FIFA Ranking Thread.

[Padams]

Canada has 2 wins (Luxembourg, Austria) and a draw (USA) in their last 3 matches (all on the road).

Congrats on your hard fought 1-nil victory against the mighty Luxembourg, ranked 194 in the world  

Look at their record in WC qualifying last year:
Team MP W D L GF GA Pts
 Portugal 12 9 3 0 35 5 30
 Slovakia 12 6 5 1 24 8 23
 Russia 12 6 5 1 23 12 23
 Estonia 12 5 2 5 16 17 17
 Latvia 12 4 3 5 18 21 15
 Liechtenstein 12 2 2 8 13 23 8
 Luxembourg 12 0 0 12 5 48 0

Alyuh good we!!!  d man boastin how dey beat Luxembourg 

[kicker]

Take a look at the best 16 teams in the world cup at this stage you still Ghana Aust Mex Arg Braz Ecua, then the best 8 teams in the world, then 4 - 2 and the number one winner Italy, it's reality so kicker give de Forum Fag sleeping next to you a good kick, he only dreaming bout berlin an world cup done....

When comments like that set in, then I realize it's not even worth debating and exchanging messages with you.......You missin' the point, you're not making sense & now you're being unnecessarily obscene....

enjoy yuhself, I done.

[Marcos]

Take a look at the best 16 teams in the world cup at this stage you still Ghana Aust Mex Arg Braz Ecua, then the best 8 teams in the world, then 4 - 2 and the number one winner Italy, it's reality so kicker give de Forum Fag sleeping next to you a good kick, he only dreaming bout berlin an world cup done....

Dred, is this English?
This is so poorly constructed that it is actually incomprehensible.
What is a Forum Fag?

It's posts like these that are discouraging people from posting.
shame

ON DE BLOCK need to get off d block/crack and fast

[Filho]

Take a look at the best 16 teams in the world cup at this stage you still Ghana Aust Mex Arg Braz Ecua, then the best 8 teams in the world, then 4 - 2 and the number one winner Italy, it's reality so kicker give de Forum Fag sleeping next to you a good kick, he only dreaming bout berlin an world cup done....

Dred, is this English?
This is so poorly constructed that it is actually incomprehensible.
What is a Forum Fag?

It's posts like these that are discouraging people from posting.
shame

ON DE BLOCK need to get off d block/crack and fast

some people get threatened when someone disagrees with thema nd the only way they know how to respond is to insult them and attack....

so let's see...the best 32 teams are the ones in the WC, right?.
1) the host nation qualifies automatically. there is no qualification criteria there...does that automatically make the host one of the best 32 teams in the world without playing a game?

2) ONDEBLOCK...you mixing up the concept of World Champion and best team in the World. The winner of the World Cup is World Champion for 4 years, but is not considered the best team for that period unless they prove it on the field. If Italy loses every game between now and 2010, noone with a brain can call them the best team in the world...but until that WC final is over in 2010...they are still World Champions and that is their bragging right. Greece is clearly not the best team in Europe. recent results have proven this...but they will be European Champs until the next final in 2008. Same concept.

3) There are teams that did not qualify for the WC that are better than T&T. That is reality ON DE BLOCK...and you know that. We do have bragging rights...we qualified for WC 2006 and Cameroun didn't...so it doh matter if they beat us the next time we meet...they cannot take that away from us...and we can sing that in the stadium and rub it in their faces. But if they outplayus and rest 4 on us, we are NOT better than them...but they still didn't qualify for Germay..we did. I think that is the point you trying to make...if not..take win...this done discussed to death

3)

[ribbit]

i think i see what point odb is making.

alot of man making claims that cameroon is better than t&t. that a bunch of european sides that didn't make it are better than t&t. that teams that did not make it to germany are better than t&t. all this without the teams playing a match on the field.

at the end of the day, world cup qualification is a concrete achievement - not idle speculation which is what is passing for logical sound judgement in this thread so far.

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

but there are those that prefer their own judgement and the judgement of others over the results on the pitch. they use this to justify that t&t is not among the best. probably the same ppl will tell you that greece wasn't the best team in europe when they won the european championship.

the difference is between concrete achievements and opinion. everyone can follow their own standard.

