Definitive stats for every African country at the WC, with rankings (credit to Folem for the initial data)

[Scipio Africanus]

I took the data from folem's post in this thread and added the following columns: Goals per game(GPG), Points per game(PPG) and win percentage.

Code: Select all

      Team	Part	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts	GPG	PPG	Win%

 Cameroon	8	26	5	8	13	22	47	–25	24	0.85	0.92	19%
 Nigeria	6	21	6	3	12	23	30	–7	21	1.1	1.0	29%
 Morocco	6	20	4	7	9	18	23	–5	19	0.9	0.95	20%
 Senegal	3	12	5	3	4	16	17	–1	18	1.3	1.5	42%
 Ghana	        4	15	5	3	7	18	23	–5	18	1.2	1.2	33%
 Tunisia	6	18	3	5	10	14	26	–12	14	0.78	0.78	17%
 Algeria	4	13	3	3	7	13	19	–6	12	1.0	0.92	23%
 Ivory Coast	3	9	3	1	5	13	14	–1	10	1.4	1.1	33%
 South Africa	3	9	2	4	3	11	16	–5	10	1.2	1.1	22%
 Angola	        1	3	0	2	1	1	2	–1	2	0.33	0.67	0%
 Egypt	        3	7	0	2	5	5	12	–7	2	0.71	0.29	0%
 Togo	        1	3	0	0	3	1	6	–5	0	0.33	0.00	0%
 DR Congo[1]	1	3	0	0	3	0	14	–14	0	0.00	0.00	0%

[Scipio Africanus]

Top 3 African countries by winning percentage at the WC

1. Senegal
2. Ghana/Ivory Coast (Tie)
3. Nigeria

[Scipio Africanus]

Top 3 African countries by points earned per game at the WC

1. Senegal
2. Ghana
3. Ivory Coast/South Africa (Tie)

[Scipio Africanus]

Top 3 African countries by goals per game at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

[Scipio Africanus]

Conclusions to come later but at first glance it seems the most important quality in WC success for African countries is number of players playing in top leagues, not the presence of an organized league, although that too is important.

[kofi86]

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

[Bigpokey24]

the stats are off, CIV ranked 3rd

[Scipio Africanus]

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

Not true, my esteemed sir. PPG correlates very strongly with how far each team progresses at the WC. The higher your PPG the more likely it is that you will get out of your WC first round group, and the more games you win after that adds to your PPG. PPG is probably the most important stat. It is no coincidence that the two African countries that have the most PPG (Senegal and Ghana) are among the two who have gone farthest at the WC (Quarter finals).

[Scipio Africanus]

the stats are off, CIV ranked 3rd

Why you dey tok like persin wey no go school? I sabi say you go school!

[kofi86]

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

Not true, my esteemed sir. PPG correlates very strongly with how far each team progresses at the WC. The higher your PPG the more likely it is that you will get out of your WC first round group, and the more games you win after that adds to your PPG. PPG is probably the most important stat.

Ok, but what it is the ultimate goal? To advance to next round, so why measure ppg when we can just look at progress per participation?

I gave the example of South Africa, do you think they have the 3rd best World Cup record of all African teams based on your stat? And who do you think played a better World Cup between Uruguay and South Korea? Uruguay has a higher ppg as they lost the 4th match, but I think we all agree that Korea had a better World Cup by advancing to the next round or do you disagree?

In your stats you have Senegal, Ghana, South Africa and CIV emerging as the strongest. CIV and South Africa never reached the second round of any World Cup whereas Morocco just made the quarters and already qualified for the second round in 1986. Do you think CIV and South Africa have a better World Cup record than Morocco or Nigeria who qualified for the second round in 3/6 participations?

[Scipio Africanus]

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

Not true, my esteemed sir. PPG correlates very strongly with how far each team progresses at the WC. The higher your PPG the more likely it is that you will get out of your WC first round group, and the more games you win after that adds to your PPG. PPG is probably the most important stat.

Ok, but what it is the ultimate goal? To advance to next round, so why measure ppg when we can just look at progress per participation?

I gave the example of South Africa, do you think they have the 3rd best World Cup record of all African teams based on your stat? And who do you think played a better World Cup between Uruguay and South Korea? Uruguay has a higher ppg as they lost the 4th match, but I think we all agree that Korea had a better World Cup by advancing to the next round or do you disagree?

