The 'Big 4' is dead. Say hello to the 'Big 5'.

I've never said that the A-league is better than the J-league, i said that it would be better to have your NT players playing in the top leagues in Europe than in the J-league, which is true.

And on that note about wikipedia, the A-league has been around for three years.

 

exactly , nuff said.

 

In a way this is true. There doesn't seem to be a Viduka or a Kewell in the next generation - we have no under 21's that are World Class yet, but at the next level (think Emerton, Bresciano even Cahill) seems to be much deeper.

We were lucky at the WC that (other than Kewell and to a lesser extent Cahill) we didn't have any injuries, because except for maybe Skoko, the players we used were the only ones really worthy of being there. I don't see that problem in our future - the opposite more likely.

 

2 from 2. Apparently a-league clubs suck?

 

I know, but it would be unfair to rate Australia's true strength from their inaugural participation at the asian cup. I really think they underestimated the cup and did not prepare as well as they should have. A more realistic gauge of their strength was how they easily dominated Qatar 3-0 in their recent World cup qualifier. Let's see how a better prepared Aussie fares against Iraq and China.

 

Good call.

 

Okay.

 

Good points, but I'd say moreso wait till at least after the World cup is over or next Asian cup. All Asian teams are a bit cagy because they don't know Australia - and vice-versa. ATM you can't leave Australia out of the "big 5" but they have to prove they deserve it. (which I'm sure they will).

Iraq, Uzbekistan and China need more consistent, and especially in China's case, better results to be able to enter, although if Iraq qualify to the World Cup after winning the Asian cup then you would have to include them in a "big 6"

 

I find it a touching gesture that you mentioned us in a game we had nothing to do with.

 

Who the fu.k are sydney?

 

Whatever guys..... it has nothing to do with this thread.

 

I wonder if the results would have been the same, if Australia were in group B. Group A was relatively easy, as Japan was the only country really that matched Australia. If Australia were to replace with any country in Group B, it would have been harder to top the group; you would have had two out of the three tough countries (S. Korea, Saudi Arabia, and Iran) on top of the dark horse, N. Korea. Australia might have finished fourth in that group. Hell, even Japan could have finish 4th in that group.

 

Group A continues to be considered "relatively easy" because Japan and Aust have played up to their potential and rankings and left the other three teams way behind. Both countries have dealt with their opponents the way teams of their stature and rankings should have. Yet a team like Bahrain can still get within a goal of Japan twice and Aust once. So called "superpowers" in Group B have not played up to their potential, or maybe that's all they have???..............and that Group is close so is considered "more difficult".

Lets be real with Group B. S Korea killed it in qualifying with a couple of games to go and then a team from outside the top 100 sits equal 2nd atm. Realistically, running a line through S Koreas form, if Japan or Aust were in Group B they would be fighting it out for 1st place with S Korea with the top 2 teams finishing comfortably top 2.

If this was a horse race then the best form guide would be to run a line through Uzbekistan and Saudi as they were both in the same group in the previous qualification stage to get to this current stage. They both finished equal 1st on points in that group.
Now bringing that form into this present Group stage: Uzbeks are last in Group A, Saudi's are equal 2nd in Group B. So maybe if we put Uzbekistan and the teams above them from Group A into Group B, then going on the previous form line, all of Group A could/should be considered better than the bottom four Group B teams.

On form, all of Group A looks stronger than the majority of Group B.

 

HMMMMMM.............

I consider it like this.

Japan beat Australia (quarter finals Asia 2007).

Saudi Arabia beat Japan (semifinals Asia 2007).

So Saudi Arabia > Japan & Australia.

Hence GROUP B >>>>>>>>>> GROUP A.

 

You'd take a 2 year old tournament over qualification games held 1 year a go as most important?

I thought you were suppose to be on a 1 month self imposed "losing pact" ban? I don't make "pacts" with those who can't keep them.

 

Whoever comes 3rd in group B will walk all over the park with the opponent from group A. WANT TO MAKE A PACT ABOUT IT OR YOU SCARED?

 

From the get go from the mere fact that one group contained only 2 of the Big 5 and the other 3 of the Big 5, it was blatenty obvious to all from football pundits to a lay person that:

Group A: the easier group

Group B: group of death

Group B is indeed proving the be a group of 'near' death for Saudi Arabia and 'probable' death for Iran. We will find out tomorrow who the actual casualties will be.

Loyalty spin is just that, a spin, and not a convincing one at that. He may be joking but unfortunatley that aint obvious.

Go back in time and ask anyone which group they rather be in, and there is your answer. End of.

 

Group B: Azadi, Ridayh, Seoul, Pyongyang, Dubai

Group A: Melbourne, Yokohama, Riffa, Khalifa, Pakhtakor

Where are Asia's most feared atmospheres located? Places like Azadi, Pyongyang.

Group A just cannot compare.

 

This is as good a measure as any. When the draw was done most people expected both Japan and Australia to finish 1st and 2nd with a bit of a dog fight for the playoff spot. In the end thats how it turned out, although not many expected it to be as clear cut as it turned out. Its hard to judge if its because Australia and Japan played really well, or the others just didn't come up to potential. Our lucky win over Bahrain last year also helped open up the gap.

In group B most of us expected the top three spots to go to Soth Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia although it was harder to pick the order. North Korea has proved a bit of a bolter although I'm not sure if its because they played really well or Iran and Saudi Arabia didn't.

In comparinmg the groups its hard to say which has better top teams right now, but its definitely true that all of us expected group B to be more competetive and thats how it turned out. The main thing is that at least 3 of the teams perform well next year, and no one gets embarrassed otherwise a spot may be in doubt for 2014.

 

roflmao.

 

Plus Group B is just more exciting.

The Korean Derby, age old Rivalry of Saudi Arabia vs. Iran, the traditional Asian rivalries between Iran-Saudi Arabia-Korea Rep, etc.

It would be interesting if AFC had a qualification system similar to South America, where its one qualifying group, top 4 make it.