Germany 2006 Fifa World Cup

[BethnalGreen]

I did not see English match, but surely England will ask questions about Sven now.

Sweden beat Hungary, looks like we will qualify soon  

Many people have been asking a lot of questions of him for a long time but it has been hard to argue the case of getting rid of him when his competitive match record was so good (including last night 22 matches and 1 defeat).  The media have gone beserk today after the defeat last night.  

I have always liked Sven but have been questioning his tactics for a while. The players though will stand by him as they have a tremendous amount of loyalty to him which will be a problem if the Football Association try to get rid him amidst the public asking for his head!

I think people are getting a little carried away though since the result - it is not as though we have no chance of qualifying now!  Northern Ireland cannot qualify but for them this result is like winning the world cup for them.  So what if about every 80 years they beat England - big deal, it gives them a little something to remember.  When we knew we were playing 2 of our 'home' teams it was always going to be difficult as it doesn't matter what ranking Wales or Northern Ireland have, playing England is a massive deal to them.  I think that this defeat will strengthen the England side and spur them on and give Wales and Northern Ireland a bit more confidence going into their next campaign.  A win for all sides as far as I can see.

Basically, what I am trying to say (in a long-winded way) is that England should still qualify and get their act together and I am happy for Northern Ireland and Wales.

[Guardian]

It looks like that a couple nations will make their World Cup debut in Germany next year. I bet those nations are very excited about their feats in making it.

[Guardian]

It looks like that a couple nations will make their World Cup debut in Germany next year. I bet those nations are very excited about their feats in making it.

Guess this BBC article answers my question:

Four Nations Into First World Cup

[Guardian]

Well, I just looked at one BBC sports article and, according to it, 24 have qualified for Germany 2006 with 8 more to be decided. For some of us, here is the list of nations who qualified so far:

Germany (host nation)

Argentina

Japan

Iran

South Korea

Saudi Arabia

Ukraine

USA

Brazil

Mexico

Angola

Togo

Ghana

Ivory Coast (Cote d'Ivoire)

Netherlands

Poland

England

Croatia

Italy

Tunisia

Portugal

Ecuador

Paraguay

[Mikel]

Spain beat Belgium 2-0 yesterday in Brussels, so Spain will play with other second-place countries to go to Germany next year. Bosnia and Belgium won't be in Germany, and I think Serbia & Montenegro is now qualified.

[Ahmet]

I have a question. Why is it that England qualified though to Germany when they are placed 2nd within their group and they haven't gone playing against another 2nd positioned nation from another group yet?  ???

[BethnalGreen]

my answer was on another thread TG, but basically the top placed teams and the two second placed teams with the highest points go through automatically in Europe...  

Poland and England could both win the group, but are still through as they have the most points of all second place teams.

Hope that helps - if not try and read it on the bbc website as they may explain it better.

[Quintana]

We played yet another crap game last saturday in Prague but we won again: 0-2. Our luck seems to know no limit. So, we're qualified and helped the English as well.

How lucky they are, becoming one of the two best no. 2's (can't see them beat Poland) thanks to their draw in the easiest group in the European zone. In their current form England would probably not have survived the play-offs.

I love Sven's comments though. Indeed, England played a fantastic first half en defended brillantly in the second  

[IceNarcissus]

I have a question. Why is it that England qualified though to Germany when they are placed 2nd within their group and they haven't gone playing against another 2nd positioned nation from another group yet?  ???

England qualified because there aren't enough matches left in the European Qualifying rounds for more than 1 team to finish second place AND to get enough points to pass England.

Also a note: When the 2nd place teams are compared to find out which 2 teams atuomatically qualify, the points and stats that are made against the last place finishing team aren't taken into consideration if they're from one of the 3 groups that have 7 teams instead of 6.

So even if a team wins every home and away match against every other team in a group of 7, the maximum number of points they can win is not 36 but 30 just like every other team playing.

SO, even though in Group 1, for instance, second place finishing Romania has 25 points (which is more than England's 22,) the stats against the last place team, which could be either Andorra or Armenia, would be taken away. If Armenia finishes last, Romania would lose 4 points from their total (1 draw and 1 win over Armenia) but if Andorra finishes last then Romania would lose 6, for 2 wins over Andorra.

The same goes for Group 3 which also has 7 teams. The second place team, whether it's going to be either Slovakia or Russia, who both have 22 points, can finish to have up for 25 points, but their stats against Luxembourg, who have no hope of rising out of last place, are taken away.

And in Group 2, Turkey is now in second with 20, but they get minus 6 because of last place Kazakhstan.

So England is free and easy and they do technically have the most points of all current second place teams, and they rank higher than Slovakia and Russia because of their higher Win/Draw/Loss record, which is again cut of the stats gotten from the matches with Luxembourg.

It's all very technical and exhausting, this European qualifying is!

Why couldn't be more simple like Africa?  

