tracy123 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Australia Up 13 places, England down 1 FIFA.com - The FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Australia Up 13 places, England down 1 FIFA.com - The FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking Or to put it another way... England 7th (one place ahead of Argentina who also went down one) Footballeroos 16th (up 13 places, which is 2 places ahead of Ivory Coast who went up 20 places) If ya gonna compare, at least do like for like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Australia Up 13 places, England down 1 FIFA.com - The FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracy123 Posted July 15, 2009 Author Share Posted July 15, 2009 Or to put it another way... England 7th (one place ahead of Argentina who also went down one) Footballeroos 16th (up 13 places, which is 2 places ahead of Ivory Coast who went up 20 places) If ya gonna compare, at least do like for like. I guess I should of put in Spain as well (down 1 BTW) Most people are from the UK and Australia so I guessed they were the most important to people. It was not done like for like, anyone interested in other teams i posted the link so they could check it out for themselves Nothing against England I thought they would of gone up as they are playing well. Anyway well done socceroos and the ivory coast Eric calm down chill out it was not ment as a swipe at England, why would i want to do that we all know money is more important to them than playing for their country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I guess I should of put in Spain as well (down 1 BTW) Most people are from the UK and Australia so I guessed they were the most important to people. It was not done like for like, anyone interested in other teams i posted the link so they could check it out for themselves Nothing against England I thought they would of gone up as they are playing well. Anyway well done socceroos and the ivory coast Eric calm down chill out it was not ment as a swipe at England, why would i want to do that we all know money is more important to them than playing for their country. well done Oz, only 4 places below the mighty USA....:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slipshot Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Just goes to show that while there is nothing else, the FIFA rankings are flawed given they rank the games played (understandably so) but believe that is sufficient to credit teams with new standings. So if Australia played Fiji, NZ, Vanuatu and some other small islands and won, they would rise in the rankings, yet the only true comparison is something like the World Cup. How can England possibly go down when they have had so many victories recently? Simple because the other teams around them did as well but not necessarily against equivalent opposition. As in Russia's case who have played small dodgy countries and won... Australia deserve their ranking (but again, playing teams such as Qatar and Bahrain is hardly a true challenge), but seeing teams like the Ivory Coast - come on. Likewise, in general terms you would always rank Portugal higher than Australia, but the rankings do not show this - only recent results that may be irrelevant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Just goes to show that while there is nothing else, the FIFA rankings are flawed given they rank the games played (understandably so) but believe that is sufficient to credit teams with new standings. So if Australia played Fiji, NZ, Vanuatu and some other small islands and won, they would rise in the rankings, yet the only true comparison is something like the World Cup. How can England possibly go down when they have had so many victories recently? Simple because the other teams around them did as well but not necessarily against equivalent opposition. As in Russia's case who have played small dodgy countries and won... Australia deserve their ranking (but again, playing teams such as Qatar and Bahrain is hardly a true challenge), but seeing teams like the Ivory Coast - come on. Likewise, in general terms you would always rank Portugal higher than Australia, but the rankings do not show this - only recent results that may be irrelevant... spot on, how the hell can Oz be abobe Portugal and checkoslovakia :cute:teams that they would lose to 9 times out of 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest proud2beaussie Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 spot on, how the hell can Oz be abobe Portugal and checkoslovakia :cute:teams that they would lose to 9 times out of 10 Australia went up,England went down.my advice is build a bridge and get over it.:wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracy123 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 Just goes to show that while there is nothing else, the FIFA rankings are flawed given they rank the games played (understandably so) but believe that is sufficient to credit teams with new standings. So if Australia played Fiji, NZ, Vanuatu and some other small islands and won, they would rise in the rankings, yet the only true comparison is something like the World Cup. How can England possibly go down when they have had so many victories recently? Simple because the other teams around them did as well but not necessarily against equivalent opposition. As in Russia's case who have played small dodgy countries and won... Australia deserve their ranking (but again, playing