Here's a larf

[brett]

Socceroos weak: US coach
AAP

The Socceroos have been rated as one of the two weakest sides at next year's World Cup by United States head coach Bruce Arena.

Despite Australia having beaten world No.18 Uruguay to qualify, Arena considered Australia and Trinidad & Tobago to be the easiest sides to beat in the quadrennial event starting next June.

World No.49 Australia is ranked higher than four other sides at the World Cup finals in Germany next year, with Ghana (50), Trinidad and Tobago (51), Togo (56) and Angola (62) all trailing.

"The last time around the easy games were China and Saudi Arabia," Arena said on the Sports Illustrated website.

"This time around you'd probably say Australia and Trinidad & Tobago are the weak ones."

"But Australia has basically all of its players in Europe, and Trinidad have a guy (in Dwight Yorke) who was arguably the top striker in soccer."

Arena has guided the United States to the quarter-finals at the 2002 World Cup and to eighth spot in the world rankings.

[brett]

Obviously people around the world feel the same way as most people in this country, they know nothing about Australian football so underrate it.

This actually surprised me, are we that unknown? Or are our credentials really that low? They cant be, look at our players, and we have Guus for f***s sake!

This underdog tag, false or not, will be a massive advantage to us at this tournament!

[Farthing]

Yea i cant believe that this american wanker thinks he can say australia are easybeats australia always rise to the occasion and even look at what we done in the Confeds Cup, we might have lost every game but still we put 3 goals past germany and thats not too had to do. I hope we get in the same group as the US so we can beat them and teach them to shut their big american mouth

[Jimmydinho]

sorry had to point this out,
the easybeats were an australian rock and roll band that copied the beatles in the late 60's

[Fish]

Who the f--k is Bruce Arena Tina Arenas dad.This bloke is nobody and I hope we draw the septics now.Weve got a squad playing in the top leagues in Europe and theyve got the MLSA or whatever its called now.Youll choke on your words tool

[ryan]

There is a possibility that they will be seeded. If so you would have to say that on paper they are the easiest seed to beat. We all know that the game is not played on paper and hopefully all of the other nations underestimate us - beacause if they do they will feel the pain of defeat.

[brett]

ryan said:

There is a possibility that they will be seeded. If so you would have to say that on paper they are the easiest seed to beat. We all know that the game is not played on paper and hopefully all of the other nations underestimate us - beacause if they do they will feel the pain of defeat.

You're right though, if they get seeded I'd love to draw them. We could top our group.

Unlike if we draw the Argies or Brazil for eg

[brett]

Tobin hits back at Arena
AAP

United States coach Bruce Arena has added fuel to the Socceroos' World Cup campaign, labelling Australia one of the two weakest teams in the 2006 tournament.

Arena said Australia and Dwight Yorke's Trinidad and Tobago shaped as the two easiest games in Germany next year despite the Socceroos being ranked above four other sides that have qualified for the tournament.

The coach's comments are sure to give the Socceroos ample reason to hope they are selected in the same pool as the Americans when the World Cup draw is completed in Liepzig, Germany, on Saturday morning (AEDT).

Former Socceroos skipper Alex Tobin, who captained Australia in its last meeting with the US seven years ago (a 0-0 draw in San Jose), said Arena's comments came down to "ignorance".

"I'd say he just doesn't know a lot about Australian football," said Tobin, now development manager at A-League club Central Coast.

"They don't get a lot of information about our football and we don't really get a lot about theirs."

"I'd dismiss it. I think Australia will be very competitive at the World Cup."

"I'd be very, very confident about Australia knocking off the United States, with all due respect to the US."

Positioned 49th in FIFA's most recent rankings, Australia sits above fellow qualifiers Ghana (50), Trinidad and Tobago (51), Togo (56) and Angola (62).

The Socceroos overcame 18th placed Uruguay last month to earn their first berth in the World Cup finals in 32 years.

In an article published on the Sports Illustrated website, Arena said: "The last time around (in the 2002 World Cup) the easy games were China and Saudi Arabia."

