Clint Dempsey will need to bring his Fulham-form to South Africa for the United States to have a chance to get out of a balanced Group C. (Photo via Newscom)

View full size photo »

As we move forward with our analysis or the World Cup groups (and our names, attempting to add color, start to get slightly more absurd), the best teams in the quartet get better while the teams at the bottom project as more strident challengers. 

That is why Group C - while on first blush seeming similar to (perhaps weaker than) groups A (The Tribe of Life), F (The Guild of Health) and B (The Fraternity of Inconclusive Diagnosis) - distinguishes itself.

For all their stylistic and talent limitations, England (in the Capello-era) has given us reason to think them better than France, Italy and Argentina (the highest FIFA rated teams in the groups previously reviewed).

At the other end of the group, all of Algeria, Slovenia and the United States have won showcase, showdown matches within the last six months.  

To get in, Algeria won a neutral-site playoff against arch-rival, continental champion Egypt.  Slovenia won a two-legged tie against one of the secretly most talented teams in the world (Russia), while the United States not only snapped Spain's 35-match unbeaten streak but also got a very difficult, under-appreciated win in Honduras.

But despite those strong performances and the form of the group's seed, nobody will mistake this group for one of the tournament's toughest.  There are no easy matches, but the group presents is the type of path with which most seeds would be happy.  

In other World Cup draws, this could have been one of the easiest groups, but in a year where a weak host side gets seeded and a couple of traditional powers are still looking to find their stride, Group C is flops down in the middle of the distribution.

Still four steps away from the Group of Death, I present, as the fifth-most-difficult group for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, the Club of Common Cold:  Group C.

Elo - Elo Rating; FIFA - FIFA World Ranking, December 2009; SPI - Soccer Power Index, Silver/Soccernet; SPA - Set Piece Analysts World Cup Power Poll; Avg. - Statistical mean of four measures

With an average ranking of 6, England is recognized (by our metrics) as the strongest side reviewed to date.  Elo and SPI see them as semifinal contenders, a level they have not reached in since 1990.  

Beyond England, the ratings see United States as a weak wing-man, while Slovenia and Algeria's averages of 34 and 37 put them amongst the lower rated teams in the draw.

So it's incumbent on me to explain why I see the reality on the pitch as different from the rankings.  Why is this group ranked 5th by yours truly?

While I see both the England and United States's ratings as fair, the recent form of Slovenia and Algeria make these ratings - ratings which take a long-term look at nation's success - as understatements.  Both Slovenia and Algeria are much better.  If your group's weakest nation is one of them, your group lacks potholes.

England - Possibly the most polarizing team in the draw as it concerns critical opinion, England is neither one of the strong contenders nor a side without a chance.  That so many fans put them in these camps speaks to that polarization.

While it's difficult to see England beating teams like Brazil and Spain, they match-up well with a number of the second-tier powers.  Fabio Capello's version of England - easily winning a UEFA qualifying group that included Croatia and Ukraine - is stronger than the struggling powers (Argentina, France, Italy, Portugal).  With the Netherlands' tendency to break down at the back late in close matches and Germany's form struggling to stay ahead of declining talent (until a ton of youth revitalizes the team), England's new-found solidity puts them in the middle of the tier below the two titans.

The key is Capello.  The former Milan, Real Madrid, Roma and Juventus boss has augmented England's deficiencies by instilling a rigid, consistent system that takes advantage of what England does best.  He's forgone any fantasies of trying to transform this side into a more continental squad.  

Building around England's physical strength and willingness to work, Capello has brought a discipline, accountability, and mental toughness that has made them both consistent and very good.  Catch phrases like "mental toughness" and "accountability" sound like analytical clichés - I admit - but in this case, I see it as the truth.  

Capello has settled on a formation (4-4-2 with a flat midfield and a big man-little man tandem up-top), decided where Steven Gerrard will play, and has concentrated on getting the Lions playing at their best within those constraints.  That is why you saw such great qualifying results, including stamping out their latest bogey team (Croatia) in two convincing wins (9-2 aggregate over the FIFA tenth rated team in the world).