In your stats you have Senegal, Ghana, South Africa and CIV emerging as the strongest. CIV and South Africa never reached the second round of any World Cup whereas Morocco just made the quarters and already qualified for the second round in 1986. Do you think CIV and South Africa have a better World Cup record than Morocco or Nigeria who qualified for the second round in 3/6 participations?

I don't have anybody as the strongest. There are several ranking metrics. To get the strongest you would have to rank teams across all of them and then do an average. I just showed 3 metrics.

Consistency counts as well. Getting to the quarter finals once 32 years ago should not carry as much weight, especially when you have lost almost all your games since (Cameroon). And 1986 was 36 years ago in the case of Morocco.

[kofi86]

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

Not true, my esteemed sir. PPG correlates very strongly with how far each team progresses at the WC. The higher your PPG the more likely it is that you will get out of your WC first round group, and the more games you win after that adds to your PPG. PPG is probably the most important stat.

Ok, but what it is the ultimate goal? To advance to next round, so why measure ppg when we can just look at progress per participation?

I gave the example of South Africa, do you think they have the 3rd best World Cup record of all African teams based on your stat? And who do you think played a better World Cup between Uruguay and South Korea? Uruguay has a higher ppg as they lost the 4th match, but I think we all agree that Korea had a better World Cup by advancing to the next round or do you disagree?

In your stats you have Senegal, Ghana, South Africa and CIV emerging as the strongest. CIV and South Africa never reached the second round of any World Cup whereas Morocco just made the quarters and already qualified for the second round in 1986. Do you think CIV and South Africa have a better World Cup record than Morocco or Nigeria who qualified for the second round in 3/6 participations?

I don't have anybody as the strongest. There are several ranking metrics. To get the strongest you would have to rank teams across all of them and then do an average. I just showed 3 metrics.

Consistency counts as well. Getting to the quarter finals once 32 years ago should not carry as much weight, especially when you have lost almost all your games since (Cameroon). And 1986 was 36 years ago in the case of Morocco.

I don't think you are really being honest here. As a Nigerian, would you rather have CIV's or South Africa's World Cup Record or Nigeria's? Just your opinion. If you don't know what constitutes a strong showing, the data is irrelevant. Why not include goals scored or number of yellow cards in your metrics? Because you think they are not measuring the performance of a team.

[Scipio Africanus]

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

Not true, my esteemed sir. PPG correlates very strongly with how far each team progresses at the WC. The higher your PPG the more likely it is that you will get out of your WC first round group, and the more games you win after that adds to your PPG. PPG is probably the most important stat.

Ok, but what it is the ultimate goal? To advance to next round, so why measure ppg when we can just look at progress per participation?

I gave the example of South Africa, do you think they have the 3rd best World Cup record of all African teams based on your stat? And who do you think played a better World Cup between Uruguay and South Korea? Uruguay has a higher ppg as they lost the 4th match, but I think we all agree that Korea had a better World Cup by advancing to the next round or do you disagree?

In your stats you have Senegal, Ghana, South Africa and CIV emerging as the strongest. CIV and South Africa never reached the second round of any World Cup whereas Morocco just made the quarters and already qualified for the second round in 1986. Do you think CIV and South Africa have a better World Cup record than Morocco or Nigeria who qualified for the second round in 3/6 participations?

I don't have anybody as the strongest. There are several ranking metrics. To get the strongest you would have to rank teams across all of them and then do an average. I just showed 3 metrics.

Consistency counts as well. Getting to the quarter finals once 32 years ago should not carry as much weight, especially when you have lost almost all your games since (Cameroon). And 1986 was 36 years ago in the case of Morocco.

I don't think you are really being honest here. As a Nigerian, would you rather have CIV's or South Africa's World Cup Record or Nigeria's? Just your opinion. If you don't know what constitutes a strong showing, the data is irrelevant. Why not include goals scored or number of yellow cards in your metrics? Because you think they are not measuring the performance of a team.