"This time around you'd probably say Australia and Trinidad and Tobago are the weak ones."

"But Australia has basically all of its players in Europe, and Trinidad have a guy (in Dwight Yorke) who was arguably the top striker in soccer."

Arena guided the United States to the quarter-finals at the 2002 World Cup and to eighth spot in the world rankings.

Tobin admitted the US had improved dramatically over the past 10 years, but said they had been helped by having a far easier passage to the World Cup finals than the Socceroos.

While Australia's qualification has essentially come down to playing a two-legged playoff every four years, Tobin said FIFA had virtually guaranteed the US a spot in the finals by offering automatic qualification to the top three teams in CONCACAF - the North American, Central American and Caribbean zone.

Tobin said there were no countries in the World Cup that could be written off as easybeats.

"You look at Togo and you look at Angola, and go, 'okay we don't know them well, but on the flip side they beat Cameroon, they beat Nigeria and all those other countries that you expect to be there, so there must be something in their ability as well'."

[kevrenor]

pjimmy86 said:

sorry had to point this out,
the easybeats were an australian rock and roll band that copied the beatles in the late 60's

Cough, cough .... who told you that crap? They are the ultimate legends of Australian rock and roll, and no more copied the Beatles than everyone in the world after 1964! Wash your mouth out lad!

[Jimmydinho]

kevrenor said:

pjimmy86 said:

sorry had to point this out,
the easybeats were an australian rock and roll band that copied the beatles in the late 60's

Cough, cough .... who told you that crap? They are the ultimate legends of Australian rock and roll, and no more copied the Beatles than everyone in the world after 1964! Wash your mouth out lad!

i know i love the easybeats. ive got all 6 of their albums. i know everyone copied the beatles.
ive also got stevie wrights solo works. and most of the albums that george young produced, including acdcs early stuff.
and im glad that they were finally adopted into the aria hall of fame.
just thought id dumb my 1st statement down.

[shelleybeach]

perhaps tina arena could do a cover of evie

[DJ]

2 weakest teams f*** off! Maybe the third weakest

Australia can beat the top sides on their day, all they need is the belief that they can do it! In saying that I think Brazil would smash 'em!

[brett]

djgrounsell said:

2 weakest teams f*** off! Maybe the third weakest

Australia can beat the top sides on their day, all they need is the belief that they can do it! In saying that I think Brazil would smash 'em!

I cant see Mark Schwarzer flailing pathetically under a 35 yard free kick cross to let it in over his head...

[brett]

Latest twist - someone needed to re-read him the quote he made. We'll happily knock these arrogant pricks off in June.


Arena: I was misinterpreted
AAP

United States coach Bruce Arena has gone in to damage control following the furore over his rating of the Socceroos as one of the two weakest sides at next year's World Cup.

Arena was lampooned by former Socceroos greats, including current assistant national coach Graham Arnold, for suggesting Australia and Trinidad & Tobago were the weaker sides in the 32-nation competition in Germany.

However, the American coach told a teleconference he'd been saying there weren't any weak sides and that his comments were misunderstood.

"Just on your Australia comment: I was, obviously, misinterpreted," Arena said after the seedings were announced for the World Cup ahead of the draw on Saturday morning (Australian time).

"I think Australia is a very good team and the comment I made this week is the fact that their entire team plays in Europe."

"They have a very strong team although they were the last team to qualify, as was Trinidad & Tobago."

"My previous comment on those two teams implied that this is a very, very strong field of 32 teams, in fact, considerably stronger than what we saw in 2002."

Arena guided the United States to the quarter-finals at the 2002 World Cup and to eighth spot in the world rankings.

He had said in an article published on the Sports Illustrated website that Australia and Trinidad and Tobago shaped as the two weakest sides in Germany next year despite the Socceroos being ranked above four other sides that have qualified for the tournament.

"The last time around (in the 2002 World Cup) the easy games were China and Saudi Arabia," Arena said in the article.

