Alternative World Rankings Thread

Discussion in 'FIFA and Tournaments' started by vancity eagle, Dec 27, 2018.

  1. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    Yes they did.

    Drawing Bulgaria at home didn't help. Also losing in the uefa nations league semi final.
     
    Paul Calixte repped this.
  2. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    **rubs eyes**

    Wait - they drew with Bulgaria?

    Nvm @vancity eagle , I withdraw the question :D
     
    edcalvi repped this.
  3. thewitness

    thewitness Member

    Melbourne Victory, Derby County
    Australia
    Jul 10, 2013
    Club:
    Derby County FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Australia
    It's taking Canada a long time to pull nearer USA and Mexico in your rankings despite their recent very good form. Or are the most recent November qualifiers not included?
     
  4. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    November not included.
     
    thewitness repped this.
  5. Christina99

    Christina99 Member+

    Argentina
    Sep 22, 2013
    Buenos Aires
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    Now, THIS is a good ranking
     
  6. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    The current FIFA rankings, and the methodology they now employ, are fine. That doesn't mean there aren't anomalies or that every side is ranked as I would rank them. Certainly not. But that is largely because no objective, results based, ranking system can adjust itself as quickly to the changing form of teams, or differences that arise in the perception of the merit of various sides when those judgments are affected by tournament performances more than what you get from league type consistency.

    Consider, for instance, an argument raging about which club is better or stronger right now: Juventus or Milan? Anyone like me, who isn't following the Serie A but has watched both those clubs closely in the UCL, would have no hesitation picking Juventus and any argument about Milan's standing in the Serie A would most likely do more to discredit the Serie A than raise Milan's stock in my eyes, since Milan has been rubbish in the UCL. Conversely, when a side like Juventus exhibits such good form in the UCL, then -- if you are like me, focused a lot more on the UCL than the Serie A-- you would still have no hesitation ranking Juventus much much higher than Milan (and, implicitly, dismiss the value of the Serie A standings). And that example involves two clubs from the same country playing similar opponents. To rank and rate sides from different continents, playing entirely different opponents in entirely different settings, is simply an exercise that can never come close to producing any more reliable output than what you get right now from the rankings FIFA publish each month.
     
  7. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    :)

    Well, I'm glad that Iran is ranked only marginally worse by @vancity eagle at #23 than how we are ranked by FIFA (#21) or ELO (#20). Otherwise, I would have great incentive to question how these rankings are any more sensible than FIFA's rankings which frankly have done excellent job even doing something they aren't meant to do, namely predict the qualifying standings in many regions with greater accuracy than pundit opinion or any alternative rankings.
     
  8. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    I've discussed this before Iranian Monitor.

    But FIFA is whack, I'm sorry

    I referenced the 2019 Concacaf Nations league where Canada was in a group with the USA and Cuba.

    Canada would recieve roughly the same amount of points for beating Cuba as they would for drawing against the US.

    If you think that is fine, then you're a pretty bad comedian.

    Not to mention the lack of win and loss margins, or the fact that you gain advantage simply by playing more games.

    Its not OK, it can greatly be improved.
     
    edcalvi repped this.
  9. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    Iran is ranked roughly the same, however there is a major difference.

    Under FIFA Iran would keep rising simply by beating up crappy Asian teams, whereas in my ranking they would plateau and not go up any further.
     
  10. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    You don't earn that many points in the FIFA rankings (which now use a slightly modified version of ELO's methodology) beating "crappy teams" and any points you do earn are fully justified considering that consistently beating such teams isn't as easily accomplished as you imagine.

