Debate - World footy rankings 2008 - other countries to consider

Welcome to World Footy News Tuesday, September 15 2026 @ 05:50 pm ACST

Debate - World footy rankings 2008 - other countries to consider | 22 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Comments are closed and no new posts are allowed.

Debate - World footy rankings 2008 - other countries to consider

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Wednesday, February 10 2010 @ 03:19 pm ACDT

We could go on for ever discussing the relative strengths of the various nations now playing Aussie Rules and any World Ranking based on whose point of view we consider is always a problem. Any ranking system must be based on actual performance and as the only series of matches that have been played with the same rules are the IC 's. But there have been many matches that have been played where both nations have accepted that the rules were such that they accepted the match as an 'International' or 'test'.
I have applied an modified Rugby World Ranking system to many such matches and the IC's and come up with a ranking based on actual performance over time. It does have some differences to that shown in the IC's . I have tried to use only matches considered as 'Internationals' and ones where the bulk of players were nationals(where known) and avoided 9-a-side matches (where known), have accepted some (i think) 12-a-side 14-a-side and 15-a-side matches. Standings at end of 2009 playing season is: not including Australia.
1. Denmark. 55.77 ranking points Played most matches.
2. New Zealand 53.63
3. Papua New Guinea 53.44
4. Great Britain 52.67
5. United States 52.15
6. Germany 52.11 Recent entry to rankings
7. Sweden 50.21 Recent entry to rankings
8. Ireland 49.99
9. Canada 47.12
10 Nauru 45.59
11. Samoa 44.04
12. South Africa 43.00
13. Norway 42.00 based on only 1 match win
14. Peace Team 40.67
15. Czech Republic 40.00 based on only 1 match loss
16. Finland 39.01
17. Japan 37.92
18. China 37.82
19. India 33.26
20. Spain 31.71

Little or no evidence for other nations in World Footy News or The Footy Record to support inclusion to ranking scheme.
I have replaced 15pt win bonus of Rugby World Ranking with 40pts win bonus.
I have stuck with IC bonus as in Rugby World Cupto give it it level of importance and player qualifying rules their due.
First match included Great Britain d Denmark 16/7/94
Last match included Great Britain d Denmark 5/10/09

If Footy World News was to publish a Ranking similar and set some qualifying rules/standards for inclusion of matches to the ranking scheme then I believe it would encourage all nations to play their 'Internationals' under those standards and then a better and more accurate World Ranking would evolve encouraging nations like many in Asia to include more nationals and fewer expats (even tho I believe there is a place for expats in national teams as long as they have lived(say no less than 5 years) in their new country for an agreed upon qualifying time, some thing the new EAFE might come up with).
I am only to pleased to share my calculations with all so that you are able to see which matches I have include and am willing to make changes if he evidence can be supported to make the ranking scheme more accurate based on matches played. I am sure that some matches might not really qualify and others left out that should be included.
cam

Debate - World footy rankings 2008 - other countries to consider

Authored by: Aaron Richard
on Wednesday, February 10 2010 @ 09:30 pm ACDT

Regardless what rugby or any other professional sport do, these rankings are on a different planet to the actual relative strengths of the national teams in Australian rules out there.

Denmark would not come within 100 points of PNG or NZ. Also, you've got Norway in there, who have only played one international, and not under IC rules, yet they're above people who've played games with a full squad of all locals.

Debate - World footy rankings 2008 - other countries to consider

Authored by: Aaron Richard
on Thursday, February 11 2010 @ 08:42 am ACDT

Cam, having another look at your rankings, I think the problem with your formula is just that they go back too far. E.g. South Africa, who are realistically top 5 at the current point in time, are a long way down the list - presumably because they got flogged in every game at the IC02 when they were at a very early stage of development.

How would the table look if you just crunch the numbers going back to, say, the 2005 IC?

Debate - World footy rankings 2008 - other countries to consider

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Saturday, February 13 2010 @ 02:16 am ACDT

Thanks for your efforts there Cam - obviously a lot of time has gone into it.

We did canvas a lot of the issues you discuss but I guess we came to the opposite conclusion. You're saying a list must be based on fixed tight applied criteria and results leading to very few games counting, and it comes up with a list that doesn't really indicate where countries stand, but offers the hope that it pushes them to play games under the rules established by the list.

But in the short to medium term they just won't do that. Many prefer or can only play 9s, and extending to include matches older than 2 or 3 years doesn't really have much meaning, and you do have to be very careful which games get included - a team named as a national side might not be widely recognised as such and may not be as strong.

So we decided that the only practical solution was to set a more generous criteria, but then more rigorously make sure it was met before including a game, and then given the sparse nature of the data, make sensible extrapolations. Then with all that in our heads, have a vote amongst our staff who follow the scene fairly closely.

To me, it's the most exhaustive and realistic list. We don't claim it to be official - none exists and can't really because of the reasons you list and all the issues we discussed in the stories leading up to the final results. But I reckon ours serves as a pretty reasonable unofficial guide. If someone says, who are the best countries in the world, pointing them at our list will answer their question.

Since this has been raised, and given the sparse data for 2009, would people like to see an end of 2009 list or should we let 2008 remain through until the end of 2010, and await IC2011 for an update?

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

RSS news	RSS events
Twitter	Facebook

World Footy News

Search

Translate

User Functions

Events

Featured Sites

Older Stories

Friday 11-Apr

Sunday 30-Mar

Thursday 27-Mar

Friday 21-Mar

Thursday 06-Mar

Wednesday 05-Feb

Tuesday 04-Feb

Socials

Who's Online

Random Image

What's New

Articles last 2 weeks

Comments last 2 weeks

Links last 2 weeks

Advertisements