U.S. moves up to fourth in FIFA rankings

It is a complete travesty to be honest. But then again, since when have rankings been able to influence what happens on the pitch?

well see. the real test isn't that far away now.

complete list.

rank prevous rank pts mar pts apr 1 Brazil 0 830 -5 2 Czech Republic 0 779 -10 3 Netherlands 0 774 -14 4 USA 1 760 -4 5 Spain 1 759 -4 6 Mexico 1 758 -4 7 France 1 754 -6 8 Portugal 2 753 -2 8 Argentina -4 753 -12 10 England -1 744 -12 11 Denmark 3 738 2 12 Nigeria 0 737 -1 13 Turkey -2 733 -10 14 Italy -2 731 -7 15 Cameroon 0 723 -3 16 Sweden 0 717 -8 17 Japan 1 709 -3 18 Egypt -1 708 -6 19 Greece 2 699 -5 19 Germany 3 699 -1 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
21 Tunisia 3 694 -4 22 Iran -3 692 -13 22 Uruguay 1 692 -7 24 Croatia -5 690 -15 25 Romania 1 687 -4 26 Costa Rica -1 686 -8 27 Colombia 3 684 -2 28 Poland -2 682 -9 29 Senegal -1 681 -8 30 Korea Republic 1 678 -5 30 Republic of Ireland -1 678 -9 32 Côte d'Ivoire 0 668 -3 33 Paraguay 0 657 -9 34 Saudi Arabia 0 655 -5 35 Switzerland 0 651 -6 36 Morocco 1 649 -4 37 Russia -2 648 -9 38 Bulgaria 1 642 -1 39 Ecuador -1 636 -8 40 Norway -1 634 -9 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
41 Ukraine 1 616 -8 41 Honduras 2 616 -7 43 Slovakia -2 615 -12 44 Australia 0 614 -7 44 Jamaica 1 614 -6 46 Serbia and Montenegro 0 612 -4 47 Trinidad and Tobago 2 607 0 47 Israel 0 607 -8 49 Finland -1 604 -6 50 Ghana 0 602 -3 51 South Africa 1 598 -6 52 Guinea 4 597 3 52 Iraq 3 597 1 54 Bahrain 0 593 -6 55 Zimbabwe -2 590 -12 56 Zambia 1 583 -8 56 Belgium -6 583 -22 58 Angola 2 578 1 59 Togo -1 574 -6 59 Uzbekistan 2 574 1 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
61 Guatemala -3 572 -8 62 Scotland 0 564 -3 63 Bosnia-Herzegovina 1 563 -1 64 Belarus -1 559 -6 65 Mali -1 556 -8 66 China PR 5 549 0 67 Chile 0 548 -8 67 Peru -1 548 -9 69 Latvia -1 547 -8 70 Congo DR 4 546 -1 71 Slovenia -2 544 -10 71 Venezuela -1 544 -7 73 Kuwait -1 541 -7 74 Wales 2 540 -4 75 Hungary -3 538 -10 76 Austria -1 537 -8 76 Qatar 1 537 -6 78 United Arab Emirates 2 536 -1 79 Cuba -1 533 -8 79 Estonia 0 533 -6 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
81 Panama 0 526 -6 82 Oman -1 524 -8 83 Jordan 0 519 -6 84 Canada 1 517 0 85 Libya -1 515 -4 86 Albania 2 514 0 87 Algeria -2 511 -6 88 Korea DPR -1 509 -6 89 Burkina Faso 1 503 0 90 Syria -1 502 -4 91 FYR Macedonia 0 492 -5 92 Singapore 0 483 -1 93 Rwanda -1 478 -6 94 Kenya 0 476 -7 95 Sudan 0 473 -7 96 Northern Ireland 2 471 -1 97 Uganda 1 470 -2 97 Iceland 0 470 -7 99 Lithuania -3 465 -13 100 Cyprus -2 464 -8 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
101 Bolivia 0 461 -8 101 Georgia 3 461 2 103 Botswana -1 456 -6 104 Haiti -1 453 -7 104 Moldova 3 453 16 106 Gabon -1 452 -3 107 Malawi -1 441 -5 108 Thailand 0 440 5 109 Armenia 0 421 -6 110 Indonesia 0 407 -6 111 Congo 0 402 -5 112 Azerbaijan 2 395 3 113 Ethiopia -1 393 -4 114 Benin -1 389 -5 115 Palestine 6 387 10 116 Hong Kong -1 382 -1 117 India 1 379 -2 118 Barbados -1 377 -5 119 Turkmenistan -1 376 -5 120 New Zealand -5 374 -9 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
121 Lebanon -1 373 -7 122 Cape Verde Islands 0 364 -4 123 Malta -1 363 -5 124 Liechtenstein 0 361 -3 125 Tajikistan 16 358 61 125 Vietnam -1 358 -6 127 Malaysia -1 350 -4 128 Andorra -1 348 -5 128 El Salvador -1 348 -5 130 St. Lucia -1 336 -4 131 Yemen -1 331 -5 132 St. Kitts and Nevis -1 330 -4 133 Mozambique -1 328 -5 133 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 0 328 -4 135 Sri Lanka 10 324 46 136 Kazakhstan -2 320 -3 137 Maldives -1 317 -3 137 Faroe Islands -2 317 -4 139 Swaziland -2 314 -4 140 Fiji -2 309 -5 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
141 Liberia -2 308 -5 141 Bangladesh 2 308 14 143 Solomon Islands -3 296 -4 144 Tahiti -2 291 -5 145 Mauritius -1 276 -4 146 Kyrgyzstan 13 275 42 147 Vanuatu -1 260 -4 147 Lesotho -1 260 -4 149 Myanmar -1 258 -4 149 Burundi -1 258 -4 151 Madagascar -1 256 -5 152 Luxembourg -1 250 -3 153 Pakistan 2 247 8 154 Grenada -2 243 -4 155 Chinese Taipei 2 240 4 156 Nicaragua -3 239 -3 157 Surinam -4 238 -4 158 Antigua and Barbuda -3 236 -3 159 Chad 1 234 6 160 San Marino -2 232 -3 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
161 Equatorial Guinea 4 224 17 162 Bermuda -1 213 -3 163 Namibia -2 212 -4 164 Guyana -1 211 0 165 Sierra Leone -2 208 -3 166 Gambia 0 200 -3 167 Tanzania 0 194 -1 168 Papua New Guinea 0 187 -2 169 Nepal 6 184 33 170 Netherlands Antilles -1 180 -2 171 Eritrea -1 177 -3 172 Laos -1 176 -2 173 British Virgin Islands -1 171 -3 174 Dominica -1 167 -2 175 Dominican Republic -1 153 -2 176 Seychelles 0 148 -2 177 Niger 0 140 -2 178 Mauritania 0 136 -1 179 Mongolia 0 134 -2 180 Belize 0 131 -2 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
181 Central African Republic 0 130 -2 182 Cayman Islands 0 129 -2 183 Samoa 0 127 -3 184 Cambodia 4 113 19 185 Somalia -1 110 -1 186 Guinea-Bissau -1 107 -1 186 Tonga -1 107 -1 188 New Caledonia -1 102 -1 188 Afghanistan 1 102 18 190 Bhutan 0 89 6 191 Philippines 0 85 9 192 Macau 0 84 10 193 Brunei Darussalam 6 73 25 194 Bahamas -1 65 -2 195 Cook Islands -1 62 -2 196 Puerto Rico -1 61 -1 197 US Virgin Islands -1 56 -1 198 São Tomé e Príncipe -1 53 -2 199 Anguilla -1 51 -1 200 Djibouti 0 46 0 Rank Team +/-Rank Mar 06 Pts: Apr 06 +/-Pts: Mar 06
201 Aruba -1 45 -1 202 Montserrat 0 30 0 203 Guam 1 22 3 203 Turks and Caicos Islands 0 22 0 205 American Samoa 0

