Why is it that so many news organizations have the seedings wrong?

[ursula]

Let's see:

- The past two world cups- those with 32 teams- have done the seedings and the pots the same way. They used the formula noted here (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=270432). They also distributed the remaining 24 teams by geography.

- For this world cup, FIFA has not given any indication that things will be different. They have said explicitly that pots 2,3, and 4 are geography based. They haven't yet said that how they are gonna determine the #1 seeds but so far there's no reason to think they will change the formula- a formula that publications have easy access too. Blatter has said some very vague things, but they could be interpreted any way you want.

Given this we have various publications routinely saying that it's gonna be different this time. Regular readers of this forum have seen multiple threads started about what various publications have said the draw will go which are at odds with what FIFA has done and look like they will continue to do.

Why? Any guesses?

[mad4footie]

I don't have any answers but I do have a question: Costa Rica seem to be listed fairly consistently in the third banding of seeds ... does this mean their designation will likely be A3, B3, C3, D3 etc ?

[Ombak]

Why? Any guesses?Sports journalism is not real journalism.

There are exceptions of course, but plenty of publications get away with lazy journalism. The seedings are not a question of opinion. Well, you can certainly give your opinion on who should be seeded, but finding out the procedure is a question of doing some research and, well, apparently no one could be bothered.

[Ombak]

I don't have any answers but I do have a question: Costa Rica seem to be listed fairly consistently in the third banding of seeds ... does this mean their designation will likely be A3, B3, C3, D3 etc ?No, the position in a group (2, 3 or 4) is determined randomly.

Position 1 is assigned to seeds.

Example: If Costa Rica is in Pot 2 (say CONCACAF+CAF) and gets drawn into group D, another draw (from a pot with balls for D2, D3, D4) will be done to see what position in group D Costa Rica will get.

[Gibraldo]

AP listed this wring seedings first and everyone copied it.

[ToonUSA]

Wishful thinking perhaps.

[Sagy]

My first guess is: It sells papers.

My second guess is: It gets you publish, editors are not likely to print articles saying it will be the same as last time. If a writer comes to an editor with a "source" stating some new system, the story is likely to get ink.

[mad4footie]

No, the position in a group (2, 3 or 4) is determined randomly.

Position 1 is assigned to seeds.

Example: If Costa Rica is in Pot 2 (say CONCACAF+CAF) and gets drawn into group D, another draw (from a pot with balls for D2, D3, D4) will be done to see what position in group D Costa Rica will get.


Thanks!

[Atlemar]

Brian Trusdell of the Associated Press did this. He lays out in his article how he arrives there. And there's no "sources" or anything. What probably happened is that he was assigned to do a mock draw story and then tried to figure it out himself. But either he hasn't watched the last two, or he forgot about them.

The story wasn't supposed to be posted until Saturday, but I saw it when it ran Wednesday, on account of I work at a newspaper. I e-mailed him Thursday, and called the desk Friday. They've been told it's wrong. Why they let it go is beyond me, but they're the AP in New York and I'm just some schmuck at a small paper on the other side of the country, so why should they pay attention to me?

The writer from the Miami Herald appeared to take Trusdell's stuff on faith.

The stuff I've seen done here on BigSoccer is closer to good journalism than what Trusdell did. Posters here have been clear about what they do and do not know, what assumptions they're making, and how it could turn out differently. And they're starting from the same knowledge base as everybody else.

And none of them are crazy enough to think that Croatia is going to get a seed.

[Sean_94]

Sports journalism is not real journalism.

Journalism isn't journalism anymore. That goes for sports or news.
I saw the article Wednesday, too. It should have been labelled an analysis. Instead it was presented as a news story, and to the average reader accepted as probable fact.
Really, the only thing factually wrong about it was Brazil was not in Group F.
The rest is his own speculation, but who knows it could happen. FIFA could magically decide to do it any way they want on Tuesday, and Trusdell's story is hypothetical. He is just making assumptions like any of us are. (FIFA could seed Tunisia if they want to.) Trusdell's assumptions are just not based on any historical precedent.
He rates the past 3 World Cups weighted as 1/2 2002, 1/3 1998 and 1/6 1994, but he offers no source or precedent for this.
He delves into potential politics of the seeding process, after his own seeding formula is more than likely flawed. I think the politics part just confuses the reader, especially if they are not a big soccer fan.
The most likely accurate assumptions are that FIFA is going to do it like the past two World Cups. But there's always at least one surprise. Holland just might boot Mexico as a seed. Maybe South Korea WILL get a seed, as Trusell says they could be in line for. That is less likely, but who knows. We just don't know until Tuesday.
But you're right, a little more research and he would not have drawn the conclusions he did. I got the sense when I read the story he got the assignment a few days prior.

