Sorry Germany I made a mistake. I had you having a win over Finland in 2007. Didn't happen!
So your win-loss is 2-3 and are still provisional. Wins over Finland in '09 and Sweden in '07. Two losses to Denamrk and one to Sweden.
But this does not really affect your position in the Ranking. eg better than Finland and possibly better than Sweden but not as good as Denmark.
Cam

Cam again. I will post a few more win-loss and who played who, for more nations so people can see what the Rank for each nation is based on.
I'll start with Germany since I made a mistake with them yesterday, and work my way up the scale.
Germany is currently 13th with 38.22 Ranking Points.
The win-loss ratio is 2-3 with 2 losses to Denmark, a win and a loss to Sweden and a win over Finland. We could say they are better than Finland, as good as Sweden but not as good as Denmark. As Germany is yet to play its sixth match they are still provisional.

Next up the list is Canada at 12th with 38.76 Ranking Points.
Canada has a 8-20 ratio with 8 losses and one win against USA, 2 losses against GB and Samoa. 4 losses against Ireland, one each against PNG , NZ and Nauru. The other wins are SA and Japan twice and one each over Spain, Finland and Sweden. The wins over SA were back in IC02 and IC05 when SA was lower ranked than Canada.

Next is Peace Team at 11th with 39.86 Ranking Points.
Peace Team has played 5 matches at IC08 with 3 losses to GB, PNG and Nauru. They scored wins over China and Finland. As they have not yet played their sixth match Peace Team is the 4th and last Provisional team.
Peace Team is the prime example of the the situation where only a very few games played can skew the ranking in favour of that team over one that has played many more games and with low win to loss ratio.
Several people have commented that Canada is a better team than PeaceTeam and I would have to agree. However at the end of the IC08 Canada was on 40.41 Ranking Points and Peace Team on 39.86. Canada has played and lost against USA since and and that loss virtually swapped Canada's and Peace Team's Ranking.
The skewing in favour of Peace Team here is reason to acknowledge all provisional Nations.

Next up is Denmark at 10th spot with 41.32 Ranking Points.
Denmarks ratio is 19 -1- 11 with 7-4 over GB, 5-1-0 over Sweden, a win &a loss against USA, two wins over Germany and single wins over Canada, Nauru and Japan. Ireland has beaten them 3 times and one loss apeice against PNG, NZ and SA. They have registered 5 of their 11 losses in the last three years and therefore slipped back from 4th-5th to 10th in that time.

South Africa is next at 9th with 41.61 Ranking Points.
The ratio is 6-10. they have registered losses against Samoa and Canada twice and USA and Ireland twice but one win apiece. With single losses to NZ and PNG making up their total loss tally, SA has registered other wins against Japan, Spain, China and Denmark.
Other ranking schemes rate SA much higher because they came 3rd at IC08. The wins at IC08 pushed SA from 14th out 16 with 34.00 Points before IC08 up to 10th out of 19 with 41.61 points. Their next game could very well confirm the higher rank given under other systems. But a low ranked team having a shock win over a premiership table leader doesn't immediately put them in top position on the table.
Enough for today, will try and complete this exercise over the weekend.

Brett, post the games and results at your leisure for the leagues as discussed it needs to be done but I hope this gives the readers a chance to see who has played who, and won and lost against who etc. so that it can be seen to be fair and accurate as far as the numbers we've used, to get to where it's at today.
Can still be tweeked if needed.
Cam

Howdy everybody.
Sorry, I haven't got back to earlier with the rest of the nations win-loss and 'who's played who' data.
I left off a couple of weeks back with South Africa who were in 9th place with 41.61 ranking pts.

Working up the list, next is Samoa in 8th place with 41.79 ranking points.
Samoa have a 9-9 win loss ratio. They have had 4 losses against NZ and one each to the USA, Ireland, PNG, GB and Japan. They have recorded 2 wins over SA, Canada, and GB with solitary wins over Nauru, India and Sweden. The only sucesses over teams higher than themselves are against Nauru and GB. But they also lost to Japan and GB at IC08 so I think their rank is relatively sound.

Great Britain ranks 7th with 42.54 ranking points.
Great Britain has the equal longest playing record along with Denmark at 14-17 win-loss ratio. Their record against Denmark is 4-7 but most of those losses were prior to 2003. They also have a negative ratio of 1-3 against Ireland and 0-3 against PNG, 0-2 against USA and 1-2 against Samoa. They have also lost to NZ once but have recorded wins over Canada and Japan, twice each and a solitary win over Peace Team. GB also has a 1-1 record against Nauru. Since 2007 they have a 5-2 win-loss record that has seen them climb from 13th to 7th place on the ranking. Again I think their ranking is probably pretty sound.

