World

Africa

Malawi

FIFA SECOND PLACE EXPLANATION

October 15th, 2008 | By: sscouser | 11 Comments »

Here is the FIFA second place explanation:
http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/preliminaries/africa/secondplace.html

However, in my opinion, the most fair way to sort this out when there are groups with unequal number of teams is to use the percentage points formula. Simply put, you divide a team’s number of wins by its number of games played. This formula is used in the NBA, NFL, MBL, etc

Let’s look at the standings http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/preliminaries/africa/standings/index.html

Let’s use Groups 2 and 11 as an example.
Angola were runners up in Group 2 with 10 points from a total of 6 games. Togo were runners up in Group 11 with 6 points from a total of 4 games. The most fair way to compare the two is to divide each teams number of wins by each teams total number of games played. Since in soccer games are allowed to end in a draw, a draw will be counted as .5 and a win will be counted as 1

Angola won 3.5 games out of 6 = 3.5 divided by 6 = 58.3%
Togo won 2 games out of 4 = 2 divided by 4 = 50%

As you can see, using this formula Angola would have been ahead of Togo. The formula used by FIFA was unfair to teams that were in Groups of 4. Anyway, what is done is done and cannot be undone. In case this situation arises again in future FIFA will need to use the percentage points formula. Also, rules need to be made before the competition starts and not after.

Conspiracy theory? Did FIFA have in mind a certain team that they wanted to qualify? I hope not.

Tags: Team News

Malawi World Cup RSS Feed

del.icio.us:FIFA SECOND PLACE EXPLANATION

stumbleupon:FIFA SECOND PLACE EXPLANATION

Comments

By Kiko | October 15th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

I wasnt aware of the percentage points formula, but I think it seems like a much more sensible formula than the one Caf used.

The minute Caf introduced that formula, I knew that there would be an issue.

I think they should have had play-offs between the 8 second placed teams with the lowest score (the original score). The 4 second placed teams with the highest scores would go through automatically.
That would have given a chance to all second placed teams and it wouldnt be unfair on any particular team.

However, as you mentioned sscouser, rules need to be made before the competition starts to avoid controversy.

Posted from United Kingdom

By Scouser | October 15th, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Am with you Kiko, the minute CAF said that games against 4th placed teams would be dropped I told my homies: “I smell something fishy here.”

Anyway, the percentage points formula has already been proven that’s why almost all US Sports use the formula.

Look at the AFC East Conference:

http://www.nfl.com/standings

Buffalo Bills are ranked # 1 because they have more percentage points than the other three teams in the same conference.

Now compare the AFC East Conference to the AFC West Conference. Buffalo Bills have played 5, won 4, lost 1 = 4 divided by 5 = .800 Denver Broncos have played 6, won 4, lost 2 = 4/6 = .667

So, if you were to rank the two, though they have played unequal # of games, Buffalo would be ranked # 1 and Denver would be ranked # 2. Just as simple as that. The formula used by CAF’s a hocus pocus.

Posted from United States

By shane | October 15th, 2008 at 4:41 pm

Bills are first in their division because they have the best record not because of % pts. Then it goes to division record. I have never heard of % pts being used in NFL before. There is a massive amount of tiebreakers and I don’t believe that is one of them.
But I do the merits of using a % system for the 8 runner ups.

By Yossi | October 15th, 2008 at 4:55 pm

The reason for not using precentage is that the teams in 3 teams groups didn’t have 2 matches against weak opponents, which they could easily get 6 more points.

Posted from Israel

By Scouser | October 15th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Hey Shane, it follows that the team that has the best record has the most percentage points. In other words, the team that has the most percentage points has the best record. Now look at the the standings by league: http://www.nfl.com/standings?category=league

Yossi, what is your definition of weak teams? Liberia finished last in their group. Are they weaker than Malawi? What about Namibia? If my memory serves me well the last time Malawi played Namibia Namibia won.