[kicker]

i think i see what point odb is making.

alot of man making claims that cameroon is better than t&t. that a bunch of european sides that didn't make it are better than t&t. that teams that did not make it to germany are better than t&t. all this without the teams playing a match on the field.

at the end of the day, world cup qualification is a concrete achievement - not idle speculation which is what is passing for logical sound judgement in this thread so far.

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

but there are those that prefer their own judgement and the judgement of others over the results on the pitch. they use this to justify that t&t is not among the best. probably the same ppl will tell you that greece wasn't the best team in europe when they won the european championship.

the difference is between concrete achievements and opinion. everyone can follow their own standard.

Very weak point.

T&T finishing behind Mexico, US & Costa Rica  vs Ireland finishing behind France, Switzerland & Israel in their qualifying is not a concrete measure of T&T being better than Ireland.........or a better example Romania finishing beind CZEC & Holland.

If Greece is the best team in Europe, why didn't they qualify for W.C. ?
How did Slovenia & Wales beat us..and they didn't make it to the World Cup ? What is more concrete ?
How did Morocco beat the U.S......and not make it to the World Cup ? What is more concrete ?

W.C. qualification is monumental, but it's not a concrete measure of the 32 best teams in the World.....AND THE ONLY REASON PEOPLE FIGHTING THAT DOWN IS BECAUSE T&T QUALIFIED FOR THE WORLD CUP THIS YEAR-FULL STOP...ADMIT IT AND DONE THIS TALK FOR GOOD

W.C. is a tournament contested by the best teams in each region.....it's that simple.

[Filho]

i think i see what point odb is making.

alot of man making claims that cameroon is better than t&t. that a bunch of european sides that didn't make it are better than t&t. that teams that did not make it to germany are better than t&t. all this without the teams playing a match on the field.

at the end of the day, world cup qualification is a concrete achievement - not idle speculation which is what is passing for logical sound judgement in this thread so far.

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

but there are those that prefer their own judgement and the judgement of others over the results on the pitch. they use this to justify that t&t is not among the best. probably the same ppl will tell you that greece wasn't the best team in europe when they won the european championship.

the difference is between concrete achievements and opinion. everyone can follow their own standard.

really? hmmm. we lost to Wales and Slovenia on the eve of the World Cup..that is something very concrete. We came up against one shit side and one OK side and lost both times. Pure facts..you cannot dispute that...I guess they deserve to be considered better than us. They 'proved' their superiority on the field...but wait...they didn't qualify for the world cup. Sorry, we are better than them because a team that does not qualify for the WC cannot be better than a team that has...right? Real results must mean nothing.

We all watch a lot of football and know much better than this...I have never seen India play Brazil but I will tell you that Brazil is a better team. My second point is, we all watch enough football to make educated judgements even if two teams have not met. It is not idle speculation. And noone is trying to belittle T&T's achievement.....that is a sad attempt to try and assign shame to make a point in an argument. Make your point without trying to infer self-loathing. That is just lame

 

[Marcos]

"I have never seen India play Brazil but I will tell you that Brazil is a better team."

Not that side Perreira put out against France.
India woulda run rings around dat side 

[kicker]

"I have never seen India play Brazil but I will tell you that Brazil is a better team."

Not that side Perreira put out against France.
India woulda run rings around dat side 

haha......India might have da side hot...

[berris]

really? hmmm. we lost to Wales and Slovenia on the eve of the World Cup..that is something very concrete. We came up against one shit side and one OK side and lost both times. Pure facts..you cannot dispute that...I guess they deserve to be considered better than us. They 'proved' their superiority on the field...but wait...they didn't qualify for the world cup. Sorry, we are better than them because a team that does not qualify for the WC cannot be better than a team that has...right? Real results must mean nothing.

We all watch a lot of football and know much better than this...I have never seen India play Brazil but I will tell you that Brazil is a better team. My second point is, we all watch enough football to make educated judgements even if two teams have not met. It is not idle speculation. And noone is trying to belittle T&T's achievement.....that is a sad attempt to try and assign shame to make a point in an argument. Make your point without trying to infer self-loathing. That is just lame

 

Yes we lost to Wales and Slovania but what was the significance of those games, we got 3 from the Checz as far as I cud remember those were all meaningless games.the only thing concrete about that is those games meant absolutely nothing,why don't you talk about what we  did in our first real competive game or is that not concrete enough ?