"This time around you'd probably say Australia and Trinidad and Tobago are the weak ones."

"But Australia has basically all of its players in Europe, and Trinidad have a guy (in Dwight Yorke) who was arguably the top striker in soccer."

Former Socceroo skipper Alex Tobin, who captained Australia in its last meeting with the US seven years ago (a 0-0 draw in San Jose), said that Arena's comments came down to "ignorance".

Positioned 49th in FIFA's most recent rankings, Australia sits above fellow qualifiers Ghana (50), Trinidad and Tobago (51), Togo (56) and Angola (62).

The Socceroos overcame 18th placed Uruguay last month to earn their first berth in the World Cup finals in 32 years.

[Rowdy]

sjf said:

Who the f--k is Bruce Arena Tina Arenas dad.This bloke is nobody and I hope we draw the septics now.Weve got a squad playing in the top leagues in Europe and theyve got the MLSA or whatever its called now.Youll choke on your words tool

Sing it Johny Young & YTT:
Close your eyes and we'll hit you.
Tooomorrowww we'll kick you.
Remember we'll always hate you.

Good night America.

www.westsidetalent.com.au/ images/johnny.jpg
[/img]

[DJ]

wyomingtiger said:

djgrounsell said:

2 weakest teams f*** off! Maybe the third weakest

Australia can beat the top sides on their day, all they need is the belief that they can do it! In saying that I think Brazil would smash 'em!

I cant see Mark Schwarzer flailing pathetically under a 35 yard free kick cross to let it in over his head...

I can't see Robinson doing that either

Seaman was old and shit, another reason why I believe Sven is a waste of space!

[Rubbernose]

I think we should all bow our heads and pray to the football gods that we draw the Seppos.

They will be very well prepared, and they play together a LOT, and they have considerable World Cup experience, and they probably shouldn't be underated either...but I think it is more than likely that we would play them off the park.

[Rubbernose]

Here's a couple of articles, one from the USA, one from England. Both writers regard Australia as the team to avoid from group 2.

The one from England;

The look of the draw
Dominic Raynor

Let the prophesying begin! FIFA have announced the seedings for the World Cup draw and football fans around the globe - well at least those of the 32 teams that have qualified for Germany 2006 - can begin predicting their potential group rivals with a modicum of accuracy.

We may only have to wait until December 9 for the official draw (which will be live on Soccernet, of course) but that will not prevent the bar room banter turning to the consideration of the best and worst scenarios possible for our beloved teams. So in the interest of arming yourself with the power of knowledge let's delve deeper.

The seedings, along with an interesting titbit to astound your friends, can be seen below, but for reasons of Anglo-centrism, as much as the need to explain the complicated mechanics of the draw, we are going to use England as our case study.

England, who have their best chance of reaching a major final since winning the World Cup in 1966, were awarded a seeded spot on Tuesday and were placed second only to Brazil. This is an interesting turn of events given that Sven Goran Eriksson's team were not even seeded for Korea/Japan 2002.

The benefit of being a top seed means that England cannot be pitted against any of the other top ranked teams and that results in an easier group stage - at least in theory.

Each of the eight groups at the finals will be made up of one team from each of the four pots and while Pot One is constructed with the top seeded teams the rest of the pots are ranked geographically and by FIFA's own murky criteria.

• Pot One: Argentina, Brazil, England, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico and Spain
• Pot Two: Australia, Angola, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Togo, Tunisia, Ecuador, Paraguay
• Pot Three: Croatia, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine
• Pot Four: Iran, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Costa Rica, Trinidad & Tobago, United States
• Special Pot: Serbia & Montenegro

Before we head of into the fantastical world of England's 'Dream Draw' it is important to note a few of the other restrictions that FIFA have imposed on the process.

The basic rule is that one team from each pot goes into the make up of each of the eight groups for Germany 2006. No two teams from one continent can be placed in the same group, except for European teams as, with 14 nations through; there must be two UEFA teams in six groups.