In 6th place is Ireland with 43.85 ranking points.
Ireland's record is a 20-6 ratio they also have the longest winning streak of 12 games along with PNG. That streak included the Atlantic Alliance Cup and IC02, their first loss coming against USA at IC05. They are 4-0 against Canada, 3-0 against Denmark. They are 3-1 against GB, 2-2 against USA , 2-1 against SA and 1-1 against NZ and PNG. Ireland has also recorded single wins over Japan, Sweden and Finland. The loss against GB in 2007 and the losses to SA and NZ at IC08 has seen them slip a little in the rankings recently.

That is enough for now will try to get to Nauru and the other teams soon.
Cam

My last instalment of win-loss, who's played who data for the nations currently in the proposed ranking scheme left off with Ireland in 6th place with 43.85 ranking points.

In 5th place are Nauru with 44.20 ranking points.
Nauru has a 7-6 win-loss ratio having two wins apiece over Japan and Canada and 1 win over each of GB, Peace Team and USA. They have not managed to record a win against PNG(3 losses), New Zealand, Denmark and Samoa(1 loss each). One could argue that with losses to both Samoa and Denmark they should be lower in the ranks, but the loss to Denmark was back in IC02 where Denmark actually finished 4th(6th Rank in scheme) and Nauru were 10th. Besides they have scored a win over USA who are ranked in 4th place. There's no rule to say that lower ranked teams aren't allowed to beat a higher ranked team now and then. I believe Nauru's ranking to be pretty sound.

USA come in at 4th place with 44.56 ranking points.
USA has a 19-9 win-loss ratio, the high win record due to an 8-1 ratio over Canada. It has been suggested that USA's ranking is too high because of this, but I should point out that the wins over Canada in 2003, 04 and 07 did not advantage USA nor penalise Canada because the Rating Gap between the teams at the time was greater than 10 anyway. USA is 2-2 with Ireland, 2-1 over SA(the wins back in IC02 and IC05), 2-0 with GB and 1-1 with Denmark. They have scored a win each over Samoa, Spain, China and Japan. On the negative side they are 0-2 against NZ and have lost once to both PNG and Nauru. The loss to Nauru could lead to arguments that Nauru should be higher, but again lower ranked teams are allowed to beat higher ranked teams once in while.

It is worth noting at this stage that gap between USA and PNG who are 3rd with 51.10 ranking points is the biggest between consecutively ranked nations. The rankings here are a good indicator of the relative strengths of PNG and NZ as opposed to the rest of the ranked nations below them.

PNG and NZ in the next instalment.
Cam

OK. Now for the final instalment of win-loss records and 'who's played who' info for the proposed World Ranking scheme.
My last instalment finished with USA at 4th place with 44.56 ranking points.

Next up the list is PNG in 3rd place with 51.10 ranking points.
PNG along with NZ has the equal third longest history in International Footy starting back in 1995 at the Arafura Games. They also share the longest winning streak of 12 games with Ireland, the first loss being to Ireland in the final of IC02. They have an impressive 22-2 win-loss ratio, the only other loss is to NZ at IC05. PNG's record against NZ is 6-1, they are 4-0 over Nauru, 3-0 against GB, 2-0 over Japan, and have single wins over each of Denmark, Samoa, Canada, USA, Peace Team and South Africa. They also have a win to go with the loss against Ireland. It can be argued that since PNG has a good record over NZ and won the last IC then they should be above NZ in the rankings, but as the rankings are dynamic and older games lose their importance we see that 5 of the wins over New Zealand were prior to IC02. The other factor which has affected PNG ranking point score is the number of matches played against much lower teams where they actually achieved no increase in ranking points.(Rating Gap more than 10). These matches were against Japan,(at IC02), Canada and GB(at IC05) and Nauru, Peace Team and GB(at IC 08).
Compare these with NZ.

Coming 2nd on our ranking scheme is New Zealand with 51.61 ranking points.
NZ has a 16-7 win-loss ratio. 5 of the losses were to PNG prior to IC02. The other losses were to Ireland(at IC02) and PNG in the final of IC08. NZ's record is 4-0 over Samoa, 2-0 over USA and Japan. They have single wins over Nauru, South Africa, Canada, Denmark, GB, Spain and India. Along with the loss to Ireland they have a win at IC08. NZ were 9th leading into IC02 with only 38.33 ranking points so 3 of their matches here recorded the 2.00 max points change..
Also significantly they entered the final of IC05 as the underdog against PNG, and their win gained the 2.00 exchange and PNG lost the max 2.00 points. So at the beginning of IC 08 they were 2.69 ranking points ahead of PNG. NZ had a little harder run at IC08 only having 2 matches where they didn't get any rise in Ranking Points (PNG 3) and even tho PNG gained the max 2.00 and NZ lost max 2.00 it wasn't quite enough to reverse their positions as had happened at IC05.

Obviously Australia is top and even tho they have played no International Games I'm going to ignore all that our scheme is designed to eliminate (ie conjecture, guessing, personal opinion, etc) and allocate Aussie with 90.99 Ranking Points and let everybody then argue the toss with that score. :-)