MC Prussian Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 IMO, easiest group would be Switzerland (sorry MC!), Tunisia/Cameroon and Iran. Horrible group would be Spain/Germany, Chile/Ivory Coast and the US. Wouldn't mind drawing South Korea, that would get tasty over here! I'm not saying we're world beaters and we finished first in a rather weak group (at least on paper). Norway disappointed massively and Iceland probably surprised everybody (apart from our very own Jordan ). But to label a matchup against Switzerland as "easy"... well, we'll have to see. I remember a particular England vs. Algeria matchup in 2010 that ended in a disappointing and dull 0-0 draw. Having said that, we hardly ever do well against England. In the past 80 years, we've won just three games and the last win dates back to 1981.
Dan Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Switzerland are a good side but compared to Germany, Brazil, Spain etc... they are certainly the side we'll be wanting and I wouldn't be surprised if we got you either, Finners had a point, we do get lucky with draws. If we'd handled our last one properly we'd have avoided Germany and drawn Ghana although given the way the whole thing panned out I wouldn't have put it past us to lose that either. Who's actually qualified then? Officially?
MC Prussian Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Switzerland are a good side but compared to Germany, Brazil, Spain etc... they are certainly the side we'll be wanting and I wouldn't be surprised if we got you either, Finners had a point, we do get lucky with draws. If we'd handled our last one properly we'd have avoided Germany and drawn Ghana although given the way the whole thing panned out I wouldn't have put it past us to lose that either. Who's actually qualified then? Officially? Apart from Brazil and Spain? Japan Australia Iran South Korea Netherlands Costa Rica Italy United States Argentina Belgium Switzerland Germany Colombia Russia Bosnia and Herzegovina England Chile Honduras Ecuador
MC Prussian Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Still 11 to play for, didn't realise that. Mexico vs. New Zealand, then Uruguay vs. Jordan. Plus a whole bunch of games involving African teams (five more spots to be decided) and four teams from the UEFA Second Round.
Uncle Albert Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Everyone seen the new FIFA rankings released today? It's quite funny how FIFA have chose to ignore the latest qualifying results and play off games to determine a teams seeding, especially when the draw for the World Cup groups isn't until December 6th. 1. Spain 2. Germany 3. Argentina 4. Colombia 5. Belgium 6. Uruguay 7. Switzerland 8. Holland 8. Italy 10. England 11. Brazil 12. Chile 13. USA 14. Portugal 15. Greece 16. Bosnia 17. Ivory Coast 18. Croatia 19. Russia 20. Ukraine
MC Prussian Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Everyone seen the new FIFA rankings released today? It's quite funny how FIFA have chose to ignore the latest qualifying results and play off games to determine a teams seeding, especially when the draw for the World Cup groups isn't until December 6th. 1. Spain 2. Germany 3. Argentina 4. Colombia 5. Belgium 6. Uruguay 7. Switzerland 8. Holland 8. Italy 10. England 11. Brazil 12. Chile 13. USA 14. Portugal 15. Greece 16. Bosnia 17. Ivory Coast 18. Croatia 19. Russia 20. Ukraine You're hardly ever going to please everybody with these rankings. If the playoff results would've been considered as well, then the teams with up to two more games could've gained an (unfair?) advantage themselves and climb higher in the ratings. FIFA had to make a judgement call at one point. They chose October, 17th.
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Still 11 to play for, didn't realise that. 4 More Europeans South American/Asian Playoff Central American/Oceana Playoff African playoffs
Aus Fox Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 For the 2006 winners and the 2010 runners up not to be seeded is disgraceful particularly as they have both qualified with ease. Seeds should be I believe Brazil as hosts Spain as holders Holland as the beaten Finalists Italy as 2006 winners. Then the next 4 highest ranked teams Germany Argentina Columbia and Belgium. No disrespect to Uruguay or Switzerland both I am sure will be competitive but on the biggest stage I would rather play those two than The Dutch or Italians. Dream group would be: Switzerland Australia New Zealand England
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 If Uruguay qualify for the world cup, I wouldnt mind them being our pot 1 team. Struggled during qualifying, lots of aeging (but good) players like Lugano who is slow at the back plus playing with a front 3 it would be Forlan's swansong. They do have Cavani and Suarez but Cavani doesnt turn it on like he does in club football and all things considered, id take them or the Swiss as a good pot 1 potential opponent for us.
Uncle Albert Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 You're hardly ever going to please everybody with these rankings. If the playoff results would've been considered as well, then the teams with up to two more games could've gained an (unfair?) advantage themselves and climb higher in the ratings. FIFA had to make a judgement call at one point. They chose October, 17th. Playoff games shouldn't be included, you shouldn't receive ranking points because you failed to qualify automatically, that would be unfair. I don't see why they couldn't wait for the last round of qualifying group games before closing the ranking system. Even being in 10th place it still wouldn't have gave England a top seed, that doesn't bother me, I just get the logic used by FIFA, it just doesn't make any sense to me. FIFA make the simplistic things complicated.
