World Cup 2018 Qualifiers - Play-offs

[Guest Cannabis]

Just now, ScoRoss said:

The top seeds for Europe's World Cup Qualifying were: Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, England, Wales, Spain and Croatia

Romania and Wales being there really is a joke. It makes it even worse that the two of these have failed to qualify for the tournament. Chris Coleman is seen as some sort of Messiah but he should have done more with what he had this campaign. 

[ScoRoss]

4 minutes ago, Dan said:

What's incredible about that is that Poland aren't even a top seed, it was actually Romania. That's the same Romania whose awful Euro 2016 was their first tournament showing since 1998. They have got to look at changing the system because it clearly doesn't work.

I'd imagine that Croatia and Wales were the other pot one sides.

Romania were ranked 8th in the World when the draw was made.

Yeah, I don't remember them having a good side either.

[Dan+]

2 minutes ago, Cannabis said:

Given that Wales were as high as 2nd at one point in the rankings I'd assume you're right.

Wales in fairness actually had tangible success. Romania were shocking. I haven't got a clue how they ended up above even Poland and Denmark.

We did look at that group ourselves and laugh at how that one ended up. Seeing Romania as the top seed posed more questions than answers.

[Dan+]

1 hour ago, SirBalon said:

I disagree with how the seeding system is done both at international level and club level...  History SHOULD take a part in all of this because to have Iceland, Poland and some others getting benefits from having achieved nowhere near some other names, is ridiculous.  Spain and Italy in the same World Cup qualification group was absolutely stupid...  Or Holland and France.

Take for example Spain in the World Cup in Russia...  They're going to be placed in a group with another big name.  Spain in recent times have won two European Championships and a World Cup.  All of a sudden they find themselves slightly out of the seeding rank for the World Cup.  This doesn't benefit the tournament (Italy may be out and someone like Argentina, France or Germany will get Spain in their group) and it doesn't benefit football.

Totally designed to get a South Korea type situation occurring again in the next World Cup by going far because big names are eliminated along the way due to the narrow margin of the possibility of elimination in small group games.  They (FIFA) couldn't do what they done within a tournament itself (self evident) when they took the Koreans to the Semis.  Now it's a hell of a lot more clandestine.

God knows how having this dreadful Italy side in it benefits football. It's their own fault for being shite. Even though they end up in a group with Spain they've still been handed Sweden over two legs - if they can't beat Sweden over two legs quite frankly they don't deserve to be in. 

[Guest]

Just now, Dan said:

God knows how having this dreadful Italy side in it benefits football. It's their own fault for being shite. Even though they end up in a group with Spain they've still been handed Sweden over two legs - if they can't beat Sweden over two legs quite frankly they don't deserve to be in. 

Basically the same situation with us. If we can't sort out New Zealand over 2 legs, it shouldn't matter that we've left Chile out. Its as simple as that we didn't handle an inferior side and don't deserve to be in it.

[SirBalon]

1 minute ago, Dan said:

God knows how having this dreadful Italy side in it benefits football. It's their own fault for being shite. Even though they end up in a group with Spain they've still been handed Sweden over two legs - if they can't beat Sweden over two legs quite frankly they don't deserve to be in. 

Much of this has to do with confidence though and their group for the qualifying campaign with us undermined them as it could’ve also done for Spain. Look at some of the other European groups for the qualifiers... They should’ve had their own group.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

Much of this has to do with confidence though and their group for the qualifying campaign with us undermined them as it could’ve also done for Spain. Look at some of the other European groups for the qualifiers... They should’ve had their own group.

That's no excuse I'm afraid. Italy are Italy and are normally better against the top sides. Italy failed to win both matches against Spain and have played awful football. Who's to say that Poland couldn't have topped them in a group? Or even Croatia who are quite good against Italy.

