Discussion in 'BigSoccer Polls' started by Idolg1982, Apr 12, 2011.
At the very least Paraguay cannot be dismissed so easily.
You mean to tell me, which a straight face, that Peru, Chile and Colombia are on the same level as England, Spain and France?????? Paraguay I respect. But you must be out of your mind if you think that the 2) teams that he listed are on the same level for Europe and South America.
I took the total points earned at a World Cup and divided it by the number of games each country played. Stats are from nationmaster.com, they only include 1930 to 2006. 2010 South America did well, but since these average include a decent number of games the jump won't be huge. If someone has a better dataset, please let me know.
England for some reason they did not have it
So you can see, several countries that apparently "don't exist" do better than the South American 2) level on a points per game basis. That's not my main point though. The main point is that the 2) level from Europe is far better than that of 2). There are of course many other ways of analyzing the data, but it is obvious that Europe has had a better 2) level historically.
Found Englands stats: 1.29090909.
I must add though that the points data on that site is a little strange. I am not sure if they used 3 points for a win or 2, or some mixed thing. So if someone has a better dataset, I can repeat the analysis. In any case, the magnitudes might come out different, but the ordering should be similar.
If you take the Big 2 from Europe Italy and Germany and the Big 2 from S. America Argentina and Brazil since 1970 Uruguay in 1970 and 2010 is the only S. American side to fnished in the top 4. Now take away Spain Holland France Portugal and England from Europe yo still have 7 times European team finished in the top 4 Poland 1974 and 1982 Belgium in 86 Sweden in 94 Bulgaria in 94 Croatia in 98 and Turkey in 2002.
sorry to spam...I found a more "reliable" site (planetworldcup.com). Data from 1930-2010. I gave 3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie.
1 Brazil (19) 2.226804124
2 Germany (17) 2.01010101
3 Italy (17) 1.9125
4 Argentina (15) 1.771428571
5 Netherlands (9) 1.76744186
6 Spain (13) 1.714285714
7 Portugal (5) 1.695652174
8 England (13) 1.644067797
9 Denmark (4) 1.625
10 Poland (7) 1.612903226
11 Turkey (2) 1.6
12 Senegal (1) 1.6
13 France (13) 1.592592593
14 Ghana (2) 1.555555556
15 Russia ***(9) 1.540540541
16 Croatia (3) 1.538461538
17 Hungary (9) 1.5
18 Uruguay (11) 1.404255319
19 Ukraine (1) 1.4
20 Romania (7) 1.380952381
21 Austria (7) 1.379310345
22 Serbia **(11) 1.372093023
23 East Germany (1) 1.333333333
24 Cuba (1) 1.333333333
25 Sweden (11) 1.326086957
26 Czech Republic *(9) 1.242424242
27 Wales (1) 1.2
28 Côte d'Ivoire (2) 1.166666667
29 Paraguay (8) 1.148148148
30 Chile (8) 1.137931034
Parenthesis show how many World Cups they participated in, so I would not read too much into the ones with 1 or 2 because those are not good sample sizes (Cuba??). But anyway, the best South American 2) level team comes in way after many European teams. However, the two top South American teams, as everybody knows, are terrific. So for me, at the top, South America and Europe do equally well. Then in the middle, Europe is stronger and much deeper. Then at the bottom, Europe is weaker again due to small shitty teams. And of course, these are stats averaged over all of history and don't necessarily represent what is going on right now.
or just ban lajake because not even his home board likes him.
Your wife sure likes me.
How is USA overrated? If so...who is rating us highly?
So according to this Uruguay is #18 ???
and Portugal is #7 ???
This is the proper ranking
and the rest I do not care...
I'd say that from 2009 to mid. 2011, Chile would have comfortably been in the 'top 10 UEFA sides' you're talking about.
Even today -- with no Marcelo Bielsa, a different tactical approach, and persistent problems (on and off the field) -- Chile would confidently hold its own against most European sides, especially mid-tier teams like the four you mentioned above.
