I've been told the other thread is too long, so a "New & Improved" thread is starting this month. the old thread is here (The first page of that thread shows the two threads which preceded that one). An FAQ will follow this post--please refer to it before posting The monthly mock draw will follow that post. This month's formula shows very little change as virtually no games were played this past month. June's results will be interesting as almost every team will play 2 qualifiers. 63.67 Brazil 48.83 Spain 47.00 England 47.00 Mexico 46.67 Argentina 46.33 Italy 45.50 Germany 45.00 France __________________ 42.00 Netherlands 40.50 USA __________________ 35.83 Turkey 33.67 Sweden
Faq Why is this list different than FIFA's coke rankings? Because Fifa's coke rankings are only part of the complex seeding formula. What is the seeding formula used for? The seeding formula is used to determine which 8 countries receive seeds. Those 8 teams are heads of each of the 8 groups in the world cup. By being seeded, they get the luxury of not having to play another seeded team until the knockout stage. What is the seeding formula exactly? The complex formula takes into account the performance at the last 3 world cups and the FIFA coca-cola rankings of the last three years. Specifically: [1(wc94) + 2(wc98) + 3(wc02)]/6 = Part A (FIFA ranking 12/03 + FIFA ranking 12/04 + FIFA ranking 11/05)/3 = Part B Part A + Part B = world cup seeding formula How is the world cup performance determined? 0 points are awarded if the country failed to qualify that year. 8 points are awarded if the country finished last in their group. 9 points are awarded if the country finished 3rd in their group. All the countries that advanced to the knockout stage are placed from 1st place to 16th place. 1st place (champs) receives 32 points. 2nd place receives 31 points. 3rd place receives 30 points. etc. All the way to 16th place which receives 17 points. How are the points for FIFA ranking awarded? Similarly to above. First, all 32 teams that qualify are ranked by their FIFA ranking. The best is given 32 points. The worst 1 point. Why don't you show all 32 teams seeding formula results? Primarily, because I don't want to accidentally misinform. Only the top 8 teams receive seeds. Teams 9-16 are not placed in a second tier--so really it's irrelevent to show all teams' seedings results. However, if you ask for it, I will show it. How do you pick which 32 countries to run the seeding formula? I pick the 32 countries based on their FIFA ranking by federation as much as is possible. For example, the best 14 European teams by FIFA ranking as long as there are at least one team from each Euro qualifying group and no more than two from each qualifying group. This is done primarily for two reasons. It keeps the criteria objective and it runs the formula with the worst-case scenario in mind. Are you sure that FIFA will use this seeding formula? No. However, the last world cup this was the specific formula used. World cups '98 and '94 used a formula extremely similar--possibly identical, but the details of those formulas were never spelled out as specifically as the one used in '02. It is possible that FIFA could change the formula or alter it, but because the last three world cups used this formula, it is a good projection of which teams will be seeded. Why do you do a monthly mock draw? Only to encourage the excitement/anticipation of the world cup. Why do I see Country X in your mock draw when Country X probably won't qualify? Because Country X is ranked higher and has yet to be eliminated from qualifying. Why don't I see Country Y in your mock draw when Country Y will probably qualify? Because Country Y is not ranked high enough and has not yet qualified--once either of those happens, you will see Country Y in the mock draw. How is the mock draw determined? I use the same pots that were used in the last 2 world cups. Pot A has seeded teams. Pot B has European teams. Pot C has non-seeded Concacaf and African teams. Pot D has non-seeded South American, Asian and Oceania teams The leftover Euro team is placed in either Pot C or D depending on which Pot needs another team. It is possible that FIFA will change the Pots this year, but until they announce that, I will conduct the mock draws using '02's model.
May's Mock Draw Apologies in advance to Ursula and Violet Crown Group A Germany Netherlands Costa Rica Uruguay Group B Argentina Portugal Cameroon South Korea Group C England Sweden Morocco Bahrain Group D France Poland Senegal Saudi Arabia Group E Italy Croatia USA Japan Group F Brazil Greece Nigeria Iran Group G Spain Turkey South Africa Colombia Group H Mexico Ireland Czech Republic Paraguay
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 Interesting draw... never thought Bahrain would still be in the mix this late, good on them. Is there any significance to the group order beyond the first team being the seeded team?
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 Group A Germany Netherlands Costa Rica Uruguay Wow no question about this group, but the USA also drew tuff .