This is the reason Serbia & Montenegro have been placed into a separate group (meaning pot four only has seven teams) and they will be placed in a group with Argentina, Brazil or Mexico.

Clear? No? Well all you need to know with regards to England is they will face one team from pots Two, Three and Four. And so, with the tedious necessity of work over it is time to crack on with the dream draw.

Looking at the groupings, an in form England should have no real problem with any of the teams in Pot Two (or Pot Four for that matter) but it would probably be best to avoid our comrades down under in Australia and the typically muscular African nations of Ghana and Ivory Coast.

That leaves us the South American duo of Paraguay, against whom England have a won both meetings 1-0, and Ecuador, who can only play well if the pitch is 2,000 metres above sea level. But worse than those two are African minnows Togo and the lowest ranked team at the finals Angola. The worst of a bad bunch would be the perfect start so let's select Angola.

Pot Three is probably the most troublesome for England as it contains all the other European qualifiers and is easily the strongest pot, bar the top seeds. The most beatable opposition from this selection would be Switzerland, Croatia, Ukraine and Poland. Recent results bear this out; England beat Ukraine 3-0 in a friendly, walloped Croatia 4-2 at Euro 2004, beat Switzerland 3-0 at Euro 2004 and triumphed 2-1 over Poland in World Cup qualifying.

Further analysis may show Ukraine to be a one man team, but that one man is former European Player of the Year Andrei Schevchenko. Meanwhile, Switzerland will be virtually playing at home in Germany and saw off Turkey in their play-off and Croatia are still the best team to emerge from the old Yugoslavia so that leaves Poland, who England have already beaten twice in qualifying.

Pot Four is a mish-mash of CONCACAF and Asian teams and the weakest of the bunch are probably Iran, Costa Rica and then even further down the scale Saudi Arabia and Trinidad and Tobago.

T&T have qualified for the finals for the first time, via a play-off with Bahrain, but they will be the party animals of the Finals and most fans will be willing the Caribbean underdogs to win, including many people in England, and for this incredibly unscientific reason I'm placing the Saudi Arabia orb on the radiator. The Saudi's have got worse at every World Cup since they made their debut and finished last in 2002.

And so, if I manage to rig the draw in Leipzig England's easy route to the knockout phase would be as follows: England, Angola, Poland and Saudi Arabia. Not the most thrilling of groups, but if its excitement England are after than we have to start thinking about the dreaded 'Group of Death'.

There will no doubt be a 'Group of Death', all tournaments must have one but it seems tough to select a group of four form the teams available that will really strike fear into the England team.

The worst case scenario from Pot Two would probably be either Australia, for reasons of sporting rivalry, or Tunisia. Under former France coach Roger Lemerre Tunisia were crowned African champions in 2004 and the absence of the usual African powerhouses of Nigeria and Cameroon they are probably the best the continent has to offer.

Having said that they still look relatively weak and England's toughest opponent from Pot Two would be Australia. The Socceroos beat Eriksson's team 3-1 in 2003 and an extension of the intense cricket and rugby rivalry between the two countries into football would prove interesting.

Pot Three contains the real ingredients for a 'group of death' with both Holland and the Czech Republic capable of beating anybody on their day. The Czechs can boast a host of stars - Pavle Nedved, Milan Baros, Petr Cech - but Holland were unlucky to miss out on being seeded and are a potent force under manager Marco van Basten. The Dutch will also be playing in neighbouring Germany and the last time the tournament was held there they got to the final. So the Dutch are the ones to watch.

Finally, from Pot Four there can be only one contender and that has surely got to be the cousins across the pond, the USA. Memories of Alexi Lalas' winning header in the US Cup in 1993 and Joe 'Larry' Gaetjens goal that effectively knocked England out of the 1954 World Cup could be laid to rest with a victory over the team ranked 8th (above England) in FIFA's official standings... well that and the fact it is a poor group to choose from.

