Who is going to be the big Surprise in SouthAfrica 2010!!

Interesting point! The same could be said for Ghana.


In that case I´ll say Mexico

 

I think Mexico is always tipped as the most likely to succeed outside of UEFA and C-Bol so they aren't really a suprise either (unless they went all the way to at least a semi)

My tip would be Sth Korea to possibly go as far as the quarters.

 

Maybe looking at the odds to win the World Cup will help carry this discussion further. I wouldn't bet on any of the teams listed below to win the WC, but some of these nations must have some pretty good odds just to reach the quarters.

Serbia and Denmark look like good bets. You'd probably get at least 5:1 odds on them reaching the quarters.

Betting on Switzerland, Cameroon or Slovakia to reach the round of 16 would also bring back a nice chunk of change.

Ivory Coast 29.00
Chile 51.00
Ghana 51.00
Paraguay 67.00
Serbia 67.00
USA 81.00
Australia 101.00
Mexico 101.00
South Africa 101.00
Denmark 101.00
Uruguay 101.00
Cameroon 126.00
Greece 151.00
Japan 201.00
Switzerland 201.00
Bosnia Herzegovina 251.00
Slovakia 251.00
Nigeria 251.00
Korea Republic 301.00
Ukraine 301.00
Republic of Ireland 301.00
Tunisia 351.00
Algeria 351.00
Honduras 401.00
Costa Rica 500.00
Egypt 500.00
Korea DPR 500.00
Slovenia 750.00
Gabon 750.00
New Zealand 1000.00
Bahrain 1000.00

 

South Africa is an extreme case of an underperforming nation when it comes to soccer. Almost as bad as England (joke). If the national team didn't have the problems politically as well as with management, they should be much more worthy contenders....Sure many nations have problems in the same area...but SA is right up there when it comes to that...
It is our national sport and i can assure you the pressure is on them for not performing like the rugby team (which was once our national sport) and are now current world cup holders.

In 2007, the PSL signed a television deal with SuperSport. Worth R1.6-billion, it is the biggest sporting deal in the history of South Africa, and it took the PSL into the top 15 ranked leagues in the world in terms of commercial broadcast deals. In the same year ABSA replaced Castle Lager as name sponsor. - wiki

Now there is a reason for that ^
They really can play soccer and play it well - or else no one would watch it. Some psl teams beat teams like ManU, Totenham to name a few...A few years back South Africa was no 1 in africa...the players/talent didn't change, but instead the management and pressures did...So the problem is not what they have at their disposal, but rather how it is used....

Whats my point?
With the recent re-appointment of Carlos Pareira as national coach as well as the return of Benni McCarthy, may lift the SA team into a new confidence level. They would really do well if they get past the first round. If South Africa scores first, they are extremely hard to beat and in my personal opinion can beat any team in the world if they play well...they are however not a very good comeback team. Against Spain and Brazil they could have won in the Confed cup if they were more level headed....but potential is certainly there...

In my humble opinion we should be ranked in the same region as other top african teams like Ghana and Cameroon...at least top 20...

 

How the hell are Slovakia's chances rated higher than that of Nigeria, Korea, Ukraine, Egypt or Ireland??? Slovakia are the whipping boys of 2010...

 

Because Ireland, Ukraine, Nigera and Egypt haven't qualified yet. Korea just aren't very good.

 

Korea would whoop Slovakia 90 games out of 100, win slightly 8 out of 100 and draw the remaining 2...

Slovakia is the weakest European qualifier at the World Cup since forever...

Even though Ireland, Ukraine, Nigeria and so on are yet to qualify I would rate their chances much higher than Slovakia's. This rating is pure rubish.

p.s. Korea is a stronger team than Japan.

 

You might be overrating Korea just a tad.

That isn't saying much. Asia usually sends the weakest teams to the World Cup.

 

They should be ranked lower than Sth Korea for sure, but unless I'm mistaken the others haven't actually qualified yet - and all of them have a difficult task to qualify - this would obviously count against them and blow out their odds.

Also you have to remember that odds arent representative of the best teams but rather those that are receiveing/ would receive the most bets.

 

No dude...i believe your wrong. Remember, Slovakia was once part of Czhekoslovakia, which is now the Czech Republic and Slovakia....Point being, its quite a soccer nation when you look at the Czechs.....Slovakia can in my opinion, also cause some upsets...

 

The only reason they qualified is because the were in a super weak group with a downhill Poland team, a pathetic Czech side and the only teams that put up a fight were Northern Ireland and Slovenia... And Slovenia thrashed them 3:1 at home.

In the meantime the managed to get thrashed by Wales, England and Croatia, lose to France, Ireland, Germany, Iceland, Turkey, Greece, Switzerland, Ukraine, Cyprus. And outside of their group they didn't manage any win against a non-Liechtenstein type team.

They only managed to advance due to a pathetic group... And they lost both games to the groups runner-up Slovenia, which will also get raped by Russia.

