Serbia jobbed, not the US

[TrueCrew]

After reading many posts, it seems to me many are upset that the US didn't get a seed. To me, this is ridiculous for a number of reasons:

1) You knew it wasn't going to happen.
2) Mexico deserves it more, and it is Arena's fault. They have Beaten Brazil and other top teams (Argentina?) both by competing in the Confederations Cup and Copa Sudamerica (which the US declined to play in).
3) Who has the US beaten? Mexico have more wins against top teams: name a top team US has beat in the last 8 years besides Mexico? After Portugal at the WC, it gets pretty hard to think of one, yes? Also, quit whining about how the US won our group, it was a tie for crying out loud. The team that really got screwed was SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO!

1) They get treated differently from every other European team by having a 2/3 shot at being put in a bot with Brazil or Argentina, which is gauranteed to have another Euro team in it.
2) This unfair treatment is based on FIFA rankings, which we all know are hooey.
3) They DID win their group, beating Spain, if any team should be singled out (and none should), it should be the teams who had to qualify via playoffs, not teams that won their qualifying groups.

SOLUTION: like many on BS have said, put all 9 Euros in a pot, and the leftover team goes into the pot with the Asains, CONMEBOL, and Australia.
When the time comes to pick that pot, if the 9th EURO team gets drawn into a Group w/ 2 Euros, redraw that Group, if they haven't been drawn into one of their acceptable Groups (Brazil, Mexcio, Argentina) by the last available group, stick them in it; or put Mexico or Argentina into Group H to fix the problem; OR have special draw for the 9th EURO with Brazil/Arg/Mex as the three possibilites.

There are lots of possibilities, NONE of which merits singling out one team for different treatment, which is unacceptable in my view. So much for FIFA being against discrimaniton!!

Anyone know where I (and others) could write to FIFA and complain!

[Serb]

Great post.

[superdave]

Serbia was set aside because they have the lowest ranking. It was an objective decision. Now, maybe it should have been random rather than objectively pre-selected...but Serbia was hardly jobbed.

I actually think FIFA did a superb job, except I would have switched Australia and Serbia. I think the groups would have been more balanced that way.

OK, now that I think about it, Serbia was slightly jobbed, because the teams in its pot, which it can't play, are weaker overall than the teams in Australia's pot. On the plus side, if there's a Group of Death, it'll be one with either the US or Japan, so Serbia can't be in that. Also, Serbia has a 1/3 chance of being in Mexico's group, which is a bonus.

[rabble-rabble]

I think that despite their low ranking that Serbia will be a very challenging and difficult opponent. I find it surprising that some posters (most notably from Mexico as they can't draw T&T) are listing their best case and worst case draws and list Serbia as the most desirable opponent from the last pot.

Of course the best thing that Serbia can do if they feel they were treated unfairly is prove they are underrated by beating up on some teams and advancing.

[Franchise]

Anyone putting Serbia in as a "best case" draw is an idiot. It would seem intuitively obvious that drawing Trinidad or Arabia would be the best possibilities from Pot 4. Sure, drawing the US (or maybe a top Asian team) would be worse, but an easier draw is very easy to see.

As to whether or not they were "jobbed," I disagree. They're probably a better team than Switzerland or Ukraine, but not markedly so. As another poster (superdave) noted, they also now have a better chance of being drawn with Mexico, which isn't a bad thing, and Argentina isn't exactly the strongest Pot A team, either. (They may even be the second or third weakest.) OTOH, they also have a better chance to end up with Brazil, and will be drawn with another Euro team. If it's the Dutch--or to a lesser extent, Portugal or Sweden--they will have a tough row to hoe. However, if they are drawn with the Swiss or Ukrainians from the Euro pot, as they are probably better than any team from the SAmer/Africa pot, their chances suddenly look good. In any case, as they are not amongst the better half of the tournament's teams, it is fair they are less likely to get a draw that gives them a good chance of advancing.

[PanchoM]

Great post.

I Agree , this can't be sugar coated , FIFA was very unfair to Serbia

[superdave]

One more thing...there's a 2/3 chance Serbia's pot 3 team can't be Paraguay or Ecuador. Which is probably better than it being random. Either Mexico will be their #1, or their non-UEFA, non-seed won't be that great. Well, at least that team will be very inexperienced at the World Cup level. I think they've all either never been or haven't been for a generation. I don't know how much that counts in this era of global soccer, but as a Yank, there's a part of me that doesn't worry about the talent on the team we might draw from that group, and would just rather avoid the two teams that have experience. The Aussies and all the African teams don't have that (except maybe Tunisia. When's the last time they were at a World Cup?)