[JLSA]

Really, the only thing factually wrong about it was Brazil was not in Group F.


Are you saying Brazil IS or ISN'T going to be in Group F. Because the FifaWorldCup website article on the draw certainly makes no claim that they will be.


The eight chosen seeds will be placed in Pot 1, and drawn as the first teams in Groups A to H, from left to right. As mentioned above, it has already been decided that Germany will play in Group A.



Sports journalism is not real journalism.

99% of football journalists would not be the best source of any information on anything. Expect possibly "Who is Jordan shagging now?" and "Where do they keep the good cocaine?"

J

[scaryice]

The AP sucks. They always get stuff wrong in soccer articles. In fact, I'm going to start an "AP sucks" thread in the Business & Media forum.

[Ombak]

Kudos to Bild for reporting something that makes sense. It'll be cool if they've guessed right and/or had the inside info all along.

[Autogolazo]

Kudos to Bild for reporting something that makes sense. It'll be cool if they've guessed right and/or had the inside info all along.


Link?

What I found on Bild is wrong again. They say Pot 2 is the 5 African teams, 2 CONCACAF teams and Australia. But we all know CONCACAF has three teams.

Here's an excerpt, wondering which pot the ninth Euro will go into:

"Topf 2? Geht nicht! Der ist mit den fünf afrikanischen und zwei mittelamerikanischen Mannschaften plus Australien voll."

"Mittelamerikanischen" is NOT South American, but Central American. Maybe it should be, for this argument's sake, but they got it wrong.

http://www.bild.t-online.de/BTO/index.html

If Bild got it wrong about Central/South America, and it's the South Americans in with Africa and Australia in Pot 2, then CONCACAF-Asia-Euro#9 will be Pot 4. Pot 3 will be the Euro teams. This would fall into line with FIFA's wanting greater "suspense" (i.e., Euro teams) later in the draw.

[tamachan]

Ive seen old men run a meat raffle better than this. They dont say much too because it will effect television ratings. Its better if they shut up than do what they have been doing. But its money at the end of the day.

[monster]

Maybe one theory is that some of these people have talked to people at FIFA off the record and gotten hints that they aren't at liberty to divulge.

Crazy, I know.

[o_l_coach]

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=351188&cc=5901
"FIFA have not confirmed how the seedings will be decided but hinted that the same method used in 2002 will be used again.

That involved taking the performances from the two previous World Cup finals, combined with an average position based on the FIFA world rankings from the past three years to establish a coefficient for each team.

On that basis, Brazil, Italy, France, Argentina, Spain, Mexico and England could all join Germany in the top group of seeds, with the Netherlands, the United States, Czech Republic, Croatia, South Korea, Japan and Paraguay in the second group. "

WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?

I've seen better reporting in HS newspapers.
For those who haven't been following this for 3+ years (like this reporter) the previously used method includes the last 3 WC, and only the first 8 are seeded. Everything after that is by region.

If you're upset by crappy reporting (like this)
"Your views on this story? Email newsdesk@soccernet.com"

[Ombak]

If Bild got it wrong about Central/South America, and it's the South Americans in with Africa and Australia in Pot 2, then CONCACAF-Asia-Euro#9 will be Pot 4. Pot 3 will be the Euro teams. This would fall into line with FIFA's wanting greater "suspense" (i.e., Euro teams) later in the draw.The images BILD had show CONMEBOL teams:

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6873735&postcount=77

[Ombak]

Maybe one theory is that some of these people have talked to people at FIFA off the record and gotten hints that they aren't at liberty to divulge.

Crazy, I know.None of them even hinted at that.

[Autogolazo]

The images BILD had show CONMEBOL teams:

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6873735&postcount=77

Images may be right--text was wrong. I couldn't pull up the images when I went to the site, but the article said "Mittelamerika" and its two teams would be in the Africa/Australia pot.