2007-09-27 - 2010 World Cup Qualifying - UEFA Seeding
It has just been announced that the FIFA ranking will be used in determining seeding groups for the 2010 World Cup qualifying, rather than the UEFA country coefficients as in the past. I must say I'm not excited by this prospect, although it doesn't actually mean that much for the majority of teams. There's some big gainers and losers though.
If the current ranking is used (and I expect that the November ranking will be used rather than the September ranking) Italy, Germany, Netherlands, England, Croatia and Czech Republic would still be seeded first, but France, Spain and Portugal would 'replace' Romania, Poland and Sweden as first seeds. Further down, Scotland would be seeded in the second group instead of Norway, and Northern Ireland would move up to the third group.
Although using the FIFA rankings will reward those who put in good performances in the big tournaments, it would also mean friendly performances have influence in how teams are seeded. I must say I strongly prefer using only qualifying competitions for seeding because they are the same for everyone and give everyone an equal chance. Of course, every team can qualify for the big tournaments, but then you're measuring things across different teams in different circumstances. Measuring everyone in the same way is to me preferable. But I guess FIFA want to use their rankings for something. 
|
|
Post A Comment!
|
2007-09-27 - sasha |
| Posted by Anonymous |
Well it is FIFA COCA COLA rang list, and the manifestation like draw in Durban is one more chance for commercializing that sponsorship.
I remember Spain had been seeded THREE times in last WC campaign (preliminaries, play-offs, and the final tournament), and they didn't deserve it, at least twice.
And when you're always seeded, you must have a result. Just compare the groups in last WC Spain (UKR,TUN,RSA) and Serbia with ARG,NED,CIV and the latter have been ahead of Spain in preliminaries. What for? To meet best world teams in final tournament, and runners up play against Tunisia and Arabia. And what would Northern Ireland have from current great qualifying campaigne. Third pot? Unfair.
About the friendly games. It's actually the suggestions from fifa that those matches shouldn't be friendly.
And those 5 spots for Asia that's redicioulus. It must be 3 for them, and 15 for Europe. Maybe it is not the subject now, but it's the same story (Europe and Asia - almost equal number of votes at fifa congresses, and the quality - less important).
Fans would like it to be fair as much as possible, but I guess there are more important things than equal threatment, and optimal criteria by achievements.
|
| Permanent Link |
2007-09-27 - UEFA Coefficient or FIFA Ranking |
| Posted by Jungle Boy |
Thanks for the reply on this subject yesterday.
Was a strange coincidence as I had no idea there would be an anouncement on the seeding for 2010 WC draw today ..... honestly, I don't work at UEFA.
As I suspected, the FIFA ranking will be used and as a Scotland fan, I'm delighted. We look to be assured of Pot 2 status (ranked 11th in Europe) but sit only 2 places outside pot 1.
Of course, using FIFA ranking suits my nation just now very well but I suppose the question should be if this is a fair system for everyone .... and equally it might go against Scotland come the 2012 qualifying draw.
Personally, I believe this is a step forward, although I thought they would use a combination of UEFA coefficient AND the FIFA rankings as both have their merits but neither is perfect.
Some counter points to the UEFA coefficient system I would say are .....
The fact that teams can reach the world cup final (Italy and France) and this has absolutely no influence on their seeding for a qualifying draw, frankly, I find this totally ludicrous.
Teams who merely do well in a qualifying campaign but never the actual tournaments retain a certain false position for seeding.
I think Sweden (no offence) are the prefect example of this. They are ranked 4th (Yes 4th!!) by coefficient but 15th in uefa by ranking. On the other hand, France are ranked 12th by coefficient but 4th in uefa by ranking.
I think everyone knows which method provides a more realistic measure of the stronger team.
The reason this discrepancy arises is that Sweden have a good seeding through this flawed method and then have relatively easy draws in qualifying to maintain this false position. When they meet a country of any standing in a tournament they go out but this will never affect their qualifying coeficient ..... and so the cycle goes on.