[Midknight]

Yes we lost to Wales and Slovania but what was the significance of those games, we got 3 from the Checz as far as I cud remember those were all meaningless games.the only thing concrete about that is those games meant absolutely nothing,why don't you talk about what we  did in our first real competive game or is that not concrete enough ?

So let me guess because we draw Sweden in our 'first real competetive game' we should be equal to them in the ranking? But wait, we loss 2-0 to Paraguay in our 'third real competetive game' so they should be ranked ahead of us and also ahead of Sweden. But wait, Sweden draw with England, who beat Paraguay so how come...

Hoss give it a rest...

[real madness]

This thread is real kicks...kicker said it in very simple terms....The WC tournament is contested by the best teams in each region.

I would like to add that some regions are stronger than others therefore due to a limit on the number of spots available to each region there are very good teams that do not qualify for the WC.  A few examples are Uruguay, Nigeria, Cameroon, Denmark,Greece.

So the WC does not include the best 32 teams in the world.  Saying it is the best 32 teams in the world at that time is FANTASTIC RUBBISH. TnT finished 27th in the WC, does that mean we are the 27th best team in the world?

[berris]

Seeing that it have ppl that want to down play the teams in the WC as not the best in de world, then why have qualifications to get in ? why fifa just doh pick the top 32 teams based on the fifa world rankings, becuz as some ah all put it, is not the best teams playing in the WC.
If yuh fail to qualify for ah WC then you were not good or better than the teams that did,in or outta of yuh region.Im not saying TnT are better than the teams that did not qualify but TnT did what they had to do to get to the WC don't try and dilute that achievement becuz other higher ranked teams fail to do what we did.

[berris]

This thread is real kicks...kicker said it in very simple terms....The WC tournament is contested by the best teams in each region.

I would like to add that some regions are stronger than others therefore due to a limit on the number of spots available to each region there are very good teams that do not qualify for the WC.  A few examples are Uruguay, Nigeria, Cameroon, Denmark,Greece.

So the WC does not include the best 32 teams in the world.  Saying it is the best 32 teams in the world at that time is FANTASTIC RUBBISH. TnT finished 27th in the WC, does that mean we are the 27th best team in the world?

Real  yuh right is not the best teams playing in the WC I agree 100% But if yuh have a competition that include the whole world and after the qualififying rounds 32 teams are left standing,what would you call those 32 in relation to the competion.

[berris]

Yes we lost to Wales and Slovania but what was the significance of those games, we got 3 from the Checz as far as I cud remember those were all meaningless games.the only thing concrete about that is those games meant absolutely nothing,why don't you talk about what we  did in our first real competive game or is that not concrete enough ?

So let me guess because we draw Sweden in our 'first real competetive game' we should be equal to them in the ranking? But wait, we loss 2-0 to Paraguay in our 'third real competetive game' so they should be ranked ahead of us and also ahead of Sweden. But wait, Sweden draw with England, who beat Paraguay so how come...

Hoss give it a rest...

Take win boy,if you hear me say we should be equal to Sweden in de rankins den it eh make sense replying to you.

[Midknight]

Real  yuh right is not the best teams playing in the WC I agree 100% But if yuh have a competition that include the whole world and after the qualififying rounds 32 teams are left standing,what would you call those 32 in relation to the competion.

mmm...qualified ?

[Midknight]

Yes we lost to Wales and Slovania but what was the significance of those games, we got 3 from the Checz as far as I cud remember those were all meaningless games.the only thing concrete about that is those games meant absolutely nothing,why don't you talk about what we  did in our first real competive game or is that not concrete enough ?

So let me guess because we draw Sweden in our 'first real competetive game' we should be equal to them in the ranking? But wait, we loss 2-0 to Paraguay in our 'third real competetive game' so they should be ranked ahead of us and also ahead of Sweden. But wait, Sweden draw with England, who beat Paraguay so how come...

Hoss give it a rest...

Take win boy,if you hear me say we should be equal to Sweden in de rankins den it eh make sense replying to you.

I never say you say anything. You ask to talk about what we did in our first competetive game. Thats what i did using what some of the people on this board like to consider logic...