But for all they've improved, England's three recent friendlies against the world's elite have shown their limitations.  

In February, England lost to Spain 2-0 in a match controlled by the Spaniards.  In August, England got a 2-2 draw with the Netherlands where their best XI were dominated in the first half.  In November, England lost 1-0 to Brazil in Doha.

England can only play one way, and they lack the technical skill, speed, or athleticism to consistently compete with Brazil and Spain.  They do not have the midfield players to take the ball off the Spanish feed (unless Owen Hargreaves gets healthy), and eventually John Terry and company will incorrectly answer one (or more) of Spain's questions.  The Brazil problem is of greater concern, as Dunga and the Selecão beat England at their own game.

With players like Wayne Rooney and Steven Gerrard, England has just enough elite attacking talent to distance themselves from the threat less-talented sides pose to their conservative approach.  But while England managed 34 goals in ten qualifying matches (testament to both their capabilities and the lack of defending in their group), the accountable approach instilled by Capello becomes inherently conservative against more difficult competition.  When that happens, it will be up to Rooney and Gerrard to be special.

There are two other players that will have to be special, elite, world-class superlative:  John Terry and Rio Ferdinand.  There are few doubts about Terry, whose continued improvement from an already superb player has made him the world's best central defender over the last two seasons.  Ferdinand, however is a huge doubt, having been out of Manchester United's lineup for two months after a horrible start to his Premier League campaign.  The drop-off from Ferdinand - in the "best of" conversation with Terry, at his best - and Matthew Upson could be the biggest difference between a semi-final appearance and a Round of 16 exit.

England still has a question in goal and can be overrun in midfield by teams that can possess, but compared to the list of issues present in other sides, Capello's side is strong.

A final piece that will be intangible until the first kickoff:  This is the last go for a generation of players that includes Gerrard, Terry, Lampard, and Ferdinand.  This will also be the last Cup for David Beckham, one of the leaders in this set-up and a key link between their foreign manager and the squad.

Everything points to a very prepared, very motivated England squad.

United States - If there is one team that is more polarizing amongst analysts than England, it's the United States, whose quality is clouded by a shock summer win over Spain and winning the weakest non-Oceania region.

Let's talk about Spain first.

How informative is the Spain result?  Very.  It shows the U.S. has to potential to beat anybody, something that can not be forgotten.

However, there is the concept of a one-off:  the idea that this is a rare result, unlikely to be replicated - a once in a generation outcome.  While beating Spain in South Africa told the world the Yanks are capable of such feats, it fails to show those results can be expected.  That expectation can only come after a pattern of results, but friendly performances against Slovakia (0-1) and Denmark (0-3) hint the Spain result was a one-off.

Also informing us is their form at the end of qualifying.  After this summer's Gold Cup (CONCACAF's confederation championship won by Mexico, an event that played out as a B-level tournament), the U.S. had three consecutive disappointing results:  losing 2-1 in Mexico in a match the federation hyped; giving a poor performance in 2-1, home win against El Salvador; winning 1-0 at Port of Spain against a struggling Trinidad and Tobago, where the only goal was a 22-meter song from Ricardo Clark.

The United States followed that with a win in Honduras which may have been the most impressive road performance by any team in CONCACAF qualifying.  True, at the time, Honduras was in unfortunate political upheaval.  And true, Honduras was hard done by some freakish U.S. goals and was - on form - the better side.  Regardless, the United States got a result in what was, considering how qualifying had set-up, a near must-win match.  Honduras may not be respected internationally nor are they likely to get out of their South Africa group, but they are a strong side, they played well against the U.S. (except Noel Valladares), and the U.S. still got three points.

The United States would go on to win CONCACAF, yet they remain a highly flawed side.  They have no presence in the midfield (whether in possession or in defense), making them susceptible to being overrun by even modestly adept sides.  They have no means of attack beyond counter or set-pieces, and they have major lineup issues at both striker and defense.

