Comments on: Which nations do we want to draw in the World Cup?

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 09:57:34 +0000

It would also probably bore the rest of us to death.

By: Shahsan

Shahsan — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 22:58:57 +0000

There’s no “to be fair” about it. Pure luck of the draw now.
But yes, Group B would be a good one to be in. Good point.

By: Tifosi

Tifosi — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 22:04:58 +0000

yep, i dont think anyone will fear France or Portugal. On paper they are big names but have been playing poorly.

By: Tifosi

Tifosi — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 22:03:42 +0000

Yes STH AFRICA will be seeded as A1.

I guess to be fair France or Portugal should end up in that group, that way it would make the draw more balanced.

Lets see what happens.

By: The Bear

The Bear — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 21:55:42 +0000

Good point, tifo. And even if it is France or Portugal (IF), then it will be likely a Domenech France or a defensively leaky Portugal.

By: The Bear

The Bear — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 21:53:14 +0000

Lol, to the draw or the cup? Neither on both counts…

By: Shahsan

Shahsan — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:39:27 +0000

I dont understand this. Is South Africa guaranteed a spot ion group A, which means no other African country? But that could still mean a France or Portugal might finish first.

By: Midfielder

Midfielder — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:59:01 +0000

Anyone on the Roar going

By: jimbo

jimbo — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:50:28 +0000

Yes England can be drawn in the same group as France – UEFA is the only confederation that can have two countries in the same group.

Don’t know how sympathetic they will be to the Irish though and exact any revenge for them. The French should’ve been kicked out of the tournament and Henry sidelined for 6 months.

Poms wishful thinking – they want New Zealand instead.

By: Colin N

Colin N — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:44:24 +0000

Can England get France? I’ve been looking at a few of the papers in England, and their groups don’t seem to include the likes of Portugal and France in their possible ‘group of death.’

By: Tifosi

Tifosi — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:53:13 +0000

Also if Australia can’t be in Group A, we want to be in Group B.

Why? Because the two teams that advance from Group B face the two teams that advance from Group A in the first round of the knockout matches.

Group A is the only group for which the two teams that advance are both guaranteed not to be Brazil, Spain, England, the Netherlands, Germany, Argentina, or Italy.

Even if OZ came second, they would most likely facing a chile/uruguay/serbia in the first knock out round

By: Allen

Allen — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:35:24 +0000

Yep wrong! As I rember from Germany the seeds automatically go to position 1 in the group. For the other pots after the team is drawn they pull out a ball from a separate pot that determines their spot in the group (2, 3 or 4).

By: Pippinu

Pippinu — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:07:12 +0000

Agree with all that.

By: Dickroo

Dickroo — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:38:50 +0000

England
France
Australia
Uruguay

What a group! Great PR exposure for Australia. With an opening match against France and Henry is banned, followed by Uruguay and the final group match with England and the loser going home…

By: David

David — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:29:12 +0000

id be happy wit dat

By: tifosi

tifosi — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:24:45 +0000

another aspect of the draw is not so much the group phase but the knockout rounds also.

Italy at the last world cup had, on paper, a tough group draw with USA GHANA and Czech Republic, which was the second hardest group on paper. (Behind the Arg,Holland,Serbia,Cote D’ivoire group, which also turned out to be a fizzer)

The reality was that Czech republic was poor and ghana and usa were also average.

Italy topped the group then played Australia then Ukraine to make the semi finals. As easy a run as anyone could want.

Argentina topped their group then had to play Mexico and Germany. Much much tougher and they went out to the germans in the quarters.

So be on the look out for which teams you will face later on in the tournament also. It makes a big difference too

By: The Bear

The Bear — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:47:14 +0000

It’s wierd. What’s really wierd is that pot 4 “happens” to have all the euro left overs in it. When the draw is made, is it likely that these teams will play the seeded teams in their groups last? Is that rigged or what? Please tell me I have got it all wrong.

