Link: Copy link
Also the relative poverty of the country. Even if the league is not particularly good, the best players in a poor country will seek clubs elsewhere if the conditions at home are crap. Whereas in some relatively wealthier African countries (particularly South Africa), the league can be considered fairly strong but doesn't export as many players because the incentive to go abroad is not there. A more extreme example of this is the Gulf.TheRoonBa wrote:In terms of teams taking it more seriously - I think they are limited to how good their domestic league is, and in some ways, punished by having better domestic leagues that export players.
TheRoonBa wrote:It has more prestige as the matches are considered as A matches, when they would ordinarily not even be listed on FIFA's site, as they are played by restrictive national teams, bound by regulations of player eligibility.Luca wrote:But to give the tournament more prestige, shouldn't they upgrade the status of the final tournament matches, as now they're regarded just as "friendlies"?TheRoonBa wrote:
to give the tournament more prestige.
Now all CHAN tournament matches are considered for the rankings and labelled as official FIFA matches - before they weren't. That's an increase in prestige.
Two wrongs making a right, there...TheRoonBa wrote:For me - this originally sounded stupid - a gap of 400 points in the FIFA rankings and a gap of 2 would be treated exactly the same. ... However, because FIFA's previous points system did not really reflect differences in strength between teams, with huge gaps between some of the teams in the Top 10, I think this was a good decision.
I know but I was asking specifically for some names, as I can't be arsed to compare the lists myself.TheRoonBa wrote:I think it should be a straightforward "the teams that are ranked much higher on the eloratings website than they were in the FIFA rankings" would benefit least...
Must... resist... temptation... Oh, very well: clickynfm24 wrote:I know but I was asking specifically for some names, as I can't be arsed to compare the lists myself.TheRoonBa wrote:I think it should be a straightforward "the teams that are ranked much higher on the eloratings website than they were in the FIFA rankings" would benefit least...
I fully agree with this. The best English player at the time was Vivian Woodward, who was an amateur. My only objection to count matches played by the England amateur team is that it was a restrictive team. The full England team (which certainly was not a full professional team, but a mix of professionals and amateurs) was not.TheRoonBa wrote: In that particular era, "professional" didn't always mean better than "amateur".