[Colm]

If Fifa counted the 1994 world cup into the seeding then Sweden would of had a good chance of being seeded along with Holland.

[superdave]

I Agree , this can't be sugar coated , FIFA was very unfair to Serbia
How was it unfair, since it was based on objective data? I mean, is it unfair that Mexico is seeded, just because most observers wouldn't rank them in the top 8?

[MassachusettsRef]

Serbia was set aside because they have the lowest ranking. It was an objective decision. Now, maybe it should have been random rather than objectively pre-selected...but Serbia was hardly jobbed.The problem is that FIFA used a hybrid formula to seed teams, but then reverted back to just the rankings to determine the "weakest" European team. Why the change? If the formula was good enough to figure out the top 8 teams, surely it was good enough to figure out the worst European team, right? Had the formula been used, Ukraine would have been the left out team. Whether Serbia is better off being in the special pot or not is up to debate, but it's undeniable that FIFA strangely tinkered with their system to get Serbia into the special pot.

One more thing...there's a 2/3 chance Serbia's pot 3 team can't be Paraguay or Ecuador. I'll give you Paraguay, but you do know that Ecuador almost literally NEVER wins away from Quito, right? We did an analysis on their performance a few months ago when someone suggested they would be a tough side to face. The results were pretty damning. There isn't a team I'd rather face (speaking as an American fan) from Pot 2 than Ecuador. I'd rather face them than the unknown that is Togo.

[PanchoM]

How was it unfair, since it was based on objective data? I mean, is it unfair that Mexico is seeded, just because most observers wouldn't rank them in the top 8?

No , the point is that Serbia should be treated the same as other non-Euro seeds . The Czechs and the Dutch do not need FIFA to look out for them,
they should take their chance at the draw and if it turns out that they will meet 2 European team then so be it . Fairness is more important then having the Dutch in the 1/4 finals .

Your insertion of Mexico as a seed in the discussion is plain dumb.

[Edgar]

If Fifa counted the 1994 world cup into the seeding then Sweden would of had a good chance of being seeded along with Holland.

Not true. Sweden would have been nowhere near.

Nation - Ranking - Performance - Total


Brazil 32.000 31.667 63.667 CONMEBOL
Spain 28.333 21.167 49.500 UEFA
Germany 20.000 28.833 48.833 UEFA
Mexico 26.000 21.000 47.000 CONCACAF
Italy 23.000 23.500 46.500 UEFA
Argentina 29.000 17.333 46.333 CONMEBOL
England 24.667 21.500 46.167 UEFA
France 30.000 14.667 44.667 UEFA
-------------------------------------------------
Netherlands 28.667 14.000 42.667 UEFA
USA 23.333 18.167 41.500 CONCACAF
Sweden 20.333 15.000 35.333 UEFA
Korea Republic 15.500 18.667 34.167 AFC
Japan 17.333 14.667 32.000 AFC
Croatia 17.000 14.500 31.500 UEFA
Czech Republic 29.000 0.000 29.000 UEFA
Paraguay 13.500 14.833 28.333 CONMEBOL
Portugal 22.500 4.500 27.000 UEFA
Saudi Arabia 12.667 10.167 22.834 AFC
Costa Rica 16.833 4.500 21.333 CONCACAF
Iran 16.333 3.000 19.333 AFC
Poland 15.000 4.000 19.000 UEFA
Tunisia 11.000 6.667 17.667 CAF
Serbia & Montenegro 8.000 7.667 15.667 UEFA
Ecuador 10.000 4.500 14.500 CONMEBOL
Switzerland 8.667 3.167 11.834 UEFA
Cote d'Ivoire 7.167 0.000 7.167 CAF
Ukraine 7.000 0.000 7.000 UEFA
Australia 4.333 0.000 4.333 OFC -> AFC
Trinidad & Tobago 4.167 0.000 4.167 CONCACAF
Ghana 3.333 0.000 3.333 CAF
Angola 2.000 0.000 2.000 CAF
Togo 1.333 0.000 1.333 CAF

[Dwbakke]

One more thing...there's a 2/3 chance Serbia's pot 2 team can't be Paraguay or Ecuador. Which is probably better than it being random.

