World Cup 2014 - Brazil

ENGLAND through!!! :slight_smile:

I was on the edge of my seat at times.

As is Belgium as well, perhaps something of a surprise, although apparently the national team is among the best it has fielded in a long, long time. I’ve heard the team’ success has triggered a (fairly) rare moment of national unity in Belgium. Is that an accurate impression Sherpshutter?

As is Belgium as well, perhaps something of a surprise, although apparently the national team is among the best it has fielded in a long, long time. I've heard the team' success has triggered a (fairly) rare moment of national unity in Belgium. Is that an accurate impression Sherpshutter?

It’s what the media try to make us believe. Unity due to sportive success is fragile. The impression the newspapers and other media are trying to create, is meant to counter the seperatist party N-VA, which is the largest political movement in Flanders at this moment. The actually have some 30% of the votes; with some 10% of the votes going to the extreme-right Flemish nationalists of Vlaams Belang, some 40% of the people are in favour of an independent Flanders. How voters for others parties like OVLD (liberal) and CD&V (christian-democrats) think about it, is a well-kept secret. Most media are strongly pro-Belgium, and therefore try to press avery drop out of this Red Devils hype.

What we have in Flanders, is a battle of nationalists: Flemish-nationalists and Belgian-nationalists (Belgicists). Feels a little surrealistic, and I guess it’s hard to understand for foreigners. When I still lived in Holland, I didn’t understand anything of it either.

Belgium do have a good national team at the moment, yes. They should be able to push through to the quarter finals or even semi-finals. They’re mentioned as one of the main outsiders for the title. Personally I don’t think they’ll go all the way, but you never know.

I can see Belgium getting to the quarters, semi’s if they get the right team. Just look at some of their top players and the teams they play for. They haven’t just got a “sprinkle” of top talent any more.

The Top 8 seeds have been announced and as usual FIFA has covered itself in excrement.

Brazil, Spain, Argentina and Germany are fair enough. Belgium also seem to have a very good side at the moment so I’ll give that one too. But Switzerland, Colombia and Uruguay? Uruguay will qualify as the 6th best team out of 10 from South America and will only qualify at all once they have beaten Jordan in a loser’s play off.
Meanwhile, Holland and Italy are unseeded. Forget England. Our place outside the top 8 is a fair reflection but Switzerland, Colombia and bloody Uruguay? How are these rankings set for God’s sake? Apparently on recent results but how can that be so when Uruguay’s results over the past two years have only been good enough to place them 5th out of 9 South American teams who had to qualify?

The bonus for those of us who are not seeded is that with half the seeded teams being less than frightening and a second tier position ensuring you won’t face any of the left out European giants in the group stages, therefore you have a 50/50 chance of a reasonably happy draw to begin with. Still doesn’t justify this organisation’s nonsensical systems though.

I’d still be happier if we pulled out of the whole thing frankly. It’s a corrupt competition run by a corrupt organisation and I’d just as soon not be part of it. The whole Qatar fiasco is just the latest in a long line of decisions made by bent officials on the make.

I love football but I really hate FIFA.

End of rant. Going for a lie down now.

It’s very complicated Phil, and very unfair.

We (that is Holland) got 28 points out of 30 in our qualification group. Along with Germany (also 28/30) we had the best result. Furthermore we were second on the last World Cup and were (if I’m not mistaken) 3rd or 4rth on this Fifa ranking. So how on earth can countries like Uruquay (5th in their group), Switserland or Colombia get past us? That’s as bizarre as organizing a World Cup in a country like - let’s say - Qatar.

Belgium have a strong team yes, and they did well in their qualification group, but they were N°71 on the list (just read that in the newspaper) and got ‘only’ 26 points out of the possible 30.

Seems like Holland and Italy are the most important victims of this system. Italy was second on de Euro 2012 and won their group easily. So how on earth can Switzerland all of a sudden be above them? Who invented this system? A complete idiot?

As you say Brazil, Argentina, Spain and Germany fully deserve to be seeded.

Scherp - Who invented this system? A complete idiot?

Money talks.

Money talks?

In the case of Qatar you’re no doubt right, and in relation to Switzerland you’d easily say the same thing, but Uruguay, Colombia, Belgium? I don’t see no financial reason to give preference to these countries rather than to Holland or Italy.

Can money not also influence easier opponents?

Probably, but Spain and France were in one group and in the past England and Germany (Quali’s for 2002) and Holland and Germany (1990) have played in one and the same qualification group. In South America there are no drawings: all teams play in one group. The ‘easiest’ qualification group was probably the one with Greece, Slovenia and Bosnia-Herzogowina, and I don’t think the Fifa received that much money from any of these countries.

When I read this today I was also a bit baffled.

It’s the Fifa ranking list, and this is done by to the results of the teams. And for that the qualification games are more important than some friendly games. Well, the Fifa is as corrupt as one organisation can be, and is led by the most corrupt man alive ( :wink: ), but this ranking can’t be manipulated.
Still the result is pretty strange.

Btw Phil, Brazil is only in that top 8 group because they are the host of the WC. In the ranking they are at the moment only at # 11.

