Subject: WC Qualifications

Nins attitude on this is common knowledge, and i couldn't agree more. I think the only thing that will change this is if we keep this topic alive for so long that the problem cant be ignored... hopefully

Poland and Italy in Pot B means there will be a couple awful, awful groups. :S

What's the problem with Italy? ;)

They eat too much pasta?

;)

Maybe they did ;)

If you look at statistics... maybe you do ;)

Then: Pot A: Germany.

I want to compare the average ratings to who qualified. The qualifiers are in bold

72.8 Polska
65.4 Nederland
65.3 Eesti
65.1 Deutschland
64.5 España
63.8 Slovensko
63.7 England
63.5 België
63.5 Suomi
63.5 México
63.4 Argentina
63.4 Italia
63.1 USA
62.6 Lietuva
61.6 Scotland
61.1 Danmark
61.1 Canada
61.0 România
60.8 Brasil
60.2 France
60.2 Schweiz
59.7 Australia
59.2 Portugal
59.2 Magyarország
59.1 Srbija
59.0 Colombia
59.0 Česká republika
58.9 Chile
58.8 Hrvatska
58.2 New Zealand
57.7 Türkiye
57.6 Norge
56.8 Österreich
56.1 South Africa
55.6 Bosna i Hercegovina
55.4 Uruguay
55.2 Ireland
55.2 Sverige
54.9 Perú
54.4 Belarus
54.2 Slovenija
53.6 Cymru
53.4 Venezuela
51.6 Hellas
51.6 Israel
50.9 Ísland
50.8 Rossiya
49.5 Bulgaria
49.1 Nigeria
47.7 Bolivia
47.6 Moldova
47.0 Malaysia
46.3 República Dominicana
45.4 Hayastan
44.9 Malta
44.4 India
44.4 Nippon
44.4 Shqipëria
44.3 Costa Rica
43.0 Hong Kong
42.9 Makedonija
42.2 Indonesia
41.8 Latvija
41.2 Ecuador
40.4 Andorra
39.8 Ukraina
39.6 Paraguay
39.1 Panamá
38.4 Honduras
38.2 Guatemala
38.1 Sénégal
36.0 Singapore
36.0 Việt Nam
35.7 Azərbaycan
35.7 Zhōngguó
34.1 Misr
33.8 Al Maghrib
32.9 Kypros
(edited)

Go Australia. Huge win. Nice going cometer, a good NT "crowd" has really helped the success of Aus this season.

And if it wasn't for an upset, in bulgaria getting the draw, 2nd would have been on the cards in a group where mexico and Argentina are :O

Anyway next time around...and Good luck to all those who made it

each team still plays every other team the same number of times during qualification

the draw has a big effect irl, and so it also does in sokker

Sure, there is some luck involved in the draw. Our group had Poland and Germany in it. Fair enough.

That doesn't justify a seeding process that allows the weakest teams to be 3rd seeds in 6 team group.

If you look at statistics... maybe you do ;)

We played almost the qualification with B or C team...
Yesterday with the A-Team we marked a 69 ;)

The seeding process is ok.
Problem is the ranking of new countrys and there are enough ways to solve this problem.
Starting with a fixed amount in the beginning was ok but a ranking evolves and so the starting points for new entrys should evolve.

In the end we should not forget that even in real life we have bad seedings resulting in worse draws.Best example:

European Championships 2008

Totally ridiculous, biggest joke ever.......
oh well, luckily i´m german ;)

I agree that luck is a big part of this process. But there is luck (not getting Poland), and then there is luck (getting 2 new teams out of the 6 in your group).

It wouldn't be so bad having new teams as #3 seeds if there were evenly distributed among the groups. But they end up split between #3 & #4 which can really skew things (some groups with 2, others with none).

I don't know how hard it would be, but setting the ranking points of new teams to 0 the day before the qualifications draw, and setting them back to 1500 the day after the qualifications draw doesn't sound that difficult and would result in a much less chaotic system.

It would be simpler just to enter them with less points. We all know full well that they're going to lose them anyway. 1200 would be generous.

That seems only a half solution. There are a number of decent teams below 1200 (Greece, Iceland, ...) and several more on the cusp (South Africa, Israel ...). Plus you could still end up with some groups with 2 new teams, others with none.

Giving beginning teams fewer ranking points could also lead to deflation - each ranking point would be worth more, which favours the established teams. I know new teams end up giving their ranking points away, but usually they give them to teams that are just a little bit older then they are - which gets these slightly less new teams (somewhat) on the road to ranking recovery.

(I realize this deflation would be a minor effect ... just trying to think the idea through) :D

If the new coutries ranking points could be held seperatly from the table for the first season, that would give them time to drop before they were properly entered onto the table.

The seeding process is ok.
Problem is the ranking of new countrys and there are enough ways to solve this problem.


Agree. That's the real problem, and, as you say, there are ways to solve it, even with very very easy solutions (like giving the new countries the standard initial 1600 points but counting as 0 for the qualification draw purposes, I don't think thats too difficult).

I don't know how hard it would be, but setting the ranking points of new teams to 0 the day before the qualifications draw, and setting them back to 1500 the day after the qualifications draw doesn't sound that difficult and would result in a much less chaotic system.

I wrote my previous post without reading this one first. I completely agree, of course.