| greaserkat 06.12.2013 13:54 |
The main thing Im excited about is seeing possibility of England not making out of group stage!!! |
| Mr.Jingles 06.12.2013 21:37 |
I'm more excited about Italy not making it out of the group stage. In all honesty, I hope Costa Rica pulls out a big surprise and grab a spot. |
| brENsKi 07.12.2013 10:15 |
i love the fact that the British Press have started their usual "Group Of Death" crap...it's the world cup finals for fucks' sake...what do THEY expect? ngland were seeded 3rd - so there should be TWO higher ranked countries than England in EVERY group. Also....Group Of Death? Pah! Based on the seedings - these are more like Groups of Death (England could've been drawn in place of the country in italics) Brazil Croatia Mexico Cameroon Spain Holland Chile Australia Germany Portugal Ghana USA Argentina Bosnia & Herzegovina Iran Nigeria |
| Thistle 07.12.2013 11:23 |
They'll fall on their arse at the first hurdle. The Italians will edge them out and Luis Suarez will absolutely murder them. Costa Rica could possibly get a draw. My prediction is ngland will take 1 point. Brazil, inevitably, will win the whole thing on their own patch. USA will be Quarter-finalists. |
| Thistle 07.12.2013 13:45 |
I think the draw allows for a Brazil v Argentina final. It also allows for three South American sides to be in the last four. Now tell me that ain't rigged lol :p My predictions (winners each group first): Group A - Brazil, Mexico Group B - Spain, Chile Group C - Greece, Japan Group D - Uruguay, Italy Group E - France, Switzerland Group F - Argentina, Nigeria Group G - Germany, USA Group H - Belgium, South Korea Last 16: Brazil v Chile Greece v Italy France v Nigeria Germany v Sth. Korea Spain v Mexico Uruguay v Japan Argentina v Switzerland Belgium v USA QF: Brazil v Greece France v Germany Spain v Uruguay Argentina v USA SF: Brazil v Germany Uruguay v Argentina Final: Brazil v Argentina. Winners: Brazil. |
| Thistle 07.12.2013 14:08 |
Thistleboy1980 wrote: I think the draw allows for a Brazil v Argentina final. It also allows for three South American sides to be in the last four. Now tell me that ain't rigged lol :pSaid, tongue-in-cheek, BEFORE I read this: link |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2013 23:20 |
greaserkat wrote: The main thing Im excited about is seeing possibility of England not making out of group stage!!!Always have faith in their ability to underachieve. |
| tero! 48531 08.12.2013 23:41 |
Thistleboy1980 wrote: I think the draw allows for a Brazil v Argentina final. It also allows for three South American sides to be in the last four. Now tell me that ain't rigged lol :pSo, this time the first pot (highest ranking countries in the World) included three South American countries in addition to Brazil. Since the same method was also used for the last games, we can safely assume that for the last five years all the major football games in the world have been rigged just to ensure that S.American teams get higher rankings and manage to get into the same pot. You tell us whether that's been rigged or not. :P |
| Mr.Jingles 09.12.2013 04:30 |
Thistleboy1980 wrote: I think the draw allows for a Brazil v Argentina final. It also allows for three South American sides to be in the last four. Now tell me that ain't rigged lol :p My predictions (winners each group first): Group A - Brazil, Mexico Group B - Spain, Chile Group C - Greece, Japan Group D - Uruguay, Italy Group E - France, Switzerland Group F - Argentina, Nigeria Group G - Germany, USA Group H - Belgium, South KoreaGroup C with Greece and Japan? Highly doubt it. Colombia has a solid team with Falcao and James Rodriguez, while Ivory Coast has Drogba still in great shape. |
| Thistle 09.12.2013 12:03 |
^ They're not solid enough. Greece are a niggly side who just dig in all the time, and produce the results if not the performances. Japan also know how to dig in deep. Columbia may play nice, but they're easily caught out. When was the last time they did anything noteworthy? @ tero: yep, quite obviously rigged lol. |
| greaserkat 09.12.2013 12:58 |
The Real Wizard wrote:I've been a Queen fan for the last 22 years, so yeah, I'm used to the English underachieving...greaserkat wrote: The main thing Im excited about is seeing possibility of England not making out of group stage!!!Always have faith in their ability to underachieve. |
| Thistle 09.12.2013 13:08 |
^ Ooooooooohhhhhhhhh. Touchy! Ouch :p |
| Mr.Jingles 11.12.2013 03:11 |
|
| Mr.Jingles 11.12.2013 03:12 |
