September 2006 FIFA Rankings
It is that time of month again when FIFA presents its thoughts on how the world’s football teams are ranked. As is usually the case, Brazil is number one on the list and American Samoa is last. In between there are all sorts of pleasant surprises like France moving up to the second spot, the Czech Republic gaining three spots despite sucking in the World Cup and the United States free falling all the way to number 29 in the world. We’ve yet to uncover why Guinea is considered a top 26 team or why Cuba moved up 31 places since the last rankings.
Here is the complete list of 1 through 198.
Related Posts
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share        |
Comments
By john | September 13th, 2006 at 12:00 pm 
Rankings mean little to top football countries. Golden Stars is what matters.
Posted from 
Canada
By Claude | September 13th, 2006 at 12:00 pm It is obvious with all the money FIFA makes that they can afford better quality drugs than the rest of us can afford. How else can you explain their monthly ratings?
Posted from 
United States
By Muddia Beduddia | September 13th, 2006 at 12:35 pm How do the idiots at FIFA not weigh their ranking system. One might think a World Cup victory would earn a country more points than a fiendly win against the student club team at Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle.
Posted from United States
By lazaro | September 13th, 2006 at 1:00 pm “Rankings mean little to top football countries. Golden Stars is what matters.”
So since there are only two countries on the entire planet who matter then why don’t you all just move to mars permanently where you can bore each other for all eternity shouting about how superior you both are to us subhumans back on earth.
Posted from United States
By john | September 13th, 2006 at 1:40 pm I dont see why we should move loseraro, earth is ours. The subhumans should move I think.
Now for normal people. If your an Argentine,Italy,German or England fan for example do you really care if your ranked 3 4 5 or 6th? Ranking 1st is ok for some bragging rights but i’m pretty sure most football supporters would trade rank for a title.
Besides US was ranked 5th (I think) prior to the WC. Did anyone actually believe the US was 5th in the world?
Regards
John
Posted from Canada
By rescorpione17 | September 14th, 2006 at 6:37 pm i am italian and i think that the rankings used now do reflect real status unlike the ones used before the WC ..Italy performed POORLY in 3 consecutive games and a demotion is well deserved ..hopefully this is just a stage, a recovery from victory hangover and a difficult transition ..i do think that Lippi quitting has done a huge damage…i was amongst the ones who put money on the Azzurri winning it all in Germany ..i all honesty i would bet on their qualifications to Euro 2008 finals at this very moment i am really curious to see how we will pull it off this time…
Posted from United States
By noelle | September 15th, 2006 at 2:27 am HA!
Beduddia: fantastic response!
Lazaro strikes again with comedy gold!
CLASSIC!
*shuffles feet back to lowly subhuman level eating a sandwich with Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle*
Posted from 
Mexico
By john | September 15th, 2006 at 8:22 am noelle…what are you babbling about?
Fifa should drop Mexico five spots just because of your post.
regards
john
By Adam Rupolo | September 24th, 2006 at 8:27 am I’d have to agree with rescorpion on the fact that a rank demotion for Italy might have been a bit deserved because of the last 3 games.
But 5th place? Seriously? Worse than England? That doesnt seem right.
But like John said, Im sure Brazil, France, Aregentina and England would trade that rank for Italy’s world cup title so w/e. 
By marty | October 3rd, 2006 at 5:46 am the only country which is overrated is south africa unles its about the money
Comments are closed