But this is exactly what I don’t understand, Stanton. If the rankings are based on qualification games how can Uruguay be ranked so high? They have been awful in qualification to the point of not actually qualifying. They will need to get past a half arsed Asian loser team before that formality is ensured.
Whichever way you look at it the system is broken and so is the organisation.
The beautiful game deserves better.

I’m or we are out of the equation this time, our national team is an image from the rest of the country, sad and hopeless.

Well the cycling world champion is Portuguese

Well, the Fifa is as corrupt as one organisation can be, and is led by the most corrupt man alive

  • I didn’t know Howard Webb ran FIFA ;D ;D ;D ;D

[quote=“Phil H, post:32, topic:3252”]But this is exactly what I don’t understand, Stanton. If the rankings are based on qualification games how can Uruguay be ranked so high? They have been awful in qualification to the point of not actually qualifying. They will need to get past a half arsed Asian loser team before that formality is ensured.
Whichever way you look at it the system is broken and so is the organisation.
The beautiful game deserves better.[/quote]

As I said, I’m surprised too. But it is based on results of the last 4 years. Mr. Wiki may explain it:

And for that it should be somehow objective. At least not manipulated.

But the actual ranking used for the WC groups may question the modus.

In looking through this system it seems to me to have a couple of glaring problems.

First off, having a points system for win, lose or draw, even if tempered by weighting, is only relevant for a closed group where everybody plays against each other. For example, in the Premier League of Bundesliga there is a limited number of teams and everybody plays everybody else, home and away, during the course of the season. In this system set points for wins and draws etc even themselves out over the course of the year and have relative meaning. For world rankings this doesn’t apply. Therefore points gained and lost get skewed and don’t get balanced. For example, in this system Uruguay get significant points for a 1-1 draw with Peru while Italy get nothing for a 1-0 loss against Spain.

Which brings me to the second point. For an open group ranking system to mean anything the quality of opponent must be the highest factor when calculating points earned. You can weight it all you like but if a loss gives zero points then 0 is all you can get out of it no matter how much you multiply it by. In reality, a 1-0 loss against Spain takes a far stronger side than a 1-0 win over Lithuania or a 1-1 draw with Greece but in the current system the opposite would be reflected in World ranking points.

Of course, it’s a lot easier to see what’s wrong with a system than to suggest a workable solution and I certainly don’t have one of those but I don’t think you need to be a genius to see that what we have doesn’t come close to working. I’m not a maths whizz but perhaps something based on goal differential in a fixture rather than win or loss and with the relative rankings of the opponents being the key weighting factor might be a starting point.

In the end, whatever any ranking list says, the usual favorites are always the usual favorites, unless one of them is for a short time in a really bad shape.

Spain, Brazil, Germany, Italy, Argentina, Netherlands, England and probably still France

Russia is a special case.

And then there are always some strong outsiders. This year probably Belgium, or Portugal mostly in the last 15 years. There are always 3 or 4 of them.

Still months to go to the tournament.

The main concern for Spain will be to have their players in good shape. Many of the players have been playing now (for the national squad and their own club team, tournaments, CL, friendlies) for about 5 years (since 2008) without any serious break. Last year, during the Confederations Cup in Brazil, the players were not fit, Spain looked like a weary team. Near the end of the season several players from Barcelona already looked tired. Another problem for Spain may be that some key players start getting a little old: Xavi, Xavi Alonso, Puyol, David Villa are all over thirty. Both Xavi and Xavi Alonso are very hard to replace.

If Spain won’t do it (again), my favorites are Germany and Brazil, probably in that order. Germany has a very good team, they have closed the gap with Spain imo and have paid the price for their negligeance and lack of experience a couple of times (Euro '12 against Italy, the 4-4 against Sweden). Brazil is a logical favorite, because they’re the home team and because they’re Brazil. Normally you would think it’s virtually impossible to beat them on their home soil, but they didn’t quite convince me during the Conferations Cup.

Argentina? Don’t know. They have Messi but the question is: will they have a team? In 2010 they had none (but maybe they’ll have a real coach this time). Holland will have to find a solution for their defensive problems (they weren’t really tested during the qualifications).

Belgium is an interesting outsider. A very talented, young team, but with little or no experience in playing these kind of tournements. I think France could be a dangerous outsider too. They want revenge after their ridiculous tournement in South-Africa and seem to have the right spirit these days; And they have Ribery, at the moment probably the best player in the world alongside Messi and Ronaldo.

But, as said, still months to go. A lot can happen in the meantime.

Germany were absolutely scintillating at the last World Cup, and whilst the Germans have always always ALWAYS been well-drilled, disciplined, organised and lots of other dependable-but-dull adjectives, I never thought I’d use the words “Germany” and “scintillating” in the same sentence. But they were. And I expect that young, exciting 2010 squad to now be seasoned and truly dangerous.

I hope Spain get lost on the way there, maybe overshoot Brazil and end up in the Peruvian jungle like Aguirre. They are so boring to watch.

I don’t think Spain is that boring, but they won three tournaments in a row, and that’s enough for the moment, as far as I’m concerned …