[kicker]

Seeing that it have ppl that want to down play the teams in the WC as not the best in de world, then why have qualifications to get in ? why fifa just doh pick the top 32 teams based on the fifa world rankings, becuz as some ah all put it, is not the best teams playing in the WC.
If yuh fail to qualify for ah WC then you were not good or better than the teams that did,in or outta of yuh region.Im not saying TnT are better than the teams that did not qualify but TnT did what they had to do to get to the WC don't try and dilute that achievement becuz other higher ranked teams fail to do what we did.

That's the entire problem with this thread..people looking at it like it's a belittling of T&T's achievement and getting defensive......

That's not the point.

The point is that as much as FIFA would love the World Cup to be a competition amongst the Worlds best 32 teams...at this point in time with the disparity in regions, it's just not the case.

The winner of the World Cup can claim to be the best in the World, because he competed against the best teams FROM EACH REGION and won......It's actually a pretty strong claim that is difficult to argue against

Qualifying teams could boast of being in the top 32 in the World if they wish....In theory fine, but as a claim it's a little more difficult to back up.........(please don't ask the difference between the two claims)......because of glaring imperfections in the qualification system.

Final thoughts

1. Bahrain was a whisper away from Qualifying for the World Cup 2006. Is Bahrain honestly anything close to being a top 32 team in the World ?

2. Had CONCACAF not had the extra half spot, T&T would not have made it to the World Cup. Are we saying that the difference between being in the top 32 teams in the World and not being in the top 32, is a FIFA ruling ?......If yes, then we should not have a damn word to say against the FIFA rankings......

[lickslikefire]

I finding the rankings looking fair.  That said, there will never be rankings that satisfy everybody.

I feel men getting confused/vex for 2 reasons:

(1) People feel we drop in rankings

Yuh can't think of it as we drop in rankings, cause it's a new ranking calculation...so yuh cah say we drop in rankings because yuh comparing 2 rankings that are calculated on different basis.....

(2) People think we should be ranked higher, cause they seeing teams that ahead of us that we previously beat....in other words, men just venting cause they feel we better than a next team thus we should be ranked higher...fellas all yuh have to realize that is a pack of assness...

Yuh cah just look at the results head to head btwn to 2 teams, and claim we should be ahead of that team....the system is based on points and yuh get points by beating/tieing teams....e.g. we beat panama 5-0, 2-0, 1-0....but wait Panama ahead of us.....why.....

answer: cause they have more points....and they get more points than us simply because they consistently beating/tieing teams more efficiently than us...when last did we consistently get good results(besides the latter part of our qualifying campaign) in the last 4 years....

Ghana beat Czech in their last game...should they be ranked ahead of them too?...

[Midknight]

Seeing that it have ppl that want to down play the teams in the WC as not the best in de world, then why have qualifications to get in ? why fifa just doh pick the top 32 teams based on the fifa world rankings, becuz as some ah all put it, is not the best teams playing in the WC.
If yuh fail to qualify for ah WC then you were not good or better than the teams that did,in or outta of yuh region.Im not saying TnT are better than the teams that did not qualify but TnT did what they had to do to get to the WC don't try and dilute that achievement becuz other higher ranked teams fail to do what we did.

That's the entire problem with this thread..people looking at it like it's a belittling of T&T's achievement and getting defensive......

That's not the point.

The point is that as much as FIFA would love the World Cup to be a competition amongst the Worlds best 32 teams...at this point in time with the disparity in regions, it's just not the case.

The winner of the World Cup can claim to be the best in the World, because he competed against the best teams FROM EACH REGION and won......It's actually a pretty strong claim that is difficult to argue against

Qualifying teams could boast of being in the top 32 in the World if they wish....In theory fine, but as a claim it's a little more difficult to back up.........(please don't ask the difference between the two claims)......because of glaring imperfections in the qualification system.

Final thoughts

1. Bahrain was a whisper away from Qualifying for the World Cup 2006. Is Bahrain honestly anything close to being a top 32 team in the World ?

2. Had CONCACAF not had the extra half spot, T&T would not have made it to the World Cup. Are we saying that the difference between being in the top 32 teams in the World and not being in the top 32, is a FIFA ruling ?......If yes, then we should not have a damn word to say against the FIFA rankings......

