Oh great, you've revived the "is Serbia a debutant" discussion...they're not, but I predict that won't stop a few pages of debate. (objectively speaking, Czech Republic is more of debutant than Serbia & Montenegro, though I don't think either qualifies)
Ghana. But I hate saying it will be a surprise, because they are a great team. And a lot of people might be perplex if Angola beats Mexico.
i dont think the ukraine will do nearly as good as a lot of people think, they only have shevchkenko , then thats about it.. i put ivory coast... i saw them draw italy not too long ago... they are like this world cup's senegal..
I am going to go with two: The Ukraine and Trinidad and Tobago. The Ukraine will go far--They are a solid team, but also their group is realistic. The Ukraine is the only one of the debut teams with a realistic chance to win their group. None of the other debutantes can make that claim. T&T are my other choice. For one, nobody rates them, and for two, they have an amazing coach. No team in qualification played the USA tougher than T&T, and they even managed to beat Mexico. While I don't expect them to advance, I expect them to play lively football and will probably get 3 points-- I can see them getting a result from Paraguay or Sweden. Unfortunately, the other teams are placed in difficult groups. Serbia and Cote d'Ivoire may draw each other, but not much else. Ghana will have her moments, but it's unrealistic to expect great results three times. That is very unfortunate for Ghana--They are an amazing team stuck in a very dangerous group. In perhaps any other group (Besides C), they would be a real danger to advance.
Serbia is the complete same country as Yougoslavia at WC 98 and Euro 2000 where they reached the second round and the quarterfinal. Serbians must be annoyed like hell because of all those idiots who keep on referring to Serbia as a newby. Go do some homework
Ukraine won their qualifying group which included Turkey, Denmark and Greece. They also are in a easy group, should they finish second to spain they have a path to the quarterfinals and possibly Semifinals. Rnd. 2 Ukr > Fra./Swiss Quart. Ukr.> Italy/Czech/Croatia Semifinals Ukr. v Ger./Neth./Arg./Por.
Very good. I was about to post a similar observation. I think they will be eliminated in quarterfinals, but who knows, they are a better team than a lot of people think. It's not just Shevchenko.
erm , lets see i havnt looked into it yet but i'll take a wild guess , the half of matches he didnt take part in DID NOT include denmark and turkey??? correct? coz the rest were fodder. greece , crap(despite euro , i dont care what anyone says , they play ugly football and have been found out over the last 2 years ) and the rest? albania , georgia and kaka stan. could the last three ties be the ones he sat out from by any chance??? either way my OPINION still stands .. they won't do as good as people think they will
Serbia Montenegro IS a new team/country Yuguslavia was Bosnia+Serbia and in these NEW countries yuguslavia split up and see here on fifa.com they also say Serbia and MoNtenegro is a new country:http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/h/pollr.html?cid=1&vote=-1
No one is arguing that. What they aren't is a new TEAM. The Serbian team is the former Yugoslavian team. Same stadium, support structure, etc....
would've picked ghana or the ivory coast, but they got put in the 2 toughest groups, and while 1 might make it out, due to Ukraine's easy group, I can see them making it possibly to the quarters, and so they get my pick.
Actually, people are arguing that. The Yugoslavia that existed for much of the 20th century constituted Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Kosovo (I think that takes care of it). So, people want to argue that Serbia & Montenegro is a "new" debutant now because it's not the same Yugoslavia as much of the 20th century. The problem is that it is the exact same territorial state as the Yugoslavia that took part in WC 1998 (Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia and Bosnia were all independent by then). The only slight difference from 1998 is that Kosovo is now a quasi-international protectorate. Still, it's technically part of Serbia & Montenegro territorially for now. So, the ONLY tangible political difference from the WC98 Yugoslavia team and the WC06 Serbia & Montenegro team is the name change. Calling Serbia & Montenegro a debutant would be like calling Flanders & Wallonia a debutant if Belgium ever decided to change it's name. Czech Republic is more of a debutant than Serbia & Montenegro (at least the Czechs have lost territory since their last finals appearance), but even claiming that they qualify as debutants is a pretty big stretch.
why does serbia count?? cuase they were in it in 98 as yugoslavia... and if you think b/c of that counts count czech republic in even tho they were previously czechoslovakia and played in the wc in 90... personally it will prob be ukraine to do the most damage out of the newbies.