I don't disagree with how the rankings are calculated. It's that I don't agree with the rankings as a meaningful way of comparing the qualities of various sides. I know Uruguay are a good side - a very good side indeed - but I don't believe that they are the 2nd best team in the world.
Just like how England are 6th. I'd like to think minimal value is placed on these "rankings".
4th in the World Cup, Champions of South America and unbeaten in 17 matches.
They're there on merit.
In these rankings, perhaps. But these rankings are preposterous. They're a form guide, essentially.
Think Ireland have a decent chance of making it through.
Not saying they're a good team but on their day they can beat Italy and Croatia. Wouldn't be surprised if they squeeze into 2nd.
Class if one of the teams accidentally scores in the 90th minute. Like, boots it towards goal but as a pass so the keeper will have it, but instead twats it into the top corner, a stonking goal.
"14 minutes of added time."
Such idiocy. It is not a maths equation. All four players are more effective and consistent in their position than Ferdinand is in his own. Rio's career at the top level is rapidly ending and he should plan accordingly. England's best centreback now and into the future is Cahill, imo.
Gerrard has been disgustingly bad all season. There was some stat about three quarters through the season that they'd only won 8% of the games he started, which was probably just his usual top drawer showing against us at Anfield.
Wish it was just that game.
He'll be wank next season, guarentee it.
Think Norwich and Swansea will both struggle a lot next season. Norwich's squad will get exposed as the mediocrity it is, and Swansea were found out in the last 2-3 months of the season. Are they able to mix it up? If not then they'll have to learn pretty damn quickly.