So after careful consideration England's 'Group of Death' would consist of: England, Australia, Holland and the USA. But even that carfeully constructed group doesn't look too tough, so there can be no excuses for England team not progressing next year. Get your bets on now!

Would England prefer the 'Dream draw' or the 'Group of Death'? Well it depends on your point of view: Do you want to see poor football and England go through or exciting football and possibility of not progressing?

On Friday the draw will probably throw up something somewhere between the two and below is a guide to help you make your own minds up.

[Rubbernose]

The one from the USA;

Mexico undeserving of a seed
Jen Chang

With just a couple of days left until the World Cup draw, one part of the guessing game is now over. FIFA's announcement of the top eight seeds for the World Cup finals on Tuesday ended vigorous speculation.

That said, a look at the seeding shows that if nothing else, FIFA needs to clean up the formula it used to determine those seedings. Of the eight countries on the list -- Brazil, Argentina, England, Italy, France, Germany, Spain and Mexico -- the choices of Mexico and Spain were shaky to say the least.

With FIFA using its own world rankings, and performance from the past two World Cups as a basis for seeding, Mexico inexplicably was seeded over the Netherlands. If one makes the argument that a team from CONCACAF deserved the seed, then that seed should have gone to the United States.

Proponents for Mexico argue that the Netherlands didn't deserve a seed since it failed to qualify for the '02 World Cup. However, let's not forget that the Netherlands also reached the semifinals of the '98 World Cup and has been consistently ranked higher than Mexico in recent FIFA rankings.

If FIFA is going to penalize the Dutch so heavily for '02, then by the same thought process, shouldn't the U.S. be rewarded for its superior '02 performance when it reached the quarterfinals? Given that the U.S. also finished ahead of Mexico in recent qualifying and won the Gold Cup, it's just as perplexing that the U.S. was not seeded ahead of Mexico.

You can't even make a case for Mexico based on historical performance. Mexico has only reached the quarterfinal stages twice historically (1970 and 1986, and both times on home territory), and has been bounced from the last three World Cups in the second round. This means FIFA places more emphasis on a team reaching the second round of the World Cup and the semifinals of a friendly summer international tournament (the recent Confederations Cup) than they do on World Cup pedigree and qualification results.

What does this mean for the U.S?

Contrary to popular belief, those countries that did not receive a No. 1 seed do not receive a kiss of death. Other than national pride being hurt, nothing else is really at stake. Since two teams will qualify from each of the first-round groups, being lumped with a Brazil, Argentina or another powerhouse really doesn't make that much difference. The short end of the stick actually comes in terms of who the other two teams in the group will be. This is where the problem lies for the U.S.

The downside of the decision to give Mexico a seed and designate a team such as Holland as a floating wild card now increases the likelihood that the U.S will find itself in the undesirable position of having two powerhouse teams in its group for the opening stages.

Clearly, FIFA needs to look at adding an additional tier of seeding, perhaps Nos. 8 through 16, since the regional allocation of teams provides for some inequity in potential group draws.

It's patently unfair that the U.S. team is lumped in the same tier as minnows such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, prohibiting the U.S. from being potential group opponents. This virtually ensures that the U.S. will be placed in a group whereby at best, there will be only one weak team.

Looking at pools, these are the best and worst case scenarios from the U.S. perspective:

Best Case Scenarios

Pool 1: Germany, France and Spain.

It's too bad that it is impossible for the U.S. to play Mexico in the group stage. In addition to adding some rivalry spice to the proceedings, the Mexican team would be by far the easiest opponents for the U.S.

Failing that wishful thinking, the U.S. should hope to play Germany first. Yes, the Germans are hosts, and hosts benefit from the inevitable 12th-man boost, but this is a far weaker German team than even those in recent years. German soccer is still suffering from a dearth of homegrown talent in recent years (outside of Lukas Podolski and Michael Ballack) and home support can only carry a team so far.

