2014 FIFA World Cup: Final Draw 06.12.13

I don't mind play against teams that we have little record against as well. Since we have played Germany and Portugal in recent times(well as recent as our WC form has taken us) I would rather not play them again. The possibility of a Brazil Italy Netherlands group scares me since it is possible and it is possible that we end up being the 4th team in that group

I don't want to insult anyone's national team since I know many teams assume we are the weakest in our pot and want to draw us. However, I would really like Bosnia in our group. They are a diff squad than when we played them previously. They also scored 30 goals in qualifying. I would love to see one of Europe's strongest attacking forces against Asia's best defense.

Speaking as a fan of a team that's never been outside of their group, I do hope that the underdog rated teams like Iran, Bosnia, USA, Switzerland can do some damage on the old world powers.

 

Oh sure, but let us know if you can come up with something better.

 

Personally, I think doing the draw geographically sucks. Part of that is because I'm American, and since CONCACAF is always in the same pot as Asia, the US never gets the chance to play teams from Asia.

If they are going to use the FIFA rankings to seed the top eight, then why not the top sixteen? Or everyone?

Yes, you'd have more potential geographic conflicts, but those can be dealt with....

For example, if the top sixteen teams had been seeded, the only complications would have been:

1) make sure no CONCACAF team was drawn in the same group as the USA (seeded #13)
2) make sure Ecuador was not drawn in a group with another CONMEBOL team (the other five would be seeded)
3) make sure Croatia, Russia, and France were not drawn in groups which already had two UEFA teams

Not too complicated, decreases the likelihood of a group of death quite a bit, and allows CONCACAF and Asia to play each other....

As it is now, you've got the possibility of having the #1 (Spain), #8 (Netherlands/Italy), #12 (Chile) and #13 (USA) all being in the same group, as well as the possibility of having the #7 (Switzerland), #19 (Russia), #59 (Cameroon) and #57 (Australia) all in the same group.

 

Seeding based solely on ranking.

Hilarity ensues.

 

I don't want either of them either. I don't mind Argentina without Messi, but I don't want them if they have Messi to make a fool of us. So I am not looking forward to Iran drawing Argentina.

While Belgium have good talent, I don't mind them at all compared to most of the other seeds. You had mentioned Belgium being a strong side physically, but Iran are actually a pretty strong side physically as well. Besides, Japan (who aren't considered strong physically) were nonetheless able to get a result against them.

In fact, historically, Belgium doesn't have a good record against Asian teams in the World Cup. The Saudis, after all, beat Belgium in 1994 to advance to the Round of 16. And even South Korea, who were pretty mediocre in 1998, were able to draw them 2:2. I will gladly take Belgium as the seeded team in our group for sure. Only Switzerland would be better for us, while I personally wouldn't mind Uruguay either. If for no other reason, just to show their 5:0 against Jordan doesn't mean much.

In a group like that, I think we wouldn't be aiming at anything other than keeping our goal difference low! Finishing 4th would almost be given, although recalling how Italy finished last in a group with New Zealand, Slovenia, and Paraguay in World Cup 2010, I probably shouldn't be so pessimistic. Especially seeing how Japan totally outplayed Italy in the Confederation Cup. But I don't want that group, that is for sure!

I don't mind Bosnia in our group either, and if they aren't in our group, then I will be rooting for them whatever other group they might end up in.

Btw, don't sell Iran's result and performance against Bosnia short. Bosnia were already a very good team when we played them last in Sarajevo in 2009. They barely missed qualifying from UEFA at that time and, while we beat them 3:2, we had to come from behind to win that game. Both of Bosnia's goals in that match, incidentally, were scored by Edin Dzeko, who is still their best player and top scorer.

 

While I understand your point, that is still a very strange comment for you to make. Especially since you are an American!

 

Why?

I think the fairest method is for every confederation to be able to play every other confederation.

 

I was alluding, somewhat tongue in cheek, mostly to the fact that you have actually faced Asian teams in the World Cup and haven't really done all that well against them. In 1998, of course, you lost to Iran 2:1. In 2002, you barely drew South Korea 1:1; if I recall correctly, you needed Friedel to save you from losing that match.

