By Mike Tuckerman
December 1st 2009 @ 3:36am
How will Australians react to World Cup draw?
Australian Danny Allsopp, left, fight for the ball with Indonesian Hariono, right, during AFC Asian Cup 2011 qualifiers Group B at Gelora Bung Karno in Jakarta, Indonesia, Wednesday, Jan 28, 2009. AP Photo/Achmad Ibrahim
What a month of football December has lined up for us. We’ve got the FIFA Club World Cup in Abu Dhabi, the final match day of the UEFA Champions League group stage and holiday fixtures in both Australia and the United Kingdom to look forward to.
But rather than any action on the pitch, it’s the World Cup draw in Cape Town on December 5 (3.45am AEDT) that has fans anxiously awaiting the fate of their respective national teams.
Pim Verbeek probably won’t be too concerned – the experienced tactician acts like the sort of bloke who’d order another round on the Titanic – and he knows full well there’s a good six months to prepare for the tournament’s big kick-off.
For the rest of us, the draw ramps up the anticipation ahead of the world’s biggest sporting event, with old rivalries renewed and new ones potentially forged.
However, with the achievements of Verbeek’s team in qualifying largely downplayed by the Australian public, one wonders how Australians will react to the World Cup draw.
That includes a mainstream media largely obsessed with meeting Fabio Capello’s England, and broadly dismissive of just about every other team in the competition.
For their part, the English will be “happy to meet” the Socceroos if a piece by The Independent’s Steve Tongue is anything to go by.
Of a potential encounter, Tongue writes: “One sport in which England should beat Australia (don’t mention Upton Park 2003). Without Mark Viduka they lack an experienced striker.”
But while a meeting with England would be the culmination of just about every Australian fans’ dreams, there’s a chance that Verbeek’s side could line up against some of world football’s less glamourous opponents.
What price a meeting with Slovenia or Honduras? Or North African side Algeria?
One wonders what the Australian tabloids would make of a match-up with some of football’s lesser lights, even if it afforded the Socceroos a decent chance of progression.
The truth is that our 2006 draw gave us every chance of reaching the second round, not the least because Australia crucially met Japan in the opening game.
It also ensured plenty of sustained fan interest, courtesy of the presence of Brazil and our close links with Croatia.
Once again, the luck of the draw will play a vital role in Australia’s chances in 2010, but with South Africa likely to produce one of the most open World Cup’s in years, there’s no reason to presume that the Socceroos will be on the first plane home.
Indeed, Australia may just find conditions in South Africa to their liking – even if the recent trend of playing friendlies in exotic lands means that old chestnut of homesick teams needing to adapt becomes less relevant with each passing World Cup.
One thing is certain: the South Africans may only enjoy a lukewarm home advantage, with Bafana Bafana fans preferring to snatch up tickets to watch England play, rather than attempting to see their own side.
Regardless of who goes in as favourites, the Socceroos will be looking to sneak in under the radar, and they’ll be hoping that a kind draw helps their cause.
It all adds up to a fascinating occasion in Cape Town, and ensures that football tragics the world over will be glued to their television and computer screens.
Dream draw or group of death – which would you prefer?
We’ll know Australia’s group stage opponents soon enough, with the World Cup draw just around the corner.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(60)
ps can anyone tell me why rugby in NZ is so dominant and played across all strata of society and in Oz it is mainly a preppy...
tifosi said | December 1st 2009 @ 4:32am | Report comment
To gain mainstream attention, the socceroos need England or maybe Italy for the revenge factor.
Apart from that, I dont think the majority of Australians could actually tell you who is at the world cup.
From the sides perspective, they need the easiest draw possible as they are likely to struggle out of the group stage.
AndyRoo said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Playing the Hosts would also be a big media event too. All of the seeds are big enough names to register with the tabloid media. It’s not possible to get at least one mouth watering match up.
whiskeymac said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:15am | Report comment
i would think that veing drawn with our mates uruguay would also create a lot of media interst – even w/o recoba.
Dublin Dave said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:30am | Report comment
Although FIFA have not yet confirmed exactly how they are going to seed the draw, one can deduce fairly accurately based on previous world cups just how they are going to do it and consequently who Australia are likely to be drawn, or not drawn, against in their preliminary matches.
