FIFA World Ranking

Discussion in 'Women's International' started by jonny63, Mar 17, 2006.

  1. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    I'm not gonna do any explicit calc.s, but just to back-on-the-envelope some things...

    The gap between USA and GER will have shrunk a little bit but definitely won't have closed. The USA lost points to FRA, but they were expected(!) to anyway based on home field advantage, and then will have lost points in the SBC draws, but those were draws instead of losses, so with wins against ESP and BRA, I don't think USA's rating will have changed much. GER's rating will have gone up, though, since their lone game was an away win against FRA. Likewise, FRA probably lost more points to GER than they gained against the USA, but then also creamed URU, so they might be holding steady. ENG's SBC run could have pushed them above FRA, but I bet it'll be pretty close

    It's a LOT more cluttered in ranks 5-9, so I'm not gonna try really teasing any of that out. Expect shuffling. I guess AUS's rating might rise a bit and NED's falls a bit, but IDK WTF will happen with anyone else's ratings.

    BRA had an awful SBC and will almost certainly fall out of the top 10, replaced by DPK, who had an impressive Cyprus Cup (even if it was a dirty win in the final). ITA will certainly benefit from 3 wins and a draw to DPK, but considering they were the #2 team by rank going to Cyprus in the first place, I'm not entirely sure if their rating or ranking will grow a ton.

    In fact, as I'm looking at the lower half of the Top 20, I don't think there will be much shuffling at all. Most of the rating gaps are at least 10pts, and I don't think any nation at any of the spring cups had a particularly good or particular bad tournament (aside from those discussed above, and maybe Nepal doing rather well). Since all of these are friendlies, the chances of any single match shipping more than 5pts around is highly unlikely - usually 2 or 3pts is what's likely, and at 4 matches that's only 8-12pts total if you won all four. Now, way further down the rankings, IDK since the point gaps will shrink so even middling performances can cause more shuffling (again, aside from maybe Nepal)
     
    blissett repped this.
  2. Lechus7

    Lechus7 Member+

    Aug 31, 2011
    Wroclaw
    Poland should rise in rankings as 34th team they won with 7th and 12th and lost against 13th. I guess they'll jump back in top 30.
     
    blissett repped this.
  3. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Does this mean that, from the FIFA rating system's perspective, France will be the favorite in every game they play at the World Cup if the current ratings stay where they are now?
     
    kolabear repped this.
  4. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Yup! Home Field Advantage in the FIFA ranking system is worth 100pts, and France is (and should be) less than 100pts away from 1st in the rankings - though it'll probably be close come June. They're currently 77pts behind the USA, and I'm not entirely sure if that will grow or shrink before the first game in Paris.
     
    kolabear, sbahnhof and blissett repped this.
  5. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    From rough back-of-the-envelope calculations, here's estimated ratings for the top 10 teams:

    1. USA 2099 (change -24)
    2. Germany 2072 (+15)
    3. England 2048 (+27)
    4. France 2043 (-3)
    5. Australia 2003 (+4)
    6. Canada 2001 (-5)
    7. Japan 1993 (+9)
    8. Netherlands 1966 (-21)
    9. Sweden 1964 (-12)
    10. Brazil 1943 (-21)
    11. North Korea 1939 (+1)
    12. Norway 1915 (+13)
    13. Spain 1913 (-7)
    14. South Korea 1884 (+4)
    15. Italy 1871 (+12)
    16. China 1865 (-6)
    17. Denmark 1838 (-4)
    18. Switzerland 1826 (-6)
    19. New Zealand 1816 (-3)
    20. Scotland 1813 (+3)

     
    Bauser, Gilmoy, Lechus7 and 2 others repped this.
  6. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So, with France's home field advantage being worth 100 points, its smallest rating advantage over an opponent would be a 44 point advantage over the USA. That would give it a 56% win likelihood v the USA, which would be its smallest win likelihood for any game.
     
    blissett repped this.
  7. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yes. I don't want to jinx France (France being France) but yes.

    Remember just two years ago Netherlands rode their homefield advantage to triumph in the Euros. The 100 points didn't make them favorites but it brought them close to the top; they got a lucky break when someone (Denmark?) knocked off Germany who was clearly #1 in the ratings among Euro participants.

