new FIFA ranking system and AFC

[gol_kuchik]

World cup ranking went through a major revision and the results were
published on July 12th. For a brief explanation of the changes and
frequently asked questions (FAQ) please visit:
http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statisti...3739,7,00.html
Here's a complete explanation of the ranking system: (check the pdf
file for all the information and example)
http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statisti...2540,3,00.html
finaly, the ranking published on July 12th can be found:
http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statisti....html?static=1
A simple question that is not posted in the FAQ is what is the ranking
used for?
The answer to that question for 2006 world cup was pretty much nothing.
This can be verified by examining the top seeds for each group. Czech
Republic for instance had a top 6 or better ranking for the bulk of 2005
yet it lost group lead to the lower ranked Italy. For the rest of the
seedings, the emphasis appeared to be on cross continent match ups and
the WC ranking played no role: Again Italy ranked 12, U.S 8,
Czech Republic 2 were in the same group while Ukraine ranked 40the Spain
ranked 6th and Tunasia ranked 28th were also in the same group.
The ranking may however effect per continent quotas for WC participation
in the future. Here's where Asia may be at a major disadvantage.
The new ranking system is heavily tilted in favor of more recent results.
Results of the last 12 months count in full and those for the previous
years count half etc. (1st year 100%, 2nd year 50%, 3rd year 30% and 4th
year 20%). This approach hurts the ranking of Asian teams more than
any other continent the closer they get to WC. Based on new AFC calendar,
Asian Cup will be played in 2007. This explains the sudden drop in ranking
of all Asian teams, while African teams and South American teams fresh out
of their continental matches are enjoying an improved ranking. Also some
continent (CONCAF) holds its continental cup (Gold Cup) every two years,
which helps raise the ranking of member teams like U.S and Mexico tremdendously.
One positive aspect of the new ranking system is its transparency as well
as simplicity of compution, which allows fans to determine their teams ranking
accurately prior to their scheduled release.
Many Asian team fans, were shokced to find out the hugely diminsed
ranking of their favorite teams in the July ranking. Based on the
new methodology and AFCs calender, although we will witness a sharp rise
in the ranking of top finishers in the upcoming Asian cup, unfortunately we
have to get used to the lower numbers. Two solutions to the problem are
more frequent continental tournements, or a much stronger showing at the WC.

[Hajagha]

[gol_kuchik]

It's more realistic in my eyes. A glance at it, I say we lose more than 5 games of 10 to 95% of the teams ranked higher than us and win more than 5 games out of 10 to 95% of the teams ranked less than us.
The previous one was a joke where was abused by some coaches/fans. I still laugh at Branko's comments about Iran being ranked 20th because of his "hard work" and "intelligence”.
Still the accuracy is around 10 (which is coming from the unpredictable nature of football) where the last one was more than 50 and made it a joke than a ranking system.

Well, let's get over Branko. I don't think he will be our coach and we all need to focus
on the future. However, if you do the quick math, and if we finish 3rd like we did in
the last Asian Cup, at the end of 2007 you may find us right back in the 20's if not teens.
Same will be true for teams like U.S and Mexico. The difference is, we would enjoy
the high ranking for a much shorter period of time for two reasons.

1-We have fewer friendlies (thanks to Branko no one at least few with higher ranking
than us, want to play our team).
2-The effect of Asian Cup success (if any) will diminish over the 2008 2009 season.

BTW, how did you come up with the 10 vs 50 accuracy model? I am curious. Certainly
new system needs time to show its accuracy and may prove a lot more useful, but I
don't know what mathematical/statistical model you used to come up with those numbers.?

[Hajagha]

BTW, how did you come up with the 10 vs 50 accuracy model? I am curious.

Well, last model, any team could be much stronger/weaker than any other team with 50 ranking different. Now, such a accuracy reduced to 10. In the other words, we easily could be 42 or 52 (10 difference), with not much of compliant. In previous one we went up all the way to 20th and could have dropped to 70th again with not much surprise and just laughing at the chart.

You are right this formula yet to prove itself. Let see what will happen with the chart next months.

[gol_kuchik]

Continuing with the ranking analysis, a flaw in the formula is that average
strength is used for both higher strength as well as lower strength teams.
Here is an example:

Assume both Italian team (ranked number 2 with the regional strength 1)
as well TM (ranked 47 with regional strenth .85) play against
Brazil and win.

The number of points Italy would have earned in this friendly win would be

1*3*2*100*1=600

however Iran would only earn:
1*3*2*100*(1+.85)/2=555!

So for equal play we won't get equal points?! It is understandable the
regional strength has to be factor for Brazil when it plays Iran and wins,
but why should that apply to a presumably weaker region team when it plays
against stronger region?

[Hajagha]

The other way around makes sense. I mean any team regional strength become a facor for the other team. So, by beating a team from Europe or S.America (if they have the same factor) you get 100% of the points but beating a team from Asia you get 85%.

In this way:

Iran and italy both will get:

1*3*2*100*1=600

But if Iran play Italy and lose, italy will only get 555 bcz of the 85% factor:

1*3*2*100*(1+.85)/2=555!

[gol_kuchik]

The other way around makes sense. I mean any team regional strength become a facor for the other team. So, by beating a team from Europe or S.America (if they have the same factor) you get 100% of the points but beating a team from Asia you get 85%.
In this way:
Iran and italy both will get:
1*3*2*100*1=600
But if Iran play Italy and lose, italy will only get 555 bcz of the 85% factor:
1*3*2*100*(1+.85)/2=555!

Almost! If Iran loses to Italy in a friendly, Italy will only get only 425:

1*3*1.53*(1+.85)/2*100=425

The difference is, you used 2 as the opponent strength where as Irans strength
is (200-47)/2=1.53

But you are correct that the formula works fine for a strong team beating weaker
team, but not the reverse.

[Hadi]

This ranking is more realistic indeed