Thistleboy1980 wrote: ^ They're not solid enough. Greece are a niggly side who just dig in all the time, and produce the results if not the performances. Japan also know how to dig in deep. Columbia may play nice, but they're easily caught out. When was the last time they did anything noteworthy? @ tero: yep, quite obviously rigged lol.Colombia has long been criticized for playing nice, keeping possession of the ball, short passing, but low scoring. It's a style that has haunted them for decades. However, ever since Pekerman took over as a coach they've been at the offense more than they've been before. Hence why they are #4 on the FIFA ranking. |
| YourValentine 16.12.2013 02:35 |
I feel bad for England, they really have a hard group to survive. In general I think all these third class football teams like Ivory Coast or Cameroon should not even qualify if the tournament is to be taken seriously. It's really hard to believe that a fantastic team like Sweden does not qualify (vs Portugal) while Cameroon is allowed to deliver the points in the group. There has never been a winner outside Europe or South America. If the tournament would only allow for the actual best teams we would not have these "death group" discussions - any group would be a death group. Imagine Saudi Arabia would qualify for an ice hockey world championship due to similar qualification rules while Slovakia would be thrown out of qualification by Czech Republic (just an example). That is what we have with the FIFA world cup. All the politics ruin the championship. |
| Thistle 16.12.2013 09:35 |
I get what you're saying Barbara, but not sure I can fully agree with it: both Ivory Coast and Cameroon have some quality players (notably Drogba and Eto'o, but there are more such as Seb Bassong, Assou-Ekotto, Salamon Kalou, Tiote, Alex Song, Kolo Toure, Yaya Toure, Gervinho....all of whom have English Premiership experience with the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Liverpool, Manchester City etc). They may not have the greatest teams in the world to beat in order to qualify, but it is still tough, as teams like Senegal, Ghana, South Africa have recent World Cup experience and have pulled off more than the odd "shock". When you compare and contrast, what do the Europeans have to do to qualify? Beat San Marino, Kazakhstan, Cyprus, Azerbaijan, Iceland, Macedonia, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Armenia, Faroe Islands, Andorra.....SCOTLAND??? It's all relative. Sure, it's a shame that Sweden didn't make it, but they just didn't bring it in the end. The Africans have their right to be there, and would it truly be a WORLD cup without them? |
| Thistle 16.12.2013 09:42 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: Hence why they are #4 on the FIFA ranking.You're really going to use the FIFA rankings as an argument? The FIFA rankings may as well be composed as a One Direction song for all they're worth :p Seriously, though, they don't mean a thing as it works on how you're performing over the last few games. Not so long ago, Croatia (yes, fucking Croatia) were in that very #4 slot, and Scotland went and beat them twice in their qualifiers. Indeed, Scotland have NEVER lost to Croatia but NEVER beaten Japan.....I'm sure you know where I'm going..... |
| brENsKi 16.12.2013 16:03 |
but that's the correct way that seedings should work...current form. what's the point in basing seedings on anything other than the past four/five years? it doesn't work. 1. half the players (from longer than five years ago) are no longer in the squads 2. managers have come and gone 3. a handful of wins against teams that were highly ranked ten years ago but are now fairly average do not merit consideration 4. how you did in a world cup/concacef/cup of nations/euro championships ten years ago should never count. |
| Thistle 16.12.2013 18:26 |
^ I'm not saying that it should be based on anything over the last five years, but there;s current and there's current. I mean, winning two or three games in a row catapults you but forgets everything that's happened in the games leading up to that. My point is that the rankings are not exactly an accurate reflection of how things actually are - with the Scotland scenario highlighting it. I mean we beat Croatia twice in the space of four games, but they were in the top 4 in the WORLD. Really? Yet Japan, who because of their current ranking should be pushovers according to Mr.J, we have NEVER beaten. No-one can say that because a side is higher up the rankings, they are certainties to qualify. And I don't think it's right to call the African sides "third class" either. They can play, and play well. They'll be difficult to overcome. Wasn't it Pele who reckoned that an African side would win the World Cup sooner rather than later? I mean, what would he know.... |
