FIFA World Ranking

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

  1. jonny63

    jonny63 Member+

    Feb 17, 2005
    Norway
    USA continue to lead the way in the FIFA/Coca-Cola Women’s World Ranking, extending their lead over Germany, whom they defeated 4-0 in a friendly match last week. China (10th, up 2) break into the top ten at the expense of Canada (11th, down 1). Otherwise, the best ten teams remain unchanged.

    In all, 124 international matches have been played around the world since the previous edition of the world ranking in March. In the wake of many qualification matches for the FIFA Women’s World Cup Germany 2011, it is pleasing to see 13 teams return to the ranking after what has been a long absence in some cases, taking the total number of listed teams to 116, including 12 teams from CONCACAF. Honduras, for instance, appear in the ranking for the first time since October 2007. They racked up eight matches as part of their qualification campaign for the FIFA Women’s World Cup Germany 2011™, alongside El Salvador the most matches played by any team since the previous ranking in March.

    ---------------------------------------------

    New FIFA ranking :

    http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/ranking/lastranking/gender=f/fullranking.html
     
  2. Samuel Vimes

    Samuel Vimes Member

    Jun 6, 2007
    They couldn't wait three more days and include the Asia Cup final match? :rolleyes:

    Edit: The last group game and the semis don't seem to count, either.
     
  3. Bonnie Lass

    Bonnie Lass Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2000
    Up top
    Club:
    Olympique Lyonnais
    Nat'l Team:
    Norway
    Norway eked by Korea DPR by one point and took sixth place.

    Funny. We slaughtered Macedonia 14-0, and got 0 points for it. Erm.
     
  4. Samuel Vimes

    Samuel Vimes Member

    Jun 6, 2007
    That's weird. It wasn't like that the last time I looked...FIFA must be doing something funny with the Asia Cup updates (I guess losing to Japan wasn't clever for ranking points). I think that may mean DPRK go past us again when they process the China-DPRK semi :p

    Well North Korea lost a point for 'only' beating Myanmar 2-0. :p
     
  5. jonny63

    jonny63 Member+

    Feb 17, 2005
    Norway
  6. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    No, no changes, those movers were there when the ranking came out; I'm pretty sure the above statement means who was in the top ten didn't change, not that they remained static.
     
  7. Samuel Vimes

    Samuel Vimes Member

    Jun 6, 2007
    Yeah, I think so too, I think they decided to count Japan - DPRK (so Japan got +21 pts and DPRK -21 pts). Because I updated the Norwegian Wikipedia on Friday, and the only changes from that Friday list was those 21 points.
    England -1 wasn't really a change, they just went from shared 8th to 9th (and similarly DPRK went from shared 5th to 6th before that last group game)
     
  8. jonny63

    jonny63 Member+

    Feb 17, 2005
    Norway
  9. Lusankya

    Lusankya Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 14, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
  10. JLSA

    JLSA Member

    Nov 11, 2003
    You know - I actually though that when the May rankings were released they were the other way around.

    J
     
  11. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Well now; I was expecting the loss to Mexico combined with all the lackluster friendlies would have dropped USA out of first, so I'm surprised but happy. Likewise, though, I'm shocked Mexico didn't move up any position....
     
  12. Lusankya

    Lusankya Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 14, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    The points Mexico got for beating the USA were nearly nullified by the points they lost for losing two times against Canada.
     
  13. mcruic

    mcruic Member

    Jun 26, 2004
    Scotland
    Club:
    Dundee United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Scotland
    FIFA's women's ranking uses a different system from the men's ranking - and generally, it's more accurate than the men's in terms of reflecting how strong the teams actually are.

    However - there is one huge problem with the recent rankings - If you look at the provisional ranking that Iraq has for their 3 matches in the recent Women's Arabian Cup - they have 975 points, compared to Lebanon's 954 points. This despite the fact that one of the results at the tournament was Lebanon 9-0 Iraq. Even if we discount this match (as neither teams is fully ranked), we can look at the 2 matches each team played against ranked teams (Egypt and Jordan)

    Egypt 15-0 Iraq, Egypt 5-1 Lebanon
    Jordan 20-0 Iraq, Jordan 3-1 Lebanon

    How does losing by a combined 35 goals get you above a team who lost by only 6 - to the same 2 teams?

    Nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense. They also have Papua New Guinea above South Africa and Equatorial Guinea - this is the same PNG team who recently lost 11-0 in the Oceania Championship FINAL to New Zealand.

    Also, Tanzania, who performed well at the recent African Championship, are below Maldives - who have drawn 1 and lost 14 of their 15 official internationals.

    Just read this list of results and tell me seriously that Maldives deserve to be above a team who qualified for and played in the African finals:

    Maldives results:
    0-17 v Myanmar
    0-14 v Vietnam
    0-6 v Uzbekistan
    0-4 v Hong Kong
    0-6 v Singapore
    0-5 v Vietnam
    0-9 v Thailand
    0-7 v Bahrain
    1-1 v Bahrain (WOW!)
    0-4 v Palestine
    0-5 v Uzbekistan
    0-9 v Jordan
    0-2 v Kyrgyzstan
    0-2 v Sri Lanka
    0-3 v Sri Lanka

    That's right - 1 goal for, 94 against. Clearly more deserving of ranking points than Tanzania.


    I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it until they change it.

    Complete pile of ****
     
  14. mcruic

    mcruic Member

    Jun 26, 2004
    Scotland
    Club:
    Dundee United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Scotland
    The ranking is pretty good for the top teams....

    BUT:

    Tanzania still below Maldives :D (There will never be anyone who can possibly justify this, I'm sure it has to be a mistake)

    Papua New Guinea still above World Cup qualifiers Equatorial Guinea, despite losing 11-0 to New Zealand...

    Macedonia still 19 places behind Luxembourg, even though they just showed they are better by beating them 5-1...

    Also, if you look at United Arab Emnirate's provisional ranking - if they maintain this for 2 more matches, until they can be included in the main ranking (after 5 matches), they would be in 26th place! Ahead of African champions Nigeria....... Something very wrong.

    Where would I direct an e-mail to complain about this ranking? Should I bother? Probably not.
     
  15. Lusankya

    Lusankya Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 14, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    However they won all their other recent matches.

    I would be more concerned when one single victory would magically put you in front of the team you won against. ;)
    Macedonia gained 41 points and Luxembourg lost 15 points after qualification, so I don't see a problem.


    Yeah, "provisional ranking" is the key word. ;)


    That's not a problem in the ranking formula. Many women teams just played to few (official) matches to have an accurate ranking.

    They also mainly play opponents (which also have only an inaccurate ranking) from the same confederation .

    The ranking for the lower teams should become more reliable in the future.
    However if you spot a critical error in the formula feel free to complain to FIFA. They won't listen to you though.
    But you can tell us and we can think of a better formula. :D
     
  16. mcruic

    mcruic Member

    Jun 26, 2004
    Scotland
    Club:
    Dundee United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Scotland
    Equatorial Guinea also won a lot of their recent matches against much better opposition, and, unlike Papua New Guinea, did NOT fail to qualify for the World Cup. They also won the African Championship in 2008. Papua New Guinea's most recent success was the Pacific Games title in 2007.

    In the last 3 years:
    Papua New Guinea were inactive from March 2008 until September 2010. They then won 4 matches v Tonga (67), Fiji (81), Solomon Islands (94) and Cook Islands (101).

    In the same period - Equatorial Guinea have reched the final of the 2010 African Championship, with victories over Ghana (49), South Africa (58), Algeria (78) and a draw with Cameroon (66), after also beating Namibia (114) in qualifying (so, 4 wins and a draw already). At the end of 2008, they also won the African Championship, beating Nigeria (27), South Africa (58), Cameroon (66), Mali (92) and Congo (unranked).

    As far as defeats are concerned, in this period, Papua New Guinea have lost twice only - both to New Zealand (24). However, Equatorial Guinea have only lost once - against Nigeria (27).

    Now whose record looks better?

    In the last 4 years, Macedonia have won 6 and drawn 3 matches. Luxembourg have won only 3, and drawn 1, against similar-level opponents. Even before the qualification, Macedonia had won 4 and drawn 2, Luxembourg had won 2 and drawn 1. So, there has been time to reflect Macedonia's superiority over Luxembourg. FIFA's ranking has just failed to show it.

    But, after they play 2 more matches, this ranking (with the same or similar points) will be official - if UAE have similar results to what they did in their first 3 matches (quite likely) - then this provisional ranking will become their official ranking, and this will increase the inaccuracy of the ranking even more.