oldmonkey wrote: It is a complete travesty to be honest. But then again, since when have rankings been able to influence what happens on the pitch?

I agree - completely crazy. Well, the men will be separated from the boys come June.

How ironic in a way, because football (soccer) doesn't seem to get any coverage in the US, from what I hear. I heard that Japan is still in the top twenty, so I'm happy to hear that.

It's as if people forgot that Claudio Reyna is useless

USA, 4th best at footie?

BOSS BOSS ZE PLANE EEZ COMING ZE PLANE EEZ COMING

leather_girl wrote: How ironic in a way, because football (soccer) doesn't seem to get any coverage in the US, from what I hear.

I don't think it's ironic; I think that's precisely why they did it. Save expats and other assorted freaks, soccer fans in the us are of the upper middle class educated grown up frat boy ilk. The type that wears polo shirts or a button down shirt with khaki shorts and finishes the look with leather flipflops, and btw they all wear footie shirts to games hahah. (There were so many of this type at the biesbol last night it made me sick)

To break into the US the way everyone wants, it really has to reach a wider audience, sports don't survive unless the working class wants to watch. What better way to get wide appeal than to say "WATCH YOUR US MEN'S SOCCER TEAM -- RANKED 4TH IN THE WORLD!!!!!!"

The ranking is disengenious but it may help open the market past educated white people, and when that happens there will be money to be made for all.

