Lies, damned lies, and FIFA rankings: Australia's plunge a concern There's a first time for everything, and the Socceroos have now set a record low in the latest FIFA rankings, having fallen out of the top 100 nations in the world for the first time in history. Its a shock-horror headline - the national team is now rated at 102, one spot below Belarus, a former Soviet Union republic, and one place above Macedonia, part of the former Yugoslavia. But at this stage any temptation to direct spleen and outrage at coach Ange Postecoglou should be tempered by caution. Yes, it's embarrassing for a leading sporting nation - which Australia portrays itself as and undoubtedly is - to be ranked so poorly in the one sport the whole world really cares about. But it's not time to worry, just yet. That will come if the Socceroos bomb out in the Asian Cup and their ranking falls still further. In that scenario, qualification for the 2018 World Cup could get a lot harder, irrespective of whether Postecoglou (or whoever might succeed him should his side fail abjectly in the Asian Cup) remains in charge. I don't expect that to happen, despite the concerns of the doom and gloom brigade who fear the worst in January. Australia is not as good as it wants to be, and there must be a realisation that the collection of players Postecoglou has at his disposal at this time is in some way inferior - at least on what they have currently achieved - to those who wore the green and gold under Guus Hiddink and Pim Verbeek in the 2006 and 2010 World Cups respectively. But I still feel that the players who will do duty in January will show marked improvement once they get back on to home soil and play in a competition where the vast bulk of the crowd is barracking for them to succeed. Still, it does no harm to prepare for the worst case scenario and pay some heed to the FIFA rankings, although they are a rather inexact measure of ability. They are based on a number of criteria which measure the values of recent and older results against opponents of varying strengths, with weight given to whether matches are friendlies, qualifiers or competitive fixtures in FIFA tournaments. But they don't always give an accurate reflection of reality. Nevertheless they can't be ignored, as the rankings are important when they are used to determine the various strengths of pots for seeding purposes when the draw is made for qualifying competitions, in Australia's case for the World Cup and Asian Cup. The further you fall down the rankings the harder it gets to qualify because you are grouped against higher rated opponents who are seeded higher than you. On the just-released standings, Australia, for so long in the top three since its move into the Asian Football Confederation in 2006, is now ranked at number 10 in the region. Ahead of the Socceroos sit Japan (53 overall), Iran (56) South Korea (69), Uzbekistan (74) UAE (85), Jordan (86) Oman (96), Qatar (98) and China (99). In part, Australia's fall is due to the coach's decision to plot a difficult path to the Asian Cup, playing good quality opponents away from home. Defeats in those kinds of matches against teams like Belgium in Liege and Japan in Osaka, even Qatar in Doha, invariably lower a nation's ranking. The real question leading up to the Asian Cup, at least where Australia is concerned, is whether the ranking is a realistic measure of the team's ability. I would suggest not. While Japan, Iran and South Korea all went to the World Cup, like the Socceroos, none did particularly well. None won a game (although all three of the above did manage to get at least a draw) and it's arguable that none played as well as Australia did in its epic encounter with semi finalists the Netherlands, whom it more than matched for three-quarters of the game. For a comparison with Australia, take a look at some of the others ranked higher in Asia. The Uzbeks' form in recent matches has been up and down. They were beaten soundly (3-0) by Qatar, drew 0-0 in Dubai with Bahrain, and then won 4-0 away against the UAE - a team against which Australia only drew 0-0. Uzbekistan has five friendly matches lined up against fellow Asian Cup competitors in December, so they will come to Australia fit and match sharp, but for all of that, would anyone really say they should be ranked almost 30 spots ahead of the Socceroos and start favourites to win should they meet them in Melbourne, Brisbane or Sydney during the tournament? It's a similarly valid question to ask about Jordan, ranked 16 places above Australia. They have lost three of their past four matches, twice at home (to Kuwait and South Korea) and once in Talinn, where they went down 1-0 to Estonia. The rankings might say they should be favoured if they encounter Australia during the Asian Cup, but would anyone realistically make them the favourites? The rankings, then, are a bit like statistics, of which 19th century British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli and American author Mark Twain were said to have observed, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. The rankings tell some kind of story, and it often has more than a shred of truth to it. But like the stats can often be interpreted to mean whatever their interpreter wants them to, the rankings can be used to condemn or damn with faint praise should anyone want to base their critique of a team's performance solely on them. The proof of the pudding will come in January, when the Socceroos step out against Kuwait (ranked at 123, 21 spots below them) at AAMI Park in Melbourne for the opening game of the tournament. The Socceroos, on FIFA's numbers, have little to lose and everything to gain.