Absent far greater sample of intercontinental matches, these issues will persist. In the meantime, I prefer grading teams to numerically ranking them. And while my grades use ELO points as a base (ELO average since Wc98 weighted equally with current Elo ranking), I generally adjust those grades in case of CAF teams by half a letter grade.
As i noted Ecuador is overrated IMO even though I do not really fault my rankings because Ecuador produced many strong results in the WCQ campaign. Senegal would be higher if they didn't draw a few low ranked sides at the recent AFCON they should have beaten. Also they just don't have the potential to earn the amount of points that Ecuador does playing 18 WCQ matches and 5 or 6 Copa matches against mostly teams well in the top 40 or so. You can only rank a team by who they play unfortunately. But yes I think Senegal is better.
I understand @vancity eagle's frustration with Elo but looking at the formula he uses to weigh games leaves me shocked. The final rounds of World Cup qualifiers represents the highest level of football in each confederation. World Cup qualifiers are taken more seriously than even continental championships in almost every confederation and even in UEFA at least on par with the EURO. The idea that friendlies and WCQs should be given the same weight, half of games played in continental championships, sounds to me like a cure worse than the disease. Or maybe I misunderstood this post?
We won't ever get a satisfactory ranking system without more intercontinental matches. But, conceptually the main problems with Elo's methodology are two-fold: 1- garbage data is allowed into the mix (non-FIFA day matches shouldn't count) 2- no "bonus points" for titles and achievements whereas IMO bonus points should be given to sides which win titles, advance from their group in tournaments, have a deep run, etc, The latter, in fact, is what creates the gripes about the ranking of a team like Iran relative to those with greater "achievements". Iran definitely has the match results to back up its decent ranking. Even in the Asian Cup which Iran hasn't won since 1976, its statistical record based on match results/points/wins/losses GD, is the best in the AFC. And Japan advancing with 4 points might have gotten a greater boost in its ELO ranking than Iran failing to do so with 4 points, but that wouldn't be due to any bonus points for advancing and rather because Colombia outranked Japan by good margin while Iran's "fluke win" over Morocco was against a side ranked below Iran.
The idea is that a tournament team is a more accurate representation than one off matches. Euro and AFCON are taken very seriously . Even FIFA weighs continental tourneys more than WCQ so I don't really understand your gripe there. You may have a point with the friendlies, bit as I have explained previously, with so few inter continental matches, I need to use them to have some sort of Guage of inter continental strength. Without this the teams from CAF, Concacaf, and AFC would be ranked even lower, and they already seem underrated as is. The cure can't be worse than ELO. In ELO rankings friendlies can have more impact than World Cup matches, never possible in my ranking.
My Updated rankings after the last window (based on my ranking formula with their points at the side, not necessarily what I personally believe) World Soccer Rankings October 2022 World Cup teams bolded 1. Brazil - 84 2. Argentina – 78 3. Belgium – 72 4. France -70 5. England – 69 6. Italy – 69 7. Spain - 67 8. Denmark – 66 9. Portugal - 64 10. Holland - 64 11. Germany – 59 12. Uruguay - 57 13. Colombia – 55 14. Hungary - 54 15. Croatia – 53 16. Serbia – 53 17. Switzerland - 53 18. Ecuador - 52 19. Algeria – 51 20. Norway – 50 21. Peru – 50 22. Poland - 48 23. Morocco – 47 24. USA - 47 25. Sweden - 47 26. Senegal - 46 27. Paraguay - 46 28. Japan – 44 29. Wales - 44 30. Czech R - 44 31. Canada – 43 32. Ivory Coast - 43 33. Iran - 43 34. Cameroon – 43 35. Scotland - 43 36. Mexico – 42 37. Ukraine - 41 38. Russia - 41 39. Egypt – 40 40. Tunisia - 40 41. Austria – 40 42. Nigeria – 39 43. S. Korea - 39 44. Chile – 39 45. Ireland R - 39 46. Finland – 39 47. Turkey - 38 48. Mali - 37 49. Greece – 37 50. Venezuela - 36 51. Slovenia - 36 52. Australia – 35 53. Burkina Faso - 35 54. Bolivia – 34 55. Costa Rica – 33 56. Georgia – 33 57. Ghana – 32 58. Saudi Arabia - 32 59. Bosnia & H – 32 60. South Africa - 31 61. Macedonia – 31 62. Panama – 30 63. R. Congo - 30 64. Gabon – 30 65. Romania - 30 66. E. Guinea - 30 67. Benin – 30 68. Slovakia - 29 69. Cape Verde – 29 70. N. Ireland - 28 71. Bulgaria - 28 72. Albania – 28 73. Zambia - 27 74. Gambia – 27 75. Qatar - 26 76. Kosovo - 26 77. Bahrain - 26 78. Angola – 26 79. Iceland – 26 80. Israel – 26 81. Kenya - 26 82. Guinea – 25 83. Montenegro - 25 84. Comoros – 25 85. Sierra Leone - 25 86. Madagascar – 25 87. Uzbekistan - 24 88. Jamaica - 24 89. Iraq – 24 90. Mozambique – 24 91. Uganda - 24 92. Jordan - 23 93. Haiti – 23 94. Zimbabwe - 23 95. Togo - 23 96. Ethiopia – 23 97. Luxembourg – 23 98. Namibia - 23 99. Honduras – 22 100. New Zealand - 22
I will publish my updated rankings at the end of the WC, and there will be a lot of change, unlike the FIFA rankings which are so static. In my rankings the World Cup is the only tournament that gives teams bonuses (a slightly higher score) for wins, draws, and close losses. From the first round only, here are the top 5 matches with most points gained and the top 5 worst points gained. MOST POINTS GAINED PER MATCH 1. 128 points for Morocco (Morocco 2 Belgium 0) 2. 126 points for Spain (Spain 7 Costa Rica 0) 3. 120 points for Cameroon (Cameroon 1 Brazil 0) 4. 119 points for Portugal (Portugal 2 Uruguay 0) 5. 119 points for Saudi Arabia (SA 2 Argentina 1) WORST POINTS GAINED PER MATCH 1. -15 points for Costa Rica (Spain 7 Costa Rica 0) 2. 0 points for Iran (England 6 Iran 2) 3. 22 points for Argentina (SA 2 Argentina 1) 4. 22 points for Canada (Croatia 4 Canada 1) 5. 22 points for S. Korea (Ghana 3 S. Korea 2)
I will publish my full rankings after tomorrows match. I will now look at the biggest movers and losers since the World Cup and the pre WC friendlies in November. Argentina and France were both among the top 5 before the tournament began and will both remain in the top 5 no matter what happens tomorrow, so neither will be among the top movers. TOP 10 POSITIVE MOVERS 1. Australia +19 Australia jumps from #52 to #33 after wins over Tunisia and Denmark, and a 1 goal loss to Argentina. 2. Saudi Arabia +17 17 place increase largely to their 2-1 victory over Argentina. 3. Japan +15 Japan victories over Germany and Spain, and draw against Croatia move them up 15 places despite already being ranked in the top 30. 4. Tunisia +15 Victory over France and draw against a highly ranked Denmark see them rise 15. 5. Morocco +14 Moroccos historic semi final run see them go up 14 places. 6. Cameroon +13 First African team to beat Brazil at the world cup and a draw against highly ranked Serbia see them go up 13 places. 7. South Korea +13 Victory over Portugal and draw against highly ranked Uruguay see them go up 13. 8. Ghana +11 One of my lowest ranked sides pre WC go up 11 with a victory over S. Korea and a friendly victory over highly ranked Switzerland. 9. Croatia +9 Croatia's 3rd place finish see them move up 9 places. 10. Austria +7 Only non WC team on the list courtesy of a 2-0 friendly victory over Italy. My conclusions are that my rankings underrate both Asian and African sides, similar to both FIFA and Elo really. However my rankings do not underrate Africa nearly as much as Elo.