| brENsKi 17.12.2013 07:44 |
I certainly didn't call any teams from any continent "third class" Pele reckoned (in 1977) that an African side would win the world cup before 2000. To date not a single African team has progressed beyond a ¼-final. - SIX world cups and plenty of African teams having a"chance" Pele is actually the wrong person to quote - he may have been a genius with a ball at his feet but is more clown than sage once his mouth is open.- here's some of his most barmy quotes: Pele Prediction: China will qualify for the next round from their 2002 World Cup group. Outcome: China finish bottom of Group C with no wins, no draws, no points, no goals, as well as -9 in their goal-difference column. Pele Prediction: Spain are favourites for the 1998 World Cup in France. Outcome: Spain humiliatingly dumped out in the first round after losing to Nigeria, and drawing with Paraguay. Pele Prediction: Colombia will win the 1994 World Cup in the USA. Outcome: Colombia exit the competition in the first round, finishing bottom of their group. Their defender Andres Escobar is also tragically shot dead by an angry fan after Colombia return home. Pele Prediction: Argentina & France will both reach the 2002 final. Outcome: Both countries eliminated in the first round, France without even scoring a goal. Pele Prediction: Ronaldo will never play football again, and his career is over, following a serious injury for Milan in February 2008. Outcome: Ronaldo returns in March 2009 for Corinthians, scoring 10 goals in his first 14 games to win the Campeonato Paulista. Pele Prediction: After starring in the 1991 Under-17 World Cup, which also featured Alessandro Del Piero, Pele proclaims Ghana youngster Lamptey as his successor, ‘The New Pele’. Outcome: What happens next goes down in football infamy. Lamptey spectacularly fails to fulfil his talent, believing himself that he was cursed by dark forces. The midfielder shifts around clubs such as PSV, Aston Villa, Coventry, Venezia and Ankaragucu, without success. Pele Prediction: Nicky Barmby will become a world class star. Outcome: Nicky Barmby becomes nothing more than an average player, winning 23 England caps, and never even appearing in a World Cup. Pele Prediction: An African nation will win the World Cup before the year 2000. Outcome: It is now 2010, and an African country has still yet to get past the quarter-final. Pele Prediction: Brazil won’t even get past the 2002 group stages. Outcome: Brazil win the World Cup. |
| Thistle 17.12.2013 08:24 |
brENsKi wrote: I certainly didn't call any teams from any continent "third class"No, not you mate, I was referring to Barbara's comment just slightly above yours. |
| Thistle 17.12.2013 08:31 |
brENsKi wrote: Pele Prediction: China will qualify for the next round from their 2002 World Cup group. Outcome: China finish bottom of Group C with no wins, no draws, no points, no goals, as well as -9 in their goal-difference column. Pele Prediction: Spain are favourites for the 1998 World Cup in France. Outcome: Spain humiliatingly dumped out in the first round after losing to Nigeria, and drawing with Paraguay. Pele Prediction: Colombia will win the 1994 World Cup in the USA. Outcome: Colombia exit the competition in the first round, finishing bottom of their group. Their defender Andres Escobar is also tragically shot dead by an angry fan after Colombia return home. Pele Prediction: Argentina & France will both reach the 2002 final. Outcome: Both countries eliminated in the first round, France without even scoring a goal. Pele Prediction: Ronaldo will never play football again, and his career is over, following a serious injury for Milan in February 2008. Outcome: Ronaldo returns in March 2009 for Corinthians, scoring 10 goals in his first 14 games to win the Campeonato Paulista. Pele Prediction: After starring in the 1991 Under-17 World Cup, which also featured Alessandro Del Piero, Pele proclaims Ghana youngster Lamptey as his successor, ‘The New Pele’. Outcome: What happens next goes down in football infamy. Lamptey spectacularly fails to fulfil his talent, believing himself that he was cursed by dark forces. The midfielder shifts around clubs such as PSV, Aston Villa, Coventry, Venezia and Ankaragucu, without success. Pele Prediction: Nicky Barmby will become a world class star. Outcome: Nicky Barmby becomes nothing more than an average player, winning 23 England caps, and never even appearing in a World Cup. Pele Prediction: An African nation will win the World Cup before the year 2000. Outcome: It is now 2010, and an African country has still yet to get past the quarter-final. Pele Prediction: Brazil won’t even get past the 2002 group stages. Outcome: Brazil win the World Cup.LOL - I knew we'd get there :p My point exactly: no-one can say for certain that the "stronger" teams are more likely to progress - Spain, Argentina, France, Columbia all touted as favourites before and fell at first hurdle. And they were "up there" in the, ahem, pointless rankings. I don't KNOW that my predictions are correct, but I'd be happy to go to the bookies with them :) |
