Cuba's average is lots higher than what it was last month, as for last month, they had some defeats that gave them zeroe points, which once averaged with the rest of points they had, gave them a lower average of points. For this last ranking those defeats disappeared from their record, so it doesn't affect their actual average of points, making it be lots higher than what it was before (due to the fact they play very few games, it meant them about 150 points in their average of points). I must say that I'm asuming that this might be the reason, although I may be wrong.
The amount of points that can be accumulated over the time period of 3 years is the difference. Not having all those Qualifiers hurt them.
Cuba is not even a top 100 side, and I don't believe they did anything. Just checked wiki and they played in the Gold cup where they lost to Costa Rica 3-0 and USA 4-1, before beating the almighty Belize 4-0 , and then losing to Panama 6-1. Elo does not have them in the top 100. I don't see Cuba ever even qualifying for an African nations cup, or an AFC cup.
Actually the time period extends itself over 4 years, not 3. And for each year according to how old it is, it is weighed diferently, being for : the last year, 100 % of the average of points for that year 2 years, 50 % of the average of points for that year 3 years, 30 % of the average of points for that year 4 years, 20 % of the average of points for that year.
Well in December, in this last year, besides of those loses, they also beat Trinidad & Tobago, Jamaica and Haiti, which were for the Caribbean cup, which as it also were qualifiers for the last Gold Cup, it meant that they give a great amount of points for each win. As they play very few games, those 3 victories gave them a very high average of points for this last year, but as fast as they jumped to higher positions within the FIFA ranking now, for the next one or for the one of January, next year, as they will be more than one year old, only 50 % of them will be counted for their average of points, where they will fall lots of places.
Its obviously stupid rankings like the one for Cuba that make one realize that there must be something wrong with FIFA's ranking methodology. Incidentally, I checked the SPI ranking, which with few exceptions, looks rather reasonable. In that ranking, Cuba is #139!!! ELO has Cuba at 106. So, obviously, something is terribly amiss with FIFA's ranking of Cuba.
Oh it's more than just Cuba, although IMO that was the most glaring failure of these pathetic excuse for rankings.
Just because you weaklings beat each other and think you must be good it doesn't mean you are actually good Be glad FIFA has a policy in which geography and potential growth are significant (for their own benefit of course) and be glad you guys and CONCACAF have so many spots. Becasue strictly based on the sporting performance that number would be cut significantly
I think the reason a lot of the CONCACAF teams are rated higher is because of the Gold Cup. And Panama did very well in that. All regions receive a slight boost after their confederation's championship. Besides, 37 isn't that far fetched (though I would probably place them in the mid to low 40s).
If you moved Panama to the mid to low 40s, you would then have to move Cuba further down. Now that wouldn't be right, would it? Anyway, my own view is that FIFA's rankings over rate many UEFA teams and almost all Concacaf sides, especially when you look at how they are being rated compared to teams like Japan and others in the AFC.
If it wasn't already obvious, it's been confirmed that the FIFA Rankings are a joke. So stupid... Cuba over a japan who slid after two great results against top 10-ranked sides. Buyt one thing I do like is Bosnia's ranking, too many fans (our own fans, actually) overrating us way too much because of how high we were ranked. This should help lower expectations, for now.
Well, can't deny that there is some truth to that, considering I have also said that until I see Iran tested against better opposition, I am not able to make any clear judgments about our team. But just to get some impression about Romania, I went to the FIFA site to check your results against the kind of European teams we have played in friendlies the past decade or so. At first, without realizing it, I was checking out results in the "women" category and some of those results had my jaws drop. 10:0 against Croatia, and similar scores against some other teams I was checking! I wanted to come and apologize for my comment about Romania and ask how was it that you got these kind of results in some games, only to be consigned to the playoffs and then lose rather decisively at the hands of Greece? Which is when I realized those were your women scores. In fairness, though, your men's scores weren't all that bad either. And even though I would love to hit back at someone who is trying to be poke fun of my team, the results I saw left me with no clear impression how Iran would rate against Romania. Indeed, rating you above Iran may (I don't know) very well be justified, although I would still question putting you ahead of Japan. You know what would make me glad: that these things weren't decided based on allocations and quotas, but instead on the playing field. In the kind of intercontinental match that would test your assumptions against mine.
Cuba's ranking is obviously ridiculous. Should be around 100. And I don't really think all CONCACAF sides are overrated. You seem to have a pretty low opinion of the Central Americans compared to a lot of people.