Using Scotland as an example, the top seeds in our groups couldn't have been harder if hand picked (Italy, France world cup finalists and Ukraine 1/4 finals) and I firmly believe we are being rewarded for doing well in a supremely tough group ... and that's the way it should be.
Under the coefficient method, the 3 points we picked up in the Faroes would have have an equal standing with our 1-0 victory in France!! The FIFA ranking addresses this and I think that's only common sense.
Obviously not every country qualifies for the major tournaments which I why I thought they'd use a hybrid of both methods ..... probably used just ranking for simplicity.
PS no offence to the Swedes, as a Celtic fan, I'm an eternal admirer of Henrik Larsson and your country.
|
| Permanent Link |
2007-09-29 - Untitled Comment |
| Posted by Petrograd |
Ugh :|
This sucks :| I guess it's fair to move Sweden down a bit, adding WC/EC records should help doing that.
Adding friendlies I object to in general. Sweden has seen them as training matches where we sometimes allow a load of substitutes, we frequently let top players rest, train talents, etc. We've had a really poor friendly record lately, at least partly due to this. According to Eloratings we've lost 53 points just since WC2006 in friendlies.
I mostly object to the impulsivity of informing us about this change 2 months in advance, meaning records of games you thought were unimportant suddently make all the difference.
I only partly agree with Jungle Boy regarding 'easy draws' of Sweden's. In 2000, we qualified ahead of England and Poland, 2002 Turkey, 2004 Poland again, 2006 behind Croatia. Those are all teams that are likely to qualify this time around. (If you go back a bit we qualified to 1994 by winning a group ahead of Bulgaria and eliminating France! Then again we failed to qualify 1996-1998.)
I guess it doesn't change all that much - hopefully we'll get drawn with England.
It's just annoying, all these statistics, it's so easy to make a 'clean' ranking, and then they use their distorted FIFA ranking that I always figured was mostly there to make non-UEFA teams feel good. |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-01 - Re: UEFA Coefficient or FIFA Ranking |
| Posted by rdasilva |
| Jungle boy, personally I think you overrate France and Italy. Sure, they were the World Cup finalists but even during the World Cup they weren't exactly in top form all the time. They've both struggled since and aren't in the form that everyone would expect. Scotland on the other hand are probably at the top end of their form, and hence they now look world-beaters, but I also think that'll be proven wrong. You can look at the France results and say that Scotland is better than France, but if you look at other recent results: 2-0 away to Italy, 2-0 loss away to Ukraine, narrow 2-1 at home to Georgia, narrow 1-0 away win to Austria, you get a different story. In fact, if you look at their ELO rating, that's grown by 89 points, of which 70 points were gained from the two France games. In other words, they've pretty much remained the same for the year, apart from those two results. I seem to remember Scotland having only 2-3 chances against France and scoring a goal, whereas France were the better team. The result therefore was rather flattering in my opinion. For the record, France's ELO rating is down around 50 over the same period, and Italy's is down 70 odd points. I think we'll only see how good Scotland are when they play Ukraine and Italy this autumn, and then if they qualify (which I still think they won't), how they far in real competition (usual plane ticket home after the first round would be my best guess). |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-02 - Re: UEFA Coefficient or FIFA Ranking |
| Posted by Jungle Boy |
Believe me, I'm under no illusions France are a far far superior team to Scotland. The players on their bench would walk into most national teams in Europe.
We got 6 points from them from making the most of our limited chances and defending as though our lives depended on it.
As for overrating France and Italy, I don't think so. Looking back to the World Cup, I don't think you could argue any other team deserved to be in the final.
As for recent form, France have had a couple of freakish results against Scotland and dropped points away to the World Cup holders. Italy dropped points to Lithuania when their league season was barely underway and against France who I believe are now a better side than Italy (only picked up 1 point in last 2 games v France).