[SirBalon]

1 minute ago, Blue said:

That's no excuse I'm afraid. Italy are Italy and are normally better against the top sides. Italy failed to win both matches against Spain and have played awful football. Who's to say that Poland couldn't have topped them in a group? Or even Croatia who are quite good against Italy.

Italy failing to beat this Spain side is completely normal. But that is irrelevant in this discussion because they are better than most of the sides going to the tournament from the UEFA conferderation.

Like I said... This has a lot to do with confidence and that’s the issue here. Put it this way... Why arent Italy playing New Zealand who they would beat with regional players and instead are playing Sweden.

How is this worked out?

I’ll tell you... It’s a story that’s occurring everywhere in football right now which is to get the dross to qualify so as to feed international tv corporations. 

[Guest]

Just now, SirBalon said:

Italy failing to beat this Spain side is completely normal. But that is irrelevant in this discussion because they are better than most of the sides going to the tournament from the UEFA conferderation.

Like I said... This has a lot to do with confidence and that’s the issue here. Put it this way... Why arent Italy playing New Zealand who they would beat with regional players and instead are playing Sweden.

How is this worked out?

I’ll tell you... It’s a story that’s occurring everywhere in football right now which is to get the dross to qualify so as to feed international tv corporations. 

I get that Spain are better than Italy but I still don't see that as an excuse. If Italy want to qualify for the World Cup, they need to win in the playoff if they can't beat the top team in the group. So far, Sweden has done their job and if they win they'll be the one that deserve to qualify. 

No one will convince me that Sweden is better than Italy on paper. Ventura has done a terrible job thus far. Especially if his main choice as a sub is Eder. 

[SirBalon]

Just now, Blue said:

I get that Spain are better than Italy but I still don't see that as an excuse. If Italy want to qualify for the World Cup, they need to win in the playoff if they can't beat the top team in the group. So far, Sweden has done their job and if they win they'll be the one that deserve to qualify. 

No one will convince me that Sweden is better than Italy on paper. Ventura has done a terrible job thus far. Especially if his main choice as a sub is Eder. 

Why aren’t Perú playing Sweden and Italy playing New Zealand?

[Guest]

Just now, SirBalon said:

Why aren’t Perú playing Sweden and Italy playing New Zealand?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when do European sides play teams outside their own continent for qualifying?

FIFA can't bend the rules just to allow the top nations to qualify. It doesn't work like that.

[6666]

Peru are playing New Zealand instead of Italy playing New Zealand because it's not the Euros... There's already a lot of European teams in there. The only team I feel bad for being in the playoffs is Switzerland, they won every game except for one.

[SirBalon]

Just now, Blue said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when do European sides play teams outside their own continent for qualifying?

FIFA can't bend the rules just to allow the top nations to qualify. It doesn't work like that.

What’s bending the rules?

It’s all about decisions and changing formats.

What has America got to do with Oceana? 

NOTHING!

Like I said... It’s about minnows qualifying too... Dross!

The World Cup as was the European Championships once upon a time, is about the best going at eachother. 

[Honey Honey]

Don't worry, the 2026 World Cup will have 48 teams, only the Dutch could fail to qualify in those circumstances 

[ScoRoss]

3 minutes ago, Cannabis said:

It's the principle that he's getting at. 

The World Cup should consist of the 32 best teams in the world, as it happens you've got teams like Italy potentially missing out whilst the likes of New Zealand board the plane to get hammered and come home. The way that FIFA works out it's groups is flawed and has been proved time and time again.

That's a much more interesting question to be raised.

Should the World Cup be the 'Best' 32 teams or be about gathering the best teams from around the world?

Basically the same debate people have about the 'Champions League'.

[Stan]

3 minutes ago, Kitchen Sales said:

Don't worry, the 2026 World Cup will have 48 teams, only the Dutch could fail to qualify in those circumstances 

And at least we can all take amusement in Scotland still not qualifying for it

 

[Honey Honey]

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

And at least we can all take amusement in Scotland still not qualifying for it

 

It was funny the first few times post 98, but now it's becoming a human rights violation

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

What’s bending the rules?

