The WC 2022 Seeding discussion thread....

Discussion in 'FIFA and Tournaments' started by mfw13, Aug 14, 2021.

  1. Kamtedrejt

    Kamtedrejt Member+

    Internazionale Milano
    Albania
    Mar 14, 2017
    Hamburg
    Club:
    FC Internazionale Milano
    Nat'l Team:
    Albania
  2. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    Funny how you can move up from 9 to 7 by beating 2 teams barely in the top 50.

    Utter garbage.
     
  3. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    That link doesn't work for me, but it would makes sense that they pass Spain in the rankings.
     
    Cosmin10 repped this.
  4. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    It makes sense knowing how the rankings work.

    But it does not make logical sense.
     
  5. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    Well, Spain lost a game so makes sense logically that they would drop this month (so by default teams just behind them in the ranking would rise if they didn't also screw up). What doesn't make logical sense to me is that Spain and Mexico would be that close in the rankings before this month. Also doesn't really make much sense of any kind that Portugal would get surpassed by Mexico during this FIFA window.
     
    vancity eagle and Every Four Years repped this.
  6. Every Four Years

    May 16, 2015
    Miramar, Florida
    Nat'l Team:
    India
    Isn't this the same as the Mexico/Spain issue? Portugal didn't gain as many points as Mexico because they played one competitive game and one friendly as opposed to two competitive games. Both teams played opponents of similar quality (at least according to FIFA). Any system that distinguishes between friendlies and competitive games has this problem.

    The issue in both the Spain and the Portugal cases is that Mexico was already overrated due to the other issues with the rankings.
     
    BocaFan repped this.
  7. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006

    I agree with you both. Mexico was vastly overrated already, but so long as they beat up average concacaf teams they will continue to climb.

    At what point will FIFA do something about their stupid rankings ?

    Thing is I see them trying to fix it by doing some sort of confederation multiplier like before, but that doesn't fix the problem, it just discriminates against certain confederations.

    Bottom line is the quality of opponent needs to be factored into the equation much more than it currently does. You should not be overtaking Spain and Portugal just because you beat some crap teams.

    Also the cumualative thing is just a disaster. Somebody earlier pointed out that Mexico played almost the most amount of games than any other national team, and some will still claim that playing more games isn't an advantage in a cumulative system.
     
  8. dna77054

    dna77054 Member+

    Jun 28, 2003
    houston
    I do not find it particularly egregious that a team that has advanced to the second round in each of the last seven world cups might snag a seed. Also, most of those European groups are not particularly strong. I just ran the numbers. Here are the average rankings (current FIFA) of their opponents in the final round of WC qualifying:

    Mex - 52 average opponents' ranking
    Portugal - 67 average opponents' ranking
    Spain - 68 average opponents' ranking

    And the three above all finished in very similar positions in the last WC, with 5-6 points each and a second round exit.

    Looks like if Spain and Portugal get to beat up on poor opponents more than Mexico. If we are not going to have some sort of neutral algorithm to determine the seeds, we might as well just let the betting lines do it.

    I am NOT saying Mexico is better than either of those two teams, but given the above, it is not outrageous that Mexico may be ranked slightly higher on occasion. And look at the points, not the ranking; these three teams are within an eyelash of each other.
     
    jared9999, Paul Calixte and Footsatt repped this.
  9. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    QFT
     
    Cosmin10 repped this.
  10. JLSA

    JLSA Member

    Nov 11, 2003
    Given that the argument was that the rankings are terrible - it probably won't sway many if you use numbers based on the rankings themselves to justify the efficacy of those rankings.

    J
     
    vancity eagle repped this.
  11. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    I dont disagree that the euro groups aren't really all that strong compared to the hex.

    But Spain and Portugal aren't ranked high simply because of qualifying but rather a solid history of results against top teams in 2 editions of the nation's league and the euro 2020.

    Meanwhile Mexico jumped up quite a few places from a lackluster gold cup where they drew against the likes of Trinidad, struggled against El Salvador and Canada and lost twice to the US this summer. Something isn't right.
     
  12. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Part of it is Concacaf having publicly gamed the system by having the NL group stage double as Gold Cup qualifiers (and convincing FIFA of the same, thus getting a better multiplier for those games).
     
    Cosmin10 repped this.
  13. dna77054

    dna77054 Member+

    Jun 28, 2003
    houston
    Well we have to base it on something. I think the ranking are better now that they have trashed that horrible confederation multiplier. Just looking at the three final WC qualifying groups for each of those teams, the actual opponents for Spain and Portugal do not look much if any better than those for Mexico, ranking aside.
     
    Guinho repped this.
  14. dna77054

    dna77054 Member+

    Jun 28, 2003
    houston
    Yes, Spain and Portugal deserve their current ranks, but from here on out their opponents are comparable to those of Mexico. And if either have any big opponent left in the nation's league, which I have not been following, then they will have an opportunity for big points, an opportunity Mexico will never get. Mexico finished about 11th or so in the last world cup and since then IIRC have only lost 2 competitive games, both in overtime on the road. You all are setting up scenarios where it would be impossible for anybody outside of Europe or South American to earn a seed, especially since the Confed cup has been scrapped, denying some possible high point value games for teams from the rest of the world.

    As for Mexico struggling, a win is a win, and losing two overtime games in the finals of two tournaments is not exactly terrible. Look at Portugal's Euro win, they barely got out of an easy group as the third place team, had the easiest road to the final for probably any Euro finalist and played at best mediocre along the way, but they got the results, and in the end that is what matters.
     
  15. JLSA

    JLSA Member

    Nov 11, 2003
    "Something" is fine. "Itself" is not fine if you are trying in any way to justify the values.