| Thistle 17.12.2013 08:32 |
Btw, and tbf, Nicky Barmby had the potential to be a world class player, and should've. But that's a different debate lol.... |
| brENsKi 17.12.2013 12:34 |
that argument doesn't stand up.because for every English player like Barmby i could probably name three Brazillians who also didn't quite attain that "immortality of world class" so i'll start the betting with Kaka, - injury plagued (like barmby) denilson - went to wrong club for big money - Betis Adriano - alcoholism robinho - man city and not fitting in/trying |
| Thistle 17.12.2013 17:41 |
I'd actually have put Kaka in the World class bracket, tbh, despite his injury plagued career. He's been a FIFA World Player of the Year, a Ballon d'Or winner, won honours at the highest level with AC Milan and Real madrid, a World Cup winner with Brazil, he's won two Confederations cups, been top scorer for each of his clubs, a top scorer and top assister for Brazil, been named in several best team selections - all among numerous other honours and awards. He's played over 80 games for Brazil, approaching 90 - with an average of a goal every three games (not bad for an attacking midfielder). Okay, not as prolific as Cristiano Ronaldo, but you get the point lol. Not anything to do with his footballing abilities, but he's supposed to be a great guy off the field, and quite the humanitarian (work with the UN etc) His wife is also a World Class hotty!! Robinho was NEVER going to be World class, just for the reason you gave: he's a lazy bastard. A good player, but he doesn't give a shit. The other two (Denilson and Adriano) I'll give ya ;) |
| YourValentine 18.12.2013 02:05 |
I hope it is not taken as arrogant or even racist when I call teams third class, it's really just a fact. The FIFA ranking list cannot be taken seriously because most African and Asian teams have only very few matches against other teams between the world cups. I understand that there is a universal love for football and African teams would be rightfully disappointed if they had no chance to qualify, at all but at the same time I dislike the fact that real strong teams are ruled out by the qualification rules to make room for much weaker teams which proceed to the tournament via quotas. The world cup is not the Olympics where everyone can take part, it's the biggest football tournament and sports criteria should decide who takes part imo. We would have much more different world cup winners if Brazil or Italy or Germany would have to play against each other in the group stage. Instead, the "favourites" are separated from each other in the group stage through the seeding system, so they kick out the weaker teams before the play offs. You can just as well start the tournament at the play off stage. The incidental "sensational" exception does not justify this system imo. |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 10:20 |
YourValentine wrote: I hope it is not taken as arrogant or even racist when I call teams third class, it's really just a fact. The FIFA ranking list cannot be taken seriously because most African and Asian teams have only very few matches against other teams between the world cups. I understand that there is a universal love for football and African teams would be rightfully disappointed if they had no chance to qualify, at all but at the same time I dislike the fact that real strong teams are ruled out by the qualification rules to make room for much weaker teams which proceed to the tournament via quotas. The world cup is not the Olympics where everyone can take part, it's the biggest football tournament and sports criteria should decide who takes part imo. We would have much more different world cup winners if Brazil or Italy or Germany would have to play against each other in the group stage. Instead, the "favourites" are separated from each other in the group stage through the seeding system, so they kick out the weaker teams before the play offs. You can just as well start the tournament at the play off stage. The incidental "sensational" exception does not justify this system imo.I don't think