It’s all about decisions and changing formats.

What has America got to do with Oceana? 

NOTHING!

Like I said... It’s about minnows qualifying too... Dross!

The World Cup as was the European Championships once upon a time, is about the best going at eachother. 

@Cannabis also going to quote you as the posts are on different pages.

I disagree because I believe there needs to be a balance. if it really was about the 32 best teams in the world, South America should have 7 spots and Europe should have 16. 

The balance comes from quality teams and actually being a "World Cup". Imagine having a world cup with 30 teams from Europe and South America and then Mexico and Japan. That wouldn't be a world cup would it. That's where Panama and Honduras come in. Neither are among the best 32 teams in the world but they qualified so they will be taking part in the event to celebrate diversity and culture.

The current 32 team format is completely perfect, where as the 48 team format will just kill off the quality and only focus on the latter.

[Beelzebub]

New Zealand should not get a direct place in the inter-continental playoffs they should first play a team form Asia and their place should be given to an African team

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Azeem98 said:

New Zealand should not get a direct place in the inter-continental playoffs they should first play a team form Asia and their place should be given to a African team

Some people have moaned about Africa having too many spots, but I'm totally on board with it. There are about 7-8 teams who consistently churn out players and usually at least 4 have good generations every 4 years. Its also a continent with a lot of countries. If its a world cup then 5 teams for Africa is spot on.

[Beelzebub]

Just now, Blue said:

Some people have moaned about Africa having too many spots, but I'm totally on board with it. There are about 7-8 teams who consistently churn out players and usually at least 4 have good generations every 4 years. Its also a continent with a lot of countries. If its a world cup then 5 teams for Africa is spot on.

Africa has 5 teams already and as in the 2010 WC six teams from Africa is not a big issue. I think it will make the inter-continental playoffs more interesting if they give the place of New Zealand to some African team.

[Inverted]

Hoping for a strong performance from Denmark, Ireland stylistically seem like they could a problem for them. 

[Dan+]

1 hour ago, SirBalon said:

Much of this has to do with confidence though and their group for the qualifying campaign with us undermined them as it could’ve also done for Spain. Look at some of the other European groups for the qualifiers... They should’ve had their own group.

I do have to say I have absolutely no idea how Italy can be pot 2 and Romania be pot 1. That's unfathomable.

But that isn't to say anyone, whether it's Italy, Spain, France, Argentina etc... should effectively be put into a situation where they can't not qualify.

It's all a bit too much like that nonsense I was reading last year from that American UEFA executive (?!?!?!) saying that Manchester United should be in the Champions League because of how big they are - if they can't come above us, Spurs, Arsenal etc... then that's their problem. No-one should have reserved spaces. I think once you start handing out guaranteed places to teams you're totally undermining the competition - killing off the others and making any achievement less impressive knowing that part of the way there, there was no way you could fail.

But like I said, Italy have a two legged play-off with Sweden. That's a good gauge to see if they're worthy of being in the World Cup. If they can't beat Sweden then they really can't be that big a loss.

[Dan+]

1 hour ago, Cannabis said:

It's the principle that he's getting at. 

The World Cup should consist of the 32 best teams in the world, as it happens you've got teams like Italy potentially missing out whilst the likes of New Zealand board the plane to get hammered and come home. The way that FIFA works out it's groups is flawed and has been proved time and time again.

So what's the suggestion? You just have one global qualifying campaign?

[Dan+]

1 hour ago, Blue said:

Some people have moaned about Africa having too many spots, but I'm totally on board with it. There are about 7-8 teams who consistently churn out players and usually at least 4 have good generations every 4 years. Its also a continent with a lot of countries. If its a world cup then 5 teams for Africa is spot on.

I'm thinking about it now and I do actually think Africa having 5 is probably a bit too many, although isn't there about 50 African countries? Problem is the majority of them are absolutely garbage.