[Editor’s note: this is an updated version of an article originally published in October 2023]
World soccer rankings are a useful way to gauge the relative strength of teams competing in major tournaments, allowing broadcasters to quickly explain to viewers who may not be familiar with countries like Romania, Georgia, Jamaica or Bolivia how they rank relative to the rest of the world.
And sometimes, that’s the story. Yesterday’s surprise win by Slovakia (48) over Belgium (3) at Euro 2024 was the biggest upset in the history of the tournament, as measured by the FIFA rankings. It was surprising in a way, and not as shocking as, say, Iceland’s win over England at Euro 2016.
But the point is that rankings shouldn’t be taken too seriously. They have a purpose, but they shouldn’t be seen as a competition in and of themselves. This might seem odd to fans of tennis, golf or snooker, for example, where being ranked number one in the world means a lot.
But in the world of football, nobody really cares, and this is something to be celebrated rather than criticised.
Why do they exist?
Let’s start with the basics: why do we need FIFA rankings?
Well, before rankings were introduced, the World Cup’s seeding system was somewhat comical. For most tournaments up until the 1970 World Cup, FIFA simply decided which teams should be seeded.
In 1970 there were no official seedings, with FIFA organising the four pots solely to distinguish between certain teams (notably Israel and Morocco).
Before the 1974 World Cup, a secret vote was held to determine which teams would be seeded. In the several tournaments since, the organizing committee has at least made the results of that vote public.
However, this was obviously not particularly scientific, and only after 1990 did real empirical results, i.e. past World Cup performances, begin to be taken into account. However, this effectively discriminated against emerging countries, so since 1998 (in 1994 the rankings were considered too new to be of much use), FIFA has been able to take the official rankings into account when choosing the seeds.
So while the exact ranking system remains a mystery even to the most avid soccer fan, it’s worth reiterating that the FIFA rankings do have a purpose: If the only option was for FIFA officials to arbitrarily decide the rankings, there would be value in having official rankings.
With Thomas Hassler as one of their stars, Germany became the first team to top the FIFA rankings in 1992 (Michael Kunkel/Bongarts/Getty Images)
Why does no one really care?
Well, the problem with soccer is that international teams only play around 12 games a year, some of which are between the best teams in the world and weaker teams, and some of which are non-competitive matches, so there isn’t a lot of information to factor into rankings.
The precise algorithm used to calculate the rankings has been criticised and overhauled on a number of occasions – in 1999, 2006 and most notably in 2018 after complaints that various teams, including Switzerland and Poland, were trying to “game” the system by limiting the number of friendlies they play.
This differs from sports like tennis or golf, where the world’s best players regularly compete head-to-head in the same tournaments, where it is fairly easy to create a fair ranking system.
Why is this a good thing?
This is a good thing because there is no tension between tournament results and world rankings, as sometimes happens in other sports.
In April 2009, Dinara Safina became the world’s number one ranked tennis player despite never having won any of the four Grand Slam tournaments, sparking debate about the merits of the system and Safina’s actual level of ability.
“Reaching the world number one ranking is a great honour and a dream shared by every girl who has ever aspired to be a professional tennis player,” Safina said.
First, it begs the question of whether that’s a) true or b) desirable. Should players grow up dreaming of being ranked No. 1, rather than winning things? Interestingly, Carlos Alcaraz did the same thing in 2022, albeit as a Grand Slam champion. “Being No. 1 in the world is a dream come true,” he said.
Safina’s ranking drew much backlash, including from Serena Williams, who had won the previous two Grand Slams when Safina first reached No. 1 in the world. After winning Wimbledon in July 2009, Williams was asked about her motivation to regain the top spot.
“If you win three Grand Slams (in one year), you should be ranked No. 1 in the world, but that’s not the case on the WTA Tour,” she said. “But maybe my motivation is to win another Grand Slam and stay ranked No. 2 in the world.”
“Dinara has done a great job to get to No. 1. She won Rome and Madrid (which are less prestigious),” Williams continued, before bursting into laughter in a comment that was somewhere between a dig at the rankings system and a dig at Safina.
Safina plays at the Italian Open in Rome in May 2009. (Ryan Pierce/Getty Images)
That seemed to affect Safina as well, as she was frequently asked when she would win a Grand Slam. In the end, she never did.
“I felt silly saying I was the best in the world,” Safina confessed years later.
In 2011, snooker player Ronnie O’Sullivan complained that he felt “intimidated” into playing smaller tournaments because of the ranking points they offered. “The ranking events are held but the prize money for the winners isn’t very big,” he complained.
“Most of the players go there and lose money, but the ranking points add up so the players are forced to play there. It’s not a very good thing but what can you do? You have to go.”
At that time, O’Sullivan was ranked 12th in the world. He would go on to win two world championships, but due to poor performances and a lack of appearances in less prestigious tournaments he was never ranked number one in the world during that time.
Ronnie O’Sullivan in 2011 (China Photos/Getty Images)
In golf, two Britons, Luke Donald and Lee Westwood, have been ranked number one in the world without winning a major, but tennis is a better comparison sport and this seems like a stretch, especially since there is now a trophy for being number one in the world.
Interestingly, Andy Murray once said that he received more congratulatory messages from his fellow players when he first reached the top of the rankings than after he had won any tournament, suggesting that professional tennis players view rankings as a measure of consistency throughout the year, and like league tables (in soccer terms), with Grand Slam tournaments like cup competitions.
Tennis introduced ranking points in 1973 for essentially the same reason that soccer did two decades later – to make tournament entry criteria objective rather than leaving it in the hands of each tournament organizer – but over time tennis has become a sport in its own right.
But sporting success should not be judged by algorithms or complex ranking points accumulated in minor tournaments at the expense of achievements on the grandest stages. It should be measured by who wins the majors, Grand Slams and world championships, decided on the pitch, not by spreadsheets.
And in soccer, there is no tension, not even the slightest debate, about this, even during the tournament. Rankings serve their purpose: they help measure long-term progress and determine seeding, but being ranked No. 1 is not, in itself, something to strive for.
And that’s exactly how it should be.
(Top photo: Robbie Jay Barratt/Getty Images)