The French are still too reliant on Zinedine Zidane and there's no guarantee that Zidane will be fully healthy and conditioned by next year's World Cup, given his age and injury problems over the last two years. Even if he is, Zidane and Thierry Henry have also yet to prove they can mesh effectively on the playing field. This makes the French one of the more vulnerable top seeds, despite their undoubted talent.

As for the Spanish, they've yet to shake their reputation as chronic World Cup underachievers. Despite the presence of Iker Casillas in goal and an abundance of attacking flair -- the Spanish defense is vulnerable to exactly the kind of high-octane direct style that the U.S. likes to employ.

Pool 2: Tunisia, Togo, Angola

All three countries are relatively unknown on the world scene and lack the type of big-name players that can put a scare into the U.S. defense. The U.S. contingent has to be hoping that they draw this pool.

Pool 3: Poland, Croatia, Switzerland

Croatia is not nearly the same force that they were back in 1998, with the golden era squad of Alen Boksic, Davor Suker and Robert Prosinecki. As for Poland, it suffers from a lack world-class talent. When your best player is comedy keeper Jerzy Dudek -- that says it all, really. The Poles are currently weaker than the '02 version that rather surprisingly beat the U.S. and would now be an ideal draw. If there is a true weak sister in the European pool, it's Switzerland -- I suspect the U.S. isn't the only one hoping to be matched up with the Swiss.

An ideal draw for the U.S. would be a group with Germany, Togo and Switzerland.

Worst Case Scenarios

Pool 1: Brazil, Argentina, Italy, England

Brazil and Argentina speak for themselves. The Italians will be arguably the third most talented team at the World Cup. If Italy can get rid of its tendency to attempt to shut up shop after scoring one goal, it could do a lot of damage. The Italians would probably be best served by ditching the aging and ineffective duo of Christian Vieri and Alessandro Del Piero once and for all.

As for England, it's undoubtedly the strongest team on paper that the Brits have sent to the World Cup in quite some time. If Sven Goran-Eriksson can figure a way to get Steven Gerrard, David Beckham and Frank Lampard on the field at the same time effectively, England will be a handful for any team.

Pool 2: Paraguay, Australia, Ivory Coast, Ghana

Teams will hope to avoid Paraguay, which has its share of flair with Roque Santa Cruz (assuming he recovers from his knee injury) and company. Australia, with its plethora of European-based players, looks strong on paper, assuming the enigmatic and wayward Harry Kewell can regain his form. Teams can't rule out the presence of Gus Hiddink as coach for Australia. Hiddink is rapidly turning into soccer's version of Larry Brown, and if he can work his magic, then the underachieving Australians could be a surprise.

In some respects, the surprising failure of traditional African powerhouses Cameroon and Nigeria to qualify has made pool No. 2 easier, albeit harder to predict. It's difficult to get a read on surprise qualifiers like Ghana or the Ivory Coast. However, both have a couple of headliners, such as Chelsea's Didier Drogba for the Ivory Coast and Michael Essien for Ghana, which makes them a difficult foe.

Pool 3: Czech Republic, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden

For all of the hand-wringing about the Netherlands' failure to land a seed, the real danger team from the European pool and probably the team no one wants to face in the first stage are the Czechs. Never in consideration for a seed because of their history, the current edition is a team to be feared. When in full flow, the lineup, which includes Pavel Nedved, Milan Baros and Tomas Rosicky, is one of the few that can compete with Brazil in terms of flair and panache.

The Netherlands also fall into this category and is a team that no one wants to face in the first round. A date with Portugal or Sweden would not be the end of the world, but considering some of the easier options out there for the U.S., both would be best avoided.

A nightmare scenario would see the U.S. draw a group that includes Brazil, Australia and the Czech Republic.

Jen Chang is the U.S. editor for ESPN Soccernet.com.

[omni]

That US Nightmare would be a nightmare for Australia too - Brazil, Autralia, Czech Republic, US - painful!

Arena has taken back what he said sayig he was 'obviously misunderstood' and he meat 'it shows the depth in this world cup' sorry dickhead I don't buy it for a second, I hope we draw the Dickheads... I mean the US