What Ifs With the World Cup Draw
On December 4, the thirty-two teams that qualified for the World Cup in South Africa will be drawn into their eight, four team groups. For the majority of nations that sit in the zone between assured advancing (Brazil) and "thanks for playing" (New Zealand), this could be the tournament's decisive moment.
If you're a team like South Korea - eight years removed from a semi-final, four years after nearly advancing in Germany - you're hoping to get drawn with South Africa, the weakest of the eight teams who will be "seeded" for the draw. You're hoping that a team like Algeria gets drawn from the Africa/South America pod, and you're hoping that Greece comes out of the Europe pod.
Hold-up. Pods?
The way that FIFA determines the groups involves putting the 24 teams that are not seeded into three, eight-nation pods. These pods are determined (for the most part) by geography. On December 4, the eight non-seeded teams from Europe will be put in one pod. Each of those teams will be drawn into a different group to ensure that as few European teams as possible face each other before the knock-out round.
Africa/South America will make up another pod (where no teams from South America will be allowed to be drawn into the Brazil or Argentina groups, same for African nations and South Africa). The final pod will be made up of CONCACAF, Asia, and New Zealand.
On Thursday's edition of Inside the Six, I hosted a mock World Cup draw. I wanted to get people acquainted with the way the draw might work (though I simplified it a bit, for the pod), but even more: I was curious to see what a Group of Death might look like.
And boy, were there a couple of Groups of Death:
| Group A | Group E |
|---|---|
| South Africa Paraguay Honduras Slovenia |
Italy Algeria Mexico Switzerland |
| Group B | Group F |
| Brazil Cote d'Ivoire Australia Netherlands |
Spain Chile New Zealand Serbia |
| Group C | Group G |
| England Ghana South Korea Slovakia |
Argentina Cameroon United States Portugal |
| Group D | Group H |
| Germany Uruguay North Korea Denmark |
France Nigeria Japan Greece |
U.S., how ya' feelin'? Yikes! This is the type of group I've been talking about on podcasts throughout the summer. The Yanks could play great soccer and still go home with three losses. Would everybody be OK with that?
There is another side of the coin. Look at Honduras's group. The United States could have easily been put in there. Well, not easily: 1-in-8 chance. Still, a Group of Death is not a given for Bradley's Battalion. There are, however, a few keys to avoiding one:
- Get South Africa. It's almost impossible for South Africa to be in a group of death. The strongest team they can get from the Africa/South American pot is Paraguay, so if the United States were drawn in with the Bafana Bafana, the ugliest it could get would be Netherlands, Paraguay, United States and South Africa. Are the U.S. favored to get out of that group? No way, but it is not close to a Group of Death.
- Target Algeria and Uruguay. These are the two weakest teams from the Africa/South America pot, and as you can see from the groups they're drawn into, it's hard to form a relatively deep group when they are drawn in. Algeria is part of the reason El Tri would be very happy with this draw. Germany would be thrilled with Group D, in part because Uruguay is not Cote d'Iviore.
- Go Greek. If there is one nation from the Europe pod the United States could, even on a bad day, beat, it's Greece.
So what would be a best-case scenario for the United States? South Africa, Uruguay, and Greece. The U.S. could win that group. They could also finish fourth (again), but with that combination, the U.S. wouldn't have to play their best soccer to advance.
But let's focus on the mock draw. Who would you see getting out of these groups, should the balls be pulled this way? Or, do you have any questions about how the draw works?
My picks are highlighted, above.
0 recs |
54 comments
|
Comments
Group B ain’t no piece of cake either. Yikes!
by bq on Nov 20, 2009 8:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah ...
… I would say Group B is the toughest group, but I can see the arguments for G and (based on just top-to-bottom equality, plus quality) Group C.
by Richard Farley on Nov 20, 2009 8:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As an Aussie, I would say I wouldn’t want that group either. Brazil and Netherlands are always talked as quarterfinalists and beyond. As for Ivory Coast.. no way. Their EPL stars are tough as nuts.
by skipkirk on Nov 22, 2009 7:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And that would ...
… be a tough, tough draw for the men of Oz, as they could advance out of a number of these other hypothetical groups.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A group of death is where all four teams are good and pretty equal
Not a group where two of the teams are going to pummel the competition.
by Cool Dudes on Nov 25, 2009 9:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually ...
… I really like that definition.
Thanks for you comments tonight, Cool Dudes.
by Richard Farley on Nov 25, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BQ!
I know that guy. Thanks for the comment/read, Brian.
by Richard Farley on Nov 20, 2009 11:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Breaks going our way
After a recent string of demoralizing injuries and unfavorable draws in the past, we deserve a bit of good luck with the draw, right?
