Visit Ahmed Bilal's column >>

AHMED BILALHome Page

If you think football is just a game, you're not playing it right...
Add To Watchlist
Articles Posted: 22; Links Seeded: 24
Member Since: 6/2006Last Seen: 7/09/2008

FIFA World Rankings For July 2006

News Type: Event — Thu Jul 13, 2006 3:53 PM EDT
advertisement

Amidst the Zidane commotion, it seems that most people have forgotten about the revised FIFA world rankings that were released on July 12.

FIFA have, under much criticism of their rankings system, revised and re-evaluated the factors that were taken into account when calculating country rankings. The main changes are:

Records of last four years will be taken into account (as opposed to last eight years under the previous system). 'Goals scored' and 'home advantage' will not be considered under the new system..

And from the site itself:

"Next year, the official FIFA website, FIFA.com, will offer an online tool that will make it possible to carry out hypothetical calculations for your team."

Top 20 FIFA Rankings (July 2006)

1. Brazil
2. Italy
3. Argentina
4. France
5. England
6. Netherlands
7. Spain
8. Portugal
9. Germany
10. Czech Republic
11. Nigeria
12. Cameroon
13. Switzerland
14. Uruguay
15. Ukraine
16. USA
17. Denmark
18. Mexico
19. Paraguay
20. Cote d'Ivoire

Details Of Revised Rankings

Now for the information starved amongst you, here's the full list of criteria used by FIFA. Each country is awarded points that accumulate over the year with the rankings revised each month. At the end of the year, the counter is reset and the cycle starts again.

Here's the criteria:

Matches Considered: All international "A" matches
Result: Win-Draw-Defeat - 3 points -1 points – 0 points
Importance of match: 1 (friendly match) to 4 (FIFA World Cup™)
Strength of opponent: Position in world ranking (no. 1 = 2.00, no. 30 = 1.70, no. 118 = 0.82 etc.) Formula: [200 - Position] / 100
Regional strength: Based on results in last three FIFA World Cups (wins per confederation per match)
Period: Last four years, gradual decline in importance of results: 100%- 50% - 30% - 20%
Number of matches considered per year: Average points gained from all matches in last 12 months (minimum: 5 matches)
Number of goals: Not considered
Home and away matches: Not considered

Still not the easiest of nuts to crack, but if you have access to the data it shouldn't be too hard to write a program that calculates these rankings automatically.

Do rankings really matter? I don't really care actually :) Pakistan is way down at #153 I think. I'll stick to supporting England and Italy for now.

Sources

Full FIFA Rankings (July 2006)

Press Release Announcing Change In FIFA's Ranking System

FIFA Ranking Procedures

Main FIFA Rankings Site

  • 16 Votes
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
4.6
0.5
{"commentId":204482,"authorDomain":"zaki"}
Zaki

USA = 16 on the list

finally something a bit more realistic.

{"commentId":204482,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"zaki"}
  • 3 votes
Reply#1 - Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:18 PM EDT
{"commentId":204587,"authorDomain":"josh"}
josh

Yeah, nice to see the US drop out of #5 or whatever ridiculous position they had before the tournament

{"commentId":204587,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"josh"}
  • 3 votes
Reply#2 - Thu Jul 13, 2006 8:43 PM EDT
{"commentId":204910,"authorDomain":"frisby"}
Stuart Frisby

I'm surprised to see England as high as fifth, but then we don't really lose very often, just when it really matters!

{"commentId":204910,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"frisby"}
  • 4 votes
Reply#3 - Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:38 AM EDT
{"commentId":204987,"authorDomain":"soccerlens"}
Ahmed Bilal

so true :)

I had thought that Portugal would be ranked higher...

{"commentId":204987,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"soccerlens"}
    #3.1 - Fri Jul 14, 2006 4:49 AM EDT
    {"commentId":206915,"authorDomain":"rkfan"}
    Logan D

    Being Portuguese myself, I was really hoping for a victory over France, but since France lost to Italy, it kind of makes us look bad. However, the final was a good game. I enjoyed it.

    {"commentId":206915,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"rkfan"}
      #3.2 - Sat Jul 15, 2006 1:20 PM EDT
      Reply
      {"commentId":205010,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}
      Oluseye

      People always attack the rankings but, it the rankings were the bible, there would be no need for the World Cup and Number one on the list would be called the World Champions.

      It's a measure of consistency over time in all matches and not on the biggest stages like with the World Cup.

      {"commentId":205010,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}
      • 2 votes
      Reply#4 - Fri Jul 14, 2006 6:09 AM EDT
      {"commentId":211039,"authorDomain":"josh"}
      josh

      It's fine for there to be a distinction between the rankings and the final winner. . injuries, luck, home pitch advantage, and lots of other factors can create a short-term winner out of a long-run contender. In fact, I've always thought it a little odd that most (all?) of the European football leagues don't have a playoff. If Chelsea goes off and wins the EPL by 40 points two months before it's over. . well. . no drama, it's just over. That wouldn't be tolerated in the states.

      The problem is when the rankings are just absurd. The USA was never at any time in the top 5 teams in the world by any sensical definition of the word 'top'. A ranking should mean, by definition, that the #1 team would consisitently beat the #2 team, who would beat the #3 team, and so on. (assuming they played a million times to even out luck). Does anyone think the US would consistently beat the 6th team on the list? 8th? 15th? Of course not.

      {"commentId":211039,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"josh"}
        #4.1 - Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:53 PM EDT
        {"commentId":211882,"authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}
        Oluseye

        Well I see what you're saying but;

        1) In football, it is well-known that the league table doesn't lie. Whoever wins the most games out of 38 tough matches wins, not who wins one sometimes dreadfully bland final. For that kind of fun and games, there is the FA Cup which has the excitement, and sometimes even non-league Amateurs have gone to the final of various FA Cups in some countries.

        2) The FIFA rankings are a mark of consistency in winning the games you do play. If, the US is ranked #5, it may never play #1-4, because perhaps they're in a different zone, or perhps those teams would not serve its purposes in international friendlies. This might not exactly exonerate the rankings but it is important to know what the rankings measure. It is not a league table. Looking at Tennis, would you say that the #1 rated player would consistently beat #2? No, he might play #2 five times in a season and lose all but retain his ranking by consistently beating #3-10

        I agree that Chelsea winning by 40 points ahead is boring but you miss the fierce competition for Continental competition qualification. And, the real drama and competition is in the relegation battle. When clubs are relegated from the Premiership, they and the locale lose money. This guarantees that people fight fiercely to avoid the drop.

        {"commentId":211882,"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911","authorDomain":"200MilesUp"}
          #4.2 - Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:18 AM EDT
          Reply
          {"canLink":false,"threadId":"32032","isPrivate":false}
          Leave a Comment:
          You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
          Newsvine Privacy Statement
          As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
          {"threadId":"32032","contentId":"286911"}
          Start TrackingStart Tracking
          Stop TrackingStop Tracking
          Back To Top | Front Page