Although the order is questionable, the only way the rankings can be done is looking at results, weighting the most recent ones higher than those from a couple of years ago.
Our results in the previous two qualifying campaigns have been nearly flawless, hence our high position. Who have we lost to from those teams in recent years? Germany in WC2010, Italy in Euro2012, France in a friendly and Netherlands in a friendly.
We were only beaten on penalties by the the runners up of the European Cup so its a fair reflection of where we are in the the football world. Remember, Germany were beat in normal time by Italy.
This is an outrage, I demand that we are considered to be more crap.
Haha, great response!
I think in a strange way we kind of underrate the English national side in this country. We do win a lot more than we lose but we just seem to choke in tournaments at the knockout stages.
When you look at countries like France and Holland, they have much more history in getting binned off by small sides in the group stages of tournaments.
Brazil will probably stay in a fairly low position before their own tournament due to the lack of qualifying games for it, though they do have the confederations cup 2013
The fact that teams slip down due to holding the tournament is rubbish, this means Brazil will be ranked about 25th by the time 2014 comes round. Have a look through the rankings and look at some of the teams in the 30-70 bracket, ridiculous
Complete and total nonsense. How can England and Portugal be higher than Italy?
Anyone who thinks that England gets a rough deal form Fifa should take a long hard look at this list and Englands recent results. Its clear favouritism.
Staistically, we have beaten Spain recently, and didn't lose in the Euros so you can sort of see why it might be. But we know that we are a long way off being 4th best in reality.
I suppose the problem is the weightings - we might beat Spainn in a friendly and Wembley but could we beat them in a meaningful game?
Ridiculous, BUT we did manage a 0-0 with the Euro Championship runners uppers. The ranking system gets more and more like Golf or Tennis in which a player can reach number one without winning a tournament of any note. Let's hope that the English squad take a pride in this overinflated ranking and attempts to play up to it.
Complete and total nonsense. How can England and Portugal be higher than Italy?
Probably because Italy have lost to Russia, United States, Slovakia and Ireland in the last 2 years, none of whom are that good. Also, Italy only won 2 games at Euro 2012, against Germany and Ireland (I'm not sure how the penalty win over England would go into the rankings). They were also dreadful in the 2010 World Cup.
Of course it could be argued that the World Cup in 2010 should have no bearing on the current strength of the sides, but how else are they supposed to rank them? It has to be based upon results over the last few years.
Staistically, we have beaten Spain recently, and didn't lose in the Euros so you can sort of see why it might be. But we know that we are a long way off being 4th best in reality.
I suppose the problem is the weightings - we might beat Spainn in a friendly and Wembley but could we beat them in a meaningful game?
What a lot of shite. What's the point of having tournaments if FIFA then produce rankings based on vapour? At least they seem to have finally got their heads around the fact that the Czechs and Norweegees aren't in the top 4. The only vaguely accurate aspect of it is that Spain are at one and that 2 first seeds from the Euros didn't make the top 20. Honestly I shouldn't look at these things, it's like the top 100 lists that have the Spice Girls above the Stones, it's just an exercise in stupidity.
Comments
Our results in the previous two qualifying campaigns have been nearly flawless, hence our high position. Who have we lost to from those teams in recent years? Germany in WC2010, Italy in Euro2012, France in a friendly and Netherlands in a friendly.
Edit, just read dabos' post.
Remember, Germany were beat in normal time by Italy.
Cant believe I,ve written that.
What was that saying, lies, damm lies, and statistics........
I think in a strange way we kind of underrate the English national side in this country. We do win a lot more than we lose but we just seem to choke in tournaments at the knockout stages.
When you look at countries like France and Holland, they have much more history in getting binned off by small sides in the group stages of tournaments.
I assume that big three there will all jump up the table then.
Anyone who thinks that England gets a rough deal form Fifa should take a long hard look at this list and Englands recent results. Its clear favouritism.
I suppose the problem is the weightings - we might beat Spainn in a friendly and Wembley but could we beat them in a meaningful game?
Of course it could be argued that the World Cup in 2010 should have no bearing on the current strength of the sides, but how else are they supposed to rank them? It has to be based upon results over the last few years.
France in 2004 as well but apart from that you're right