Keep your fingers crossed.
by deepsouthsoccer on Nov 20, 2009 11:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
And it could happen!
Just watch were Algeria and Uruguay get drawn. Beyond getting into the group with South Africa (which will still be improbable to advance out of if, say Cote d’Ivoire and the Netherlands are drawn in), that is the key.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
South Africa
Won’t there be measures preventing them from being drawn with another African country?
by Nico2.0 on Nov 23, 2009 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep ...
… good catch! South Africa and Cote d’Ivoire can not be grouped, to the toughest that can be drawn in with SA from that pods is Paraguay …
Oh yeah! I mention that in the article. Looks like SOMEBODY doesn’t read his own copy.
by Richard Farley on Nov 24, 2009 12:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
France and Italy are weak seeded teams
Not as weak as South Africa, clearly, but they’re not “pray for one point and expect zero” teams like Brazil, Spain, England.
Netherlands being unseeded is scary, as they could end up in a group with one of those three, virtually eliminating the other two teams before the starting whistle. (In this draw it’s no great loss, but what if the other two are Chile and the US?) The other unseeded European teams are not the same level of fear-inspiring.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
by PaulThomas on Nov 20, 2009 1:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Go Bears!
I wonder though that if we got matched up again with Spain we could use our newly found psychological advantage to eke out some points. Also, even if we end up in Italy or France’s group we could still have a good chance of stealing some points off them.
I’m rooting for South Africa, Paraguay and Switzerland (or Greece).
by johnnycougar on Nov 23, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd take that group in a heart beat
but I wouldn’t call it the best scenario group. South Africa is definitely included, but I’d rather see Slovenia out of Pot B and New Zealand or North Korea filling out our group.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 23, 2009 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought we couldn't get Asia / New Zealand?
Okay, reading your post below I guess there’s a chance. Obviously getting either of those two teams would be better than Uraguay or Paraguay.
Heck, I’d even take a group of France, USA, Algeria and Slovenia / Switzerland / Greece.
by johnnycougar on Nov 23, 2009 7:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That would be an easier group ...
… though Paraguay would be really tough. And South Africa on their home soil would be no cake-walk. However, as World Cup groups go, the U.S. should be thrilled to be drawn in taht one.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Question
What would have happened if Costa Rica won? How would the pots have changed?
by Bingham Lab on Nov 20, 2009 1:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Had Costa Rica won
things would have gotten a little confusing. CONCACAF would have four teams and be in the same pot as Asia, who also have four teams. That would put Africa, South America and New Zealand in the other pot. There wouldn’t be another way to put teams in the pots. The way it played out, there are two ways. CONCACAF/Africa or CONCACAF/Asia and New Zealand.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 20, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Another reason to hate Costa Rica...
That takes away the possibility of drawing New Zealand.
A South Africa/New Zealand/Greece/US draw would have been awesome.
by Bingham Lab on Nov 23, 2009 8:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What I cared about more than drawing New Zealand
is drawing South Africa and Uruguay winning gives us a much better possibility of that happening so I was rooting for Uruguay.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 23, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Suck a good question ...
… that I’m going to include it in the next post, which will appear within the next 30 minutes. Thanks, Bingham.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks!
Thanks for looking at this. The draw is always an underrated portion of the reason for success in the group stage.
Future Redbirds! www.futureredbirds.net
Rams Gab! www.ramsgab.com
by jroman on Nov 20, 2009 2:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I've printed out little sheets of paper and cut them out
so I have each team on a sheet of paper and have conducted about 10 mock draws in the past two days. I will most likely continue to conduct draws until December 4. Remember, I do this because I am so cool.
I don’t know why people continue to put Asia and CONCACAF in one pot and Africa and South America in the other. It’s just as possible that CONCACAF be put with Africa and Asia with South America. I’ve done draws with both possibilities and I’d think that FIFA would announce the pots when they announce the seeds.
P.S.- if you’re a US fan, pray that CONCACAF goes with Africa because that gives the Yanks a 33% chance of being drawn into South Africa’s group.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 20, 2009 4:24 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I think you're right ...
… that it is possible CONCACAF will be put with Africa, but I think saying “just as possible” is a stretch. I think motive, precedent, fairness, and “making things fit” point to CONCACAF being put in with CAF and Oceania.
I admit, though: it is a possibility, one that my article brushes over for the sake of brevity.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How did you decide who was seeded?
Last I’d heard, they weren’t going to even announce the seeding formula until two days before the draw.