100% agree with this ranking. Big LOL at Portugal being ranked ahead of Uruguay, yeah right...Uruguay has more semifinals and above performances in the WC than Portugal has WC appearances.
Yes, Chile would rank around fifth or sixth if in UEFA.
Uruguay is #18 with respect to this particular statistic. How one rates them overall is another question, obviously their cup wins raise their real ranking. My point with theses statistics was to show that there are many non-top European teams that do better on average than the South American 2) level teams that someone listed. I wasn't even focusing on Uruguay because they were put in the 1) level.
But really, you don't need any data to realize that putting England/France/Spain/Portugal at the same level as Peru/Paraguay/Chile/Colombia is ridiculous. Sweden even has a better record than those countries.
Lol, so what? Many countries have fielded good teams from time to time.
Finally had some time to do this.
England/Spain/France/Portugal # of semifinals reached by CONMEBOL's 2nd tier divided by # of WC finals they've taken part in:
0.25 (i.e. 1 in every 4 times)
Chile/Paraguay/Ecuador/Colombia # of semifinals reached by CONMEBOL's 2nd tier divided by # of WC finals they've taken part in:
0.045 (i.e. 1 in every 22 times)
Big gap in quality, using your own criterion
I was not defending Chile's historical record, which is quite average and nothing special. My point was simply a counter-argument stating that Chile has been every bit as competitive as its mid-tier European counterparts in recent years, and in some cases, significantly better. That's all.
In any case, it's not too difficult for European teams to out-perform South Americans when UEFA has 53 member associations and CONMEBOL has 10.
well in the last world cup, didnt new zealand do better than italy
I'd say that from 2009 to mid. 2011, Chile would have comfortably been in the 'top 10 UEFA sides' you're talking about.You may try to Buy WOW Gold online.
You don't have to be rated highly to be overrated. Just rating the USA ahead of, say, Mexico would make them overrated IMO.
What evidence that half-assed ranking has, made by a person that didn't even bother to understand the basis of snahdog's research and probably just doesn't like seeing Portugal so up high and can't comprehend Uruguay being so low? What that personal preference is based on?
Fixed. Do your research first.
You obviously can't get your head around the fact that that ranking is based on total points gained divided by number of games, NOT finishes and titles. You forget that Uruguay has had lots of poor World Cups and that's the reason it's not ranked very high there. For the record, from Wikipedia:
Uruguay - 18W-12D-17L (46,81% of total points)
Portugal - 12W-3D-8L (56,52% of total points)
Argentina 2 world cups = Uruguay 2 world cups
Argentina 2 olympics (U-23) < Uruguay 2 olympics (world championships FIFA)
Argentina 1 confederations cup < Uruguay 1 (the only one) mini world cup
Argentina 14 copas america < Uruguay 15 copas america
Conclusion: Argentina < Uruguay
Another statistics: I) Uruguay and Argentina played 12 finals between them: 10-times the champion was Uruguay (8 copas america and 2 world championships) and only 2-times the champion was Argentina (2 copa america). II) Uruguay has been 5-times wc semifinalist, 1930, 1950, 1954, 1970 and 2010, while Argentina has been only 4-times wc semifinalist, 1930, 1978, 1986 and 1990.
LOL, okay so Uruguay has reached the semifinals or finals of the WC as many times as Portugal has reached the WCs...that just means how much better Uruguay is. The rest of your post is meaningless to me, or anyone else with a sense of footballing history.
Out of the last 6 World Cups this last one is the only one I remember Uruguay finishing better than Portugal. 2002 was the only WC if I remember right in the last 6 or 7 Portugal has qualified for the did not make it to the knockout round.
You might want to look these things up in future. Portugal's overall WC record is pretty dismal.
When they make it to the Finals (i.e. past the qualification), they are not dismal. Though, yes, they have failed to qualify quite often.
But Uruguay has failed to even qualify for the World Cup 6(!) times, while Argentina only missed the party once (not counting withdrawing or deciding not to participate). So Uruguay is a lot less consistent and has long periods of low performance where they lose to teams like Australia.