[IceNarcissus]

Also:

Sweden is the only country with a chance (and a very good one) to pass England for the highest 2nd place team.

England's final match is against current 1st place and already qualified Poland, which may prove to be difficult. (And if England wins, they finish 1st and Poland's 24 points would be the new bar to get close to for finishing 2nd.)

But, Sweden's final match is against minnows Iceland which will almost certainly have the Swedes getting 3.

[Rob2012]

We played yet another crap game last saturday in Prague but we won again: 0-2. Our luck seems to know no limit. So, we're qualified and helped the English as well.

How lucky they are, becoming one of the two best no. 2's (can't see them beat Poland) thanks to their draw in the easiest group in the European zone. In their current form England would probably not have survived the play-offs.

I love Sven's comments though. Indeed, England played a fantastic first half en defended brillantly in the second  

It was a pretty easy looking group. But if you take into account the fact that four of England's matches were local derbies, the group doesn't look quite so easy. That's no excuse for some of the worst performances I've ever seen from my national team, and I agree with you that Sven's comments were completely perplexing - he's losing it, and I don't think a change of coach for 2006 would be a bad idea tbh.

Luck has nothing to do with it though. Despite playing poorly in some of our games, we have still qualified and that takes more than luck. If, say, Northern Ireland or Malta were to get a best second place spot everyone would be praising them for getting through.

England don't deserve praise becuase our expectations are higher, but dismissing our qualification as lucky ignores the fact that, more often than not, England have got the result (if not the performace) that is expected of them. Don't forget, we beat Austria. It was nice that Holland made sure that we got a best second place spot, but had we drawn or lost that match, that wouldn't have been the case.

I would also say, on current form, we probably wouldn't get through the play-offs, but we don't need to. Which is nice.

[baron-pierreIV]

Yeah, but come December 9, England will end up in the Group of Death.

[Rob2012]

Yeah, but come December 9, England will end up in the Group of Death.

Depends on the seedings, and only God knows how those will work out:

Confusion over World Cup seedings

[baron-pierreIV]

Wasn't England in the Group of Death in the last 2 WCs?

[Rei]

Wasn't England in the Group of Death in the last 2 WCs?

ya, In Korea/Japan 2002 England had to do with Argentina, Sweden and Nigeria in Group F.. not just a trip..

..but in France '98 the run was quite untroubled with Tunisia, Romania, Colombia in Group G..

[Faster]

right now for the lucky losers

England and Croatia have taken the sets because both of them are out of reach of the Czech Republic - so not matter win or lose Croatia and England are in - though if Sweden loses against Iceland or ties and the Czech Republic wins - Croatia will be a group winner and the Czechs will take their luck loser spot - but if Sweden nails Iceland to the ground like is expected - Sweden takes the lucky loser, and Croatia has the group win

btw

out of the teasm qualified seeds should go to England, Argentina, Brazil, Portugal for sure

[Ahmet]

I have a question. Why is it that England qualified though to Germany when they are placed 2nd within their group and they haven't gone playing against another 2nd positioned nation from another group yet?  ???

England qualified because there aren't enough matches left in the European Qualifying rounds for more than 1 team to finish second place AND to get enough points to pass England.

Also a note: When the 2nd place teams are compared to find out which 2 teams atuomatically qualify, the points and stats that are made against the last place finishing team aren't taken into consideration if they're from one of the 3 groups that have 7 teams instead of 6.

So even if a team wins every home and away match against every other team in a group of 7, the maximum number of points they can win is not 36 but 30 just like every other team playing.

SO, even though in Group 1, for instance, second place finishing Romania has 25 points (which is more than England's 22,) the stats against the last place team, which could be either Andorra or Armenia, would be taken away. If Armenia finishes last, Romania would lose 4 points from their total (1 draw and 1 win over Armenia) but if Andorra finishes last then Romania would lose 6, for 2 wins over Andorra.

The same goes for Group 3 which also has 7 teams. The second place team, whether it's going to be either Slovakia or Russia, who both have 22 points, can finish to have up for 25 points, but their stats against Luxembourg, who have no hope of rising out of last place, are taken away.

And in Group 2, Turkey is now in second with 20, but they get minus 6 because of last place Kazakhstan.

So England is free and easy and they do technically have the most points of all current second place teams, and they rank higher than Slovakia and Russia because of their higher Win/Draw/Loss record, which is again cut of the stats gotten from the matches with Luxembourg.

It's all very technical and exhausting, this European qualifying is!

Why couldn't be more simple like Africa?  

That you for explaining everything thoroughly.  

It is really complicated and judging by this. If Turkey manages to qualify as the second placed nation; then we are a 100% guaranteed to play another nation that is placed in 2nd place in a different group.

My question now it, does this system not place the 2nd placed division nation who are in a group of 6 at an advantage over those that are in a group of 7? I mean, Sweden is at all likely to qualify through as the second placed team as well.  ???