As an aside, FIFA really needs to get organized in that regard. Between this and announcing the seeding for the UEFA playoffs with two matchdays left in the group stage, it almost seems like they’ve figured out who they want to be seeded and just need to figure out what formula will make it happen that way. They really need to announce these things before qualification starts so everyone knows the formula before they start.
by SpartanDan on Nov 20, 2009 8:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
But then FIFA couldn't manipulate things the way they want
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 21, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Can't tell if you're serious or not
Which is part of the problem, really. By deciding these formulas at the last minute they leave themselves open to exactly that charge, even if they are being completely honest and fair about it.
by SpartanDan on Nov 22, 2009 11:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was being serious
and if they didn’t decide at the last minute then they couldn’t manipulate things. If they decided not to seed the teams for the European Playoffs, Portugal and France could have drawn each other, meaning at least one of their biggest teams would be out no matter what. Not what FIFA wants.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 23, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with Ryan ...
… that FIFA wants to maintain control of this process, and that means not only keeping the formula private, but also not finalizing the formula until you can guarantee results. It happened four years ago, when there were a lot of questions heading into (and out of) the seeds being announced, where Mexico’s seed was widely discussed. It will happen this year, too.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW
this is the link to the draws I’ve done. I’ll continue to update it until December 4.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ag2SjaAywGSvdHZpVUVjdnRCemRLeTFyRTVVNVlmUHc&hl=en
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 21, 2009 1:45 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Ryan ...
… I’m going to link to this in Monday’s post.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just wanted to pop on and thank you for this blog
been waiting for a good general football/soccer blog and this has the makings of being that
oh, and go arsenal(damn you sunderland) and go USA
"Albert hits good pitches hard and bad pitches even harder. And when he gets in the batter's box, if you pray, then you start praying. And if you don't pray, you think about starting."--Brian Bannister
by VolsnCards5 on Nov 21, 2009 12:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
That Sunderland game was atrocious
Very frustrating.
You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.
by 3k on Nov 21, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For some reason, I had a feeling that would be a hard game for us
Back from the two week Int’l break, on the road, first game w/o RVP up front and lacking his and Bendtner’s size against their sturdy defense. You could say that it was a lucky goal for Bent, but Sunderland did well in creating their chances all game long. We looked lethargic, Traore looked terrible replacing Glichy (I would give anything to have placenta fluid lady rub anything and everything over Glichy and Kieran Gibbs at this point) and our midfield didn’t do enough to break down their defense.
Hopefully they can find a better result tomorrow with what appears to be a squad that will be missing some regular starters, due to injury or rest, that they can build from that into this weekend’s game against Chelsea. I’m hopeful, but cautious, for these next couple of weeks.
by Twin Cities Hawk on Nov 23, 2009 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's November and December for Arsenal ..
… which means not enough scrutiny on a training staff that can’t keep people healthy. Is it just bad luck? You can’t blame Gunners trainers for RvP’s injury. But it happens every year.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks ..
… and sorry to see the Arsenal result. They were just depleted up front. I was surprised how much they missed RvP. Probably a mistake to leave Arshavin out.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Question
I’m not familiar at all with many teams outside of CONCACAF or Europe. What would you say is the overall strength of the African and South American teams? Who are the “weak” teams that the US would love to see in the group stage?
by MileHighAir on Nov 21, 2009 12:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure you were asking Richard
but I’ll chime in with my thoughts.
Teams to avoid:
Ivory Coast- This is the “hot pick” for a darkhorse who can go deep. I’m not as high on them as some, as their organization and defensive play on the wings left something to be desired when I saw them, but playing a team with Drogba, Kalou, Toure, Toure and Keita is scary.
Chile- Why more people aren’t talking Chile is beyond me, but I’m sure we’ll hear more about them next year. They finished second the South American qualifying, just one point behind Brazil and were thoroughly impressive. Fernandez is pure class and will be on the move to a bigger club from Sporting soon, while Vidal is a rock at the back. Suazo was an absolute terror throughout qualifying as well. If Maradona is still leading Argentina, I’d rather play them than Chile
Paraguay- The Paraguayans finished in a tie with Chile during qualifying. They’re very strong at the back with an older defense that is extremely disciplined. They have a couple poachers up top in Suazo and Valdez impressed me when I got the chance to see him. While I don’t think they have the ability to go as deep as Chile, they’re a definite threat to get out of the group stage.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 21, 2009 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here are some teams the US would love to see
Outside of being drawn into Group A, which every team is hoping for, the US would love to see New Zealand or North Korea out of Asia/Oceania and Algeria out of Africa. Uruguay isn’t an easy team to beat, but I think the US should be able to beat them. In Europe, I was less than impressed by Slovenia and Serbia.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 21, 2009 8:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I might rather see Chile/Paraguay
Than Ivory Coast. We’ve tended to struggle against African sides, and they’re the best Africa has to offer. But you’re right, those two teams are tough and flying under the radar.