    In the meantime, be objective and compare your rankings to those from FIFA, with an eye specifically on the qualifying tables in UEFA, CAF, CONMEBOL, AFC, etc. Which one do you imagine better tells how those standings look? I haven't done this exercise, but the results from your rankings don't appear to correspond as much with qualifying tables...
     
    majspike and Cosmin10 repped this.
  11. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    Below is the top 50 according to FIFA's rankings. There are a few sides outside the top 50 which have a shot at qualifying to the World Cup, but they are long shots, Panama (ranked #63) being arguably the one not included in the top 50 with the best shot at qualifying. Otherwise, except for Qatar (#51) who have qualified as hosts, the top 50 according to FIFA also gives us a good picture of who is in and out of contention to qualify to the World Cup.

    I have colored teams who have qualified already in navy blue, teams whose current position in the standings would see them qualify in light blue, teams who are either in the CAF or UEFA playoffs in green and those whose current position would put them in the playoffs in a different shade of green, and teams which are already eliminated in red. (Those still in contention but who aren't currently in a qualifying position are left black).
    1. Belgium
    2. Brazil
    3. France
    4. England
    5. Argentina
    6. Italy
    7. Spain
    8. Portugal
    9. Denmark
    10. Netherlands
    11. Germany
    12. USA
    13. Switzerland
    14. Mexico
    15. Croatia
    16. Colombia
    17. Uruguay
    18. Sweden
    19. Wales
    20. Senegal
    21. Iran
    22. Peru
    23. Serbia
    24. Chile
    25. Ukraine
    26. Japan
    27. Poland
    28. Morocco
    29. Tunisia
    30. Austria
    31. Czech Republic
    32. Algeria
    33. Korea Rep
    34. Russia
    35. Australia
    36. Nigeria
    37. Turkey
    38. Scotland
    39. Hungry
    40. Canada
    41. Norway
    42. Slovakia
    43. Paraguay
    44. Romania
    45. Egypt
    46. Ecuador
    47. Rep of Ireland
    48. Saudi Arabia
    49. Costa Rica
    50. Cameroon
     
    Every Four Years, Kamtedrejt and edcalvi repped this.
  12. edcalvi

    edcalvi Moderator
    Staff Member

    Olimpia
    Guatemala
    May 1, 2005
    US
    All those bright colors really hurt my eyes.

    And I'm still using the blue light filter.
     
  13. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    #63 vancity eagle, Nov 23, 2021
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2021
    Interesting that FIFA has Ecuador only at #46 while my ranking has them way up at #28, even though my ranking is a month behind and doesn't include their 2 wins against Chile and Ecuador which would bring them up even further.

    This is because as I have outlined before FIFA does not give enough respect for drawing against GOOD TEAMS. They would rather give you cheap points for beating crappy teams.

    Also Ecuador thrashing Colombia 6-0 would heavily be rewarded in my ranking but FIFA sees no difference whether it was 1-0 or 6-0.

    I dont know how you can claim to judge strength without taking into account win and loss margins. It's quite comical really.

    Ecuador is currently #3 in Conembol qualifying.

    So what seems more accurate #28 or #46 ?
     
    Christina99, Kamtedrejt and edcalvi repped this.
  14. edcalvi

    edcalvi Moderator
    Staff Member

    Olimpia
    Guatemala
    May 1, 2005
    US
    #28 makes way more sense IMHO.
     
    Christina99 and vancity eagle repped this.
  15. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    Well, sorry about that, although it helps make my point: the top 50 is full of colors because it basically corresponds to World Cup qualifying records of these teams. The higher in the rankings, the more likely (with some notable exceptions) that you have qualified or are in position to qualify and the lower in the rankings, more likely (with a few exceptions) that you are either eliminated or facing elimination.

    But since I was planning to do the same with the ELO ratings when I get the chance, I will try to use different colors and ones not so bright.
    That is called 'cherry picking':) Do what I did from the top 50 in your rankings and lets see. I don't have any brief to carry for FIFA and if your rankings are doing better, I will be more than happy to credit you for those rankings.
     
    Kamtedrejt and edcalvi repped this.
  16. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    #66 vancity eagle, Nov 23, 2021
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2021
    IM

    I dont really see the relevance of your color system.