 

[berris]

Seeing that it have ppl that want to down play the teams in the WC as not the best in de world, then why have qualifications to get in ? why fifa just doh pick the top 32 teams based on the fifa world rankings, becuz as some ah all put it, is not the best teams playing in the WC.
If yuh fail to qualify for ah WC then you were not good or better than the teams that did,in or outta of yuh region.Im not saying TnT are better than the teams that did not qualify but TnT did what they had to do to get to the WC don't try and dilute that achievement becuz other higher ranked teams fail to do what we did.

That's the entire problem with this thread..people looking at it like it's a belittling of T&T's achievement and getting defensive......

That's not the point.

The point is that as much as FIFA would love the World Cup to be a competition amongst the Worlds best 32 teams...at this point in time with the disparity in regions, it's just not the case.

The winner of the World Cup can claim to be the best in the World, because he competed against the best teams FROM EACH REGION and won......It's actually a pretty strong claim that is difficult to argue against

Qualifying teams could boast of being in the top 32 in the World if they wish....In theory fine, but as a claim it's a little more difficult to back up.........(please don't ask the difference between the two claims)......because of glaring imperfections in the qualification system.

Final thoughts

1. Bahrain was a whisper away from Qualifying for the World Cup 2006. Is Bahrain honestly anything close to being a top 32 team in the World ?

2. Had CONCACAF not had the extra half spot, T&T would not have made it to the World Cup. Are we saying that the difference between being in the top 32 teams in the World and not being in the top 32, is a FIFA ruling ?......If yes, then we should not have a damn word to say against the FIFA rankings......

I hear yuh kicker,and I agree wid you and Real M, it have better teams out there than the final 32. That being said ......just some food for thought ... say Mexico won the WC this year, would you consider them the best team in the world ? ..even though they came out of the weakest if not one of the weakest regions to qualify ?
.......now replace Mexico with TnT  ...................just ah thought !!

[ribbit]

i think i see what point odb is making.

alot of man making claims that cameroon is better than t&t. that a bunch of european sides that didn't make it are better than t&t. that teams that did not make it to germany are better than t&t. all this without the teams playing a match on the field.

at the end of the day, world cup qualification is a concrete achievement - not idle speculation which is what is passing for logical sound judgement in this thread so far.

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

but there are those that prefer their own judgement and the judgement of others over the results on the pitch. they use this to justify that t&t is not among the best. probably the same ppl will tell you that greece wasn't the best team in europe when they won the european championship.

the difference is between concrete achievements and opinion. everyone can follow their own standard.

really? hmmm. we lost to Wales and Slovenia on the eve of the World Cup..that is something very concrete. We came up against one shit side and one OK side and lost both times. Pure facts..you cannot dispute that...I guess they deserve to be considered better than us. They 'proved' their superiority on the field...but wait...they didn't qualify for the world cup. Sorry, we are better than them because a team that does not qualify for the WC cannot be better than a team that has...right? Real results must mean nothing.

We all watch a lot of football and know much better than this...I have never seen India play Brazil but I will tell you that Brazil is a better team. My second point is, we all watch enough football to make educated judgements even if two teams have not met. It is not idle speculation. And noone is trying to belittle T&T's achievement.....that is a sad attempt to try and assign shame to make a point in an argument. Make your point without trying to infer self-loathing. That is just lame

filho, back up the train. why were we playing wales and slovenia? because we had already qualified for wc2006.

the point i'm trying to make is that tournaments are prizes by which one could judge the greatness of a team. the measure of "best" is being bandied about alot but i can tell by the way that it is used that it involves some speculative judgement.

[ribbit]

i think i see what point odb is making.

alot of man making claims that cameroon is better than t&t. that a bunch of european sides that didn't make it are better than t&t. that teams that did not make it to germany are better than t&t. all this without the teams playing a match on the field.

at the end of the day, world cup qualification is a concrete achievement - not idle speculation which is what is passing for logical sound judgement in this thread so far.

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

but there are those that prefer their own judgement and the judgement of others over the results on the pitch. they use this to justify that t&t is not among the best. probably the same ppl will tell you that greece wasn't the best team in europe when they won the european championship.

the difference is between concrete achievements and opinion. everyone can follow their own standard.