TOP 10 WORST MOVERS 1. Wales -14 A draw and 2 multiple goal losses see Wales as the worst mover. 2. Russia -13 2 draws against very lowly ranked Uzbekistan and Tajikstan see this non WC team suffer massive drop. 3. Paraguay -12 Friendly losses to Peru and Colombia see Paraguay drop 12. 4. Qatar -10 3 straight 2 goal losses see hosts drop 10 places. 5. Canada -9 3 straight losses see Canada drop 9. 6. Belgium -8 Dissapointment as Belgium crash out in the first round see an 8 place drop for the team ranked #3 before the WC. 7. Algeria -8 Friendly loss to Sweden and draw against Mali see Algeria drop 8 places. 8. Ireland Rep. -7 Friendly loss to Norway 9. Denmark -6 First round crash out see Denmark drop 6 10. Poland -6 Only victory of the World cup was over lowly ranked Saudi Arabia. 2 goal losses to Argentina and France, along with a draw to Mexico see Poland drop 6. Final Conclusions The conclusions are not as evident as with the top movers, but it does seem to suggest that my rankings my overrate some 2nd tier UEFA sides.
My updated Rankings post WC 1. Brazil – 90 2. Argentina – 88 3. France - 85 4. Holland – 80 5. England - 79 6. Croatia - 74 7. Portugal - 74 8. Spain – 71 9. Morocco - 68 10. Italy - 67 11. Belgium – 66 12. Germany – 62 13. Japan - 61 14. Denmark – 61 15. Serbia – 56 16. Uruguay - 55 17. Ecuador - 55 18. Colombia – 55 19. Switzerland - 55 20. Hungary - 54 21. Cameroon – 53 22. Senegal - 52 23. Peru – 52 24. USA - 50 25. Tunisia - 50 26. Norway - 50 27. Algeria – 48 28. Poland – 48 29. Sweden - 48 30. S. Korea - 47 31. Mexico - 44 32. Czech Rep. - 44 33. Australia – 43 34. Austria – 43 35. Scotland - 43 36. Ivory Coast - 42 37. Egypt – 42 38. Iran – 42 39. Paraguay - 42 40. Canada – 41 41. Saudi Arabia – 41 42. Ukraine – 41 43. Wales - 41 44. Turkey - 39 45. Finland – 39 46. Ghana – 38 47. Nigeria - 38 48. Mali - 38 49. Greece - 38 50. Chile – 37 51. Russia - 37 52. Ireland R – 37 53. Slovenia - 37 54. Costa Rica - 36 55. Burkina Faso – 36 56. Venezuela - 35 57. Georgia - 34 58. Bolivia – 33 59. Bosnia & H – 32 60. South Africa - 31 61. Gabon – 31 62. Macedonia – 31 63. R. Congo - 30 64. Romania - 30 65. E. Guinea - 30 66. Benin – 30 67. Panama - 29 68. Cape Verde – 29 69. N. Ireland – 28 70. Slovakia - 28 71. Bulgaria – 28 72. Zambia - 27 73. Gambia - 27 74. Albania – 27 75. Bahrain - 27 76. Angola – 27 77. Iceland – 26 78. Kenya - 26 79. Israel - 26 80. Guinea - 25 81. Comoros – 25 82. Sierra Leone - 25 83. Iraq – 25 84. Madagascar – 25 85. Qatar - 24 86. Jamaica – 24 87. Uzbekistan - 24 88. Kosovo – 24 89. Luxembourg – 24 90. Montenegro – 24 91. Uganda - 24 92. Haiti – 23 93. Zimbabwe - 23 94. Togo - 23 95. Mozambique - 23 96. Ethiopia – 23 97. Namibia - 23 98. Honduras – 22 99. New Zealand – 22 100. Oman - 22
Eh, we left several better players at home, played a tactic that needed a good preparation time to be successful and the coach made some weird decisions, so we played a disappointing WC. The only thing good is that we again left a WC unbeaten.