Those lineup issues would be present regardless of health, but the States are going through a injury crisis.  Their best forward, Charlie Davies, is unlikely to be available for the World Cup after a myriad of injuries suffered in a car accident.  Their best defender, Oguchi Onyewu, is a question, being out until April with a knee injury.  Their strongest midfield options - Maurice Edu and the yet-to-be-capped Jermaine Jones - have not played at all for their clubs this season.  Jay DeMerit, Onyewu's partner, is struggling with a freak eye injury.

If the U.S. has a chance to advance, wings/forwards Clint Dempsey (Fulham) and Landon Donovan (Los Angeles Galaxy) will each need to be world-class players.  The U.S. will need multiple goals from each in addition to the odd tally from other sources.  Dempsey did score a goal at the last World Cup, while Donovan notched two in 2002.

Slovenia - Tactically, Slovenia is the best defensive team in the tournament.  You can make the argument for the North Koreans - another nation that has to use superior tactical acumen to make up a constant talent gap - but in big matches against Russia and Slovakia,

Slovenia has gone beyond the North Korean's ability to force a stalemate.  The Slovenes have consistently won matches against World Cup caliber sides.

Whenever you talk tactics and defensive prowess, you have to look to a squad's coach.  In taking both matches from group-winning Slovakia before completely out-managing Russia's Guus Hiddink, Matjaz Kek is making his case to be included amongst the world's elite coaches.  You see it in the way his players ardently keep their man in front of them.  You see it in Slovenia's unrelenting organization.  You see it in Kek's ability to set-up to counter into his opposition's greatest weakness, and you see it in his ability to find goals from a decidedly untalented squad.

Kek does this with a team representing a country whose population is somewhere between Houston's and Phoenix's.  It's an affluent nation, but it's small, not very athletics oriented, and those who do pursue sports are more likely to lace up skates than boots.  For a country of this size, getting to one World Cup (qualifying through Europe) would be astounding.  This is their second in three cycles.

Perhaps it is all those limitations that has forced Kek, a coach who has progress through the Slovene system with his players, to rely on being more organized than his opponents.  It's certainly worked, putting up second-best defensive record in European qualifying, but it belies a lack of goals.  Like the U.S., they are overly reliant on the counter, and while Kek's tactical acumen gives him an advantage over Bob Bradley, he lacks players like Dempsey and Donovan.

Their best scoring option is Milivoje Novakovič (Köln), who relies on the hard work of partner Zlatko Dedic (Bochum) and wide play from Robert Koren (West Bromwich Albion) and Aleksander Radosavljevič (Tom Tomsk) to create opportunities.  Kek is not afraid to play Miso Brecko (Köln) and Bojan Jokic (Sochaux) as attacking wing backs in a 4-4-2 that often functions as a diamond in the middle.  At the back, Udinese's Samir Handanovic is solid.

Amongst Kek's current starting XI, the Slovenes have regular players in the top divisions of Germany (four), France (two), Italy (one) and Russia (one).  The media in this market covers the Slovenes as unknowns, but there is a quality to Slovenia's anonymity that makes them a threat to advance.

Algeria - The Desert Foxes are another team whose talent will surprise those who have not seen them play.  

While they are certainly one of the less-talented sides in a tournament, Algeria is far from a push-over.  Doing the same top-division-breakdown we did for Slovenia, Algeria has regular players in England (three), Germany (three), France (two), Italy (two), Portugal (one) and one with Rangers in Scotland.  

While it can be messy to look solely at club representation as a barometer of talent, this messy guide sees Algeria at least comparable with both Slovenia and the United States.

Their leading scoring threat, Rafik Saifi, is not one of those players playing in Europe, having just moved from France to the Qatari league to cash in on the last days of his career (he's 34).  He partners up-top with Siena's Abdelkader Ghezzal to lead Rabah Saadane's set-up.  

The midfield is anchored by Lorient's Yazid Mansouri - their captain and pivot - with Karim Ziani (Wolfsburg) as his more-dynamic foil. The back line that allowed four goals in seven qualifiers features Madjid Bougherra (Rangers), Nadir Belhadj (Portsmouth) and Antar Yahia (Bochum).

