England Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
- 2 Replies to chris
Rather than get abusive replies which mean nothing, let me instead enlighten you with the "silly" world rankings (thats FIFA) and the REAL world rankings (thats ELO).
If you are really that concerned about where teams should place in terms of rankings, then only use the ELO method.
IF you are American and like the "propaganda" used to get one of the largest sport economies interested in football, then stick to the aptly named (oh and American of course) Coca-Cola FIFA world rankings.
The "get americans interested in 'soccer'" rankings (i.e. b*llocks): http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index.html
The mathematically perfect/most logical rankings: http://www.eloratings.net
As i'm sure you can see, with ELO, Brazil are 1st, Dutch 2nd, ENGLAND 3rd, Argentina 8th, USA.... FOURTEENTH.
Does this sound a little more likely? Thought so...
I hope this has cleared up some of the confusion. FIFA is there to get Americans interested, ELO is there for people who DO actually know how football rankings should work.
ELO is "mathematically perfect" for a reason - in other words, its what you should go by. FIFA rankings are confused, and the way they work out rankings is inherantly very stupid since they dismiss obvious factors, such as the strength of say Andorra playing the USA. While the same points would be awarded to England v Brazil, which doesnt take a genius to work out the flaws already...