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 When other teams are drawn into the group they can be placed in any of the remaining 3 spots (another lottery ball is drawn to see which spot they get). This affects your schedule - check the Match Schedule and you'll see how - ie if you're drawn as A2 you play the venues/dates shown, if you're drawn as A4 you play those instead.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 No. Not really. Except top team is pot A, then pot B, then pot C, then pot D. I didn't go as far as pick the position in the draw like a real draw.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 You think so? Italy: limped out of Euro04 and we all know what happened in WC02. Sure they could be tough but even if they get their act together the US only needs to come in 2nd. Croatia: another team that looked poor at Euro04. Sure they had England and France but their draw with the Swiss was horrible, the draw with France said more about France, and the loss against England should have been larger. Japan: haven't exaclty set the AFC WCQ on fire. I doubt they'll play as well in Germany as in Japan for WC02. We could draw much worse than those three.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 I'd say group H is the most evenly matched group. Group B could be very entertaining if everyone plays to their potential.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 Besides, if Mexico could win a group with Italy and Croatia, surely the USA would have no problems.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 Fighting for 1 of two spots vs. Italy and Croatia is a tuff asignment for any country ,It would probably come down to who scores more against Japan The thing with the seeds that I find intresting is that Holland will be in the group of Death its almost a certainty and whoever draws Holland from ConCacaf/Africa or SouthAmerica/Asia will have a tough time in Germany .
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 are there realistically any 2 of the 9 countries currently listed above the USA who have a real opportunity/possibility to not qualify for the WC Finals in 2006? 63.67 Brazil 48.83 Spain 47.00 England 47.00 Mexico 46.67 Argentina 46.33 Italy 45.50 Germany 45.00 France __________________ 42.00 Netherlands How are Spain, England, Fance and the Netherlands all doing? Any chance 2 of them could fail to qualify? Should that happen, would the US be a seeded team?
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 I believe that FIFA does not allow team in draw into the same group in one WC to be placed into the same group at the next world cup. And this is the same formula used in the two previous world cups.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 There is no such rule. EDIT: In fact I was sure there was such a case recently and looked it up. Paraguay and Spain have been drawn together in the last two World Cups.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 And looking forward a little farther, Argentina v Holland or Germany is likely in the round of 16 as well as USA (if they squeak through) against Brazil.
Re: Faq I've been reading--and occassionally participating--in these threads for awhile, and I think I've overlooked the significance of this point up until now. I was under the mistaken impression that the actual Coca-Cola Rank (or point totals, perhaps) of a qualified team is what was taken into account, rather than ranks viz-a-viz other ranks. Am I correct in presuming that this is the factor that is most likely to contribute to any major reshuffling as the draw approaches? For example, if Spain were to not qualify, not only does every team benefit (inherently, just from Spain not qualifying), but also--any teams below Spain in the Coca-Cola Rankings will see the points assigned for their rankings increased by one, while teams ranked above Spain will see no change. So, sticking with the hypothetical of Spain not making it, the US and Italy would benefit because they are below Spain in the rankings; meanwhile, Argentina, England, Mexico, Netherlands, France and Czech Republic wouldn't. Or, am I misinterpreting this?
