Discussion in 'World Cup 2022 - Qatar' started by Mean Machine, Apr 1, 2022.
South Korea (N)
For those who are hesitant to accept the scoreboard and group stage advancement as the final arbiter of who were the best and worst teams in Qatar, and want something more objective than their eyes, below are the Sofascore power rankings of the 32 teams after the Group Stage.
1 Brazil 2310
2 France 2123
3 Argentina 2040
4 Spain 2006
5 England 1921
6 Portugal 1919
7 Germany 1876
9 Croatia 1758
12 Morocco 1671
14 Uruguay 1658
15 Poland 1644
16 USA 1642
17 Iran 1633
18 Ecuador 1628
19 Costa Rica 1613
20 Senegal 1611
21 Serbia 1607
22 Mexico 1603
23 Australia 1565
24 Japan 1539
25 Ghana 1532
26 Wales 1525
27 Saudi Arabia 1517
28 Cameroon 1498
29 South Korea 1487
30 Tunisia 1479
31 Canada 1477
32 Qatar 1420
Suggested it, expected 1 or 2 to pull it off, but not all three!
I was saying thé only way Cameroon beats Brazil is that Brazil gifts them the game.
And that's what they did imo.
Just like Portugal and Spain.
That was no gift. The B team is simply not as good as people claim.
My own power rankings would be similar to sofascore in many instances but quite different in a few:
1 Brazil A-
2 France A-
3 Spain A-
4 Portugal A-
5 England B+
6 Argentina B+
7 Netherlands B+
8 Croatia B+
9 Morocco B+
10 Germany B+
11 USA B
12 Senegal B
13 Australia B
14 Japan B
15 South Korea B
16 Switzerland B
17 Uruguay B
18 Belgium B
19 Iran B
20 Serbia B
21 Mexico B
22 Denmark B
23 Ecuador B
24 Poland B-
25 Tunisia B-
26 Canada B-
27 Costa Rica B-
28 Ghana B-
29 Wales B-
30 Saudi Arabia B-
31 Cameroon B-
32 Qatar C
Football involves a lot more than lineups. Much of it has to do with focus, determination, team spirit, and other intangibles that often have a greater impact than people realize. None of the top teams that lost their games, did so intentionally. But even the same "B" teams (I reject that categorization) that lost their last games to lesser sides desperate for points, could have done better if the shoe was on the other foot.
Not playing with the needed focus or determination was a gift for Cameroon. Same for other teams. Playing mixed teams with players that don't want to be injured or give everything on the pitch is a gift compared to others teams in their groups that had to face the best of the same squads.
Now if you can tie a serious challenger for the second spot and got thé luck to meet an already qualified seed in the 3rd game the schedule gives you an advantage that has never been seen as much before.
Yes. But it was a gift driven by earlier results and the schedule. Of all the 3 matches played at the group stage, M3 ones are often the most significant but more often than not, the least telling about quality as opposed to psychological fortitude.
But tite playing a B team could have easily backfired if Switzerland had scored 1 more goal. In that case Brazil would have been relegated to the 2nd spot and instead of SK would have faced Portugal.
Your take would have been believable if you had said so before the game. I suggested why teams like Cameroon could win and you outright said no. I was right you were wrong.
Cameroon with 4 pts at 31? Serbia with worst defence at World Cup at 20?
Yes the schedule makes a différence but we have never seen that impacting so many matchs at the same time before.
France Brazil Spain Portugal losing their 3rd game against Tunisia Cameroon Japan and Korea.
It's the first time in History something liké that happens.
All three of their b teams are still better than Cameroon, Japan and South Korea. It has much to do with really not caring much. If 1 team is already locked in first, or 90% there, or in Spains case, no incentive for first place, and the teams they're are playing still have everything to play for, who do you think will be fired up? This isn't rocket science.
The grades are more important that the numerical ranking. The points earned should also be read in context. If Cameroon had opened against Brazil, and Serbia-Switzerland had gone first, the points earned might have looked different too. In giving the ratings, I have also taken into account the sofascore points as well.
Serbia is 28-29 in this World cup.
Even if the main guys arrived out of form the showing is disastrous.
Mentally tactically defensively a shameful performance.
Better not coming if it's to bé at this level.
Just go on developping some good players for top leagues and stop the blood with thé NT. Now it's too much.
Last time, many M3 matches were low stakes matches for both sides (and neutrals) alike: Russia/Uruguay, Saudi/Egypt, England/Belgium, Tunisia/Panama, France/Denmark, Australia/Peru, ... but we had some good ones where the two teams were both seriously fighting for a place in the R16 too.
If this ranking is based entirely on group performance this is all you need to tell you it's complete bullshit
I'm not entirely convinced. Those "B Team" players should be keen to take the opportunity to show they should be "A Team": players and have that as an incentive to perform well.
Against a stingy Dutch defence I can’t see US getting the goals required.
would love to go with my heart but fifa is doing their best for Messi
I think the energy & momentum of the Japanese may be too much for Croatia
Easy pick to be fair
Senegal missing to many key players
Too strong for an awful Poland
Morocco has a lot of momentum and I feel will be hard for Spain to break down
Two sides met twice in nations league first a 4-0 win for Portugal and then a 1-0 loss more recently, feel as though Portugal has more in them than the Swiss and that loss will mean they have there guard up.
Too much for Croatia you made my day
I doubt it is purely on group performance but it is definitely not based on group results.
The Danes, incidentally, had 3 (more or less) closely contested games. They just happened to lose 2 of them and get only a draw in the first one. They were neither better nor worse IMHO than either Tunisia or even Australia. About or around the same level, which was still shocking to those who thought they would be a lot better.
Yeah, but that is not the same as doing the best for the team. Take the so-called Portuguese Mbappe, Rafael Leao: every time I see him on the pitch for Portugal, it seems he is trying to shine individually at the expense of his team. In the process, he neither helps his team nor himself. If I were Santos, I would have a long chat with him before letting him play again.
I always thought football was all about results. Other stats are useful in comparing teams who haven't played against each other, but when we have results of games and the team that comes last in a group is ranked way above the teams that finished above them it casts doubt on the ratings. I accept that the performance of the teams in question against each other were close, but these ratings don't show them close.
The only match that was pro-forma with no stakes this time around was... Holland - Qatar.