[BethnalGreen]

My question now it, does this system not place the 2nd placed division nation who are in a group of 6 at an advantage over those that are in a group of 7? I mean, Sweden is at all likely to qualify through as the second placed team as well.  ???

TG - I am not sure I understand your question ?

[Ahmet]

My question now it, does this system not place the 2nd placed division nation who are in a group of 6 at an advantage over those that are in a group of 7? I mean, Sweden is at all likely to qualify through as the second placed team as well.  ???

TG - I am not sure I understand your question ?

My apologies regarding my poor English!  :blush:

What I was trying to ask is, are 2nd placed nations that are found in groups that make up six nations (That being, group 6, 7 & 8) have a slight advantage over those that are 2nd in their groups which have 7 nations within their group?

Since it seems, that Sweden will all likely be the other nation that would be given the green light to go to Germany without having to fact another nation from another 2nd placed group.  

(Gosh this can almost pass for a tongue twister, I hope that it made sense)

[Faster]

My question now it, does this system not place the 2nd placed division nation who are in a group of 6 at an advantage over those that are in a group of 7? I mean, Sweden is at all likely to qualify through as the second placed team as well.  ???

TG - I am not sure I understand your question ?

no its equal footing

in each of the 7 team groups there is two really crappy teams

for a lucky loser their results are based on ten games which were played against the best teams -

if Sweden and the Czechs win Sweden will have 24 points in 10 games - Czechs will have 21 a Swedish tie it would 22 - 21 - so it does not put anyone at a disadvantage - the Czechs put themselves at a disadvantage by losing to Romania

when it comes to Turkey's group - only Ukraine has played well enough through the whole tourney to earn a direct spot - Turkey, Greece and Denmark have all been huge disappointments in their lackluster play at times

Russia and Slovakia are in a group with 2 extremely easy teams not to mention the less than formitable Estonia and Latvia - so its not like they deserve a direct spot either

not to mention its just better for the fans to have Sweden in compared to Russia - they blow through qualifying and than blow the big show every time

[BethnalGreen]

I think I get you, but I don't think it is your

English that's at fault (it is excellent by the way) - I find it confusing myself!

If you mean it is hard for teams in groups of 7 to get high points, then it is probably the other way around as they could could get much higher points than teams in groups of 6.  Therefore that team's results against the bottom placed team in a group of 7 are ignored.  By doing that then all teams are playing a similar no of games and therefore have the same chance of scoring similar points? I'm not sure there is a fairer way of doing it than that, except for maybe no 2nd place team going through automatically and all of them going into a playoff...

[IceNarcissus]

Yes. The deleting of stats from the lowest teams in each of the 3 groups of 7 allows the comparisons from every group to be based on 10 matches total.

An advantage of being in a group of 7 is that if you really screw up against one of the lower teams you may not even have to worry about those lost points if they finish last, while a team in a group of 6 has to really work it every match because nothing is spared.

[Guardian]

So, which South American team should Australia want to compete against in a play-off match?

World Cup Drama In South America

[BethnalGreen]

So, which South American team should Australia want to compete against in a play-off match?

World Cup Drama In South America

I haven't been following any of this, but if I had to take a guess then would say Colombia.  Who would you suggest?

[KRATK]

I really don't know what will happen... but I think Chile has the easiest chance to qualify:

*Uruguay vs. Argentina

Last qualifies Argentina and Uruguay made an arrangement so they get a 1:1 and Uruguay get the 5th place over Colombia but this time, it won't happen. Argentina didn't play very well last Sunday against Peru. The local media (the one who expelled coaches and Presidents) didn't like the way of the team with Pekerman, so he must prove that they won't have the same fiasco than 2002. Of course, the rivality with Brazil for the first place will be very important. So, Argentina will have the pressure of a victory. Also, Pekerman is testing players for Germany and those players won't lose their opportunity of their lives. I think Argentina will beat Uruguay or at least a draw.

*Paraguay vs. Colombia.

This match is the one that made me afraid of. In 2001, if Uruguay lose against Argentina, Colombia only needed a victory. They never get the three points at Asunción... but oh! surprise! Paraguay was beated 4:0... anyway, the arrangement of the countries of La Plata defeated the arrangement Paraguay/Colombia. This year, Paraguay hasn't been beated in Asunción... but they haven't the pressure because they are already qualified so Colombia has chances... I hope they will draw.

*Chile vs. Ecuador

I repeat... Ecuador isn't a good team... they did well at Quito but outside, the only important was a victory at La Paz... with Bolivia, in one of their worst times ever. Also, Ecuador hadn't won at Estadio Nacional de Santiago, and with the pressure of the qualification, Chile will attack for the victory. I think about a Chilean victory 2:0 or 3:1.

This are my bets, but in South America, nobody knows exactly what will happen tomorrow.