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 And Netherlands/Belgium in 1994/1998 and almost every other major competition throughout that decade.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 Yep, another example. Of course, there are many examples of similar draws, these two though show that similar draws can happen in consecutive Cups.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 I have a few questions: Why is this list different than FIFA's coke rankings? What is the seeding formula used for? What is the seeding formula exactly? How is the world cup performance determined? How are the points for FIFA ranking awarded? Why don't you show all 32 teams seeding formula results? How do you pick which 32 countries to run the seeding formula? Are you sure that FIFA will use this seeding formula? . . . . Just kidding. Very informative post. Thank you. I have always been confused by how the seedings work, and this helps my understanding a great deal.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 I don't see Brazil or Argentina or Mexico NOT qualifiying. Which leaves Europe, where generally anything can happen and something usually does. Germany is an automatic seed. France: tied for 1st with 10 points with Israel, but Ireland and Switzerland both also have nine points. Could easily fall to second and need to play in, possibly drop out at this round altogether. Netherlands at 16, with Czech Republic, 15, on their heels and Romania not far behind at 13. Italy at 12 points is four clear of Slovenia and Norway. They should be in. England (16) is just one point up on Poland (15) but should take their group. Spain are tied with Lithuania at nine points behind Serbia & Montenegro at 11. Intriguing. In reality they have quite a few games left to go, so don't read too much into current standings.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 OK - I have been keeping a running track of the status of the teams above us in the other thread, so since we have a new thread, I'll update it hear. First of all, Germany is in and given the qualifying structure of their respective regions, it is inconceivable that Mexico, Brazil or Argentina would fail to qualify - i.e., there is no way Mexico drops to 4th in concacaf or that either Brazil or Argentina drops to 6th in Conmebol. That means we only have to "track", Spain, England, Italy, France & Netherlands. So here's a look at UEFA Qualifying. In UEFA, the group winners qualify automatically. Also, the 2 best 2nd place teams qualify automatically. The other 6 2nd place teams are drawn into a home and home playoff for qualification. Group 1 1. Netherlands - 6 gp, 16 pts, +11 gd 2. Czech Republic - 6 pg, 16 pts, +9 gd 3. Romania - 7 gp, 13 pts, +4 gd Netherlands still has to play AT Czech Republic. Our best "hope" here is that Netherlands slides into 2nd place and that they're not one of the best two 2nd place teams. Then they would face a playoff where anything can happen. Group 4 1. France, 6 gp, 10 pts, +4 gd 2. Israel, 6 gp, 10 pts, +2 gd 3. Switzerland, 5 gp, 9 pts, +7 gd 4. Ireland, 5 gp, 9 pts, +5 gd Given that Switzerland & Ireland have a game in hand and a better goal differential, if they each only drew their game in hand, they would both move ahead of both France & Isreal. So it is very much possible that France could fail to qualify outright or finish 2nd and need to go through a playoff. Group 5 1. Italy, 5 gp, 12 pts, +4 gd 2. Norway, 5 gp, 8 pts, + 3 gd 3. Slovenia, 5 gp, 8 pts, +1 gd Italy is comfortably in the lead here. Very little chance of them failing to qualify. Group 6 1. England, 6 gp, 16 pts, +10 gd 2. Poland, 6 gp, 15 pts, +14 gd 3. Austria, 6 gp, 11 pts, +3 gd About the best we could "hope" for here is that England falls to 2nd and needs to go through a playoff. However, given the point totals of both Poland & England, it seems likely that even if they fall to 2nd, they'd wind up being one of the two best 2nd place teams and qualify directly anyway. Barring a bunch of injuries, I don't see England failing to qualify. Group 7 1. Serbia, 5 gp, +11 pts, +10 gd 2. Spain, 5 gp, +9 pts, +7 gd 3. Lithuania, 5 gp, +9 pts, +5 gd 4. Belgium, 5 gp, 7 pts, +0 gd Serbia missed a chance to really put a dagger in Spain's hopes by drawing at home to Spain. Spain is now in a position that they have more key home games than the rest with only Belgium on the road among their games with the top 4. Summary So, England & Italy both look safe. Netherlands is probably comfortable. France and Spain are both shaky. France & Spain are in a position just one or two key injuries at the right/wrong time and they could be in trouble. Netherlands would probably take more than one or two injuries to key players to have them falter. Our best bet for is seed is probably for one of France or Spain fail to qualify and for us to pass Netherlands in the rankings. That's probably not a strong likelihood, but it is a possibility.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 I'm just wondering...Is it official that Germany is going to be placed in A? It seems like the trend in the last couple World Cups is for the host nation to play their first game several days after the opening match. Could a Group F placement be in the cards for Germany? The group F opener is the first match to be played in Berlin. It would seem logical for Germany be in that fixture. Also F1 and A1 play in same venues for their 3 group matches, so the big stadiums (Berlin, Munich, Dortmund) are featured in either placement. Another question: is this World Cup also going to have a balanced number of teams from the same confederations play in the front groups A-D as in the back groups E-H? (for example will A-D receive one of Argentina or Brazil and E-H receive the other). This was done in Korea/Japan.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 Germany will play in group A. And no, the front and back groups will not be balanced; that was done only to split the conferations evenly between Korea and Japan.
Re: WC06 seeding formula :: Updated May 18, 2005 FIFA wants Germany to play the opening game. Germany even tried to put Brazil in Group A (or themselves in group F) and were told by FIFA, "no you'll play the opening game". This is probably a decision related to not giving the current champion an automatic spot anymore.