Anyway, for argument sake, let’s say group 11 also had 4 teams. Are all the fourth placed teams equally weak? Ok. they threw away games against the “weakest” teams and Malawi made it. Which is weaker, Malawi or DRC?

I thought DRC are ranked higher than Malawi on FIFA Rankings. IMO, on a given day, any team can be weaker. Hull 1 Arsenal 0. Arsenal were beaten because Hull were a better team. However, I must admit that Djibouti were a weaker team because of the number of goals they conceded. Namibia scored 7 against 12, Niger 5 against 11, Equatorial Guinea 4 against 10, Liberia 4 against 12, Botswana 3 against 8. Some of these teams even won (drew)against the top three teams in their groups. So I am not quite sure what you mean by weak. Are they weak because they finished last? If that’s the case then we can also conclude that all teams that didn’t make it to the next round are weaker than all teams that made it. Am I clear?

Posted from United States

By shane | October 15th, 2008 at 6:24 pm

Yeah I’m an idiot. I wasn’t thinking properly.

By Scouser | October 15th, 2008 at 7:21 pm

Shane, please don’t call yourself an idiot.

“Respect yourself and others will respect you.” -
Confucius (551 BC – 479 BC)

Posted from United States

By Brad | October 17th, 2008 at 10:18 pm

Sscouser,

Your idea for percentage points and basing it on the current NFL standings doesn’t work. The main reason being that when the season is done and they need to break a tie they can never go to the percentage points because the teams will have always played the same number of games. It doesn’t matter in the middle of the season if you rank the Bills higher than the Broncos, it only matters at the end of the season and at that time all the teams will have played the same number of games which will make percentage points inconsequential.

So, it kinda seems like you are comparing apples and oranges. I watch the NFL, NBA, and MLB and you are right they keep track of the winning percentage of the teams but it is never used as a tiebreaker at the end of the season because all the teams play the same amount of games so you finish ahead of another team because you have more wins, not because you have a better winning percentage. And if there’s a tie they go to things like head to head records between the two teams.

And as far as a conspiracy theory?? There is no way. The rule about the second place finishers was brought in with far too many games left to play for them to have any idea which teams this kind of rule would benefit.

Posted from Canada

By Scouser | October 18th, 2008 at 11:07 am

Brad, how is Canada? Assuming that you are really posting from Canada.
Could it be that it says “posted from Canada” because the server you use is in Canada?

Anyway, let’s talk ball. You stated: “The main reason being that when the season is done and they need to break a tie they can never go to the percentage points because the teams will have always played the same number of games.” Exactly my point. Teams in Group 11 played fewer games than teams in the other 11 groups so the percentage formula applies because they played unequal # of games. Are we on the same page here?

The rule about the second place finishers was brought in after Malawi had already beaten Djibouti 8-1. I will leave it at that.

Posted from United States

By Brad | October 19th, 2008 at 12:57 am

Yup, I am in Canada and it’s great here.

I understand what you are saying about using the percentage points in a situation such as thw qualifiers with some groups having only 3 teams. My point is that you can’t use the NFL, NBA, and MLB as examples of how that idea is already being used because it doesn’t really apply. I don’t really have any problem with your percentage points theory, there is just something about it that doesn’t sit right with me. So yeah, mainly i was disagreeing with your supporting arguments for the theory not the theory itself. Hope that makes sense.

And even though the rule may have been brought in after Malawi’s 8-1 win over Djibouti, I still don’t think there is any reason to think that there was some sort of conspiracy going on. Just my opinion.

Posted from Canada

By Scouser | October 19th, 2008 at 9:35 am

You must have lived in Canada for years. I understand in Canada you only see the sun in two months and you call that great? Just kidding.

You are entitled to your opinion and Am entitled to mine. It is fine with it as long as we disagree without being disagreeable.

“Where there is much desire to learn, there of necessity will be much arguing, much writing, many opinions; for opinions in good men is but knowledge in the making” – John Milton (1608 – 1674)

Posted from United States

Comments are closed