Would any of the major nations fancy their chances of qualifying from a group above France, Italy and Ukraine ...... looking at this campaign I really don't think so but I'd be interested to hear ..... perhaps Germany looking at recent results although their group is doesn't even begin to compare.
In terms of Scotland being at the top end of their form, I personally believe the team is improving all the time. Only David Weir is at the wrong end of his career and many of the players involved are in their early 20s. These guys are picking up vital experience with Celtic and Rangers in the Champions League or playing against quality opposition in the English Premiership. This campaign is the first time I can remember people actually debating before games what team we should pick as we now have some decent options coming through.
As for qualifying, I agree, we're far from making it to 2008 just now. None of the 9 remaining points are certain for us by any means. I'm hoping the fact Ukraine and Georgia are only playing for pride might help us towards 6 points although I think 4 might be more likely. In that case, we'll need to beat Italy to ensure it or draw with them and hope France drop points away to Ukraine on a cold day in late November.
If we go into the final game against Italy with our hopes still alive, I think whatever happens, it has been a memorable campaign and the guys have already surpassed all expectations by topping the group with just 3 games to go ..... but maybe, just maybe .......
..... and as for our chances if we get through to face 'real competition' as you put it (I thought the qualifying games were competitive matches), it would be impossible to give us a tougher group than the one we're currently in.
Would the lads fear playing any of Germany, Spain, England, Portugal, Netherlands, Czechs or Romania ...... probably not if they'd qualified from a group with in my opinion the 2 best teams in Europe (France 1st and Italy 2nd).
|
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-02 - Untitled Comment |
| Posted by Petrograd |
I'd agree with Eloratings on which four teams are best in Europe atm, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands. I'd put Germany ahead of France though.
Either way, even if Scotland does lose this battle of three, they've obviously made a great competition and deserve a higher rating next time.
They should just merge the UK teams already, that way they'd pretty much always qualify :P |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-02 - Re: Re: UEFA Coefficient or FIFA Ranking |
| Posted by rdasilva |
>As for overrating France and Italy, I don't think so. Looking
> back to the World Cup, I don't think you could argue any
> other team deserved to be in the final.
Indeed in one match Italy beat Germany, but I personally think Germany performed much better during the tournament than Italy did, and they and Argentina were also capable of winning the tournament and 'deserved' to be in the final in my opinion. Boy is that difficult to say as a Dutchman!
As for any team fancying being the same group as Italy and France, with Germany you've hit the nail on the head. They're so much better than any other team out there at the moment and the only one that's actually get better game by game. All the other major nations are continuously having dubious results. Germany is even winning with their 'B' team in some matches. If Euro 2008 was held right now, I wouldn't bet on anyone else than them. They may be in what you seem to say is an easier group, but if you look at their results since the start of the World Cup you'll see that they are the side to beat, not Italy or France.
> Would the lads fear playing any of Germany, Spain,
> England, Portugal, Netherlands, Czechs or Romania ......
> probably not if they'd qualified from a group with in my
> opinion the 2 best teams in Europe (France 1st and Italy
> 2nd).