Your question has a big assumption in it, which I already addressed in my previous post. In the 3 ranking metrics I showed, Senegal is in the top 2 positions with two first place rankings. That should tell you something. As a Nigerian I would rather have Senegal’s WC record. Why are you mentioning CIV and South Africa? Who’s being dishonest here? Now take back the dishonesty part or feel the full wrath of Scipio

[kofi86]

That's the context for your stats:

Conclusions to come later but at first glance it seems the most important quality in WC success for African countries is number of players playing in top leagues, not the presence of an organized league, although that too is important.

Don't tell me with a straight face that when somebody asks you whether CIV or Nigeria played a better World Cup in 2018 that

1. you cannot tell without looking at different metrics with how far each team advanced not being one of them
2. CIV might have indeed played a better World Cup since their winning percentage was higher (1/3 compared to 1/4 for Nigeria) as the points per game was the same (1 for each, as CIV was eliminated with 3 points from 3 games whereas Nigeria won 4 points from 4 games)

The only thing that matters in a World Cup is how far you advance. Everything is else is secondary.
Otherwise you might argue that Brazil played a better World Cup than Italy in 1982 (winning percentage of 0.8 compared to 0.58 and ppg [if 3 points were awarded] of 2.6 compared to 2.2) despite one winning it and the other not making the semis. Or that Spain and Netherlands performed equally well at the World Cup since each won 6/7 and lost one game.

[Scipio Africanus]

That's the context for your stats:

Conclusions to come later but at first glance it seems the most important quality in WC success for African countries is number of players playing in top leagues, not the presence of an organized league, although that too is important.

Don't tell me with a straight face that when somebody asks you whether CIV or Nigeria played a better World Cup in 2018 that

1. you cannot tell without looking at different metrics with how far each team advanced not being one of them
2. CIV might have indeed played a better World Cup since their winning percentage was higher (1/3 compared to 1/4 for Nigeria) as the points per game was the same (1 for each, as CIV was eliminated with 3 points from 3 games whereas Nigeria won 4 points from 4 games)

The only thing that matters in a World Cup is how far you advance. Everything is else is secondary.
Otherwise you might argue that Brazil played a better World Cup than Italy in 1982 (winning percentage of 0.8 compared to 0.58 and ppg [if 3 points were awarded] of 2.6 compared to 2.2) despite one winning it and the other not making the semis. Or that Spain and Netherlands performed equally well at the World Cup since each won 6/7 and lost one game.

**angry rant deleted** for now.

For one CIV did not qualify for the 2018 WC

Secondly you have obstinately refused to listen to the point I am making that there are SEVERAL ranking metrics to be considered. I only showed 3.

The fact you keep mentioning CIV almost made me smash my computer. It is infuriating as all hell because you insist on putting words in my mouth to the effect that CIV is the best African WC team. Stop it or please go and start your own thread on the topic

Quality of opponent beaten also matters. So instead of trying to nit pick my metrics, come up with your own, BASED ON THE DATA and post them here for all to see

[kofi86]

I meant 2014 World Cup, not 2018, my bad. I pointed out that your "several metrics" are missing the most important one. And the moment you have the most important one, the others might only become interesting for _further_ investigation.

I gave plenty of example (Italy/Brazil in 1982, Holland/Spain in 2010, Uruguay/Korea in 2022, South Africa and CIV in general, and CIV/Nigeria at 2014 (not 2018)). So won't you answer, just quick questions:

Who played a better World Cup between

1. Italy and Brazil in 1982
2. Spain and Holland in 2010
3. Nigeria and CIV in 2014
4. Uruguay and Korea in 2022

Why is it important? Because of your conclusions:

Conclusions to come later but at first glance it seems the most important quality in WC success for African countries is number of players playing in top leagues, not the presence of an organized league, although that too is important.

So what my metric be?
Roughly something that is based on advanced rounds and participations, i.e.

Nigeria 3/6
Ghana 2/4
South Africa 0/3
Senegal 2/3

Of course, it has a serious flaw: it does not diffentiate between second round and quarter finals.

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

Not true, my esteemed sir. PPG correlates very strongly with how far each team progresses at the WC. The higher your PPG the more likely it is that you will get out of your WC first round group, and the more games you win after that adds to your PPG. PPG is probably the most important stat. It is no coincidence that the two African countries that have the most PPG (Senegal and Ghana) are among the two who have gone farthest at the WC (Quarter finals).

