usa shud stick to promoting their womens game cos the men cant play fo shit.

___________________
*** Sig edited -> overall sig size too big
http://img141.**************/img141/972/england8rx.gif

quote:

Originally posted by Eddie N MIAMI Brass Monkey that funky Monkey Chang Monkey Chelsea junkie That fucking Monkey

U S of A will be ranked #1 in the world after Poland wins the world cup in 50 years

___________________
Breaks, house, electro & downtempo.

quote:

Originally posted by bluE_Neon U S of A will be ranked #1 in the world after Poland wins the world cup in 50 years

yes brother

___________________
"A style that's impossible to define. Prog? Hardly. Tech house? Not boring enough. It's like trippy twisted acid house but deep and funky. See, I told you - impossible."

There is a point, it's a decent way for determining seedings and it is the best national team ranking out there (try coming up with a better way of calculating it, probably hard!). But it doesn't really matter much neither should it bother you.

___________________
sempre contra a corrente do jogo

Dont the FIFA rankings (over the past x amount of years) determine the seedings for international tournaments? We absolutely shitted on Germany to get to South Korea 2002 but the Germans were seeded above us and got to the final facing such mighty teams as Paraguay, America and South Korea in the knockout phase! So if they do determine seedings then they are important and probably lost us the World Cup!

The fact you won 5-1 over Germany shouldn't automatically give you an higher ranking. That's about the same logic of: Torreense beat Porto, Porto beat Man United, Torreense are better than Man United. Or getting the conclusion that Lens are from an incredibly higher level than Auxerre just cause they beat them 7-0, when the last few seasons show these 2 clubs are about the same level. That Germany 1 England 5 was blatantly a freak result.

Also getting Paraguay, USA and South Korea resulted from these teams leaving other "giants" among the way, it hasn't got the slightest thing to do with rankings or seedings. This was the knockout stage.

___________________
sempre contra a corrente do jogo

quote:

Originally posted by paranoik0 The fact you won 5-1 over Germany shouldn't automatically give you an higher ranking. That's about the same logic of: Torreense beat Porto, Porto beat Man United, Torreense are better than Man United. Or getting the conclusion that Lens are from an incredibly higher level than Auxerre just cause they beat them 7-0, when the last few seasons show these 2 clubs are about the same level. That Germany 1 England 5 was blatantly a freak result.

Er...

We won the group...

quote:

Also getting Paraguay, USA and South Korea resulted from these teams leaving other "giants" among the way, it hasn't got the slightest thing to do with rankings or seedings. This was the knockout stage.

Germany's progression had everything to do with the seedings - if they hadn't been seeded they would not have got these teams in the knockout stage

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Er... We won the group...

Well, want a cookie?

I can't be arsed right now at 3AM to search and analyse the results of the english and german national team around the 1998-2002 period which i assume the ranking focuses in the most. But in there there's some mathematical explanation of why Germany was above England in that ranking at that point.

___________________
sempre contra a corrente do jogo

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Germany's progression had everything to do with the seedings - if they hadn't been seeded they would not have got these teams in the knockout stage

Seedings are just for the group stage.

Admitedly England had a awfully hard group compared to Germany but the Germany above England factor wasn't the only one into this. Bad luck had a part too.

Both qualified on their group, Germany in 1st, England in 2nd. Let's assume Germany only managed to get the 1st place because of beeing benefitiated in the group seedings, and would have got the 2nd place instead. In the 1/8 finals all the 1st placed play against the all the 2nd placed. This means the advantage that comes out from the seeding ends in the 1/8 finals, since theorically all the best teams will be in the 1/4 finals.

Germany's opponent in the 1/8 finals was Paraguay. If they would have been 2nd placed it would have been Spain, admitedly an harder team to beat. Therefore, the progression did indeed depend on the seedings.. but only until Paraguay. Getting America and South Korea afterwards was only on pure luck, and the fact there were less "giants" around than usual on those rounds. England had again awful luck to play Brazil on the 1/4 finals, just like they could have got Senegal of Turkey if they were placed in another group, regardless of the seeding.

Is this enough text to convince you on this meaningless point?

___________________
sempre contra a corrente do jogo

quote:

Originally posted by paranoik0 Is this enough text to convince you on this meaningless point?

No its bloody not! We wuz robbed!

Just like that ****ing referee robbed us when we "beat" Portugal in 2004!

Altho on the plus side said referee decided to retire after all the death threats he got afterwards!

This is soooo unnecessary. Why do it..?