Very weak point.

T&T finishing behind Mexico, US & Costa Rica  vs Ireland finishing behind France, Switzerland & Israel in their qualifying is not a concrete measure of T&T being better than Ireland.........or a better example Romania finishing beind CZEC & Holland.

well here you are going back into the hypothetical instead of staying in reality. did we have to play ireland for a spot in the world cup? would we ever have to play ireland to get to the world cup? ireland is in a different conference. you are getting tied up trying to sort out who's better for fixtures that don't even exist!

again, returning to my point, some people prefer to use world cup qualification as the standard for the quality of a side. you are free to stick to your imaginary pairings.

If Greece is the best team in Europe, why didn't they qualify for W.C. ?

should have slipped in the phrase "in 2004".

How did Slovenia & Wales beat us..and they didn't make it to the World Cup ? What is more concrete ?
How did Morocco beat the U.S......and not make it to the World Cup ? What is more concrete ?

W.C. qualification is monumental, but it's not a concrete measure of the 32 best teams in the World.....AND THE ONLY REASON PEOPLE FIGHTING THAT DOWN IS BECAUSE T&T QUALIFIED FOR THE WORLD CUP THIS YEAR-FULL STOP...ADMIT IT AND DONE THIS TALK FOR GOOD

W.C. is a tournament contested by the best teams in each region.....it's that simple.

what, teams should play their best games during the friendlies but when it's world cup qualifiers they can fete? morocco, slovenia and wales ... all after qualification was obtained. so obvious - why do i have to point this out?

again, some choose to look at world cup qualification as the standard for excellence. ask someone taking esl what "standard" means if you are stuck.

[Filho]

i think i see what point odb is making.

alot of man making claims that cameroon is better than t&t. that a bunch of european sides that didn't make it are better than t&t. that teams that did not make it to germany are better than t&t. all this without the teams playing a match on the field.

at the end of the day, world cup qualification is a concrete achievement - not idle speculation which is what is passing for logical sound judgement in this thread so far.

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

but there are those that prefer their own judgement and the judgement of others over the results on the pitch. they use this to justify that t&t is not among the best. probably the same ppl will tell you that greece wasn't the best team in europe when they won the european championship.

the difference is between concrete achievements and opinion. everyone can follow their own standard.

really? hmmm. we lost to Wales and Slovenia on the eve of the World Cup..that is something very concrete. We came up against one shit side and one OK side and lost both times. Pure facts..you cannot dispute that...I guess they deserve to be considered better than us. They 'proved' their superiority on the field...but wait...they didn't qualify for the world cup. Sorry, we are better than them because a team that does not qualify for the WC cannot be better than a team that has...right? Real results must mean nothing.

We all watch a lot of football and know much better than this...I have never seen India play Brazil but I will tell you that Brazil is a better team. My second point is, we all watch enough football to make educated judgements even if two teams have not met. It is not idle speculation. And noone is trying to belittle T&T's achievement.....that is a sad attempt to try and assign shame to make a point in an argument. Make your point without trying to infer self-loathing. That is just lame

filho, back up the train. why were we playing wales and slovenia? because we had already qualified for wc2006.

the point i'm trying to make is that tournaments are prizes by which one could judge the greatness of a team. the measure of "best" is being bandied about alot but i can tell by the way that it is used that it involves some speculative judgement.

Boss, you know exactly what my point is, even if you do not agree with using friendlies as an example. Trust me, this is all about people thinking we dissing T&T accomplishments...which is not true. PLus, everyone who discounting friendlies only doing so because it suits the argument they are trying to make at this point in time, becasue I telling you if T&T did not qualify for a WC, but beat some big sides who had qualified in friendlies leading up to the Cup, then those same friendlies would have some meaning for sure.  Anyone who wants to believe that the teams in the WC are the 32 best teams in the world...then good. South Africa, well done..you get a boost into the top 32 teams in the world without playing a game. Nice. Read kicker last email..if you doh get that...cool. That is how the world turns..we cannot all agree. I done

[Bakes]

What wrong with allyuh!!??

Allyuh does just have some knee jerk reaction without even doin ah ounce of research... or trying to understand....