Well, yes, it might be better than getting a random Pot 2 team. I don't think that makes up for trading a Pot 4 opponent for a Pot 3 one, and also making the shot at getting Brazil 1/3 instead of 1/8. Clearly, this is much worse for Serbia than if they were in Pot 3.

But some team has to be in this situation. There has to be a European team that both gets put in Pot 4 has a 1/3 chance at getting Brazil. But at least there was a rationale for picking Serbia. It would be much more unfair for that team if it were chosen randomly. If the Netherlands were the team in this situation they would be screwed more than Serbia, because as a better team they deserved it even less. I agree that FIFA should have used the same rankings as for the #1 seeds and this team should have been Ukraine. But it makes a lot more sense for Serbia to be the team that gets a slightly worse deal than the Czech Republic or the Netherlands.

[Autogolazo]

Mass Ref has it right--don't change the system for seeding into Pot A and seeding in Pot C (the UEFA pot) just so Serbia gets the boot.

I'm sure Serbian ire will fall silent if they get Mexico, Switzerland and Angola, however.

Per the Ecuador discussion--I would rather face Ecuador than the talented sides of Ivory Coast and Ghana, or than the experienced/heavily-supported-by-immigrants side of Tunisia. I don't know enough about Togo and Angola to say.

That said, Ecuador's defeat of Croatia (who had everything to play for and could've qualified for the second round with a win) remains for me the single most baffling result of WC 2002.

[NBlue]

Who has the US beaten? Mexico have more wins against top teams: name a top team US has beat in the last 8 years besides Mexico? After Portugal at the WC, it gets pretty hard to think of one, yes? Also

No. Offhand, I can recall that the US has beaten Argentina, Brazil and Germany (three times!) in addition to Portugal over the past 8 years. While I agree that US should not be a seed at this World Cup and further agree that the treatment of Serbia is unfair, I think you should check your facts before you call out the US in this regard.

[leonidas]

No. Offhand, I can recall that the US has beaten Argentina, Brazil and Germany (three times!) in addition to Portugal over the past 8 years. While I agree that US should not be a seed at this World Cup and further agree that the treatment of Serbia is unfair, I think you should check your facts before you call out the US in this regard.

I think bringing up specific games that happened 7-8 years ago is pretty meaningless in my opinion. I feel the same way when looking at Mexico. I really get annoyed by this whole Mexico-US debate. And when you look at some of the specific circumstances, like say, Brazil - US, in the 98 Gold Cup, well, it was the Gold Cup. What were the results of US-Germany and US-Argentina? But yeah, the US has beaten some good teams in recent memory. However, I would like them to at least follow Mexico's path and arrange some good friendlies, and not play teams like Scotland...

[Solid444]

About the US, it is childish for US fans to cry about not getting a seed. The only thing that the US has done since 98' is get to the quarters in 02'. Korea got to the semis and i doubt they are crying about not getting a seed. How do you expect to get seeded when you disregard international competitions at the national team level. Declined to go to Copa America, did not go to Confederations Cup in Germany and was a disgrace in Confederations Cup in France and then you have the nerve to complain that you were cheated (I know missing Confederations Cup was not a decision but a loss to Brazil U23). The US has locked themselves up in the Concacaf for the past 3 years, assessing their improvement through crappy competition and not taking advantage of the opportunities they were given on an international stage.

"But those competitions dont matter, what only matters is the WC". I dont know how many times i heard this. Hmm, i wonder if US fans feel the same way. The US should be thankful they were one point away from seeding even after their fiasco in Franco 98'. Due to the messed up Fifa Rankings, if Mexico keeps getting into the second round and if the US is able to do the same, the WC where both of them are seeded is not far off (if the same formula is kept).

[superdave]

About the US, it is childish for US fans to cry about not getting a seed. The only thing that the US has done since 98' is get to the quarters in 02'.
I agree that the (small but not small enough) minority of US fans who are crying about this are wrong.

But to correct your post...we won the latest Gold Cup, and we won the qualifying group both ways you can measure it...we were the first to qualify, and we topped the group.

I mean, our run through the first 7 games of the hex was pretty damn impressive.

[Hachiko]

(see first post)

Repped.

[argentine soccer fan]

I Agree , this can't be sugar coated , FIFA was very unfair to Serbia

If they would have used the hibrid formula to rank the second tier Euro teams, which country would have been last?

What nationality is Blatter?

Well, it is probably just a coincidence.