teams such as Qatar and Bahrain is hardly a true challenge), but seeing teams like the Ivory Coast - come on. Likewise, in general terms you would always rank Portugal higher than Australia, but the rankings do not show this - only recent results that may be irrelevant... Would you not agree then that if Australia played Fiji, NZ, Vanuatu and some other small islands and won that they would be best in their group? Then should that not be shown in World standings? If Portugal lost alot of there games in their group should that not show in the world rankings? I dont think you give Australia much credit, look at the world cup we out played Italy and should of won but hey thats life. As an Australian i was proud of the way we played our games, we came off the pitch having done our best. What did you hear off the England players urmmm we could of played better, how can you be proud of a team that does not give 100%???? is winning enough???? Soccer has been inbedded in Europe for many years and most countries only play 1 or 2 national sports eg in the UK you have Football or Rugby over winter (yes i know you play other sports but surly you would have to agree that they are the main 2, football being no1) In Australia soccer is a fringe sport (that is changing) most kids play football (AFL) or Rugby then all the fringe sports soccer, basket ball, base ball etc take up the rest. It wasn't that long ago and I'm sure its still said today soccer was called wog ball as it was only played by new Australians (Europeans) And because of this I think we have done a great job getting to where we are today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Would you not agree then that if Australia played Fiji, NZ, Vanuatu and some other small islands and won that they would be best in their group? Then should that not be shown in World standings? If Portugal lost alot of there games in their group should that not show in the world rankings?I dont think you give Australia much credit, look at the world cup we out played Italy and should of won but hey thats life. As an Australian i was proud of the way we played our games, we came off the pitch having done our best. What did you hear off the England players urmmm we could of played better, how can you be proud of a team that does not give 100%???? is winning enough???? Soccer has been inbedded in Europe for many years and most countries only play 1 or 2 national sports eg in the UK you have Football or Rugby over winter (yes i know you play other sports but surly you would have to agree that they are the main 2, football being no1) In Australia soccer is a fringe sport (that is changing) most kids play football (AFL) or Rugby then all the fringe sports soccer, basket ball, base ball etc take up the rest. It wasn't that long ago and I'm sure its still said today soccer was called wog ball as it was only played by new Australians (Europeans) And because of this I think we have done a great job getting to where we are today. To say England players do not give as much as Australian players is such a stupid statement, I have watched England teams live and on the TV and thet always give 100%, look at the faces when we have gone out on pens so many times....nah mate they care...as much as any player playing anywhere in the world. Funny enough the laziest players I have ever seen who never seem to give 100% are 2 aussies...Viduka and Kewell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracy123 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 To say England players do not give as much as Australian players is such a true statement, I have watched England teams live and on the TV and they always give 80%, look at the faces when we have gone out on pens so many times....nah mate they care...as much as any player playing anywhere in the world. Funny enough the laziest players I have ever seen who never seem to give 100% are 2 aussies...Viduka and Kewell. the English team after winning matches in the world cup said we did not give 100%. So if they are saying it it must be true or were they lying? :tongue: The faces are of shame and disappointment for putting in another poor effort. If your team is beaten by a better team but put in 100% what more could you ask for? Thats something to be proud of. But if your team wins and turns around and said we could of done better, is that something to be proud of? greatful for yes proud of NO...... (thats just not of England players BTW) Funny enough the laziest players I have ever seen who never seem to give 100% are 2 aussies...Viduka and Kewell Different when they play for the socceroos though!!! You can see the pride in there faces :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 the English team after winning matches in the world cup said we did not give 100%. So if they are saying it it must be true or were they lying? :tongue:The faces are of shame and disappointment for putting in another poor effort. If your team is beaten by a better team but put in 100% what more could you ask for? Thats something to be proud of. But if your team wins and turns around and said we could of done better, is that something to be proud of? greatful for yes proud of NO...... (thats just not of England players BTW) Funny enough the laziest players I have ever seen who never seem to give 100% are 2 aussies...Viduka and Kewell No much different when they play for the socceroos lazy fat waste of space viduka is mate Agrre with you there mate. Have you a link for you statment