Well, it means I was right by before the tournement started telling everybody we're not so good, and going to be boring as hell, but also very hard to beat.
This isn't a subjective rating, but one based on a mathematical formula. Like all ranking formulas, context other than the result is irrelevant. Like you said, Holland was one of the only teams not to lose a match in the WC. France, Argentina, Brazil, Spain, Germany, all lost to much lesser opponents. That certainly hurt all of their ranking points.
@vancity eagle Where do you have the UAE in your rankings? In my own personal ranking system I have them at #67.
I have them currently at #105 with 21 points. They've usually been just inside my top 100, but they've lost 4 of their last 5 matches, including a 5-0 loss to Argentina and a 4-0 loss to Venezuela. Multiple goal losses are detrimental in my rankings unlike FIFA. Right before that stretch they drew AT HOME against Gambia who I have ranked at #73. Also recently lost to Iraq who I have at #83 They probably should be higher in my rankings but their record hasn't been that great.
Someone mentioned (in here or in another thread) we were the only one undefeated team in the tournement. So actually we're the champions
Comparing FIFA to my rankings post WC to see where discrepancies lie. I look at the top overrated and underrated teams by FIFA according to my ranking formula. Costa Rica is the most overrated team by FIFA and my rankings place them 22 places below FIFA who had them at #32 while I have them at #53 Also interesting that the top 3 FIFA ranked concacaf sides are all in my overrated list with Costa Rica and Mexico being #1 and #3. MOST OVERRATED BY FIFA Costa Rica -22 Chile -19 Mexico -16 Ukraine -16 Wales -15 Iran -14 Russia -14 Nigeria -12 USA -11 Belgium -7 Switzerland -7 Poland -6 Australia -6
MOST UNDERRATED BY FIFA Ecuador +24 Norway +17 Hungary +16 Serbia +14 Algeria +13 Canada +13 Ghana +12 Cameroon +12 Ivory Coast +11 Finland +11 Saudi Arabia +8 Japan +7 Scotland +7 Basically my ranking swaps a number of UEFA teams from overrated to underrated and vice versa. My rankings seems to indicate that all the top tier concacaf are overrated except for Canada who I find underrated. (They easily topped concacaf qualifying so I think there is something there) Also my rankings indicate that a number of top tier African sides are underrated by at least 10 placings. The overall most underrated side by FIFA is Ecuador, again because Ecuador was placed so low when the rankings reset and it takes forever to climb even after a 4th place finish in conmebol qualifying. I do think my ranking of them at #17 is a bit generous but obviously far more accurate than FIFA putting them at #41.
Well I saw a flaw in my rankings and I called it out ahead of the WC that Senegal was better than Ecuador. Rankings will never be entirely accurate, but I prefer the fewer flaws of my system than FIFAs or even much worse Elos. Funnily Ecuador is still above Senegal in my updated rankings, but are now only 5 places above instead of 12.
How do your rankings handle situations like Mexico and Poland, who were essentially dead-even in the group stage? Poland advanced on a tiebreaker and was thus more successful, only to get blitzed by France and end up with a worse world cup record than Mexico.
Well my rankings pre WC overrated Poland IMO. The problem with some of my rankings is that they can overrate teams in the stronger confederations, and can underrate some tesms in the weaker ones. Poland had 48 points to Mexicos 42 pre WC, while post WC Piland remained at 48 points while Mexico went from 42 points to 44 points. Post WC Poland and Mexico are #28 and #31 respectively which I see as a pretty accurate representation of their current strength. I'd probably reverse and give Mexico the slight edge though.
My question, more in general, is does a team get "punished" points wise for advancing, but then losing a R16 game in relation to a team that does not advance but has the same group stage record (all else being equal). It would appear so given Mexico gained points relative to Poland despite both having identical group stage records against the same opponents.
Well my system isn't Cumulative like FIFA and Elo so it isn't as simple as gaining and losing points and moving up or down. The change in points has to do with new results replacing old results and a calculated average of the most recent results. So technically Poland and Mexico could have 3 games with the exact same result, but the old results replaced could be different. So if Polands replaced results were better than Mexicos, the exact first round results would see Mexicos average increase compared to Polands. More specifically to answer your direct question. Yes a team would be punished for making it further and losing that match. Especially if a team loses the knockouts my multiple goals. I can understand why FIFA chooses not to punish teams in this regard, but my rankings has no objective to protect teams that make it further into a tournament, but to rank a teams strength based on all available data. Each match is data, and rankings already have very little data (matches per year) to be begin with. So I don't want to ignore any data. Similarly according to FIFA, Elo, and my own rankings teams could Similarly "get punished" for qualifying for the WC and losing all or most matches. Canada is one such example. They lost ground compared to Panama, Honduras, etc. because they advanced only to lose 3 straight. Is this not the same type of disadvantage for Canada in relation to Panama, Honduras, Jamaica ? Should Canada get "punished" in relation to those teams because they lost against 3 top opponents. What I have done to partially remedy this is to give World cup bonuses, whereby all victories, draws, and losses are worth slightly more in world cup matches than any other type of match.
The numerical order in the ranking of teams by FIFA (or ELO) are largely coincidental. Fans look at them for bragging rights but it is the points and point differentials which suggest whether there is a statistically meaningful qualitative difference between different sides. In Group B, for instance, you had before the start of the tournament: England ranked 5th by FIFA with 1728p. USA ranked 16th with 1635p. Wales ranked 19th with 1569p. Iran ranked 20th with 1564p. In terms of numerical order, the difference between the US and Iran was merely 4 places, while the difference between the US and England was 11. But the point differentials suggested that the difference between the US and Iran (71p) was roughly similar as the difference between the England and the US (93p). Iran and Wales, otoh, were virtually tied on points with only a 5p difference between them. Since Wales had accumulated its points within UEFA while Iran had done so within the AFC, and since these two teams played under similar tactical dynamics (both needed to win), the match was actually quite telling. More so since unlike say Ecuador (which happened to rate much higher by Elo than FIFA), Iran and Wales were ranked similarly by ELO as well. Iran, of course, beat Wales 2:0 but what was even more telling was that Iran was the superior side, besides the result, on attempts/shots (21-10), shots on goal (6-3), and xG (1.76 - 0.97) as well. This made Iran's result, in the context of a match both sides were playing for 3 points, quite telling. The match showed what mathematical logic would tell us anyway: that it is much easier to pick up points in UEFA (or Conmebol) than in the AFC (or CAF). The reason is that the kind of upset results (e.g., Saudi/Arg, Japan/Ger and Japan/Spain) we saw in this World Cup (and which for @vancity eagle and his rankings mean a lot more than they should) will happen in football quite regularly, provided you get the chance to play an opponent enough times (and in UEFA there are plenty of teams with a lot of points to pass onto as a result). For purposes of understanding the confederation advantage/disadvantage in rankings (mathematical rankings don't have country bias per se), Australia v Denmark and and S. Korea v Uruguay were also quite telling. Similarly, Japan v Croatia was even more telling than any of Japan's group games. S. Korea (#28-1526p) played a perfectly even match to a draw against Uruguay (#14-1638p). Australia (#38-1488p) beat Denmark (#10-1666) where the game was overall pretty even as well. And Japan (#24-1559p) v Croatia (#12-1645) was very even; if anything, Japan was slightly better. There is no evidence nor much logic IMO in the idea that Concacaf's top sides are overrated. But because of Mexico and the US (even Costa Rica) have historically done well at the World Cup, there are extra points that get passed around to lesser Concacaf sides and see many of them overrated comparatively. Otherwise, as much as I root against them, the truth is Mexico and the US are properly rated. CAF teams, otoh, are like AFC teams underrated with CAF being particularly challenging for mathematical rankings due the lack of any consistent performer and the undeniable depth and near parity within CAF between a dozen sides.