The first group of seeds will be the host nation South Africa followed by the seven leading countries in the FIFA rankings. At the moment these comprise. Brazil, Germany, Italy, Spain, England, France, and Argentina. Australia will have to play one of these teams in their group.
FIFA’s other concern is not to allow too many countries from the same qualifying tournaments to meet each other at the group stages. Consequently, they limit the number of European teams in each group to two. They will probably do this by putting all the remaining European qualified teams into a separate grouping.
Therefore we may say that Australia’s second opponents (not in the chronological sense) will be one of the following:
Portugal, Netherlands, Switzerland, Slovenia, Greece, Denmark, Serbia, and Slovakia.
The last two groups will be made up of the remaining teams from the CONCACAF, CONMEBOL, African, Asia, and Oceania regions. At this stage, FIFA will probably operate a simple “redraw” mechanism to keep apart countries qualifying from the same tournament. So should Australia be drawn against an Asian team it might already have met, the draw will be nullilfied and the picker will have to draw again.
So a nightmare “group of death” scenario might be something like a group consisting of Spain, France and Uruguay, while a more benign one might be England, Denmark and Algeria. Not that England are easy but it’s probably the top ranked team most Australians would love to take on.
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:02am | Report comment
I fear the Socceroos, under Pim Verbeek, will perform exactly the way South Korea performed in 2006. That is, four years after their brilliant performances under Hiddink in 2002, Korea under Pim in 2006 were the same but not quite.
That is how Australia looks now too. There is no star quality upfront now that Viduka is gone, and that sharpness, organisation and exuberance underlined by an X factor have all gone.
Valiant first round elimination, I’m afraid — no matter who we are drawn with.
Rob said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:25pm | Report comment
Sad..but right on the money I fear Shahsan
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:04pm | Report comment
Yah, I hope to be proven wrong but I dont think so. I will own up if the Socceroos make it to teh second round.
All tha tis wrong can be encapsulated by one fact alone: Harry kewell is now thought of as our main striker. It’s like John Barnes or Ryan Giggs suddenly becoming central striker in their 30s. In a way it is like Rivelino for Brazil … in 1974.
Joe FC said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:31pm | Report comment
Dick Advocaat was Korean coach in 2006, Pim was his assistant.
Shahsan said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:15am | Report comment
i stand corrected. but my point remians
Joe FC said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
What was your point?
Shahsan said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
That Australia’s performance post Hiddnk will be the same as Korea’s was post-Hiddink.
Joe FC said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Based on what?
Shahsan said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
Based on observation, experience, and a hunch. It’s called a prediction.
Joe FC said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
One of your observations was that Verbeek was Korean coach in 2006, which is incorrect. My point Shahsan is that some fans are allowing their prejudices to lead them to hasty & rash conclusions concerning the future prospects of the national team.
Derryn said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:11am | Report comment
Was lucky enough to get tickets to the WC and starting to get very nervous about the draw. Our side is going to find it tough this time around, we’ll have to try and sneak games and rely on a bit of luck.
Really hoping to draw England. Would also be good to renew our rivalry with Uruguay. South Africa would be a great seeded team to get.
I’ve got a bad feeling that we’ll get a group of death, but being underdogs will suit us.
Pippinu said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:22am | Report comment
If meeting Slovenia, Honduras or Algeria affords us an easier passage – it just demonstrates how difficult it will be to replicate our performance of 2006.
Tom said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Very true.
Mattay said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:26am | Report comment
I hope we draw England as well, and I know a lot of poms who would love to draw us, just to knock us down a few pegs. As far as football in Australia goes, drawing England would be an absolute dream. I think the mainstream would also love us to draw USA as well, due to our ties. Or possibly Italy or Uruguay, for the revenge factor. Sadly, a draw against New Zealand seems unlikely as it appears we’ll be in the same pot.
Personally, I hope we get somewhat of a glamour draw. It’s the World Cup for crying out loud. I don’t want to have waited 4 years to see a group of Australia, South Africa, Denmark and Algeria. Sure, we might have a better chance of getting through, but where’s the love?
Therefore, I’m hoping for:
England, Netherlands, Australia, Uruguay
Group of Death – sure. But what a group!!!
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Ultimate group of death really would be with Brazil/Spain, France/Portugal and Ivory Coast/Ghana. Zero chance of getting through, I think.
The Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Knowing Verbeek’s charmed run so far, we will get drawn a dream group, which will include France and Honduras, …and somehow further progress thru to the quarters at Portugal’s expense. Then he will sit there and look very smug and satisfied with himself ; )
Pippinu said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:53am | Report comment
NEWS FLASH – THIS IS NO JOKE
Just heard that Ireland has put in a plea to this conference Blatter is chairing, to be an additional team at the WC, i. the 33rd team.
I heard him pronouncing it publicly to howls of laughter.
If a replay was never on the cards, then surely this is cuckoo land??
The Bear said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Irish will be there in spirit. No pun intended. When France get drawn with Algeria, the Irish will toast. The Aire may well still have an influence on the Cup… even if it’s from their living rooms.
Art Sapphire said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:10am | Report comment
It is a joke Pip. Blatter has rejected the Irish whinge in a polite a manner as possible.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/nov/30/republic-of-ireland-world-cup-fifa
The Republic lost in Paris after Thierry Henry appeared to deliberately handle the ball in the build-up to William Gallas’s decisive late goal. Blatter said that while Ireland would not become the 33rd team at the World Cup, the incident could have long-term implications on the qualifying process, and lead to the use of additional officials at next year’s tournament in South Africa.
“We received a delegation from Ireland at Fifa and they were naturally absolutely unhappy at what has happened. They know the match cannot be replayed and the decision of the referee is final,” said Blatter. “Naturally they have not asked for any sanctions to be given to any player or the referee, but they have asked, very humbly ‘Can’t we be team No33 at the World Cup?’ They have asked for that, really. I will bring it to the attention of the executive committee but if we do that, we will also have to bring in Costa Rica.”
The Costa Ricans believe they too were eliminated unfairly – this time by an offside goal scored by Uruguay – but Blatter’s tone suggested it was inconceivable Fifa would add any more countries to the 32-team finals next year.
vladimir said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:17pm | Report comment
stick to rugby pippinu…
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:06pm | Report comment
Why? What is wrong with what he said? Explain yourself, Vladimir.
roarer101 said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
I am not a big football/soccer fan, so I don’t really care whether Australia progresses at all. But I WOULD love to see Australia V England at the World Cup. That would make me sit down and take notice. God I hope that occurs!
Derryn said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
A brilliant quote form The Guardian this morning re the Irish:
In the extremely unlikely event that Fifa decides to pander to O’Ireland’s wishes, the Football Association of Ireland is set to table assorted other completely reasonable requests, among them a demand that they be allowed to play in January’s African Cup of Nations and be appointed 1961 Double winners instead of Spurs.
Chop said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:09am | Report comment
I’d like to see the socceroo’s group as
England
Netherlands
Australia
New Zealand
It would’ve been better if we could get South Africa instead of the Netherlands.
There would be some good rivalries going then….
Moo cow said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
Not scared of anybody…except Brazil a little. But anyone else I think we can take on and win.
dasilva said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
England
Uruguay
Netherlands
australia
Group of death
Damn wouldn’t that be entertaining to watch.
Ghost said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
I would have thought the following would be the ‘dream’ draw from a public entertainment and TV rating point of view, with the added bonus that it gives us a decent chance of a top 2 finish and progression…
Pot 1 – England or Italy
Pot 2 – Greece
Pot 3 – USA or Sth Korea
Pot 4 – Australia
Ghost said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
On the other hand there are only three teams I’d be desperate to avoid – Spain, Brazil, and the Netherlands.
I’m also a bit wary of France as they have undeniable world-class potential despite lacking coaching and leadership, and will have a serious point to prove.
Ghost said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
Don’t know where it disappeared to but I just posted that from both a public entertainment / cultural ties and also Socceroo-centric point of view (ie giving them chance of progression) perhaps a good potential draw could be:
Pot 1 – England or Italy
Pot 2 – Greece
Pot 3 – USA or South Korea
Pot 4 – Australia
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Traditionally, the so-called and over-used “Group of Death” refers to when four strong teams are put together. Not when 3 teams Australia might find tough are in with them. A group of England, Netherlands, Uruguay and Australia is no group of death.
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
For example, at the last world cup, many kept calling Australia’s group (Brazil-Australia-Croatia-Japan) the Group of Death. Rubbish. The much tougher groups were Italy-Ghana-Czech-USA and Argentina-Holland-Ivory Coast-Serbia.
