Flip Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Moved up a place in the world rankings. Can't wait for Woy to say ranking. :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Roy's doing the business already then. Slowly but surely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Uruguay 2nd. :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Uruguay 2nd. :lol: Been good last 3 years.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I know they have, man. It's still ludicrous, as are the rankings generally of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Uruguay 2nd. :lol: 4th in the World Cup, Champions of South America and unbeaten in 17 matches. They're there on merit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Uruguay 2nd. :lol: 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 How else are the rankings to be calculated other than on results? They finished 4th in the World Cup, won the 2nd hardest continental tournament without defeat (arguably not far behind the Euros) and have generally been very consistent recently. If they win their game in hand at home to Peru they will also top South American qualifying (also without defeat so far). The only team that deserves to be ahead of them on the rankings is Spain and they are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I'm struggling to grasp how else the rankings should be calculated. By how highly people rate their players? The only way it can be done is on results and success in major tournaments over a recent time period. It's not an exact science but looking at the current top 20 there isn't much wrong with it. France and Argentina will overtake us sooner rather than later and then it will be just about spot on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 How else are the rankings to be calculated other than on results? They finished 4th in the World Cup, won the 2nd hardest continental tournament without defeat (arguably not far behind the Euros) and have generally been very consistent recently. If they win their game in hand they will also top South American qualifying. The only team that deserves to be ahead of them on the rankings is Spain and they are. 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". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Aye it's all bollocks like, same as the European coefficiancy (sp) thing for the Europa League etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 How else are the rankings to be calculated other than on results? They finished 4th in the World Cup, won the 2nd hardest continental tournament without defeat (arguably not far behind the Euros) and have generally been very consistent recently. If they win their game in hand they will also top South American qualifying. The only team that deserves to be ahead of them on the rankings is Spain and they are. 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". Does anybody place value on them though? They're the only form of ranking possible other than to rank how good a team is on perception of the quality of their players, which is fair enough but purely a subjective thing. Looking at the current top 20 I don't think there's much wrong with the rankings at all. They are there to judge the level teams are currently performing at and generally I think they're a fair representation. Once France's recent run is reflected by breaking the top 10 they'll be near enough spot on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I know they have, man. It's still ludicrous, as are the rankings generally of course. Didn't they win the Copa America? Seems just fine to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I know they have, man. It's still ludicrous, as are the rankings generally of course. Didn't they win the Copa America? Seems just fine to me. Aye, unbeaten in 17 games too (stretching the Copa and qualifying). Will top qualifying if they win their game in hand against Peru. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 They shouldn't include friendlies and I think they do. that's my only gripe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 They shouldn't include friendlies and I think they do. that's my only gripe. True. It's hard to gauge how competitive a friendly is, the odd one can be even more competitive than qualifying games whereas many are glorified kickabouts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinho lad Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 They've got better strikers than England. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sicko2ndbest Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Defoes gone home due to fathers death Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David28 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Euro 2012 - Paper Round: Fears grow over Terry John Terry’s chances of playing against France are in the balance, according to the back pages. The Daily Mirror warns that the central defender is a serious doubt after only managing one light training session in the past two days after a hamstring problem surface during the friendly against Belgium. With England meeting France on Monday in their Group D opener, time is running out for the defender to prove his fitness. Terry has become a key component of the England squad, especially in the light of a spate of injuries that have robbed Roy Hodgson of central defenders and experienced players. Terry’s defensive partner at Chelsea Gary Cahill has already been ruled out of the tournament this week with a broken jaw, while the squad has also been shorn of veterans Frank Lampard and Gareth Barry in recent weeks. There will be pressure on Hodgson to play Terry regardless, but in another twist, the Daily Star claim that if Terry does line up against France, he could well rule himself out of the rest of the tournament. http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/07062012/58/euro-2012-paper-round-fears-grow-terry.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chubby Jason Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 fucks sake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Error to pick Terry anyway really, he's average now and he's also probably a major part of the reason the likes of Ferdinand, Lennon and Richards aren't there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Error to pick Terry anyway really, he's average now and he's also probably a major part of the reason the likes of Ferdinand, Lennon and Richards aren't there. That's ridiculous. I'm not a fan of Terry but to say 3 black players weren't picked because of him is sensationalism at its extreme. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 It's amazing how 1 player (Terry) has caused so many problems for the England team in recent years. A stronger football hierarchy would had cast him off from the national scene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 It's amazing how 1 player (Terry) has caused so many problems for the England team in recent years. A stronger football hierarchy would had cast him off from the national scene. He's done us a favour with Bridge tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I can understand if he does but has Defoe pulled out of the squad entirely or is he taking a few days away to sort things out? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts