We're just days away from the draw for the 2018 FIFA World Cup, which provides me with the perfect opportunity to perform a comparison between the FIFA Rankings and my own.
One of the most hotly debated topics in the lead up to the draw has been Poland's appearance within the top seeding pot. This feat has been partly achieved on merit, but one key (and now well known) variable has tilted the final outcome in Poland's favour, and that is the lack of friendly matches they have played in the last 4 years. For the uninitiated, friendlies (whether won, drawn or lost) generally pull a team's average points down, especially for those at the top end of the standings, so their avoidance - whilst it might cost the national association a few quid - can pay off quite handsomely at a later date. If this fact has been exploited by Poland, then I can only applaud their ingenuity.
We saw a similar issue in the build up to the 2014 draw. That time it was Switzerland who benefited, at the expense of both the Netherlands and Italy. In the years leading up to that event, the Dutch played a relatively meaningless friendly against Indonesia, whilst the Italian's took on their local minnows San Marino in an equally pointless game. Both matches resulted in wins on the pitch for the European giants, but losses in terms of valuable ranking points.
One notable improvement FIFA have made this time around is the use of their much-maligned rankings to seed all of the pots (not just the top seeds). This means that the remaining pots are no longer based on geographic criteria, thus giving the likes of Mexico a fairer shot at receiving an easier draw. This is a positive step by the powers that be in my honest opinion.
So, to the comparison.
Firstly, the 4 pots according to FIFA:
Pot 1: Russia, Germany, Brazil, Portugal, Argentina, Belgium, Poland, France
Pot 2: Spain, Peru, Switzerland, England, Colombia, Mexico, Uruguay, Croatia
Pot 3: Denmark, Iceland, Costa Rica, Sweden, Tunisia, Egypt, Senegal, Iran
Pot 4: Serbia, Nigeria, Australia, Japan, Morocco, Panama, South Korea, Saudi Arabia
And according to my rankings:
It is perhaps ironic that, given this is my first comparison to the FIFA rankings, the results aren't significantly different, but on this occasion I think FIFA have got things reasonably correct. Poland (and obviously Russia as hosts) aside, the top seeds make a lot of sense. This can only be good news for those of us who want 8 evenly matched groups.
Delving into the detail somewhat, there are three key differences between my rankings and those of FIFA, namely:
1. My ranking ignores friendly matches entirely
2. My ranking is based on an 8 year period (as opposed to 4)
3. My ranking allocates bonus points based on tournament performance
These three elements, especially the latter item, help to explain why the above variances exist.
Pot 1/2: Poland vs. Colombia
It has already been identified that Poland appear to have used the vagaries of the FIFA rankings in their favour. No such an advantage is to be had in my ranking where the total elimination of friendly matches has taken place, largely because of the use of second string line-ups and quite often the reluctance of clubs to release even semi-injured stars for international duty. This opened the door for Colombia, who with a quarter final appearance in the last World Cup and a semi final performance at the 2016 Copa America Centenario fully merit their top seeding.
Pot 2/3: Peru vs. Iceland
Perhaps a pair of unexpected qualifiers to the untrained eye, but both sides reached the quarter finals of their most recent continental championships. Peru losing out on penalties to Colombia, having eliminated Brazil in the group stage, and Iceland reaching the quarter finals of Euro 2016 with that now infamous humbling of England. Both came through tremendously tough qualification processes to make it to Russia - Peru in the slugfest that is the CONMEBOL super group, and Iceland finishing ahead of Croatia, Turkey and Ukraine (all countries with much greater populations) in a qualification group of death. I think the fact that Iceland actually won their group gives them the slight edge, but there's really not much in it.
Pot 3/4: Iran, Senegal & Tunisia vs. Serbia, Australia & South Korea
This is where tournament bonus points have made a significant difference.
Firstly though, Serbia. Winning a tough qualification group containing the Republic of Ireland, Wales and Austria is no mean feat. In my opinion, they should be in the third pot.
Regarding the remaining teams, on pure form, Iran, Senegal and Tunisia, are probably slightly stronger at the moment. Senegal were a joy to watch in the group stage of the 2017 AFCON before letting their imperious form desert them in the quarter final shootout loss to eventual winners Cameroon. Despite a mishap away to South Africa in the world cup qualifying (a 2-1 loss which was later overturned on appeal in an unprecedented decision by FIFA after the referee was found guilty of match fixing), they have looked top of the class of African football over the last couple of years. Iran convincingly won their qualifying group ahead of South Korea (by 7 points) so it is hard to strongly argue against those two sides being in the higher pot. Tunisia have also done well to finish ahead of an improving DR Congo side, although I would struggle to justify them being ranked ahead of Serbia amongst others.
Per the bonus allocations, Australia and South Korea continue to profit from their win and runner-up performances respectively in the 2015 Asian Cup and this has given them the edge in my rankings. They will of course have to defend these points in the 2019 edition. Iran (controversially), and as mentioned above Senegal were both eliminated at the quarter final stage of their respective most recent continental tournaments which has cost them valuable points. Tunisia also fell at the same hurdle, losing out 2-0 to the Stallions of Burkina Faso in Libreville.
In conclusion, there isn't a massive variation in the seeding pots derived by the two ranking systems, and it would be quite reasonable to prefer either set of options. At another suitable juncture, I'll perform a deeper dive further down the ranking lists which will most certainly reveal some wider positional chasms, but that will need to wait for another day. The major step forward for me is the choice by FIFA to use their rankings to seed all 4 pots for the draw, and this should result in a better balance of quality within each group. For those that like them, a group of death is still a possibility, so all hope is not yet lost for you!!
Scott.