[Scipio Africanus]

I meant 2014 World Cup, not 2018, my bad. I pointed out that your "several metrics" are missing the most important one. And the moment you have the most important one, the others might only become interesting for _further_ investigation.

I gave plenty of example (Italy/Brazil in 1982, Holland/Spain in 2010, Uruguay/Korea in 2022, South Africa and CIV in general, and CIV/Nigeria at 2014 (not 2018)). So won't you answer, just quick questions:

Who played a better World Cup between

1. Italy and Brazil in 1982
2. Spain and Holland in 2010
3. Nigeria and CIV in 2014
4. Uruguay and Korea in 2022

Out of curiosity I will use my 3 metrics to see who had a better WC from your examples above.

So what my metric be?
Roughly something that is based on advanced rounds and participations, i.e.

Nigeria 3/6
Ghana 2/4
South Africa 0/3
Senegal 2/3

Of course, it has a serious flaw: it does not diffentiate between second round and quarter finals.

Now you’re talking! Maybe you can come up with a points system: 10 points for advancing to a final, 6 for a semifinal, 3 for a quarterfinal, 1 for R16 etc

[YUJAM]

I think you are being a bit pedantic here. Winning % and PPG mean a lot here in my view. This is the WC we are talking about here where there are few easy teams.

So give Senegal its credit for having the best winning % and best PPG

You left out the most important stat:
How far did each team progress at each participation.

Points and Wins do not tell the whole story and it not be wise to compare them to each other.
Tunisia's win against France team B or Cameroon's win against Brazil's team surely are not equal to Senegal's win against Sweden in the second round against Sweden in 2002 for example. Generally speaking, the motiviation in individual group stage games might be very different for the involving teams whereas every single team wants to advance to the next round.

I mean South Africa might be tied on 3rd place for winning percentage or points per game, but who cares? 3 participations, 3 group stage exits, the rest does not really matter.

[Scipio Africanus]

Koi86, my apologizes because I had a typo and wrote this in my 4th post on this thread

Top 3 African countries by winning percentage at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

when it should have been this.

Top 3 African countries by goal per game at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

I have corrected it in the original post. I now see why you were going on about Ivory Coast.

[AreaDaddy]

Koi86, my apologizes because I had a typo and wrote this in my 4th post on this thread

Top 3 African countries by winning percentage at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

when it should have been this.

Top 3 African countries by goal per game at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

I have corrected it in the original post. I now see why you were going on about Ivory Coast.

The points should be wieighted by the round in which they were got, as in general the further you progress the team are much better.

i would not for instance give equal weighting to Morocco's victory over Canada as we give to its victory over Spain.

[Scipio Africanus]

Koi86, my apologizes because I had a typo and wrote this in my 4th post on this thread

Top 3 African countries by winning percentage at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

when it should have been this.

Top 3 African countries by goal per game at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

I have corrected it in the original post. I now see why you were going on about Ivory Coast.

The points should be wieighted by the round in which they were got, as in general the further you progress the team are much better.

i would not for instance give equal weighting to Morocco's victory over Canada as we give to its victory over Spain.

Very good points but Morocco actually tied against Spain. That game goes down as a draw in the record books.

[AreaDaddy]

Koi86, my apologizes because I had a typo and wrote this in my 4th post on this thread

Top 3 African countries by winning percentage at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

when it should have been this.

Top 3 African countries by goal per game at the WC

1. Ivory Coast
2. Senegal
3. Ghana/South Africa (Tie)

I have corrected it in the original post. I now see why you were going on about Ivory Coast.

The points should be wieighted by the round in which they were got, as in general the further you progress the team are much better.

i would not for instance give equal weighting to Morocco's victory over Canada as we give to its victory over Spain.

Very good points but Morocco actually tied against Spain. That game goes down as a draw in the record books.

lol. I remembered after I posted that it went to penalties, but you get the general jist of what I was suggesting

[Enugu II]

Conclusions to come later but at first glance it seems the most important quality in WC success for African countries is number of players playing in top leagues, not the presence of an organized league, although that too is important.

How exactly does the presence of an organized league factor into this? Are the World Cup players drawn from such a league?