MC Prussian Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 NZ are hopeless. They have a great goalkeeper, but lack a team. Somebody please report it to the closest Lost & Found office.
Wycombe Fox Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 Probably better off spending £1 on 6-0 to Mexico at 11/2 The disparity between the two teams, much like the earlier qualifier is shocking. I would expect all of the European play-offs to be much closer than the two games played today.
MC Prussian Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 Oh, look: New Zealand have come out of the tunnel. Shame they missed the first half.
MC Prussian Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 I wouldn't mind having Glen Moss as a backup keeper. He's quality.
Guest MattP Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 Mexico 5-1 New Zealand. Again the gulf in class between a super football continent and a poor football one embarrassingly evident.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 I wouldn't mind having Glen Moss as a backup keeper. He's quality. Hahaha you have to be kidding me! One good game doesn't mean you are a good keeper. The fans at Melbourne Victory single handedly sacked the bloke after 14 of the worst games you will ever see as a keeper, seriously never seen fans chanting for the reserve goal keeper to be brought on half way through a game and this happend at about 3 home games before the coach finally stood in and dropped him never to be seen again. He makes a howler once every couple of weeks, easily the worse goal kepper in the a-league and wasn't even first choice last year at Wellington Phoenix the worst team in the league.
ADK Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 It's easy to look good as a keeper when the other team has 100 shots. Nobody notices a few mistakes amid the regulation saves and occasional dive for the cameras.
MC Prussian Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 Hahaha you have to be kidding me! One good game doesn't mean you are a good keeper. The fans at Melbourne Victory single handedly sacked the bloke after 14 of the worst games you will ever see as a keeper, seriously never seen fans chanting for the reserve goal keeper to be brought on half way through a game and this happend at about 3 home games before the coach finally stood in and dropped him never to be seen again. He makes a howler once every couple of weeks, easily the worse goal kepper in the a-league and wasn't even first choice last year at Wellington Phoenix the worst team in the league. That may be, but at age 31, he's probably got his best five years still ahead of him. Was he the sole responsible for Victory's slump or just a handy scapegoat? He had a great game against Mexico, some miraculous saves in there - if if hadn't been for the shoddy defense in front of him...
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 That may be, but at age 31, he's probably got his best five years still ahead of him. Was he the sole responsible for Victory's slump or just a handy scapegoat? He had a great game against Mexico - if if hadn't been for the shoddy defense in front of him. He was solely responsible for quite a few of them, saw him live the other week and he has issues with regulation shot stopping and still hasn't grasped the fact that he shouldn't parry the ball in to the line of the attacking player. There is a reason why he is already an A-league journey man, trust me i've watched all bar one of his 5 starts this season and he is useless.
ozleicester Posted 13 November 2013 Posted 13 November 2013 Hahaha you have to be kidding me! One good game doesn't mean you are a good keeper. The fans at Melbourne Victory single handedly sacked the bloke after 14 of the worst games you will ever see as a keeper, seriously never seen fans chanting for the reserve goal keeper to be brought on half way through a game and this happend at about 3 home games before the coach finally stood in and dropped him never to be seen again. He makes a howler once every couple of weeks, easily the worse goal kepper in the a-league and wasn't even first choice last year at Wellington Phoenix the worst team in the league. WEEEEEUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
leicsmac Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 Mexico finish 4th in a group of 6 with at least 2 joke teams and still qualify for the World Cup. Blehhhhhh. May as well give them and the US a permanent pass into the Cup every four years. Even if they make a total Horlicks of their qualifying campaign they'll still make it through, it would seem. But then I guess the system is the system. And if you take a place or two away from CONCACAF, who are you going to give them to? Asia already have at least 4 places which is about right, South America have basically the entire top half of the table qualifying as it is, and Europe are already massively represented. Which leaves Africa. As another question - does the format of who each continent plays in the playoffs change with each world cup? Last time NZ had to beat Bahrain to qualify, this time it was Mexico, so I'm assuming it shifts about every four years?
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 As another question - does the format of who each continent plays in the playoffs change with each world cup? Last time NZ had to beat Bahrain to qualify, this time it was Mexico, so I'm assuming it shifts about every four years? Just depends, I know when we were in Oceania the we had to play the 5th team from South America the last 2 times.
Dan Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 Mexico finish 4th in a group of 6 with at least 2 joke teams and still qualify for the World Cup. Blehhhhhh. May as well give them and the US a permanent pass into the Cup every four years. Even if they make a total Horlicks of their qualifying campaign they'll still make it through, it would seem. But then I guess the system is the system. And if you take a place or two away from CONCACAF, who are you going to give them to? Asia already have at least 4 places which is about right, South America have basically the entire top half of the table qualifying as it is, and Europe are already massively represented. Which leaves Africa. As another question - does the format of who each continent plays in the playoffs change with each world cup? Last time NZ had to beat Bahrain to qualify, this time it was Mexico, so I'm assuming it shifts about every four years? How on EARTH did Mexico come 4th?
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 How on EARTH did Mexico come 4th? They very nearly didn't even manage that.