Macs.football said | December 1st 2009 @ 4:25pm | Report comment
exactly
Mattay said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:12am | Report comment
The Argentina-Holland-Ivory Coast-Serbia group was the group of death, and only because Argentina and Holland were 2 teams with realistic chances of winning the cup and Ivory Coast being the most favoured African team. Serbia will still seen as bunnies of the group.
The Italy group wasn’t seen as a group of death at all. And why would it with USA and Ghana, two teams who Italy and Czech would have been confident in getting wins over (though in actual events, that was not the case).
Shahsan said | December 2nd 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
No one ever writes off teams from the old Yugoslavia, so Serbia, being a major chunk of that, was always a threat, along with three very strong teams.
Italy and Czech were very strong in 2006, and Ghana was always the main threat from Africa, as they proved. The USA are like Australia — capable of strong performances against anyone but not strong enough to go all the way. Any two could have come through from that group.
Ben of Phnom Penh said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
I will meet the draw with all the dignity I can muster after drinking all Friday night in the sports bar awaiting the results. No doubt I will conduct myself with aplomb.
Wayne of Windale said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:21pm | Report comment
The point I dont agree with is how playing in a group with a “lesser light”, for example Honduras or New Zealand, helps our chances of progression.
If the two stronger sides in the group both beat Honduras then how does that help us progress? We got through our group in 2006 because Japan and Croatia drew, not because one team in the group lost all 3 of its matches.
The same logic applies to being drawn with Brazil. We don’t need to finish on top of the group. We would prefer the team that runs first to beat the other two teams in the group, not drop points against them.
Rob said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:45pm | Report comment
“One thing is certain: the South Africans may only enjoy a lukewarm home advantage, with Bafana Bafana fans preferring to snatch up tickets to watch England play, rather than attempting to see their own side.”
Sorry Mike, but this statement is totally without logic…..It makes you sound like someone who’s only knowledge of RSA comes from sharing a flat in Acton with a drunken Afrikaaner.
There are aboout 40 million “brothers” in RSA who love Bafana Bafana. As far as the overwhelming majority of the population is concerned anything overtly European is still linked to colonial rule.
There will be massive support for the home team.
Mike Tuckerman said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:20pm | Report comment
That line was supposed to link to this article: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/local-soccer-fans-prefer-england-to-bafana-bafana/story-e6frf9if-1225803445836
I wasn’t suggesting that the citizens of South Africa don’t support their team, but rather highlighting that local fans have bought more tickets to see England than they have their own team.
Midfielder said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:04pm | Report comment
I would like France in our group Kama is a big thing … they will not get out of the play off stages…
Shahsan said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:06pm | Report comment
Why? because Australai will give France a lesson in football?
Midfielder said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:46pm | Report comment
No because the football gods will say it is time for France to loose … well I hope so …
Ingerlund said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:16am | Report comment
Cor blimey, I hope England do draw the Aussies in the bacon butty. We’ll slap a few goals in the onion bag and take 3 easy points, no problem guv. You fellas are Salvation Army if you reckon you got a chance against us. And if that sounds a bit Jodie Marsh, all I can say that your team looks well pony. No offence intended boys.
katzilla said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:08am | Report comment
Been watching Lock Stock ave we guv?
Whilst what you say may be true I highly doubt you’ll go more then 1 round past the Occers.
They won’t make it out of the pools, you wont make it out of the Quarters.
Ingerlund said | December 2nd 2009 @ 6:14am | Report comment
That’d be two rounds further then geezer. You should know the Ali mate. If England do get the convicts, I reckon it’ll be 3-0 England and then the old tin tack for Verbeek. England are nailed on for the semis at least – the old currant bun aint gonna be half as Alan Knott as it is normally in world cups.
katzilla said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Yes you be right. 2 rounds.
Semi finals? Very hopeful geezer.
Good luck to ya
The Bear said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Tin tack for Verbeek? Well if it ends the way you reckon, then it won’t be all bad.
tifosi said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:00pm | Report comment
Pots just announced. Pretty much as expected except france miss out on seed. Payback for the henry incident maybe?
The pots for Friday’s World Cup draw to be hosted in Cape Town.