ChrissMari wrote:

To break into the US the way everyone wants.

exactly who wants?

certainly not any fans outside the US. Stick to your own brand of 'football'...........please

'....all I know is Glazers gonna die'

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

To break into the US the way everyone wants.

exactly who wants?

certainly not any fans outside the US. Stick to your own brand of 'football'...........please

'....all I know is Glazers gonna die'

Are you fucking serious? What a chav-tastic argument.

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters? It doesn't matter if you don't want it. Fans' opinions don't count only their money.

If fans mattered you wouldn't have an English team poised to win europe with no English players. No one wants to see that, sorry bonz

ChrissMari wrote:

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters?

says it all

put your replica top back on and whoop-dee-fuckin-doo

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

To break into the US the way everyone wants.

exactly who wants?

certainly not any fans outside the US. Stick to your own brand of 'football'...........please

'....all I know is Glazers gonna die'

the more the merrier, that's what i say. it can only be good for football.

NOOLigan wrote:

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

To break into the US the way everyone wants.

exactly who wants?

certainly not any fans outside the US. Stick to your own brand of 'football'...........please

'....all I know is Glazers gonna die'

the more the merrier, that's what i say. it can only be good for football.

No way only the english and perhaps europeans can play it or watch it. Look what happened when south america got involved!!!!!! RUINATION

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters?

says it all

put your replica top back on and whoop-dee-fuckin-doo

Yeah it's not as if any club would ever open a chain of stores charging fortunes for branded merchandise, and basically stealing money for kits (must be a good 50,000% mark up on those). I'm ignorant of footy, but I know Man-U have been a VERY overtly comercial side. Then again, at least it's quids and not bucks in the coffers.

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters?

says it all

put your replica top back on and whoop-dee-fuckin-doo

You're picking and choosing what to quote me on. We have the same point. Why are you arguing? Oh wait, because I'm american I forgot.

What?

ChrissMari wrote: We have the same point. Why are you arguing? Oh wait, because I'm american I forgot.

you say that like it's illogical or something. :D

Ranked in at 96, get in there

Steve Campbell wrote:

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters?

says it all

put your replica top back on and whoop-dee-fuckin-doo

Yeah it's not as if any club would ever open a chain of stores charging fortunes for branded merchandise, and basically stealing money for kits (must be a good 50,000% mark up on those). I'm ignorant of footy, but I know Man-U have been a VERY overtly comercial side. Then again, at least it's quids and not bucks in the coffers.

It's not quid it's yen and chickens or whatever southeast asian uses for currency.

Also, this whole argument is crap. Is my money any better because I paid for 3 shirts (city, oldham, stockport oh look only one prem team and barely a prem team at that) in pounds rather than dollars?? Oh I know, I should act cool as a cucumber as if I don't care and pretend I don't like what I like. That's what all the cool kids do.

Oh no. Because I'm an American and therefore a football fonie, and it doesn't matter that I live and breathe by the game and have since living in the shadow of COMS (oh noes that makes me a newish fan also a strike against me).

Anyway, I wasn't saying the love of money in football was a good thing, in fact I thought it was clear that I was saying the opposite.

This whole thing stinks of teenagers saying "I like the band before the radio hit and now they suck because it's popular"

Really immature and xenophobic

Snoopy wrote: Ranked in at 96, get in there

Us lot? The side that ass-rammed Engerland (seniors and under14's)? Surely not. Norn Iron are a great side to have in a world cup cos the fans only knock fuck out of each other :D

Maybe my avatar needs switching back to the Cantona one and it will have a calming presence on Nick

ChrissMari wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote:

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters?

says it all

put your replica top back on and whoop-dee-fuckin-doo

Yeah it's not as if any club would ever open a chain of stores charging fortunes for branded merchandise, and basically stealing money for kits (must be a good 50,000% mark up on those). I'm ignorant of footy, but I know Man-U have been a VERY overtly comercial side. Then again, at least it's quids and not bucks in the coffers.

It's not quid it's yen and chickens or whatever southeast asian uses for currency.

Also, this whole argument is crap. Is my money any better because I paid for 3 shirts (city, oldham, stockport oh look only one prem team and barely a prem team at that) in pounds rather than dollars?? Oh I know, I should act cool as a cucumber as if I don't care and pretend I don't like what I like. That's what all the cool kids do.

Oh no. Because I'm an American and therefore a football fonie, and it doesn't matter that I live and breathe by the game and have since living in the shadow of COMS (oh noes that makes me a newish fan also a strike against me).

Anyway, I wasn't saying the love of money in football was a good thing, in fact I thought it was clear that I was saying the opposite.

