usaindia said: from nehru cup only cameroon matches dont count
we just played too many games last few years and lost majority of them,
since fifa takes last 24 or 36 months games with different weightage ,we are getting dinged.
for us to improve play 1 or 2 winnable games and dont play too much for next 7 months.
I think it would b better the other way round..try and play on every fifa match days and win 60-70% of the matches we wil automatically rise..we should play any team which is below 100 to 140 and then gradually go up playing better teams..starting with afc teams!
> Joyptan said:
> fifa should seriusly think about changing the ranking syestem. Not because india got demoted 1 place but overall it doesent accuretly represent that countryr current footballing status.
I really don't think the FIFA rankings are all that bad. The rankings are based on results, not on the strength of the team. Most people will think that Brazil should be in the top 10 but what they forget is that Brazil's results haven't been good at all, specially in the major tournaments. Comparing the rankings with performances, I really can't fault it.
usaindia said: from nehru cup only cameroon matches dont count
we just played too many games last few years and lost majority of them,
since fifa takes last 24 or 36 months games with different weightage ,we are getting dinged.
for us to improve play 1 or 2 winnable games and dont play too much for next 7 months.
I think it would b better the other way round..try and play on every fifa match days and win 60-70% of the matches we wil automatically rise..we should play any team which is below 100 to 140 and then gradually go up playing better teams..starting with afc teams!
Thats true. we must play as much as we can. doesnt matter what rankings.100 onwards. the gap between below hundred is too much and an occasional match is fine.. even worse ranked teams sometimes is not a bad option.. we are trying to adapt to a new system and practice games as international friendlies against teams like Pakistan or other lower ranked teams is not a bad option. agree more matches should be against 120 to 140 provided we manage to convince their football boards..just play as much as u can. I dont c any point in not playing to improve rankings. aur kitna peeche jayenge? I believe this team has the potential to be between 120- 140..whether they achieve it in 2-3 years is whats to be seen
> anish1996 said:
> > I really don't think the FIFA rankings are all that bad. The rankings are based on results, not on the strength of the team. Most people will think that Brazil should be in the top 10 but what they forget is that Brazil's results haven't been good at all, specially in the major tournaments. Comparing the rankings with performances, I really can't fault it.
Yes it's based on result, but the problem is the fact that FIFA deals with the results with a heavily flawed method.
Let me give you a quick and simple example.
1. Team A had 5 friendly matches against #1 team, yeah Spain, and won twice, drew once, and lost twice.
2. During the same time frame, Team B had only 1 friendly match against #100 European team (Let's say Luxembourg) and won it.
Which team do you think should get more points ?
Of course it should be Team A, right? But according to FIFA formula, Team B gets more.
A friendly win over Spain gives you 600 points (3x200x1x1) and a draw gives you 200 points (1x200x1x1). And of course you get no point when you lose no matter what the opponent is.
Therefore, Team A gets 1400 points in total with 2 wins, 1 draw, 2 losses against Spain.
But that's not it. Remember FIFA points is "points per match" number, not cumulative one.
So you should divide it by 5, since Team A played 5 games.
1400 / 5 = Team A gets 280 pts.
Now, Team B gets 300 points just with a win against Luxembourg. (3x100x1x1)
They played no more game. So no need to divide it. Team B gets 300 points.
Absolutely ridiculous, isn't it ? And i can talk all day and night about many more ridiculous sides of FIFA formula.
Actually there's a wide consensus among football fans and experts around the world that FIFA point system is too shoddy to be counted as the official ranker and used as seedings etc, and many believes ELO rating system is way more reasonable and reliable.
Yes it's based on result, but the problem is the fact that FIFA deals with the results with a heavily flawed method.
Let me give you a quick and simple example.
1. Team A had 5 friendly matches against #1 team, yeah Spain, and won twice, drew once, and lost twice.
2. During the same time frame, Team B had only 1 friendly match against #100 European team (Let's say Luxembourg) and won it.
Which team do you think should get more points ?
Of course it should be Team A, right? But according to FIFA formula, Team B gets more.
A friendly win over Spain gives you 600 points (3x200x1x1) and a draw gives you 200 points (1x200x1x1). And of course you get no point when you lose no matter what the opponent is.
Therefore, Team A gets 1400 points in total with 2 wins, 1 draw, 2 losses against Spain.
But that's not it. Remember FIFA points is "points per match" number, not cumulative one.
So you should divide it by 5, since Team A played 5 games.
1400 / 5 = Team A gets 280 pts.
Now, Team B gets 300 points just with a win against Luxembourg. (3x100x1x1)
They played no more game. So no need to divide it. Team B gets 300 points.
Absolutely ridiculous, isn't it ? And i can talk all day and night about many more ridiculous sides of FIFA formula.
Actually there's a wide consensus among football fans and experts around the world that FIFA point system is too shoddy to be counted as the official ranker and used as seedings etc, and many believes ELO rating system is way more reasonable and reliable.
In ELO rating, SAFF is like this at the moment.
159. India
172. Maldives
188. Bangladesh
190. Afghanistan
191. Nepal
193. Pakistan
199. Sri Lanka
227. Bhutan
>
>
OK, the rankings have a few flaws but that doesn't mean it's as bad as it's made out to be. The ELO rankings are probably a better system as a whole but the FIFA rankings aren't terrible themselves. If you compare the elo and FIFA rankings of countries, they are pretty similar to each other except for a few exceptions.
Comments
I think it would b better the other way round..try and play on every fifa match days and win 60-70% of the matches we wil automatically rise..we should play any team which is below 100 to 140 and then gradually go up playing better teams..starting with afc teams!
> Joyptan said:
> fifa should seriusly think about changing the ranking syestem. Not because india got demoted 1 place but overall it doesent accuretly represent that countryr current footballing status.
Thats true. we must play as much as we can. doesnt matter what rankings.100 onwards. the gap between below hundred is too much and an occasional match is fine.. even worse ranked teams sometimes is not a bad option.. we are trying to adapt to a new system and practice games as international friendlies against teams like Pakistan or other lower ranked teams is not a bad option. agree more matches should be against 120 to 140 provided we manage to convince their football boards..just play as much as u can. I dont c any point in not playing to improve rankings. aur kitna peeche jayenge? I believe this team has the potential to be between 120- 140..whether they achieve it in 2-3 years is whats to be seen
good explantion of rankings
> anish1996 said:
> > I really don't think the FIFA rankings are all that bad. The rankings are based on results, not on the strength of the team. Most people will think that Brazil should be in the top 10 but what they forget is that Brazil's results haven't been good at all, specially in the major tournaments. Comparing the rankings with performances, I really can't fault it.
no problem...india will improve their rankin by playin on fifa dates;;;
india vs singapore is next
> Guchimare said:
> >
isnt Myanmar Part of SAFF?
> samiam said:
> isnt Myanmar Part of SAFF?