your comments are arrogant or racist at all - you do have a point, as I feel the same way about even having San Marino and their ilk playing "competitively". I also agree about the rankings/seeding system. But it's not "fact" at all that the African sides are third class. Your argument is based on the Swedes (for example) being stronger, but that's not always the case: they are extremely hit and miss. Every dog has it's day and all. What I'd do, because it IS logistically possible, is have a "preliminary qualifier" where the lowest of the low each vie for a spot among the bigger sides, thus only a handful would go through. After this, I'd then make the proper qualification process global instead of regional, so European sides could play African/Asian/South American sides. This would make it fairer and iron out the issue once and for all. As for seeding at the Finals? It wouldn't happen. I'd be happy to see a group consisting of Brazil, Spain, Argentina and Germany with only two going through. I don't think seeding should happen in ANY tournament in ANY sport - a tourney should literally be "luck of the draw". If that, for any reason, led to a World Cup final contested between Iran and Iceland, at least it would borne from integrity over favouritism. |
| brENsKi 18.12.2013 11:20 |
i think they should scrap the continent based qualification process. in these days of quick and easy travel - all 207 competing countries should be drawn like a knock out based on best net result over two home/away games. so in effect you'd have a first round with 158 countries and 49 byes - all selected at random second round 128 countries third round 64 countries final 32 go to finals only proviso - you'd have to separate seed from playing each other first two rounds so in theory england could play china, and uruguay in the pre-tournament knockouts |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 11:30 |
^ I'd prefer groups, but the straight knockout would work too :) |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 11:31 |
....as long as the proviso you advise was scrapped: the seeding idea sucks big time. Luck of the draw all the way. |
| brENsKi 18.12.2013 12:05 |
"luck of the draw" doesn't work for tournaments you have to have some seeding, otherwise your scenario could leave the Qatar 2022 world cup looking completely unwatchable. think about it....you could end up with a World Cup Finals with only 8 decent teams if in the 2 pre-tournament knockout 32 highly ranked teams get drawn against each other and lower ranked teams get three knockout games against each other. There are many more poor teams than good teams... |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 13:33 |
brENsKi wrote: "luck of the draw" doesn't work for tournaments you have to have some seeding, otherwise your scenario could leave the Qatar 2022 world cup looking completely unwatchable.I'm not sure I can go with that. If the stronger teams really are so good, the shape will look familiar come the business-end of things anyway? To me, it should be about what is fair, not necessarily about what is more attractive to see. If that means a New Zealand v Kazakhstan match, then fuck it - it'll take a great effort, so if it just happened to pan out that way, then it would be deserved. Surely better than saying "your continent is shite, so don't bother...." lol. |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 13:38 |
Sorry mate, just re-read your last post - of course there is the potential for the top sides to be drawn against each other. In a knock-out scenario, this would be exciting but could leave the finals devoid of "class". On the other hand, if the qualifiers were groups (still on the luck of the draw) instead of your proposed knockouts, then there's still the potential for a good number of the better sides to go through. I'm still all for fairness though, so if Brazil missed out to Ghana (for example), at least it was because Ghana deserved it, not because they *had* to have an African qualifier at the tourney. |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 13:42 |
Oh, fuck it. It's all dreaming anyway. Scotland and Ireland would still never have a chance :p |
| brENsKi 18.12.2013 15:22 |
you can speak for your own "third world tin-pot footballing nation" as for my own "third world tin-pot footballing nation"....everything went decidely turdish after the Thierry Henry (cheating bastard) handball/goal BUT - i can see good times on the horizon - a return to the days when Ireland were regularly in the top 20 in the rankings, beating Italy in the USA, getting knocked outin the ¼-finals by Italy @Italia 90. The reason? who in the name of fuck won't play like their life depends on it with Keane/O'neill in charge? |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 16:33 |