    Just outlining teams to qualify or being close to qualifying doesn't really prove much, considering certain confederations (conembol) can only qualify half of their teams, yet the teams who dont qualify are still highly competitive.

    Even if we look at individual confederations, they are all in different groups playing different teams.

    The only confederation where all the teams play the same opponents is Conembol and concacaf.

    And my rankings are far more accurate in terms of Ecuador , the #3 team in Conembol.

    If we look at concacaf, I had Canada at #3 in their confederation before FIFA who had Costa Rica at #3 until the most recent ranking.

    I had Canada at #3 from my October ranking, while it took FIFA until their November ranking to have them at #3. Again my ranking ahead of the curve and more accurate within confederations.

    I've also got African champs Algeria as #1 in CAF while they are only #4 in FIFA, despite beating FIFAs #1 Senegal twice at the past afcon.
     
  17. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    Okay, if you don't like colors I will explain it in words:
    In UEFA, 8 of the 10 top seeds qualified directly, with Italy and Portugal dropping late to go the playoffs. In CAF, all the top 10 seeds topped their groups. In the AFC, in Group A, the two top seeds (Iran, S.Korea) top their group, while in Group B, Saudi Arabia has done better than its ranking being on top of the group (showing improvement, which rankings can't predict) but otherwise the two top seeds (Japan and Australia) are in position to even finish as the top 2. In Concacaf, Canada (another team that has improved significantly) has taken the top spot, while Costa Rica is no longer one of the top 3, but otherwise its pretty much the same teams you would expect from the rankings with the US and Mexico still among the top 3. In CONMEBOL, Ecuador is the team that appears to be most improved and doing better than its ranking, but otherwise (if you replaced Uruguay for Ecuador) the standings for the top 5 are pretty much the same as you would get in the rankings. And the truth is that none of the teams in CONMEBOL, besides Brazil and Argentina (the top ranked teams who have already qualified) can be assured of their qualification still, not even Ecuador.

    Now, perhaps your rankings did better, but so far, I see nothing in FIFA's rankings to justify being totally dismissive about them. The few teams which have over-performed (Canada, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia) or under-performed (Italy, Portugal, Uruguay) have been (to me at least) easily understandable exceptions that don't refute the fact that the rankings as a whole are doing their job. And that job is not to tell us how teams will necessarily do in the future, but how they have done so far.
     
  18. Kamtedrejt

    Kamtedrejt Member+

    Internazionale Milano
    Albania
    Mar 14, 2017
    Hamburg
    Club:
    FC Internazionale Milano
    Nat'l Team:
    Albania
    For me Ecuador are on current form a Top 20 national team in the world. ELO Ratings which I prefer to FIFA Rankings have them in 16th at this moment of time.
    https://www.eloratings.net/
     
    edcalvi repped this.
  19. Kamtedrejt

    Kamtedrejt Member+

    Internazionale Milano
    Albania
    Mar 14, 2017
    Hamburg
    Club:
    FC Internazionale Milano
    Nat'l Team:
    Albania
    #69 Kamtedrejt, Nov 23, 2021
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2021
    Let's look closer at Ecuador and see who's more among FIFA and ELO for Ecuador's progress.

    Before the Eliminatorias started on 8 October 2020

    FIFA Rank Ecuador — 64
    ELO Rank Ecuador — 37

    As of now

    FIFA Rank Ecuador — 46
    ELO Rank Ecuador — 16

    FIFA rewarded Ecuador "only" with placing them 18 places higher whereas ELO rewarded them with a climb of 21 places.
    Keep mind that it gets usually tougher to climb up the ranks the higher you are placed.

    So, you are right on FIFA's system making it hard for teams to climb.

    As someone who watched Ecuador quite a few times I found ELO's assessment on them much more correct. They are a good side and nobody should wish to pull them out out of pot four.
     