For the future http://www.11v11.com/uefa/ (any confederation you want) Choose the country then Head to Head From Romania's point of view it is very accurate so I hope this is true for everybody else Just don't look at our record against Italy and Hungary (altough the record is mostly in the past) You should check our record against England
I'm not really sure what a countries overall record has to do with anything. The rest of the world is catching up to Europe pretty fast. It's much more competitive today than even 20 years ago. As far as I'm concerned, those records are nearly irrelevant to this thread.
They are? What good teams now haven't had at least one good generation in the past? And by good I don't mean get out of the groups... Also you forgot to include S America I gave that link to Iran Monitor I thought he would apreciate it
Most of FIFA's rankings are ridiculous but Cuba's is by far the worst. I've been working on a ranking system for a while and would post it here but seemed to have lost the privileges to start new topics for some reason. Here's a list of the FIFA rankings biggest mistakes in my opinion (not in order of worst mistake): My ranking, Country, FIFA, ELO, SPI #72, North Korea, 113, 61, 85 #81, Canada, 114, 91, 102 #82, Cape Verde, 39, 79, 97 #87, Latvia, 119, 99, 113 #108, Sierra Leone, 74, 117, 133 #109, Cuba, 47, 106, 139 #127, Dominican Rep, 88, 139, 135 #135, Liberia, 105, 127, 121 #139, Niger, 104, 136, 132 #151, Fiji, 181, 125, 131 Obviously there are plenty of other mistakes with FIFA's rankings but these are the largest in terms of number positions.
there aren't any mistakes in FIFA's ranking. It is just the same formula applied to each of the teams accordingly to the same rules. You may like it or not, but it is as how it is. I, personally, hate it.
Good point they are not mistakes. Their formula just produces an outcome that is not matched by reality.
Well, we agree on that one at least Seriously, when they get such a nonsensical result, FIFA should immediately feel its on notice that there is a glitch in its formula that needs fixing. But like the situation where they don't find a way to accommodate the differences in ranking that arises from who is playing its confederation qualifying or continental championships when, and the problems in the points that cannot be earned by teams exempted from qualifying (e.g., hosts), not to mention the bizarre way the confederation coefficient works in this formula, FIFA seems impervious to making the required changes. At most, it sometimes (not this time for seeding purposes) accommodates the problems by ignoring its own rankings! The right answer to me is to fix the rankings when you have an obvious glitch or problem, not to ignore it! Not really. When you look at FIFA's ranking of Concacaf sides in isolation, compared to what you get from ELO and SPI, the differences are minor for most of these other sides (Cuba not included!). But when you compare Concacaf sides with the AFC, the differences you get can be substantial. According to FIFA's ranking, leaving aside the US and Mexico, all of Costa Rica, Honduras, and Panama (and even Cuba!), rate above Japan, South Korea and Australia (and, except for Cuba, above Iran too). But that obviously can't be true. And you don't get that kind of a counter intuitive result from anyone else. ELO would have both Japan and Iran above all of them -- above Costa Rica, Honduras and Panama (and obviously Cuba, which everyone except FIFA rank in the 100s). So which picture is more credible, the one from FIFA that has all these teams above all their Asian counterparts, or the picture from ELO? Even SPI, which produces something between FIFA and ELO on this issue, would at least put Japan above Honduras and Panama, although (incredibly in my eyes) SPI puts them behind Costa Rica. (Under SPI, Iran and South Korea rank behind not only Costa Rica, but also Honduras, although both rank above Panama). Even if you are completely biased in favor of Concacaf, I just can't see how you could question even what comes from SPI in these comparisons, much less FIFA. (And, frankly, other than on this issue and a few here and there, I think SPI's ranking is pretty good).
Thanks. I am aware of that site and am going to do a comparison, focused on results since say 2000, for Romania and Iran. Common opponents only, regardless of confederation, and just for fun as I have reminded enough how friendlies don't count . Yet, without taking into account friendlies we would hardly have any matches much less a large enough sample to make any comparison! Once I am done, I will post the verdict, whatever it may be!
What do you think of these world rankings? They have been around since 1997. http://www.rankfootball.com/
Here are a few more: http://chancedegol.uol.com.br/rksel.htm (Brazilian website) http://www.eurotopfoot.com/mondfoot/monde.php3 (French website)
Would like to believe Iran is #17 in the world, but I can't take a ranking that puts Spain at #8 (Spain being back to back Euro champs and reigning World Cup champions, whose main failure up to now has been losing in the final of the Confederation Cup to Brazil), behind Chile (#4), Colombia, Netherlands and Uruguay seriously at all. Frankly, almost makes FIFA's rankings look good!