    You might also consider that in the UEFA group, to qualify directly Spain has to finish ahead of all their opponent. In the CONCACAF group, Mexico doesn't have to finish ahead of two of those teams. Therefore on that measure alone the average should be only of those teams you need to beat.

    J
     
  16. NaBUru38

    NaBUru38 Member+

    Mar 8, 2016
    Las Canteras, Uruguay
    Club:
    Club Nacional de Football
    I used a similar system to simulate a world ranking for men's rugby union.

    A key aspect is that winning by multiple goals shouldn't give too many extra ranking points. Instead, losing by many goals should indeed reduce the number of points received.

    Adaping my ranking system to football, it would be sort of like this:
    • 10 points: defeat 5th team by 2+ goals.
    • 9 points: defeat 5th team by 1 goal, defeat 10th team by 2 goals.
    • 8 points: lose to 5th team by 1 goal, defeat 15th team by 1 goal.
    • 7 points: lose to 15th team by 1 goal, defeat 25th team by 1 goal.
    • 6 points: lose to 25th team by 1 goal, defeat 35th team by 1 goal.
    • 5 points: lose to 35th team by 1 goal, defeat 50th team by 1 goal.
    • 4 points: lose to 50th team by 1 goal, defeat 80th team by 1 goal.
     
  17. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So, how badly did the draw in Panama damage Mexico's chances?
     
  18. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    Probably not much. If they already overtaken Spain and Portugal (who don't have many games left) and Mexico has 11 more, there will be plenty of opportunity for them to gain points.

    The draw against Panama won't see them lose that much.
     
  19. dna77054

    dna77054 Member+

    Jun 28, 2003
    houston
    Apples and oranges. We are not talking about qualifying but about earning rankings points. If Mexico should qualify 3rd out of Concacaf, they will, I assume, not pick up enough point to be ranked ahead of Spain and Portugal anyway. Your argument is a non sequitur. It would also mean if a team qualifies before the last match day they would not need to get any more results, so any remaining games would be worth nothing in the rankings. Sound like a bad idea to me.
     
    Guinho repped this.
  20. JLSA

    JLSA Member

    Nov 11, 2003
    Actually the comment related to average points of opponents, so ranking points teams already have (that was the comparisoin provided between Mexico, Spain and Portugal) rather than anything they are getting in the future.

    If the claim is that CONCACAF teams are overrated and the teams they play aren't very strong, then saying that the average rankings of the CONCACAF teams that Mexico play are equal to the average rankings of UEFA teams that Spain plays is rather circular and self-serving.

    J
     
  21. BocaFan

    BocaFan Member+

    Aug 18, 2003
    Queens, NY
    Didn't another poster to the math earlier, and estimated that Mexico/US would need to go 8-2-2 to get a top seed (assuming one of Denmark, Spain or Portugal win out which seems quite likely now). That's excluding the matches between Mexico and the US, and I wouldn't be surprised if Mexico bottles it against the US twice.

    So yeah, the draw against Panama doesn't kill their chances by any means, but OTOH playing crappy in 2 of the first 3 games isn't a strong indicator that they're going to get it done.
     
  22. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The numbers vary, but a rough estimate for Mexico playing against the 5 non-US teams is a win gains ~6, a draw loses ~6, and a loss loses ~18. So if they win 2 lose 1 next window, despite having 13 points from 18 they would be about where they started in terms of ranking points.

    Arguably the most important games for Spain are the two NL finals. If they lose both, (semi and 3rd place) they could drop below Denmark.
     
  23. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    There is never going to by anything like a 'perfect' ranking system, least one so accurate to differentiate differences between sides of similar caliber to precisely set them all in numerical order and even less so when many of these sides come from different confederations and never play one another in any meaningful matches.

    In any case, regardless of the ranking system one is focused on, a mistake that is often made is to focus too much on the numerical rank of various teams and not nearly as much on the points each have earned. For me, if there are nearly a dozen sides within say 50 points of one another, the differences between them are clearly overstated by their numerical rank while, conversely, if a side is ranked even 1 or 2 above another but with a substantial gulf between them in terms of their points, then the differences between those two sides cannot be understood simply by looking at their numerical ranking.

    My own preference has always been to see an expansion of meaningful inter-continental/confederation matches, mostly in the guise of intercontinental World Cup qualifiers, where each confederation would have a small number of guaranteed allocations and would have to earn the rest playing teams from other confederations. If you followed what I suggest, you could then also perhaps find a ranking system that would be slightly more in tune with people's perceptions of how various teams should rank.

    As an aside, in the last World Cup, you had Croatia finish as the runner up team. This was at the World Cup -- the premier tournament in football. Yet, I don't think too many people would have ranked Croatia as the number 2 team in the world simply by virtue of that tournament finish. Which is another way for me to emphasize how difficult it will be to have anything that might be considered close to a 'perfect' ranking system.
     
    Guinho, dna77054 and Every Four Years repped this.
  24. HomietheClown

    HomietheClown Member+

    Dusselheim FC 1971
    Sep 4, 2010
    Club:
    --other--
    If we have 2 World Cups per cycle there would be more matches played between the confederations which would help give us more accurate rankings.:D
     
    Guinho repped this.
  25. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    While your comment is obviously made in jest, the greater number of matches between teams of different confederations (for a host of other reasons mainly) is one of the few good things about the bi-annual World Cup proposal, even if there are more negative things about it for this to be a good idea when you analyze all the pros and cons.

    Incidentally, you could have something like a bi-annual World Cup of sorts if FIFA worked out some sort of an agreement (including on an equitable distribution of proceeds etc) with the International Olympic Committee when it comes to football. Olympic football to me is a total waste and a barometer of exactly nothing, but it was freed from its current age and other restrictions, it could also serve as a world football championship of sorts between World Cups.
     

Share This Page