Super long post here! Carrying on Bobby McMahon's excellent post: http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymc...e-inequity-of-the-fifa-2014-world-cup-draw-2/ - the disparity in distance traveled by group is insane. Specifically when it comes to the second round games, starting with the round of 16. I'm not going to dive into the disparity when it comes to the group games because McMahon covers it pretty well, and I think fatigue is more likely to start hitting in game 4 and beyond than in games 2 and 3. *Warning - I used McMahon's numbers for the group stage, then used his numbers where I could for traveling to the next round and distance.to to find the length of the trips that don't happen during the group stage. I have no guarantee that these numbers are 100% accurate, and I may have mistyped somewhere along the line. The crux of the matter is this - of the 32 slots available, I found that only 10 of them have fewer miles after traveling to the Round of 16 location if they finish in 1st place compared to 2nd place. Five of those ten belong to seeded teams. In Groups G & H, finishing in 2nd means fewer miles for your team for all slots. Breaking it down by group, first number is number of miles if they finish 1st in the group, 2nd is number of miles if they finish 2nd. Something to remember is that the #1 slots are assigned to the seeds, the remaining 3 are random - ie, Pot 2 teams do not necessarily fill slot #2. Brazil: 2911 / 3573 A2: 4449 / 3820 A3: 1682 / 1053 A4: 3310 / 3972 B1: 3392 / 2242 B2: 3403 / 2265 B3: 2646 / 1508 B4: 3041 / 1891 Group A: The team that is slotted into position A3 will have a huge advantage if they finish in 2nd in Group A. They will have traveled 1053 miles, while their opponents will have flown either 3392, 3403, 2646, or 3041 miles (B1 - B4). A3's distance benefit from winning the group to face the 2nd team in Group B isn't as great, as I'll show below. If Brazil tops this group, the opponent they face will have traveled 1000 fewer miles than they have prior to the round of 16 game. Group B: Average distance for team that finishes top of Group B - 3120 miles. Average distance for team that finishes in 2nd - 1976 miles. The winner of Group B has to go to Fortaleza, coming from either Curitiba (1660 miles) or Sao Paulo (1473 miles). Interestingly, despite this, with the exception of facing A3, Group B has the distance advantage in every matchup against Group A, particularly in the winner of Group A against the runner up of Group B. Worst case scenario: A2 comes in first (4449 miles) against B3 (1508 miles). C1: 1912 / 2456 C2: 2770 / 1800 C3: 3442 / 2472 C4: 2711 / 3255 D1: 3043 / 4182 D2: 2425 / 1629 D3: 2986 / 2190 D4: 2077 / 3216 Group C and Group D: The interesting issue here is that in both Groups, the 2 and 3 teams would prefer to finish in 2nd, while the 1 and 4 teams would prefer to come in 1st. In Group C, C1/4 has to travel 981 miles in 1st and 1594 in 2nd, while C2/3 would travel 1361 in 1st and 391 in 2nd. D1/4 is 157/1296, D2/3 is 1014/218. No clear winners here, though D1 is in trouble if they advance (which they should, they're seeded), having to travel over 3000 miles no matter what. Worst case scenario: D1 in 2nd (4182 miles), C1 in first (1912 miles). E1: 3483 / 3948 E2: 1919 / 1315 E3: 3011 / 2407 E4: 3243 / 3708 F1: 1574 / 2138 F2: 3075 / 2831 F3: 2014 / 1770 F4: 2377 / 2941 Group E & F: E1 loses out on the travel battle no matter what, as does E4. They have lengthy travel from their final game to the Round of 16 game. Worst case scenario: F1 wins group, E1 runner up, 1574 vs 3948. G1: 2881 / 1451 G2: 3915 / 3728 G3: 2413 / 2226 G4: 5332 / 3902 H1: 1339 / 964 H2: 2284 / 1514 H3: 2510 / 1740 H4: 2473 / 2098 Note to my preferred team: Do not get drawn into G4. Honestly, don't get drawn into Group G, period. Group H has a pretty significant advantage, particularly for the team that finishes 2nd. Worst case scenario: G4 wins group, H1 runner up, 5332 vs 964 (wow). Overall, it's possible we may see some really large differences in travel Round of 16 opponents. We could also see matchups where the differences aren't all that great. It will certainly be interesting to see what happens.
I'm strongly considering selling my tickets. The cost for hotels and travel coupled with the constant packing is going to be ridiculous. Brazil really wants to squeeze as much money as they can from people on this tournament.
This is why I decided not to go in the first place. But it should be noted, FIFA sets the match schedule, not the host nation. The travel was for the most part just as bad for South Africa. It's the downside of having World Cups in places without high-speed rail.
For the US World Cup, the teams typically had "home bases" where they would play 2 group games at a particular venue. That's the most fair I think for large expansive countries like US, Brazil, or South Africa. Unfortunately, the best strategy for this World Cup would be to just pick a venue, catch one of your games, and just enjoy the party - and then plan accordingly for the knock-out rounds. That will likely be my strategy with Brasilia as a home base for a Brazil game and whatever other group games interest me.
Considering the teams will all be flying between cities, I'm skeptical of how big a difference this will really make. Does a couple of hours extra on a plane over the course of a week really matter? The climate changes - absolutely, but not the distances.
For the most part, yes, but for those of us who can't be arsed to travel long distances during the tournament there was a cluster of 4 stadiums around Johannesburg. I probably wouldn't have gone otherwise. There's nothing similar this time.
I can imagine it can have an impact, particularly in combination with a tight travelling schedule. Sitting still for (quite a lot) more hours directly after a game can I think impact the players' physical condition quite badly. Plus, travelling longer probably means sleeping less.
I don´t know why FIFA didn´t use the same system it used in the US for the Brazil World Cup (considering that´s the only two countries of continental proportions that had World Cups) They say Brazil needed to play in lots of different places to justify the cost of the World Cup. I am brazilian and this makes no sense, unless you are afraid Brazil will not get out of Group Stage. Just had Brazil playing in northeast cities at Group Stage. The knockout stages move to Brasilia/São Paulo/Rio/BH Not only having all knockout stages at Brasilia/Southeastern capitals would make travelling distances smaller, as also the matches would be only cooler but not cold climates. And it would also allow group stages divided by REGIONS.
is that to blame on Brazil or FIFA?? FIFA sometimes seems to make bullshit decisions, like the ridiculous 1pm matches in the north/northeast. Crazy I say. WE BRAZILIANS DO NOT PLAY FOOTBALL before 16pm! Because we are perfectly aware that direct sun in your head with temperatures close to 30ºC is not healthy.