One of the most hotly debated topics in the lead up to the draw has been Poland's appearance within the top seeding pot. This feat has been partly achieved on merit, but one key (and now well known) variable has tilted the final outcome in Poland's favour, and that is the lack of friendly matches they have played in the last 4 years. For the uninitiated, friendlies (whether won, drawn or lost) generally pull a team's average points down, especially for those at the top end of the standings, so their avoidance - whilst it might cost the national association a few quid - can pay off quite handsomely at a later date. If this fact has been exploited by Poland, then I can only applaud their ingenuity.
We saw a similar issue in the build up to the 2014 draw. That time it was Switzerland who benefited, at the expense of both the Netherlands and Italy. In the years leading up to that event, the Dutch played a relatively meaningless friendly against Indonesia, whilst the Italian's took on their local minnows San Marino in an equally pointless game. Both matches resulted in wins on the pitch for the European giants, but losses in terms of valuable ranking points.
One notable improvement FIFA have made this time around is the use of their much-maligned rankings to seed all of the pots (not just the top seeds). This means that the remaining pots are no longer based on geographic criteria, thus giving the likes of Mexico a fairer shot at receiving an easier draw. This is a positive step by the powers that be in my honest opinion.
So, to the comparison.
Firstly, the 4 pots according to FIFA:
Pot 1: Russia, Germany, Brazil, Portugal, Argentina, Belgium, Poland, France
Pot 2: Spain, Peru, Switzerland, England, Colombia, Mexico, Uruguay, Croatia
Pot 3: Denmark, Iceland, Costa Rica, Sweden, Tunisia, Egypt, Senegal, Iran
Pot 4: Serbia, Nigeria, Australia, Japan, Morocco, Panama, South Korea, Saudi Arabia
And according to my rankings:
Pot 1: Russia, Germany, Argentina, France, Portugal, Brazil, Belgium, Colombia
Pot 2: Spain, Poland, Uruguay, England, Switzerland, Iceland, Croatia, Mexico
Pot 3: Costa Rica, Peru, Serbia, Australia, Sweden, Egypt, South Korea, Denmark
Pot 4: Panama, Japan, Iran, Senegal, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Tunisia
It is perhaps ironic that, given this is my first comparison to the FIFA rankings, the results aren't significantly different, but on this occasion I think FIFA have got things reasonably correct. Poland (and obviously Russia as hosts) aside, the top seeds make a lot of sense. This can only be good news for those of us who want 8 evenly matched groups.
Delving into the detail somewhat, there are three key differences between my rankings and those of FIFA, namely:
1. My ranking ignores friendly matches entirely
2. My ranking is based on an 8 year period (as opposed to 4)
3. My ranking allocates bonus points based on tournament performance
These three elements, especially the latter item, help to explain why the above variances exist.
Pot 1/2: Poland vs. Colombia
It has already been identified that Poland appear to have used the vagaries of the FIFA rankings in their favour. No such an advantage is to be had in my ranking where the total elimination of friendly matches has taken place, largely because of the use of second string line-ups and quite often the reluctance of clubs to release even semi-injured stars for international duty. This opened the door for Colombia, who with a quarter final appearance in the last World Cup and a semi final performance at the 2016 Copa America Centenario fully merit their top seeding.
Pot 2/3: Peru vs. Iceland
Perhaps a pair of unexpected qualifiers to the untrained eye, but both sides reached the quarter finals of their most recent continental championships. Peru losing out on penalties to Colombia, having eliminated Brazil in the group stage, and Iceland reaching the quarter finals of Euro 2016 with that now infamous humbling of England. Both came through tremendously tough qualification processes to make it to Russia - Peru in the slugfest that is the CONMEBOL super group, and Iceland finishing ahead of Croatia, Turkey and Ukraine (all countries with much greater populations) in a qualification group of death. I think the fact that Iceland actually won their group gives them the slight edge, but there's really not much in it.
Pot 3/4: Iran, Senegal & Tunisia vs. Serbia, Australia & South Korea
This is where tournament bonus points have made a significant difference.
Firstly though, Serbia. Winning a tough qualification group containing the Republic of Ireland, Wales and Austria is no mean feat. In my opinion, they should be in the third pot.
Regarding the remaining teams, on pure form, Iran, Senegal and Tunisia, are probably slightly stronger at the moment. Senegal were a joy to watch in the group stage of the 2017 AFCON before letting their imperious form desert them in the quarter final shootout loss to eventual winners Cameroon. Despite a mishap away to South Africa in the world cup qualifying (a 2-1 loss which was later overturned on appeal in an unprecedented decision by FIFA after the referee was found guilty of match fixing), they have looked top of the class of African football over the last couple of years. Iran convincingly won their qualifying group ahead of South Korea (by 7 points) so it is hard to strongly argue against those two sides being in the higher pot. Tunisia have also done well to finish ahead of an improving DR Congo side, although I would struggle to justify them being ranked ahead of Serbia amongst others.
Per the bonus allocations, Australia and South Korea continue to profit from their win and runner-up performances respectively in the 2015 Asian Cup and this has given them the edge in my rankings. They will of course have to defend these points in the 2019 edition. Iran (controversially), and as mentioned above Senegal were both eliminated at the quarter final stage of their respective most recent continental tournaments which has cost them valuable points. Tunisia also fell at the same hurdle, losing out 2-0 to the Stallions of Burkina Faso in Libreville.
In conclusion, there isn't a massive variation in the seeding pots derived by the two ranking systems, and it would be quite reasonable to prefer either set of options. At another suitable juncture, I'll perform a deeper dive further down the ranking lists which will most certainly reveal some wider positional chasms, but that will need to wait for another day. The major step forward for me is the choice by FIFA to use their rankings to seed all 4 pots for the draw, and this should result in a better balance of quality within each group. For those that like them, a group of death is still a possibility, so all hope is not yet lost for you!!
Scott.
Comments
Post a Comment