I saying this 2 months now.... that we supposed to drop ever since dey annonunce de new ranking procedure.... Midknight also been saying de same ting.....

This is about right..... It certainly better than de old rankings.......... Allyuh get over it

I does have to laff at some of de assness people duz be posting sumtimes oui...I dunno how or why people could criticize the ranking when TnT play absolute shit in qualifying (save fuh some well-timed victories), and pull real stones in the pre-WC friendlies.  All of that counts...because we salvage some respectability in the Cup doh mean we should automatically be among the upper echelon.  I agree with you...knee-jerk reactionism absent critical thought.  Just as you can't penalize a team for having a rough stretch (as say in the WC)...so too you can't overly reward another team for having a relatively nice run.

The race is neither for the swift nor the fast...let's see TnT elevate their play consistently before we start railing against the system.

[Bakes]

First of all I think that the 32 teams who made it to the world cup should be ranked in that order and then everyone else.

get serious .... That's something a primary school student would say....

You and I know the World Cup is not about the 32 best teams in the World....I can't believe this hour of the day, people still talking that kinda nonsense.

Lmao...

[kicker]

I hear yuh kicker,and I agree wid you and Real M, it have better teams out there than the final 32. That being said ......just some food for thought ... say Mexico won the WC this year, would you consider them the best team in the world ? ..even though they came out of the weakest if not one of the weakest regions to qualify ?
.......now replace Mexico with TnT  ...................just ah thought !!

I answered your question already: see below

The winner of the World Cup can claim to be the best in the World, because he competed against the best teams FROM EACH REGION and won......It's actually a pretty strong claim that is difficult to argue against

world cup qualification is a standard for a team's ability and a test of which teams are "the best". it is a real and concrete thing.

Very weak point.

T&T finishing behind Mexico, US & Costa Rica  vs Ireland finishing behind France, Switzerland & Israel in their qualifying is not a concrete measure of T&T being better than Ireland.........or a better example Romania finishing beind CZEC & Holland.

well here you are going back into the hypothetical instead of staying in reality. did we have to play ireland for a spot in the world cup? would we ever have to play ireland to get to the world cup? ireland is in a different conference. you are getting tied up trying to sort out who's better for fixtures that don't even exist!

again, returning to my point, some people prefer to use world cup qualification as the standard for the quality of a side. you are free to stick to your imaginary pairings.

You realize how you are contradicting yourself ? You said WC qualification is a concrete and real measure. I give an example of why it may not be...and then you say, I'm hypothesizing. That is no hypothesis. Those aren't imaginary pairings.....U serious ? Those are the actual World Cup 2006 qualifying groups......Did you even follow the qualifiers outside of CONCACAF ? I'll dumb down my point for you, if you can't follow logic- a concrete measure of who's better between T&T & Ireland would be a match between the two- not whether or not they qualified for the WC...as you implied.

If Greece is the best team in Europe, why didn't they qualify for W.C. ?

should have slipped in the phrase "in 2004".

So based on your reasoning, how do we decide at what point in 2006/2007/2008/2009 that Italy would no longer be the best team in the World ?

How did Slovenia & Wales beat us..and they didn't make it to the World Cup ? What is more concrete ?
How did Morocco beat the U.S......and not make it to the World Cup ? What is more concrete ?

what, teams should play their best games during the friendlies but when it's world cup qualifiers they can fete? morocco, slovenia and wales ... all after qualification was obtained. so obvious - why do i have to point this out?

By this logic, Trinidad would have beaten Slovenia if it were a WC qualifier ? How do you know that ? Whatever happened to the real and the concrete? You're contradicting your own self. I hope you realize how you deliberately choose to make no sense just to fight down common sense.

again, some choose to look at world cup qualification as the standard for excellence. ask someone taking esl what "standard" means if you are stuck.

Nice try at arrogance, but yuh talkin' a pile. Ask an esl student what "a pile" means if you're stuck...

Anyway, this has been over-talked. I done. T&T should be in the top 32 teams in the world. Happy ? (wasn't even my point to begin with)

[croc]

They could take their ranking and shove it where de sun dont shine..dats what I think of their new system..ah gorn.....

[sprog]

i am not surprised lets let our booots do the talking fifa on sh*t

[trinidad badboy]

that list is a set of nonsense