This whole thing stinks of teenagers saying "I like the band before the radio hit and now they suck because it's popular"

Really immature and xenophobic

Go back, read it again, you will see that I was merely saying BA didn't exactly have the moral high ground is all. As for bucks in the kitty...your dollars are good.....Coke's or Macroshaft's...not so. IN MY VIEW anyway, I'm NOT a footy head, but I do like to stop your lot taking EVERYTHING over (mainly cos yous bail at the first sign of trouble,...ahem Jaguar F1 team ahem :D:D)

Steve Campbell wrote:

Snoopy wrote: Ranked in at 96, get in there

Norn Iron are a great side to have in a world cup cos the fans only knock fuck out of each other :D

Well unless they manage an all linfield or all Glens team, it's gonna get all windsor park soooner or later :D

BTW....the yanks aint doing to bad on this, and it;s REAL rankings.A1-GP, motorsport's nation's cup

Not bad for a country were nobody brakes or turns right :D

Steve Campbell wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote:

Barney Army wrote:

ChrissMari wrote:

Just exactly how much money do you stand to gain over 300 million potential supporters?

says it all

put your replica top back on and whoop-dee-fuckin-doo

Yeah it's not as if any club would ever open a chain of stores charging fortunes for branded merchandise, and basically stealing money for kits (must be a good 50,000% mark up on those). I'm ignorant of footy, but I know Man-U have been a VERY overtly comercial side. Then again, at least it's quids and not bucks in the coffers.

It's not quid it's yen and chickens or whatever southeast asian uses for currency.

Also, this whole argument is crap. Is my money any better because I paid for 3 shirts (city, oldham, stockport oh look only one prem team and barely a prem team at that) in pounds rather than dollars?? Oh I know, I should act cool as a cucumber as if I don't care and pretend I don't like what I like. That's what all the cool kids do.

Oh no. Because I'm an American and therefore a football fonie, and it doesn't matter that I live and breathe by the game and have since living in the shadow of COMS (oh noes that makes me a newish fan also a strike against me).

Anyway, I wasn't saying the love of money in football was a good thing, in fact I thought it was clear that I was saying the opposite.

This whole thing stinks of teenagers saying "I like the band before the radio hit and now they suck because it's popular"

Really immature and xenophobic

Go back, read it again, you will see that I was merely saying BA didn't exactly have the moral high ground is all. As for bucks in the kitty...your dollars are good.....Coke's or Macroshaft's...not so. IN MY VIEW anyway, I'm NOT a footy head, but I do like to stop your lot taking EVERYTHING over (mainly cos yous bail at the first sign of trouble,...ahem Jaguar F1 team ahem :D:D)

By this argument I meant the tread not specifically what you said.

Eta: though you are being xenophobic

very well, misunderstanding cleaered up ;)

I think I'll leave you to Nick, I;ve exhausted my football opinions for another while :D

Steve Campbell wrote: very well, misunderstanding cleaered up ;)

I think I'll leave you to Nick, I;ve exhausted my football opinions for another while :D

I need to be afk well away from phone as it were. My bus ride to work is almost over but thank you and ba for keeping me occupied most for most of it. :)

ChrissMari wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote: very well, misunderstanding cleaered up ;)

I think I'll leave you to Nick, I;ve exhausted my football opinions for another while :D

I need to be afk well away from phone as it were. My bus ride to work is almost over but thank you and ba for keeping me occupied most for most of it. :)

glad to be of service. Tho I'm sure he's not....being a miserable northern git :D

NOOLigan wrote:

rank prevous rank pts mar pts apr 1 Brazil 0 830 -5 2 Czech Republic 0 779 -10 3 Netherlands 0 774 -14 4 USA 1 760 -4 5 Spain 1 759 -4 6 Mexico 1 758 -4 7 France 1 754 -6 8 Portugal 2 753 -2 8 Argentina -4 753 -12 10 England -1 744 -12

Still cannot understand. And I do not know a single American player... I am not very involved in football but... anyone seeing this list would say : what do the USA here ?

Brazil : ok Cesko : overrated Netherlands : surpised USA : was this list released on the 1st of April ? Spain : ok Mexico : why not ? France : seems overrated Portugal : fair Argentina : can understand England : so low !!! hey, do the English learn on the field ? so many good players from all around the world playing by you in the English league !!! Your football should be the European conterpart of Brazil !!!

Still you are better than the Italians... but so low comparing to Spain. Well, the investments in buying players are incredible and huge in England, Spain and Italy... I wonder why they are not in the top 5...

this is why FIFA Rankings are full of $H!T the whole world know's it, who cares.

Argentina is going to win the world cup anyway