Dan Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 They very nearly didn't even manage that. That really is inexcusable. Them and USA should absolutely blitz those groups.
Guest MattP Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 How on EARTH did Mexico come 4th? Had the USA not scored in injury time in Panama Mexico would have finished 5th.Leicsmac has it spot on, the CONCACAF group is a joke, it's almost literally impossible for the USA not to qualify. No surprise Mexico have been going down the toilet since a certain person had a spell in charge though
purpleronnie Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 Leicsmac has it spot on, the CONCACAF group is a joke, it's almost literally impossible for the USA not to qualify. damn straight, I know its not particulary popular but i would to see a more open qualifying groups, so European countries could draw African, Asian and South/North america countries.
leicsmac Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 I'd be in favour of either giving the European teams one more place (so best second place group finisher goes through automatically, the other 8 play off) at the expense of CONCACAF, or perhaps giving it to the African groups. Either that or expand the international playoffs so both 3rd and 4th in CONCACAF have to play off, rather than just 4th. Perhaps against the two 3rd-place finishers in the two final Asian groups? I reckon that's probably the better idea as it keeps the idea of inclusion up. Of course it would mean New Zealand would always be playing the 5th South American team, but you could change that round too. Perhaps have the 6 teams (2 Asian, 2 N.American, 1 South American and 1 Oceania) all drawn against each other randomly? Having 3 teams guaranteed to qualify out of a group of 6 with a good shot for a 4th is a farce, and with the quality of some of the teams in it it is even more so.
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 I'd be in favour of either giving the European teams one more place (so best second place group finisher goes through automatically, the other 8 play off) at the expense of CONCACAF, or perhaps giving it to the African groups. Either that or expand the international playoffs so both 3rd and 4th in CONCACAF have to play off, rather than just 4th. Perhaps against the two 3rd-place finishers in the two final Asian groups? I reckon that's probably the better idea as it keeps the idea of inclusion up. Of course it would mean New Zealand would always be playing the 5th South American team, but you could change that round too. Perhaps have the 6 teams (2 Asian, 2 N.American, 1 South American and 1 Oceania) all drawn against each other randomly? Having 3 teams guaranteed to qualify out of a group of 6 with a good shot for a 4th is a farce, and with the quality of some of the teams in it it is even more so. It's worth taking note that there are four stages of qualifying before in the CONCACAF region, all have entered by the time you get to the third where 12 teams are whittled down to the six that play the last round. 35 entrants in total and only 3 guaranteed a place at the finals. I think that's fair enough. To say it is "impossible" for the States to not qualify is rubbish and is no more true than saying it is impossible for Spain or Brazil to qualify. In fact the States were starring down the barrel of going out in the last game of the third stage this time last year, they needed get a result against Guatemala who had already managed a point against the States in the first game, or they would of been out, and they went 1-0 after 5 minutes and had to turn the game around.
leicsmac Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 It's worth taking note that there are four stages of qualifying before in the CONCACAF region, all have entered by the time you get to the third where 12 teams are whittled down to the six that play the last round. 35 entrants in total and only 3 guaranteed a place at the finals. I think that's fair enough. To say it is "impossible" for the States to not qualify is rubbish and is no more true than saying it is impossible for Spain or Brazil to qualify. In fact the States were starring down the barrel of going out in the last game of the third stage this time last year, they needed get a result against Guatemala who had already managed a point against the States in the first game, or they would of been out, and they went 1-0 after 5 minutes and had to turn the game around. Then perhaps tweak the group format? Make the last 12 into two groups of 6 with the top teams qualifying and the second place finishers playing off for the last spot? Would allow for a bit more unpredictability and punish bad campaigns better. Just the idea of a team only winning two games out of 10 in any stage qualifying group (whether initial or final), getting 11 points out of a possible 30 and still having a chance to make it through raises my ire. It wouldn't happen in pretty much any other continent, surely?
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 November 2013 Posted 14 November 2013 Then perhaps tweak the group format? Make the last 12 into two groups of 6 with the top teams qualifying and the second place finishers playing off for the last spot? Would allow for a bit more unpredictability and punish bad campaigns better. Just the idea of a team only winning two games out of 10 in any stage qualifying group (whether initial or final), getting 11 points out of a possible 30 and still having a chance to make it through raises my ire. It wouldn't happen in pretty much any other continent, surely? Well again it comes down to the fact it's the final stage, half of that final six is going to qualify and one is going to get a play off spot.....the team in 4th place isn't going to have a sparkling record in a six team league is it.......in the third stage they dominated their group which included already qualified Cost Rica, and won all six games, if anything I'd say the fact they've got to go to a second qualifying round after that is hard on them, it's easy to say the other two teams in the group were crap but El Salvador are better than San Marino or Moldova and if it weren't for those two sides we only won two qualifying games to qualify for the World Cup........swings and roundabouts really. Their format is a little complicated but I don't see changing altering who would qualify and as a confederation they often contribute two teams that get to the knock out stages out of the three that qualify out right. I'd of thought they deserve more places if anything not less.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.