Formula that shows which countries are under-performing
- 9 Jul 06, 09:15 AM
LONDON - Academics at the Cass Business School in London have devised an alternative set of world rankings - and guess who is top?
The report's author, Dr Garry Gelade, took into account the number of people playing football in each country, wealth, climate and length of Fifa membership - reaching the conclusion that first-round losers the United States should in fact be the world’s best team.
While Brazil, top of the Fifa rankings, are down in lowly 18th. Gelade says this proves that Brazil have consistently punched above their weight due to their passion for football, while the USA are squandering their soccer potential due to the lack of theirs.
Germany came in second (11th in Fifa's sometimes controversial world rankings averaged over five years*) with this year's finalists Italy (Fifa* = 7th) and France (Fifa* = 2nd) third and fifth respectively.
England, according to the findings, should really be fourth best team in the world which according to the report "proves" what fans have long suspected, that the team have under-performed given their Fifa ranking* of 9th.
This blog makes no comment on the science behind this research - or its relevance - but for the record here is how it works.
The table is based on the snappy formula: Performance = ((111xP) + (1.2xN) + (5.8xE) + (188xW) – (1.2xWxE)- 68)-881 where P = number of men who play football regularly, N = the number of years the country has been a member of Fifa (can anyone suggest why is this relevant?), W = wealth, E = number of internationals who play abroad.
Add in a final determining factor (climate), and Gelade reckons he can show where a country should sit in the rankings, as opposed to their actual place in the Fifa rankings based on their performance.
The formula in full:
Number of alternative ranking points =
(111 x Popularity Index**) + (1.2 x Number of years member of Fifa) + (5.8 x Percentage of expatriate internationals) + (188 x Wealth Index***) - (1.2 x Wealth Index x Percentage of expatriate internationals)
Then take Climate**** in account: If a hot humid country, subtract 61 x Wealth Index, and a further 87 points. If a cool temperate country, subtract 68 points. Finally subtract 881 points.
* Fifa rankings referred to are an average of rankings from 2000-2005.
** The Popularity Index is the logarithm of the number of men who regularly play football (3.3m in England).
*** The Wealth Index is the logarithm of the per capita GDP measured in US$. Expatriate internationals are international players who play club football abroad.
**** Climate is defined according to the following:
Hot Humid: Avg annual precipitation = 2,139 mm, Avg annual temp = 25.1 deg C, avg vapour pressure = 25.2 hPa
Cool temperate: Avg annual precipitation = 837 mm, Avg annual temp = 7.8 deg C, avg vapour pressure = 8.5 hPa
Countries of the third type have: Avg annual precipitation = 643 mm, Avg annual temp =22.7 deg C, avg vapour pressure = 16.5 hPa
In the "hot humid" countries, most of the population live in a tropical or sub-tropical climate zone. In the "cool-temperate" countries, most of the population live in a temperate climate zone. In the third type, which is more mixed, the most common climates are desert or steppe.