Pot 1 (seeds): South Africa (group A), Argentina, Brazil, England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain
Pot 2: Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Honduras, Mexico, USA, New Zealand
Pot 3: Algeria, Cameroon, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay
Pot 4: Denmark, France, Greece, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland
tifosi said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:07pm | Report comment
The FIFA Organising Committee approved today the procedure for the Final Draw of the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™, which will be held in Cape Town on Friday 4 December. The seeding was based on the October 2009 FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking (which you can see by clicking on the link to the right), and Brazil, Spain, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Argentina and England are therefore the seven squads that join hosts South Africa as seeded teams for the Final Draw.
The committee also approved the composition of the other pots as well as the procedure for the final draw:
• Pot 2 will be composed of teams from Asia (Australia, Japan, Korea DPR, Korea Republic), North, Central America and the Caribbean (Honduras, Mexico, USA) and Oceania (New Zealand)
• Pot 3 will include teams from Africa (Algeria, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria) and South America (Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay)
• Pot 4 will have the remaining European teams (Denmark, France, Greece, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Switzerland)
• hosts South Africa will be automatically positioned as A1; the other seeded teams will be drawn into the other groups B-H, but will always be in position “1” of their group
• groups will be drawn from A to H and the positions in the group will be drawn for Pots 2 to 4
• geographical criteria will also be respected, meaning that no two teams from the same confederation will be drawn in the same group (except European teams, where a maximum of two will be in a group). For example, South Africa cannot play the African teams from Pot 3 and Argentina and Brazil cannot be drawn against the three remaining South American teams.
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:28pm | Report comment
It’s actually worked out quite neatly, with Asia/Nth America making up one pot, and Africa and the 2nd tier Sth American teams making up another, and the remaining European teams completing a pot of their own.
My tip for easiest group for Australia and hardest.
Easiest:
Sth Africa, Australia, Chile, Greece
Hardest:
Spain, Australia, Nigeria, France
Joe FC said | December 2nd 2009 @ 9:16pm | Report comment
Agree.
katzilla said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:36pm | Report comment
I’d put in Portugal for France. But either or is a tough ask.
dasilva said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:47pm | Report comment
Why does FIFA change the seeding system from the last world cup?
for the 2006 world cup. Their ranking system was combination of previous world cup performances and fifa world ranking.
Now they just revert to simple world ranking which resulted in France losing their seed for the Netherlands.
Did they just change the seeding just to punish France for the handball controversy or what? It seems strange that they abandon a pretty decent seeding system that was used in the previous two world cups just like that.
If they had the world ranking by itself for the seeding for the last world cup. USA would have been a seeded team for the 2006 world cup which wouldn’t be to FIFA’s liking.
It seems like FIFA are changing the seeding system for it’s own political benefit
tifosi said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:33pm | Report comment
Pip.
nigeria are probably the weakest of the african teams, apart from the hosts.
Id doubt anyone would be fearing france either, but they have pedigree no doubt.
I guess if france ended up in group A with sth africa it might even out the draw on paper
Pippinu said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
tifosi
Sth Africa aside – all the African teams look pretty strong to me, especially playing on their own continent.
None of the 2nd tier European teams scare the bejeezus out of me – and we all know that the top nations are always favoured by the refs.
Brian said | December 2nd 2009 @ 9:51pm | Report comment
So Worst case scenario – Spain, France, Ivory Coast, Australia
Best Case – South Africa, Slovenia, Chile, Australia.
Marketing Wise – England, Greece, Uruguay, Australia. Our biggest sporting rival, our biggest football rival and nearly our biggest historical immigration intake
Main thing is to avoid France & Portugal from Pot 4. That way even thought we’ll probably be with a strong seed we’ll at least have 2 teams we could beat.
BTW – seems the unseeded South Americans get a pretty big free kick with a 1/3 chance of drawing Sth Africa. Thats almost as good as being seeded.
jimbo said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:02pm | Report comment
From an interest point of view to attract the most Aussies to watch the Socceroos playing in the FIFA Football WC I think the best grouping would be:
England (or Italy), Australia, Uruguay and Greece
The easiest opponents and the ones our style of play would suit to beat:
South Africa, Paraguay and Serbia
The toughest opponents:
Brazil, Ivory Coast and Portugal.
We seem to get stuck with Brazil a lot in tournaments and FIFA officials will give them the protection they need to progress.
We won’t be playing Japan, USA or the All Whites in this WC – unless we proceed further into the tournament.