1 2 1 5 5 0 5 13 England C 4 1 2 1 3 5 −2 5 14 Mexico A 4 1 1 2 4 5 −1 4 15 Korea Republic B 4 1 1 2 6 8 −2 4 16 Slovakia F 4 1 1 2 5 7 −2 4 Eliminated in the group stage 17 Côte d'Ivoire G 3 1 1 1 4 3 +1 4 18 Slovenia C 3 1 1 1 3 3 0 4 19 Switzerland H 3 1 1 1 1 1 0 4 20 South Africa A 3 1 1 1 3 5 −2 4 21 Australia D 3 1 1 1 3 6 −3 4 22 New Zealand F 3 0 3 0 2 2 0 3 23 Serbia D 3 1 0 2 2 3 −1 3 24 Denmark E 3 1 0 2 3 6 −3 3 25 Greece B 3 1 0 2 2 5 −3 3 26 Italy F 3 0 2 1 4 5 −1 2 27 Nigeria B 3 0 1 2 3 5 −2 1 28 Algeria C 3 0 1 2 0 2 −2 1 29 France A 3 0 1 2 1 4 −3 1 30 Honduras H 3 0 1 2 0 3 −3 1 31 Cameroon E 3 0 0 3 2 5 −3 0 32 Korea DPR G 3 0 0 3 1 12 −11 0
West Germany (the Federal Republic of Germany) and Germany (the Federal Republic of Germany) are the same country. The re-incorporation of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) did not change that. The Federal Republic of Germany has the same government it had prior to the re-incorporation.
A little Geography now.... Bundesrepublik Deutschland - Federal Republic of Germany (1) Deutsche Democratische Republik - German Democratic Republic (2) 2 dissolved and was taken over by 1 in 1990. The DFB, which has always been the national football team's board of 1 has remained unchanged since 1900.
I don't think so. Some people just put it there because they think that it was a slightly different country.
I know it's the same country. I put West in parentesis only to acknowledge the difference from East Germany, which also has participated in the World Cup. It's like if North and South Korea get back together and are called Korea, and we are talking about South Korea's accomplishments, I might put South in parentesis to differenciate them from the North, which also has participated. Anyway, my point was that it matters above all how many WC titles we won, but it also matters quite a bit how long it's been since we've won a WC title. I'm sorry if the name clarification distracted from that.