 

Well, it's fair to say Japan outrunned Italy, not outplayed. If Iran (which I admit I never saw playing) has a fit team with good runners, then Italy would be probably one of the best draw (if not really THE BEST) out of the euro pot, in the group stages. The same goes for the other teams, like USA, Korea, Japan, Australia, who have proved to have absolutely top level phisical conditions in the beginning of previous tournaments. Run twice as Italy, press in opponents' midfield, tackle hard but fair and Itaky is going to suffer (even if now Prandelli has got ridden of the classic defensive midfielder of Italy's past and so has one more player who can help the team in keeping possession). Other euro sides will probably be in better shape than Italy at the beginning of the group stages, as they will probably focus on getting to the round of 16 and will peak in match 2 or 3. The same is probably true for Switzerland and Belgium., teams for which a win in the round of 16 would already be a big achievement.

 

On the BBC website there is an article that makes the interesting point that if the Netherlands hadn't scheduled a friendly against Indonesia then they would have been seeded. Ouch!

 

The value of being a seeded team is overrated. With the exception of one or two countries, the difference in quality between pot 1 (the seed teams) and pot 4 is pretty marginal.

 

US does get the short end of the stick in these draws, but that's the downside of playing in an extremely weak region that essentially assures you a spot at the WC.

Plenty of teams would gladly take their odds of being drawn into a tough group in Brazil, vs sitting at home because the competition to get there was better than Panama and Jamaica.

I think it would be much more fair to have the Americas all qualify together. I happen to be South American, but am reasonable enough to say the US and Mexico would qualify from a South+North America group, some of the time, but there would certainly be times when they stayed at home. Like Mexico this time. This would give them credibility when they have particularly strong teams and prevent them from always ending in the pot with 'bad' teams. With all the cash from those NA teams though, noway FIFA ever lets that happen. They want them there at the Finals.

 

a) yeah, but if you're in pot 4 you might get dragged in pot 2.
b) IMO the difference is more than "marginal"

 

The perfectly balanced draw, with no group of death and no group of life. A draw that makes everyone a bit unhappy, a bit relieved, and a bit anxious. How would it look like, using the same pots as we have now?

Here is my take on what would be the most balanced draw from these pots.

First, Brazil's group.

1- Brazil
2- Portugal
3- Algeria
4- Mexico

Then, Spain's

1- Spain
2- Russia
3- Nigeria
4- Japan

Then, Germany's

1- Germany
2- Bosnia
3- Ghana
4- South Korea

Then, Argentina's

1- Argentina
2- Croatia
3- Ivory Coast
4- Iran

Then, Colombia's

1- Colombia
2- England
3- Cameroon
4- USA

Then, Belgium's

1- Belgium
2- Holland
3- Ecuador
4- Australia

Then, Switzerland's

1- Switzerland
2- Italy
3- Chile
4- Honduras

Then, Uruguay's

1- Uruguay
2- France
3- Greece
4- Costa Rica

 

^ Spain and Switzerland would have the toughest group, Germany and Argentina the easiest ones

Predicting an easy group for Brazil

 

The important feature in those groups is that in none of them, would you be able to comfortably predict which 2 teams would advance. In fact, in most of them, no team is absolutely safe and no one is hopeless. In a few, you might have the top seed feel they are relatively assured of advancing, but even in those groups, it is far from assured.

 

I don't think Germany wouldn't comfortably advance in their possible group to be honest.

Bosnia qualified from the easiest group in Europe, and even struggled to beat Lithuania (0-1) in their last game. You know how South Korea performed in the last campaign, which leaves the only decent NT: Ghana.

Agree with your other groups though, especially Colombia's group would be very balanced.

 

Germany might have a decided advantage, but the 2nd team in that group is not as clear cut as you may think. Ghana is a good team, but South Korea and Bosnia are both quite capable of upstaging them in this group. And while South Korea and Bosnia can each trouble Ghana, Ghana can probably trouble Germany even if South Korea and Bosnia won't.

In Iran's group, Argentina would be clearly favored and I doubt any of Croatia, Ivory Coast or Iran would be able to stop them. But the battle for 2nd place will be intense. Ivory Coast have Didier Drogba and are still ranked #1 in CAF, even if most people who have watched them recently didn't find them persuasive at all. Croatia is the kind of team that does better against those who are ranked above it than those ranked below. Both Iran and the Ivory Coast can trouble Croatia and I personally give Iran a good enough chance in those games.

The rest of the groups are balanced enough. Even Brazil's group is not entirely comfortable for the Brazilians as they have Mexico in there and Brazil often seem to have problems with Mexico.

 

That is irrelevant.

Which isn't really relevant either.

They and Bosnia were in the easiest group, Latvia, Lithuania and Liechtenstein are arguably one of the weakest NTs out there. Slovakia has a few good players (like Hamsik), but other than that their adventure in 2010 in South Africa they have never qualified for a WC.

The difference between Germany and Bosnia is huge, I just don't rate you guys.