While those are just names to most, each player has a similar profile to Slovene and American counterparts, and like the Slovenes - who proved their metal in knocking out Russia - the Algerians have shown the ability to get results under pressure.

Actually, "under pressure" is a euphemism  There as no single performance more informative of a team's character than Algeria beating Egypt on November 18 in Khartoum.

Algeria, four days earlier, had gone to Cairo needing to stay within one goal (or win) to get CAF's Group C World Cup spot.  The night before the match, their team bus was attacked outside their hotel, with bricks thrown through the windows causing multiple players to play the next day with their heads bandaged.  

It was an extension of a heated footballing rivalry that stretches back to 1989, when violence ensued after Egypt's playoff win over Algeria in Cairo.  That win sent Egypt to the 1990 World Cup.  Neither nation has qualified since.

In this year's match in Cairo, Amr Zaki scored early for the Pharoahs, but the Foxes held out until a chance goal off of sloppy play in second half stoppage time gave Egypt a 2-0 win, forcing the November 18 playoff.

Algeria was devastated by their near-miss qualification, upset that the match was even played in the wake of the previous night's violence, yet had to go to the Sudan and play Egypt again - a win-and-in match on what was supposed to be a neutral pitch.

Even with all the obstacles (and a hotly contested, physical opening to the match), Saadane remarkably got his players focused on the match, and when Antar Yahia scored in the 40th minute, the Algerians had the goal which would put them back into the World Cup.

It is difficult to imagine any group stage match carrying as much pressure as that playoff in Khartoum.  With Algeria grouped with nations who, on a similar level, can win the group's second spot, experiences like Cairo and Khartoum could prove decisive in determining who advances.

Worthless Predictions

June 12, Rustenburg:  England 2, United States 0 - A couple of opening game mistakes give the U.S. some half-chances, but a Capello team that has been looking forward to this match for over six months does not come close to losing.  Tim Howard, focused to play well against some of the same faces he sees in league, has a strong day, but the U.S. ends up looking ineffectual.

June 13, Polokwane:  Slovenia 1, Algeria 0 - Slovenia converts one counter in a match where the Foxes can never unlock the Slovene defense.  Kek has his team focused towards three points, with the small country's win dispelling the notion that all African nations - even ones near 5,000 miles from Cape Town - will have a home-pitch-advantage.

June 18, Cape Town:  England 4, Algeria 1 - After losing to Slovenia, the Algerians know they will need at least a point from England to survive.  Unfortunately, their fight plays against them as England maintains their shape and continuously exploits the Foxes.  We see some of the same potency in attack that the Lions exhibited in qualifying, leading to a final score more indicative of the circumstances than the relative qualities of the sides.

June 18, Johannesburg:  Slovenia 0, United States 0 - While the U.S.'s loss to England would suggest they should be the aggressors, the Yanks stay conservative knowing they can get to their targeted four points even if they draw against Slovenia.  In a battle of two sides reliant on the counter, it's the Slovenes who generate the match's best chances.  Lack of quality in the final third relegates this to a bore draw.

June 23, Pretoria:  Algeria 2, United States 1 - With nothing to play for but pride, Algeria hopes to show their 4-1 loss to England is a aberration.  The United States, on the other hand, know that a win may put them through.  Unfortunately, the U.S. has a poor record in when trying to close out World Cup group play, while Algeria's sense of pride and occasion was on display in Khartoum.  Had this match been the first game of the tournament, I might have picked the U.S.  Ultimately, this result may not matter:

June 23, Port Elizabeth:  England 0, Slovenia 0 - Capello's team is already through but wants the number one seed.  Slovenia needs only a point to eliminate the United States.  Slovenia starts conservative, slowly bunkers, while England stays disciplined.  Neither side dispels the notion of an implicit agreement between them.  Both go through, with the Slovenes doing so with a remarkable one goal scored.