|
|
Post by omni on Dec 5, 2005 23:51:49 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by shelleybeach on Dec 6, 2005 3:07:24 GMT 10
you could recycle some dwight yorke chants too
|
|
|
|
Post by DJ on Dec 6, 2005 7:55:09 GMT 10
Australia will be in the same pool as Trinidad surely? There's 1 team who have never been to a world cup and 1 who have only been to 1, their world cup history is almost as crap as eachother!
|
|
|
|
Post by Farthing on Dec 6, 2005 15:13:05 GMT 10
Yea i agree with DJ, i highly dobut they will put both T&T and us together in the same group, on paper most people will expect argentina and S&M to go through and S&M arent even that good themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Dec 6, 2005 15:32:05 GMT 10
Um most of the draw is random.
The group will be a seeded team, so a really good team.
Then a European team, Serbia and Montenegro would be about as easy as we could hope for.
Then another random team, that wasn't from the Confederation of our seeded team. TT would be blissfully easy! I'd rather someone harder so the two non seeded teams would maybe draw.
|
|
|
|
Post by grimsbymariner on Dec 6, 2005 22:18:36 GMT 10
Would i be happy with that draw- yes i would!
What a load of crap though- they should just draw all 32 teams randomly. If you get Brazil, Argentina, France and Holland in one group and Togo, Trannydad and Tobacco, Ivory Coast and Iran in another, then so be it.
|
|
kevrenor
Moderator 
Keeping the 'surrounding regions' yellow since 2004 ... Be Mariners, be Yellow, be a Marinator!
Posts: 2,130
|
Post by kevrenor on Dec 7, 2005 9:12:40 GMT 10
fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/051206/1/5hj3.htmlPlus from an English source: England have been named as one of the seeds for next summer's World Cup finals in Germany. World Cup organizers announced in Leipzig today that Sven-Goran Eriksson's side will be one of the eight top teams who will be kept apart for the group stage of the tournament. The rest of the teams will be drawn on a geographical basis so that, for example, two African sides are not in the same group. Hosts Germany, holders Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Italy, Spain and France are also seeded meaning England will avoid playing any of those heavyweights in the group stage of the competition. England actually came out second behind Brazil in the system used by FIFA to determine the seedlings. The system looked at teams' record in the 2002 and 1998 finals and their world ranking over the last three years. The USA and Holland have both just missed out on being seeded. Under the seedlings system Brazil have 64 points followed by England (51), Spain (50), Germany (48), Mexico (47), France (46), Argentina (44) and Italy (44). The USA had 43 points and Holland 38. Other news Germany will play in the opening game so have already been placed in group A with the position A1 for the purpose of games. Serbia & Montenegro will be placed in a non-europeam seeded group.
|
|
|
|
Post by omni on Dec 7, 2005 9:31:22 GMT 10
Interesting, France seeded above Holland and SCG not being in a Euro group (meaning having 9 in that Pot).
|
|
striker 9
Local league player
best striker ever!
Posts: 58
|
Post by striker 9 on Dec 7, 2005 11:53:46 GMT 10
Why is england in the top 8 seeded teams, I'll never know? - I guess the selectors need to look at their formula again! 5 top seed are from Europe - I guess where the best football is being played and 3 from the americas...  |
|
kevrenor
Moderator
Keeping the 'surrounding regions' yellow since 2004 ... Be Mariners, be Yellow, be a Marinator!
Posts: 2,130
|
Post by kevrenor on Dec 7, 2005 12:01:46 GMT 10
why is england in the top 8 seeded teams, I'll never know? Read the FIFA site On another list I'm on people are speculating about the best and worst groups. The consensus is that the worst group of death would be: Brazil Netherlands Japan Australia |
|
striker 9
Local league player
best striker ever!
Posts: 58
|
Post by striker 9 on Dec 7, 2005 12:13:07 GMT 10
Yep - I read the FIFA web - that's where I got the info from...what I'm saying is that England is a shit team and doesn't deserve the top 8 seed, but FIFA intend to use their formula as a standard measure so I guess we have to accept it! |
|
|
|
Post by DJ on Dec 7, 2005 14:29:48 GMT 10
Yep - I read the FIFA web - that's where I got the info from...what I'm saying is that England is a shit team and doesn't deserve the top 8 seed, but FIFA intend to use their formula as a standard measure so I guess we have to accept it! England have been a consistant team in the top 10 for 4-5 years, that's 1 of the reasons why they are seeded! Plus last World Cup they made the quarters, France, round 2 (but were very unlucky), USA lets not bring that up, and Italy semi finals so I don't see any reason why they should be seeded. England have the quality, just not the consistency! |
|
|
|
Post by Bearinator on Dec 7, 2005 19:42:42 GMT 10
Your very defensive aren't you DJ
|
|
|
|
Post by DJ on Dec 7, 2005 20:07:04 GMT 10
Your very defensive aren't you DJ Not really just stating the facts! But I do agree with anyone who says England have no chance next year! |
|
Murphs
State League player
mmmmmm beer
Posts: 265
|
Post by Murphs on Dec 7, 2005 21:04:54 GMT 10
how could any team have a chance with a stick insect for a striker
we have quite the opposite....mark viduka
|
|
|
|
Post by pieman on Dec 7, 2005 21:23:41 GMT 10
I really don't think Engerland should be in the top 8 BUT who else is there?
they are consistant but they'e not quality sorry!
They need a manager who can motivate them not get pissed with them and shag their P.A.'s
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Dec 7, 2005 23:21:48 GMT 10
England has some of the most quality players in the world, and solid depth in key areas, consistency, or perhaps tactics or cohesion must be the problem, not lack of quality!
Of course they are in the top 8 in the world. You can poo-poo them all you like but there aren't 8 teams better than them ON PAPER which is what this is all about!
|
|
|
|
Post by DJ on Dec 8, 2005 8:11:51 GMT 10
how could any team have a chance with a stick insect for a striker we have quite the opposite....mark viduka He is 1 of the strikers yes, I have no idea why? Rooney and Owen will start anyway, Defoe is better than that lanky crap! |
|
|
|
Post by DJ on Dec 8, 2005 8:15:10 GMT 10
I really don't think Engerland should be in the top 8 BUT who else is there? they are consistant but they'e not quality sorry! They need a manager who can motivate them not get pissed with them and shag their P.A.'s Of course a Scotsman would say that  But it's true, as I said they have the quality but the consistency has not been there for years! Sven will be gone after this world cup and the person I would love to see take his place is Martin O'Neill! Irish I know but he's a legend! Unfortunately thou I think it's more likely to see McClaren take over, then the next to favourites would be Curbishly or Big Sam! |
|
|
|
Post by omni on Dec 8, 2005 10:46:24 GMT 10
I think England shoould be seeded, but France were 32nd at 2002 (OK not neccesarily but I like the sound of it) and did poorly in European qualifying and have been slipping down the rankings, why the hell are they seeded above Holland???
|
|