    Christina99 repped this.
  20. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    I like the ELO rankings, but as I recall, they were quite unflattering to many CAF teams. Anyway, unless someone else hopefully beats me to it, I will try to at some point put up ELO's top 50 and color the sides based on their WC qualifying status similar to what I did for FIFA.
     
  21. Kamtedrejt

    Kamtedrejt Member+

    Internazionale Milano
    Albania
    Mar 14, 2017
    Hamburg
    Club:
    FC Internazionale Milano
    Nat'l Team:
    Albania
    Let's look at another team that improved a lot. Canada that is.

    Before first round qualifiers started on 24 March 2021

    FIFA Rank Canada — 73
    ELO Rank Canada — 60

    As of now

    FIFA Rank Canada — 40
    ELO Rank Canada — 28

    Once again, ELO gives more reward for a team on the rise.
    Jumping from 60th to 28th is in my eyes more rewarding and impressive than from 73rd to 40th.
     
  22. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    I"l take the top 20 by ELO over the top by FIFA without hesitation, but there are quite a few anomalies, especially when it comes to CAF. To lessen the risk of injury to anyone's eyes, changed some of the brighter colors: Dark Blue: Q GREEN: CAF/UEFA playoff; Purple: Q position in standings Brown: playoff position in standings
    1. Brazil
    2. France
    3. Argentina
    4. Belgium
    5. Spain
    6. England
    7. Italy
    8. Portugal
    9. Germany
    10. Denmark
    11. Switzerland
    12. Netherlands
    13. Colombia
    14. Croatia
    15. USA
    16. Ecuador
    17. Uruguay
    18. Serbia
    19. Mexico
    20. Iran
    21. Wales (#20 jointly with Iran)
    22. Peru
    23. Czechia
    24. Sweden
    25. Ukraine
    26. Chile
    27. South Korea
    28. Canada
    29. Poland
    30. Russia
    31. Japan
    32. Algeria
    33. Norway
    34. Australia (#33 jointly with Norway)
    35. Austria
    36. Scotland
    37. Paraguay
    38. Turkey
    39. Hungry
    40. Finland
    41. Morocco
    42. Senegal
    43. Bolivia
    44. Saudi Arabia
    45. Ireland
    46. Venezuela (tempted to use red for eliminated)
    47. Greece
    48. Slovakia
    49. Romania
    50. Ivory Coast
     
  23. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    #73 vancity eagle, Nov 23, 2021
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2021
    Elo ranking are also a joke IMO and you are right that they are way off on the CAF teams.

    One of the reasons I found out was that they count regional non FIFA tournaments, and they also weight them very heavily.

    So you could have literal B or C squads playing mickey mouse tournaments and elo will count them as if they are really important.

    CAF has plenty of these type of irrelevant tourneys.

    FIFA actually is better than elo in this regard.
     
    Kamtedrejt repped this.
  24. Every Four Years

    May 16, 2015
    Miramar, Florida
    Nat'l Team:
    India
    I am not a fan of the Elo ratings either. They are better than the pre-2018 FIFA formula, but with the current revision to the latter I much prefer FIFA.

    Tbh I think the current FIFA rankings are pretty decent, and most of the remaining issues have pretty easy fixes. There is no need to exclude losses in knockout tournament games, a team that consistently advances to the knockout stage will still end up higher over time than one that does not. Maybe exclude third-place games (or give them lower weighting) but other than that it's not really a "problem". Home and away should definitely be considered in the rankings, and margin probably should be given some consideration too.

    Nonetheless, despite these quirks, I think FIFA's rankings more or less get it correct in the end.
     
  25. vancity eagle

    vancity eagle Member+

    Apr 6, 2006
    #75 vancity eagle, Nov 23, 2021
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2021
    I'm not a fan of FIFA but I think I actually prefer it to ELO.

    Nigeria not even in the top 50 is hilarious.

    Some of their rankings are way off.
     

Share This Page