We’re really just hoping we can draw someone from Asia instead of Africa. Preferably North Korea. There are really only a handful of teams that we’d love to see in our group. Everyone else will be a tough out. That simulated draw actually wouldn’t be too bad if Portugal and Argentina stayed in their slumps.
by Incipient_Senescence on Nov 21, 2009 11:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pray, pray, pray
that the CONCACAF teams are put in the same pot as the African teams. It gives us a 33% chance of being in Group A and we’ll have a 63% chance of getting a Asian side.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 22, 2009 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
South Africa is clearly the worst seeded team even with home-field
but honestly, I’d be very surprised if they don’t advance out of their group. Never— not once— has the host nation of the World Cup failed to advance at least one round into the tournament. They are, counting both Korea and Japan, 19 for 19.
I don’t think it actually makes that much of a difference. Much more important to avoid the land mines (like the Netherlands) in the other pods.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
by PaulThomas on Nov 22, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I keep hearing about how the host has never not advanced
but look at who has hosted. 2006- Germany, 2002- Korea/Japan, 1998- France, 1994- USA, 1990- Italy, 1986- Mexico, 1982- Spain, 1978- Argentina, 1974- W. Germany.
I think that’s enough to see that every host has always been an exceptional side except for USA, Korea/Japan. Well Korea/Japan were far superior to what South Africa is now and the USA made it out of the group stage as the third team in their group, something that wouldn’t happen in today’s format. Fact is that South Africa is far and away the worst side to ever have the luxury of home field so history isn’t so much of an indicator here.
Then if you really want to take a look at it, would you rather be in the host’s group with South Africa, or with any of the other seven seeded teams? It’s not even close so I don’t think you can say that it doesn’t make that much of a difference.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 22, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, that is a good point ...
… but you could argue that the state of the U.S.’s program in 1994 was behind that of the current South Africa team, which has some historical World Cup experience (qualified in 1998 and 2002 and almost made it out of their group in 2002).
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Strong and Weak teams
From Africa, the United States would be underdogs against Cote d’Ivore, Ghana, and Cameroon, slight dogs to Nigeria, and possible favorites against Algeria and South Africa … one a neutral pitch! I don’t know how the U.S. does against those two sides in South Africa as opposed to (say) Germany.
From South America, the only weak team is Uruguay. They are very inconsistent, though their talent is considerable. They have one of the best strike duos in the world, yet they are only two months away from a loss at Peru that remains one of the most inexplicable results in CONMEBOL qualifying. This is the one squad from South America that I think the U.S. could beat, as each of the other teams have quarterfinal potential.
by Richard Farley on Nov 23, 2009 7:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
According to Grant Wahl
The USSF wants CONCACAF in the same pot as Africa, no surprise there. They don’t know how FIFA will decide the pots though.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 22, 2009 6:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Our only hope is FIFA trying to give South Africa an easy group
If Africa is paired with CONMEBOL, SA will be paired with Chile, Paraguay, or Uruguay. If Africa is paired with CONCACAF, SA will be paired with either USA, Mexico, or Honduras. Not sure how big of a difference there is between those two groups, but most would probably take the South American trio over the CONCACAF bunch.
by Incipient_Senescence on Nov 22, 2009 8:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
England get the key easy group
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Nov 23, 2009 6:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Please oh please
let Farley be right and Germany ending up getting Uruguay, N. Korea, and Denmark in Group D. I promise to never cuss at the t.v. again during a World Cup draw if it happens.
by 1newplayer on Nov 23, 2009 7:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Just to let everybody know ...
… I deleted a comment for the first time right now from a poster that’s been a bit ruder than the other dialog on the site. I don’t feel great about it, but the comment combined rudeness with xenophobia, so I pulled the trigger.
I hate deleting comments and I might not do it ever again. I’m very conflicted about this.
by Richard Farley on Nov 25, 2009 3:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
FYI, I was going to reply to his comment in a means that would have been sarcastic and would have attacked the commenter. So if nothing else, your deleting avoided that….
by Michael White on Nov 26, 2009 3:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm Done Hoping We Get an Easy Draw
We’ve been to the Round O 16, Quarter finals, if we can’t beat good teams might as well not show up.
Even if we got a ridiculous draw like Group G above, if we can’t beat those teams, we’re not going to be in the final.
Group A is pretty funny though.
by Cool Dudes on Nov 25, 2009 9:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
In the draws I've been doing
I just drew the toughest group I’ve seen. England, Netherlands, Ghana, Chile
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 26, 2009 12:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 










