I've noticed that some teams get really lucky like Turkey playing Brazil Costa Rica and China barely make it out of the group over Costa Rica then in the following matches they get Japan and Senegal. They should have just handed them a ticket directly to the semis with those opponents. On the other side Paraguay has gone out in the Ro16 in the last two world cups. The first they lost on a golden goal to the eventual champions and then they lost by one to the second place team. Can you think of any similiar situations?
I've said it before ... Germany played: Paraguay, USA, and South Korea to get to the final. Paraguay has the biggest tradition in that group. And they barely made it through with 1x0 victories.
And the Paraguay game was the worst game of that tournament... Hardest route to the WC that I can think of was Italy 82' after the group stage: 2nd group round Argentina Brazil Semi Finals Poland Final West Germany.
And yet Germany could have played teams that were much more highly regarded, but simply failed to deliver. If Mexico had beaten the United States, and either Italy or Spain had beaten South Korea, then we'd be calling Germany's road to the final one of the more difficult in recent history.
To their credit, Germany did come out of a fairly difficult group... topping a group containing both Ireland (who had put out Holland in the qualifiers) and African champions Cameroon - whom they played while down to ten men for most of the match. Topping their group game them a deserved easier route in and neither Paraguay nor the US were pushovers and the Koreans were playing at home. I do agree that they were able to avoid the "traditional" powerhouses though. Turkey's route I do agree with - especially their first round group.
Argentina in 1978. On the way to the final, they played the following teams: First round: Hungary France Italy Second round: Brazil Poland Peru Final: Holland Not the hardest draw ever but was fairly tough draw. The result against Peru has been considered as strange.
Not to mention the terrible referee who really worked against them. I'll take your drugged Juve team over these Argentine basterds any day.
The Czechs had a tough draw in 1962 and they weren't rated highly. In most clashes they had went in as underdogs. First round: Spain Brazil Mexico (their only weak opposition but they somehow managed to lose) Quarter-Finals Hungary Semi-Finals: Yugoslavia Final: Brazil I have listed some tough draws but the one borruma listed was the toughest which was Italy's in 1982.
I didn't say that Argentina were a great team which they weren't. Argentina won because made the most of their home advantage, politicians and dodgy referees. Holland weren't as good as they were in 1974 but if the World Cup wasn't in Argentina, Holland would have won without a doubt. Arie Haan's goal against Italy is probably the greatest long-range shot I've seen. I was thinking of putting up the teams Holland played but I wasn't sure which team had a harder draw. The Dutch played Iran in the group stage and in terms of individuals, Hungary would have been more of a threat than Iran although the Hungarians lost all three matches. To add to that, Hungary had their two star players sent off against Argentina and what they had done was nothing compared to what some of the Argentinians did.
Argentina won 6-0 and Peru didn't seem like they were trying. Peru had a good team which had players like Teofilo Cubillas and Hugo Sotil but there was a catch. Ramon Quiroga, Peru's goalkeeper, was originally from Argentina and some of those goals could have been save easily.
Brazil 1994 may have had a pretty tough route, but it might have been them not playing properly in all games. the Group stage had Cameroon, Russia and Sweden, three decent sides... in round 2 they played uninspired against an ordinary USA team without Tab Ramos, and got a late goal Then they Played Holland against one of hollands better teams of all time, Sweden again (rematches are never easy) and Italy... had they not been maybe the 5th best team ever, they might not have won
But when you write it like this people get the impression that Argentina actually made it to the final by beating all these tough teams. They didn't. They lost to Italy and drew Brazil 0-0. Not the most credible of WC winners . . .
Argentina 90' had Yugoslavia in the quarters not the Czechs. Oh and they played like complete crap. I'd actually think that Germany's route in 1990 was harder than Argentina's (Uae Excepted) and unlike the Argies they won the majority of their games: Group Stage: Yugoslavia, UAE, Colombia 2nd Round: Netherlands Quarter Finals: Czechoslovakia Semi Finals: England Final: Argentina Out of all the victors I'd say Brazil 02' had the easiest route to the WC, only really one tough opponent, who froze after going 1-0 up. Brazil 94' and Argentina 86' weren't the toughest but they were still pretty hard.
True, but didn't they advance as a third place team. They should consider themselves lucky to get to the round of 16.
It should also be stated that going into that match, Argentina and Peru knew that a 4-0 or greater scoreline would put the hosts into the final. The other game in that group, Brazil 3-1 Poland, ended approx. a half-hour before Arg-Peru kicked off. In the days leading up to those matches Brazil had lobbied to FIFA - unsuccessfully - for both matches to kickoff simultaneously. It was this situation and, especially, the 1982 West Germany 1-0 Austria debacle that finally led FIFA to have the final first-round matches within the same group kickoff with the same start times.
Answering the original thread question,"Hardest/Easiest World Cup Route", the answers would be Easiest-Asia,Hardest-CONMEBOL.
Brazil had as tough a road as they could, considering all the choking by the traditional powers. They did beat the runner-up Germans easily, and the 3rd place team Turkey TWICE, along with the English. I wouldn't call it the toughest of tournaments, but it was a legitimate road. Of course, the shameful part was how the referees protected the host teams with atrocious calls.
Italy 82 and Czechoslovakia 62 have already been mentioned, and I would probably put them as the two hardest routes to the final. Others I would mention would be: Brazil 58 - England and USSR in the groups were both very tough, Wales in the last 8 were missing John Charles but gave them their sternest test, France had a fantastic side lead by Kopa and Fontaine and Sweden in Stockholm were a very strong team. Hungary 54 - OK the group couldn't even be classed as mildly challenging, but to face Brazil in the quarters and Uruguay (unbeaten at the World Cup) in the Semis ranks as tough as any similar route to the final.
Good point. The Italy and Argentina match must have been one of the matches of 1978 tornament. Another suspicious thing happened during that World Cup. After the Italy vs Argentina clash, the referee Abraham Klein was sent home and he did nothing controversial. I suppose the fact that Argentina lost when he was refereeing pissed the Argentinians off too much.
They did. Cameroon was on top, Romania second, Argentina third with the Soviets on the bottom. ------------- P W D L Gls Pts CAMEROON 3 2 0 1 3-5 4 ROMANIA 3 1 1 1 4-3 3 ARGENTINA 3 1 1 1 3-2 3 Soviet Union 3 1 0 2 4-4 2 The Argentinians did have a tough draw in 1990 but when considering that it was Argentina and the team they had, they shouldn't belong in this thread.
Brazil 58's draw also has to rank among the toughest. Hungary 54's group was a walkover for them though it did help that the West Germans didn't put on their strongest team. Then again it wouldn't have made a difference if West Germany did, the Hungarians had always seem to be the better team except in the Final where the circumstances were different. For instance, Puskas wasn't 100 per cent fit, the pitch was wet and towards the end Puskas had a goal disallowed.