By: roarer101

roarer101 — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:11:27 +0000

I’m not a soccer/football fan but I REALLY want the socceroos drawn against england. I would love to see them beat the english at their own game. Other than that I don’t care about soccer/football. I think I am possibly/probably indicative of the non-soccer/football loving public.

By: dasilva

dasilva — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:38:44 +0000

There’s one thing that bothers me about the seeds
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

By: 2006 World Cup

2006 World Cup — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:31:13 +0000

In the 2006 World Cup, Australia was only in a winning position in the tournament for perhaps 5 mins – OUT OF 360 MINS+ of game time across 4 matches!

Incredible really, just around 1% of our playing time at the World Cup was spent ahead. Most was spent behind, the rest level.

By: David

David — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:00:52 +0000

I hate to say it but i reckon we arent going to make it past the Group stage i love our socceros but unles we draw South Africa we will prob lose at least 2 of our 3 matchs there is just tomuc quality opposition

By: Jim Bom

Jim Bom — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:04:32 +0000

Do you mean the New Irish will give ‘em one for the Old Irish??

By: keeper11

keeper11 — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:52:28 +0000

Don’t know why people aren’t including Argentina as a glam opponent for us…

awesome team on paper..unbeatable on a good day yet prone to implode if things not going well…
also there is the ‘wild’ Maradona aspect aswell a bit of rivalry/ history between the teams..

would ba a fab matchup for Socceroos either way…

By: Pippinu

Pippinu — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:50:09 +0000

That’s right – despite all the predictions about African football – go through the WC records, and you will see that African performances have been marginally better than Asian ones over the last 44 years (and that’s being generous).

By: AndyRoo

AndyRoo — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:34:11 +0000

It definitely seems like the gap between teams is a lot smaller than previous cups.

By: Savvas Tzionis

Savvas Tzionis — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:32:07 +0000

Lets compare the results of some of the earlier World Cups to more recent matches.

Only Saudi Arabia’s 8-0 walloping in 2002 matches the more horrendous scores from earlier periods.

Hungary 10-1 over El Salvador in 1982
Haiti or Zaire losing 9-0 to Yugoslavia in 1974
And numerous other shellacking’s from earleir tournaments.

So whilst it may be true to say that the World Cup is too biased against Europe and South America lets not make too much of big deal about it.

By: The Bear

The Bear — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:28:07 +0000

I think everyone is pretty excited about drawing a top seeded team, rather than B’Bafana, though as pointed out a lot of hype will surround the home team..so it’s win:win if we get them. The other two pots are where the margins for progression will open. Having USA, Mexico, South Korea and Australia in pot 2 AND France and Portugal as possibilities in pot 4 will make for perhaps TWO groups of death for this Cup. Pot 3 is pretty strong, especially if you consider Algeria in a group with France – lots of pride on the line in that matchup. I shall put my reputation on the line and press the claim that this is the most evenly contested *group stage* World cup, ever.

By: Art Sapphire

Art Sapphire — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:25:10 +0000

Greg – Nations from one confederation need to prove themselves against other confederations.
This is really important when FIFA decides how many spots each confederations gets.
For the Asian confederation to increase or even maintain their current quota of 4.5. It is important that Japan, Sth Korea and ourselves perform well. We are not just representing ourselves, we are representing Asia.

I agree that they do no need to tinker with the way the the pots are drawn so that higher ranking teams like USA, Mexico, Australia get a better chance of at least drawing one opponent that is ranked in the bottom 8 competing teams.

By: Kazama

Kazama — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:22:36 +0000

Agree – my money is on Brazil.

Number of non-South American teams to win a World Cup held outside of Europe: 0

By: Shahsan

Shahsan — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:18:58 +0000

The main difference is that African teams play unorthodox but often exhilirating football.
Asian teams, aside from Saudi Arabia in 1994 and the well organised and superfit Koreans in 2002, plus perhaps Iran in 78 and Kuwait in 92, have been pretty poor to watch.