    Here are estimated performance ratings over the last year-plus for most of the top teams. This is based on FIFA ratings and covers matches since 1/1/2018

    Germany 2090 (current FIFA 2057)
    France 2074 (2046)
    USA 2073 (2123)
    England 2026 (2021)
    Spain 2001 (1920)
    Japan 1986 (1984)
    Sweden 1986 (1976)
    Netherlands 1955 (1987)
    Norway 1951 (1902)
    Canada 1950 (2006)
    North Korea 1939 (1938)
    Australia 1927 (1999)
    Brazil 1911 (1964)
    South Korea 1909 (1880)
    Italy 1876 (1859)

    all of these teams will be at the World Cup except North Korea
     
  8. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But, to put the psyche on France was exactly why I posted that they're the statistical favorite!:D
     
    Gilmoy repped this.
  9. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You can use the year-plus performance ratings to put even bigger pressure on them. With homefield, they'd have a full 100 point advantage over the USA (= roughly 76% chance of advancing in knockout game) and roughly a 62% chance over the highest performance-rated team Germany

    There's no significant difference in 2018-2019 performance ratings of Germany, France, USA; and England is just below the top three.

    Spain, of course, is the surprise addition to the top rank of teams with a perf. rating of 2001 (ranked #5), well above their current official rating of 1920
     
    blissett repped this.
  10. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Correction. a 100 point advantage would roughly equate to a 64% chance of the higher-rated team advancing in a knockout game.

    It would take a 200 point advantage to give the higher-rated team roughly a 76% chance of advancing.
     
    blissett repped this.
  11. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Sticking with the "back of the envelope" ratings (rather than the one year + ratings), the US would have had a 56 point lead over France. Give France 100 points for home field advantage and it changes to a France 44 point lead over the US. Using the probability table, which is close to a straight line from 64% for a 100 point lead to 50% for a 0 point lead, a 44 point lead would translate to roughly a 56.6% win likelihood for France v the US.
     
    kolabear repped this.
  12. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Delighted with the idea of jinxing France, aren't we?!
    :)
     
  13. toad455

    toad455 Member+

    Nov 28, 2005
  14. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Quite interesting that Brazil retained their top-10 status by measly 4 points over North Korea (1944 to 1940), that's virtually nothing.

    For North Korea to catch up with them, winning the final of Cyprus Cup in regulation instead of penalty shootout would have most probably been enough. :coffee:
     
    SiberianThunderT repped this.
  15. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's close. I think probably they would've tied Brazil in the ratings. They lost about a point by going to PKs with Italy (officially a tie); with a one-goal victory, they would've gained about 3 points. That's a 4-point swing, closing the gap with Brazil.

    Brazil just doesn't seem to get the results that a serious World Cup contender should - despite having a number of talented players besides Marta. I've been impressed watching Camila, Debinha, and Andressinha play in the NWSL for example. Obviously they're a good team but the results, reflected in the ratings, aren't those of a contender.

    Their performance rating in 2018-2019 is lower than the official rating (estimate 1911 vs the new rating of 1944 and previous rating of 1964). Worse, their performance rating in that time against teams rated 1900+ is 1842, another sign of weakness

    (fwiw, my back-of-envelope calculation on Brazil's new rating was very close - I estimated a new rating of 1943. It came in at 1944)
     
    blissett and SiberianThunderT repped this.
  16. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    This makes me wonder if it ever happened (after an official update) that two teams were tied in the rankings at the exact same number of points. Maybe it did indeed happen longtime ago, but I can't seem to remember anything alike in the recent past. :coffee:

    Of course, with 4 significant figures in the pointing system, a tie is a quite unlikely event, but @kolabear's calculation shows that it could have been possible with just a one-goal-margin win by North Korea.
     
    kolabear repped this.
  17. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    There's very frequently a tie in the rankings. In the current release, you only have to go down to position 20 to find a tie - between Belgium and Scotland. Not much further down, Mexico and Colombia are tied.
     