that they said they did not give 100% or are you telling one of your famous porkies again :biglaugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracy123 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 Agrre with you there mate.Have you a link for you statment that they said they did not give 100% or are you telling one of your famous porkies again :biglaugh: No i have no link but i will do my best to find them for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 No i have no link but i will do my best to find them for you Will not hold my breath...:cute: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongrel Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Socceroos who earn their crust anywhere than the national league , asian cup ( european nations equivalent ) the beek played a league players result ****. World cup side , no a league players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Socceroos who earn their crust anywhere than the national league , asian cup ( european nations equivalent ) the beek played a league players result ****. World cup side , no a league players yorkshire mate, can you say that in English please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongrel Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 yorkshire mate, can you say that in English please. sorry 5 letter words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 sorry 5 letter words :cute: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracy123 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 Will not hold my breath...:cute: I can only find this snippit but its when they lost so not really what you wanted its about 18 seconds into the interview when Frank Lampard makes comment about someone (can't catch the name) criticizing the team earlier in the week. (When they were winning but not playing at there best (my words)) [YOUTUBE]JgVFnfnLkIQ[/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlimbo Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 I can only find this snippit but its when they lost so not really what you wanted its about 18 seconds into the interview when Frank Lampard makes comment about someone (can't catch the name) criticizing the team earlier in the week. (When they were winning but not playing at there best (my words)) [YOUTUBE]JgVFnfnLkIQ[/YOUTUBE] Have you been drinking mate:laugh: Lampard says "sepp blatter criticised England for whatever reason" nothing about the England players from Lampard...as I say "will not hold my breath" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slipshot Posted July 19, 2009 Share Posted July 19, 2009 Would you not agree then that if Australia played Fiji, NZ, Vanuatu and some other small islands and won that they would be best in their group? Then should that not be shown in World standings? If Portugal lost alot of there games in their group should that not show in the world rankings?I dont think you give Australia much credit, look at the world cup we out played Italy and should of won but hey thats life. As an Australian i was proud of the way we played our games, we came off the pitch having done our best. What did you hear off the England players urmmm we could of played better, how can you be proud of a team that does not give 100%???? is winning enough???? Soccer has been embedded in Europe for many years and most countries only play 1 or 2 national sports eg in the UK you have Football or Rugby over winter (yes i know you play other sports but surly you would have to agree that they are the main 2, football being no1) In Australia soccer is a fringe sport (that is changing) most kids play football (AFL) or Rugby then all the fringe sports soccer, basket ball, base ball etc take up the rest. It wasn't that long ago and I'm sure its still said today soccer was called wog ball as it was only played by new Australians (Europeans) And because of this I think we have done a great job getting to where we are today. I think you should read what I wrote, firstly. I said 'Australia deserve their ranking'. However, my point is the ranking system which you have nicely highlighted. Beating teams such as Fiji, Vanuatu is NOT the same as beating teams like Germany, Spain etc. Very very different. But the system does not provide for the ranking of the other team played against since it is not set-up to do this. As for Australia outplaying Italy - sure. I agree. But one game is hardly a moniker on which to hang your hat! As for your knowledge of the game, wog ball is a term I have never heard in many years, and it may interest you to know that like the USA, women's football is and has been the fastest growing sport amongst kids in Australia for years and boys football is rapidly getting there too. AFL remains predominantly Victorian, and rugby other states. Same as the USA - it's an easy game to play (jumpers for goalposts and all that) and thus easy to adopt. At some stage football will take over as being the number one sport in Australia, because it will transcend boundaries and cultures - AFL remains Vic-based and rugby the eastern states - predominantly. Your comments about 100% are nonsense of course but others have said that as well. I'm very pleased for the way Australia have come up the rankings and it is only right they have with the massive European influx. The FFA are well organised and will be building the game too. The biggest hurdle to Australia remains its geographic location... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.