Uncle Albert Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Winning a World Cup 8 years ago gives you no right to be a top seeded team at a World Cup.
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 For the 2006 winners and the 2010 runners up not to be seeded is disgraceful particularly as they have both qualified with ease. Seeds should be I believe Brazil as hosts Spain as holders Holland as the beaten Finalists Italy as 2006 winners. Then the next 4 highest ranked teams Germany Argentina Columbia and Belgium. No disrespect to Uruguay or Switzerland both I am sure will be competitive but on the biggest stage I would rather play those two than The Dutch or Italians. Dream group would be: Switzerland Australia New Zealand England Are Italy not a Pot 1 team? really? EDIT: Just checked, they were CLOSE to being a pot 1 team, but im still surprised at that.
Uncle Albert Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Why do Italy deserve to be a pot 1 team? Have I missed something? Italy were in an easier group than England, played the same amount of games, accumulated the same amount of points, both teams won 6 and drew 4, England scored more and conceded less in a tougher group and yet Italy deserve to be in pot 1? My mind boggles. Yeah I know they reached the Final of Euro 2012 but again that doesn't mean you're a pot 1 team.
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Colombia 4th Big threat at the world cup. Dark Horse
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Why do Italy deserve to be a pot 1 team? Have I missed something? Italy were in an easier group than England, played the same amount of games, accumulated the same amount of points, both teams won 6 and drew 4, England scored more and conceded less in a tougher group and yet Italy deserve to be in pot 1? My mind boggles. Yeah I know they reached the Final of Euro 2012 but again that doesn't mean you're a pot 1 team. So if previous history doesnt count for anything, why are Uruguay on the cusp of being a pot 1 team having barely scrambled into a playoff in south america (ignoring their good showing at the last world cup and winning the copa america to play devils advocate)
Uncle Albert Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 So if previous history doesnt count for anything, why are Uruguay on the cusp of being a pot 1 team having barely scrambled into a playoff in south america (ignoring their good showing at the last world cup and winning the copa america to play devils advocate) I've never said Uruguay deserve to be in pot 1 have I? I don't know what point you are trying to make, Italy were the team who were mentioned about not being in pot 1 not Uruguay.
Jordan Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 <p> Apart from Brazil and Spain? Japan Australia Iran South Korea Netherlands Costa Rica Italy United States Argentina Belgium Switzerland Germany Colombia Russia Bosnia and Herzegovina England Chile Honduras Ecuador You might as well put Ghana on that list after they won the first leg vs Egypt, 6-1! Speaking of teams that one would or wouldn't want his team to meet, as an American with a long memory, that's one team I want as far away from us in the draw as possible!
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 I've never said Uruguay deserve to be in pot 1 have I? I don't know what point you are trying to make, Italy were the team who were mentioned about not being in pot 1 not Uruguay. Im just using that as an example to show why not having Italy in pot 1 is random
Dan Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Big threat at the world cup. Dark Horse The 4th best team in the world though? Sorry but they just aren't. Maybe about 9th/10th but 4th is laughable.
Uncle Albert Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Im just using that as an example to show why not having Italy in pot 1 is random It's not random though? Uruguay have probably won more games over the last 12 months than Italy? Same goes for every team in pot 1. I think I read if Italy had beaten Armenia at home on Tuesday then they would have been in pot 1, so they had the chance and they didn't take that chance.
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 It's not random though? Uruguay have probably won more games over the last 12 months than Italy? Same goes for every team in pot 1. I think I read if Italy had beaten Armenia at home on Tuesday then they would have been in pot 1, so they had the chance and they didn't take that chance. They won 1 more qualifying game than Italy, but played 6 more games than Italy in qualifying. They didnt have to qualify for the copa america, their entry is automatic, whereas Italy have to qualify for the Euro's and won games along the way. The Euro's were more recent than the copa america. I still dont get it
Donut Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 The 4th best team in the world though? Sorry but they just aren't. Maybe about 9th/10th but 4th is laughable. What are you basing 9th or 10th on, relative to say, the Swiss, Belgians etc Are Belgium really 5th?
Alexikokopops Posted 17 October 2013 Posted 17 October 2013 Playoff games shouldn't be included, you shouldn't receive ranking points because you failed to qualify automatically, that would be unfair. I don't see why they couldn't wait for the last round of qualifying group games before closing the ranking system. Even being in 10th place it still wouldn't have gave England a top seed, that doesn't bother me, I just get the logic used by FIFA, it just doesn't make any sense to me. FIFA make the simplistic things complicated. Unless I'm missing something the latest rankings include the last round of the group stages and not the play-off games. Hence it's the current top 7 plus Brazil that are the seeds. I could just be slightly confused by what you're trying to say though. Anyway, whatever you say about the rankings they put far too much on results in the past year. You have two teams in the top five who haven't made it to a World Cup in over 10 years, and we managed to move up seven places just by beating Montenegro and Poland while Montenegro have slipped 27 places
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.