    kolabear and blissett repped this.
  18. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Oh, ok: so this means that I tend not to notice ties!!! :laugh: So, my next question is: did a tie in top 10 (the positions I look at the most) happen recently and are in general ties in top 10 as frequent as in any other part of the rankings? Or the teams in the top positions use to be more "spaced" and to generate less ties?
     
    kolabear repped this.
  19. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Ties in the top ten are fairly infrequent because of the spacing up there, yes. They're not unheard of, though - the last time it happened was in the March 2017 ranking, when JAP and SWE tied for sixth. And in fact, way back when the rankings began, one of the early releases had the USA and GER tied for first!
     
    blissett and kolabear repped this.
  20. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    One thing I would take away from the ratings is how much closer it's getting near the top. There are now 8 teams within 150 points of the #1 team the US. (A team rated 150 points below another would have roughly a 30% chance of an upset in a knockout round). In 2011, there were only 4; in 2015 only 5 within 160 points.

    There are now 5 teams within 100 points of the US. (A team rated 100 points below another would have roughly a 38% chance of an upset in a knockout round). In 2011 there were only 2; in 2017 only 3
     
  21. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    I'm assuming you mean 2015 and not 2017 as the last date there, if you're comparing cycles? There haven't been less than four teams within the #1 (which was actually Germany in the March 2017 rankings) since March 2017.
     
  22. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yes, 2017 was a typo.

    So USA is still a favorite but let's put it in perspective using the ratings. Let's say the US makes it to the quarterfinals along with the other top-8 teams and is slated to play #8 Netherlands (rating 1967), #5 Canada (2006), and #2 Germany (2072). Their odds to win the Cup would then be roughly 23% (68% to advance against Netherlands, 63% against Canada, and 54% to win against Germany)
     
  23. hotjam2

    hotjam2 Member+

    Nov 23, 2012
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    regardless of FIFA's rating system, I think Canada is way overrated. From watching 2 of their streamlined games from the Algarve Cup. and honestly, Beckie seemed like their best player in both games, Yet Janine gets little playing time on the current Man City & had a hard time becoming s starter on the NWSL clubs that she played for.in the past(and that include that horrible Sky Blue from last season. Other players, Buchanen lost her starting spot over at Lyon. Quinn played for the near as terrible Spirit. Schmidt took the year off from pro clubs. Sinlcair is more intend on getting the scoring title than being a team player. Scott & Matherson are now in their mid 30 as well. Not sold right now on Huitema, she got the long legs/lanky body that might make her a star vs other youths, but we'l; see how she can compete against senoirs.
    On the pro side, CA has some strong, athletic players in Lawrence {Prince & Rose. but not sure if their more technical.minded coach is taking full advantage of that like Herdman used to.

    So just sayin, if this is what the 5th ranked team in the world looks like, it just don't bode well for everybody below them to win the WC either.
     
    kolabear repped this.
  24. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Canada's performance rating, by my estimate, is 1950 (as opposed to their official rating of 2006) in the last year-plus. That suggests, by recent form, they are a bit overrated but I wouldn't say "way overrated".

    I reviewed most of their Algarve match against Sweden, a team which is thought to be in good form; on the whole, I thought Canada was the better team.

    But I agree, instead of Canada, I'd say the best chance of a team outside the top 4 (US/Germany/England/France) hoisting the Cup would be Spain, Japan, and Sweden.
     
    blissett and SiberianThunderT repped this.
  25. hotjam2

    hotjam2 Member+

    Nov 23, 2012
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Sweden can be odd, they still start the Jacobsson/Blackenhaus combo at fwd even though they've under performed as a duo this year at Montpelier. while rather shockingly, don't want to give more playing time to Bayern Munich excellent striker, Rofo. Then CB wise, they still got the trusty 35 year old, Fisher, but combining her with Illstead, who probably is more well known for her her good looks than any kind of defensive stands, lol

    I like to think Australia as perhaps currently better than Canada. Perhaps they can make some inroads if they can beat Jill Ellis over-the-hill gang in one of their upcoming games. But the're bringing some newbies for this series. so got the feeling like almost everybody else, they don't want to show a full deck, and keep their wild cards hidden till WC
     
    kolabear repped this.

Share This Page