    They only have an inaccurate ranking because the formula doesn't work properly. In this case, it spreads through the rest of the ranking and makes even more teams' rankings inaccurate.

    The ranking for the lower teams will only improve when they play teams from other confederations - which doesn't seem likely in the near future.
    There's no error in the formula - the formula just isn't suitable for calculating a meaningful ranking for the majority of teams. Only those who play in World Cups (the Top 20 or so) have meaningful rankings.

    A case in point were the 2 friendly matches in December between Jordan and Tunisia. Jordan, 161 points and 30 positions above Tunisia before the matches, drew 4-4 and lost 0-3 at home. These results were entirely expected if you know anything about women's international football. But if you use the FIFA rankings as a guideline, it would appear to be a shock. [Incidentally, if I hadn't e-mailed FIFA about these results, they would never have known that the matches were played and Tunisia wouldn't have got any ranking points for these matches]

    I've said it before and I'll say it again - there are already many rankings that do a much better job than FIFA's. If enough people can see their flaws and complain, then they might change them. If we all just sit and accept that there is nothing wrong with them, they'll never change. :D
     
  17. jonny63

    jonny63 Member+

    Feb 17, 2005
    Norway
    How would the Women`s ranking be if they used the same criteria as the Men`s ranking ?
     
  18. mcruic

    mcruic Member

    Jun 26, 2004
    Scotland
    Club:
    Dundee United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Scotland
    That would be an interesting project for someone.

    From Wikipedia, FIFA's women's ranking seems like the ELO system.

    # FIFA Women's World Rankings are based on every international match a team ever played, going back to 1971, the first FIFA-recognized women's international between France and the Netherlands. (The men's ranking system considers only matches in the last four years.)
    # FIFA Women's World Rankings are implicitly weighted to emphasize recent results. (The men's results are explicitly weighted on a sliding scale.)

    So, we can see that all matches played more than 4 years ago would no longer be included in the ranking. I think this might actually be an improvement.
     
  19. Samuel Vimes

    Samuel Vimes Member

    Jun 6, 2007
    Goodness me, no. Have you seen the men's FIFA ranking? Luxembourg hopped 75 places by beating Switzerland, for example. Cuba are ranked in the top six of CONCACAF despite not qualifying for a Hexagon or a CONCACAF quarter-final since 1981. Teams who play friendlies can not score as many points as teams who do not. Etc. Etc. Etc.
     
  20. mcruic

    mcruic Member

    Jun 26, 2004
    Scotland
    Club:
    Dundee United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Scotland
    I was being hopeful... :(

    Anyway, I think that most people with any knowledge of international football will not take FIFA's ranking as a tool to measure national team strength, more like just a fun thing that gets a lot of media attention.
     
  21. JanBalk

    JanBalk Member+

    Jun 9, 2004
    Uppsala, Sweden
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    It is a helpfull but rather (or in some case very) inexact way of measure national team strength.
     
  22. Lusankya

    Lusankya Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 14, 2007
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    Actually you can find flaws in any ranking. That doesn't have to be a flaw in the formula, it's just that many people won't like a ranking if it doesn't rank teams the way they would do.

    I am pretty sure no ranking formula can classify all women's teams "correctly", unless of course the formula is "I rank the teams according to my opinion every month".
    But if you use a mathematic formula you won't get good results for women's teams, because probably half of the teams play only very few matches and most of these are friendlies or unofficial tournaments.


    I think the biggest flaw of the FIFA ranking is that they don't provide us with enough data. They only give us the basic formula but fail to list all results and what the startign values of each team were.
    I would love to know how exactly UAE got their points. I can't imagine they got that many points by playing 3 matches.
     
  23. fire123

    fire123 Member

    Jul 31, 2009
    I don't know the exact numbers for football but in chess where they use ELO, a new player starts out with a rating of 1500. For a game one can win or lose from 2-32 points depending on the strength of the opponent. The rating before you have played 30 games is provisional.

    If you play a player with rating 400 points higher, if you win, you gain 32 points, if you lose, you lose 2 points.
    If you play a player with rating 400 points lower, you can win 2 points but lose 32.
    If you play a player of equal strength, you can win or lose 16 points.
     

Share This Page