^ yeah, the Henry thing really peed me off too. Firstly, because he's an Arsenal legend and I'd like to think better of him, and also because I really wanted Ireland to go through. Always do, unless it was against Scotland. I think the O'neill/Keane pairing will do really well, I've always had a lot of time for O'neill and plenty respect for Keano (even though he played for Moan U). I'd love to see them do well.I can see a positive turnaround for them. Us too, tbh. |
| brENsKi 18.12.2013 16:40 |
and i have to say that - on pedigree alone - i must've been the only one to see the Crappatoni appointment being another "Bonny Vogts" calamity |
| Thistle 18.12.2013 17:57 |
Nah, me too. He was too senile to be coaching. You'd have been better with Staunton for all Trappatoni was worth. I think that a national coaches should be native to the country they're managing. Well, I know that O'neill is actually from the other side, but it's better than we had with Vogts, and Keane is in there too. I never actually used to think that way, because Charlton was quite a character for your lot....it was actually Vogts that made me take that stance. |
| YourValentine 19.12.2013 05:03 |
I really detest the seeding process but if you have the lucky draw which I would prefer, you must make sure that the best teams qualify and not let underperforming teams in via quotas. As the system works now the underperforming teams only deliver the points in the group phase. I would enjoy a group with Germany, Italy, Argentina and Brazil but not if the other group would be Japan, Costa Rica, New Zealand and Luxembourg. Because this would make the beginning of the competition interesting but not the play offs. As to Ireland - they will be sorely missed, mainly for their fair play, passion and the fantastic and unique support they bring. Ireland vs Spain in EURO 2012 is unforgettable. Actually, Ireland should have a free ticket to all international cups just for bringing these fantastic fans. |
| brENsKi 19.12.2013 09:02 |
YourValentine wrote: As to Ireland - they will be sorely missed, mainly for their fair play, passion and the fantastic and unique support they bring. Ireland vs Spain in EURO 2012 is unforgettable. Actually, Ireland should have a free ticket to all international cups just for bringing these fantastic fans.love you Barb - you talk sense (as always) now do you think you could get this made "football law" for me? have a word with Prattini and Splatter would you? let the c*nts know that a permanent entry to finals of european and world finals for Ireland is the only way they can undo the Thiery Henry wrong |
| Thistle 19.12.2013 10:54 |
The above two posts are among the best I've seen here :) |
| brENsKi 19.12.2013 12:12 |
much as i love the idea - it'll never happen - simply because there are dozens of countries who could cite a unique case for a "finals bye", primarily: Ireland - party, passion, spirit, fair play Scotland - all of the above Wales - because it's been like f*cking forever since they ever got an invite Brazil - because how better can you say "it's just like watching Brazil" England - because "if Carlsberg did holliganism, it'd probably be the best hooliganism in the world" France - because, well "what's a major tournament without the f*cking hand-balling cheating c*nts", and anyway, it's nice knowing they'll all fall out with each other...just anticipating it is like the expectancy of Christmas. South Korea - because it's nice to have an underdog to beat France Iran - because - why else would the USA even bother to attend? USA - because - why else would Iran even bother to attend? Germany - because they play classy football - every time, and hardly ever go to war with anyone lately (sorry barb, couldn't resist) ;-) Holland - because everyone likes the 1-1-8 total football, kids in the playground formation football Saudi Arabia - because goal-hanging and public executions can sometimes mean the same thing :-) San Marino - because i miss the days of final's tournaments when someone gets beaten 8-nil |
| Thistle 19.12.2013 12:48 |
^ I keep hoping that San Marino, one day, will actually get a competitive win. The closest they came to a worthwhile result was when (sorry Bren) it took a last gasp Stevie Ireland goal for Ireland to beat them 2-1 a few years back: link The funniest ever thing San Marino did was score against England in eight seconds :) link |
| Thistle 19.12.2013 12:58 |
Just for my own enjoyment :) link link |