Slovakia will be destroyed in their group and the best they can hope for is parking a bus in front of goal and hoping not to lose too many goals.

 

Slovakia is indeed pretty weak, but they are stronger than South Africa. I just hope the host can get extra energy from the home crowd, otherwise they will become the punching bags of the tournement, not Slovakia.

 

People seem to have a short memory and seem to have forgotten how RSA played at the Confed Cup.

And they seem to forget that RSA does have in its squad one of the best midfielders in the Premier League - Steven Pienaar.

 

By the way, do we talk about North or South Korea, because North Korea is definitly weaker than Slovakia. South Korea is somewhat stronger I guess.

 

Sure, but 22 points out of 10 Euro games with Poland, the Czechs and Slovenia is pretty good. I respect the Czechs to much to call them pathatic.

What to think about Skretel in defence and Stoch in offence who is really good at Twente (Holland nr 1). Again, the team is pretty weak, but they have some nice players on their own.

I think the home advantage is pretty big, but have to see it for game 2 and 3 of the group stage for SA. I think they can play the opening match for the motherland, oke, but then I just have to see it.

 

How do the compare the inept Greece of 94 or Slovenia of 02, two pretty crappy Euro qualifiers. Will Slovakia have a better goal differential than Serbia 06?

 

They'll stand little chance against whoever the seeded team is in their group (unless they luck-out and get group "A"), but apart from that they should have a decent chance to pick-up some points. With a little luck in the draw they might even reach the second-round, that's why they might be worth a punt. Recent history shows that betting on a "weak" UEFA team is a better move than betting on an Asian team.

 

My tips for doing a suprise are:

Ivory Coast
Uruguay (if they qualify)
Bosnia (if they qualify)
Australia

 

I don't know about Australia!

Sure we are # 24 (righty or wrongly) and we did remain undefeated in the qualifiers.

Saying that though, there is a question mark about our defence and also about our formartions.

While we will probably do okay (get out of the group hopefully) I don't know if we are up to the quarter finals as yet.

I guess we will find out next year!

 

Cameroon. They'll make the final.

 

Just curious, why is Camaroon stronger than Ivory Coast in your opinion.

 

Why? I'm not sure if I would rate them higher, but definitely on par.
a) The coach Le Guen has really worked wonders. Vahid Halilhodžić just isn't the same quality level...
b) The first team of Cameroon is on par with Ivory Coast's, but the defence line is complemented with an excellent goalkeeper (Kameni), whilst this is really IC's achilles heel. Almost every other position has players which are comparable with Ivory Coast's (Geremi and Eboue, Toure brothers and Song brothers, N'koulou and Bamba, Boka and Assou-Ekotto, Makoun and Zokora, Eto'o and Drogba). The only flaw in the Cameroon's first team is Eto'o strike partner.
c) The midfield of Alex Song - N'guemo - Makoun - Emana has much more creative power than Ivory Coast's, but at the same time is just as destructive and controlling.

The only weakness Cameroon has is a very short bench for strikers and defenders. And Ivory Coast's bench of strikers is ridiculously long... and now with Gervinho coming in force is even more ridiculous. Cameroon is heavily dependent on Eto'o and the Song brothers. Ivory Coast can cope without Drogba and the Toure brothers.

 

They'll be the T&T of this tournament, they could pull out a draw and they'll push the bigger teams more than expected, but they wont "achieve" anything more than some respectability. North Korea should be the same.

IMO there will be more big suprises at this cup with the teams that fail - ala France in 2002. Only AFC seems to have had surprises in qualifying (so far) with both Iran and Saudi failing and Nth Korea and NZ getting through, the rest of the teams are on the whole stronger than previously - especially from Africa.

 

this is the first time that concacaf, conembol, and caf have all sent their best teams. In concacaf I've always considered Honduras stronger than CR. Conembol has sent Ecuador the last 2 WC's who IMO were weaker than Uruguay and Chile. As for caf, they have never sent such a strong combination of teams. If Egypt qualify which I'm betting on, it will definately be their top 5 teams, and they are all relatively of the same quality. All 5 teams I think would have a fairly decent chance of qualifying even from a group of death.
As for AFC it is the opposite, this confederation has always pretty much sent their best sides in previous WC's, this time about the unknown N Korea and New Zealand over more fanciful sides like Iraq, S Arabia, Iran. The big 3 however remain and should be a decent test for any team.
Uefa can never send all its top teams, there will always be weaker ones that sneak in due to what always seems to be unbalanced groups. This time around it seems the big absentees are Croatia and Sweden, while Portugal and Russia are far from being secure for a place.

IMO the WC 2010 will be very similar to 2002 and unlike 2006 which was so euro dominated. I think at least 2 or 3 so called big boys will be making a first round exit like France and Argentina in 2002, we will also see a few teams who are not the usual suspects in the quarters and even semis.