I know a typical Scottish team would not fear those teams, but I don't think they have the quality to beat these teams on a home/away basis. In a tournament they might beat one, but I think the teams you've mentioned all have more quality. Although Portugal and the Czechs are struggling here and there, I think if it came to the crunch they would probably perform, just like the others would. I really rate Romania right now also, and if they can shake off their naiveness and replace it with some strong feeling of pride like the Scots do, they could surprise at next year's tournament. I still tip them to win group G and that would mean they'd be better than my own team, and look at the individuals they have walking around in that team! If they come together as a team then the rest better watch out. In five players alone there's already a value of around 120 million Euro, and if you think the Premiership boosted their entire budget by 400 million, you'll realize the quality. I'm talking about Robben (35 million), Sneijder (23 million), Babel (17 million), van Nistelrooij (probably worth around 15-20), and van der Vaart who Hamburg didn't want to sell for the 23 million that was offered. Not to mention the Champions League's best midfielder Clarence Seedorf, Ajax striker Klaas Jan Huntelaar (who will undoubtedly go abroad for some large amount in January or next summer, say 15-20 million), and Robin van Persie who must be rated around the 20 million as well. If only they could play as a team (assuming they could fit all those players on the pitch!), then they will definately rival Germany for the title next year. |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-02 - Re: Untitled Comment |
| Posted by rdasilva |
> They should just merge the UK teams already, that way
> they'd pretty much always qualify
And they might have a chance to beat Sweden that way! Ha-ha! Mind you, you'd end up with what Spain have always had to contend with, a split team with several 'nationalities' within the team. Like with the Netherlands, England and Spain, you rarely get out the same as the sum of their parts, the opposite of Germany and Sweden, who often give a better output than the sum of their parts. |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-03 - Untitled Comment |
| Posted by Jungle Boy |
If I thought you were serious about merging the UK teams I'd be quite upset :)
I would rather never qualify for a tournament again than support Rooney or Lampard as players of my country .... no bitterness, I just love the rivalry!!
As for the Netherlands, you boys have cost me a lot of money down the years as I always fancy a bet pre-tournament on you. With the colllection of talent available over the years, the list is too extensive to mention here, I always expect big things from Oranje ..... if you feel things are coming together, let me know so I can recoup some of that lost dough!
I'll reserve judgement on Germany until I see them against the big boys but I'm starting to be swayed. They're usually dangerous enough before a tourney when their form hasn't been so great, so I dread to think how good they could be when they're flying. |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-03 - Re: Untitled Comment |
| Posted by rdasilva |
> As for the Netherlands, you boys have cost me a lot of
> money down the years as I always fancy a bet
> pre-tournament on you. With the colllection of talent
> available over the years, the list is too extensive to mention
> here, I always expect big things from Oranje ..... if you feel
> things are coming together, let me know so I can recoup
> some of that lost dough!
Don't you know never to bet on the Dutch? We're famous for turning a bunch of top professionals into amateurs when it comes to semi finals (if we get that far, luckily or unluckily however you see it, quite a few times since 1988...). The current team is no exception. Worth well over 150 million Euros, in the current qualifying campaign they beat Albania 2-1 and 1-0 (when the reverse scores wouldn't have been unfair), Luxemburg 1-0 (when 1-1, 0-0, or even a win for Luxemburg wouldn't have been unfair) and Slovenia 1-0 again with a last minute reprieve just like against Albania. But, having won the U-21 Euro championships in 2006 and 2007, and having such a current crop of players you have to think it won't be long. In 1998 Frank de Boer commented after losing the World Cup semi final to Brazil on penalties that that was the best opportunity since 1978 to win the World Cup and that we might not see this quality of team for a long time he didn't realize that a new top team was just around the corner. I wouldn't bet on us, but if all the current players play at their best I can't see us losing to anyone.
> I'll reserve judgement on Germany until I see them against
> the big boys but I'm starting to be swayed. They're usually
> dangerous enough before a tourney when their form hasn't
> been so great, so I dread to think how good they could be
> when they're flying.
Exactly, the German strength is to turn it on for the major tournaments. They've been winning easily without much trouble during the qualification campaign, but they haven't really needed to show their mettle yet. They're 100 ELO ratings points up since their pretty damn excellent performance at the World Cup, their only blemish being a home loss in a friendly with their 'B' team against Denmark. They've disposed of England and the Czechs away from home, and beaten Romania, Switzerland and Sweden at home, without really having their first 11 in any of those games. Not completely convincing on their own, but if you look at the ease with which they won those games you'll realize that not taking this team seriously is a mistake. There's almost a year to go to Euro 2008, but Switzerland and Austria will be a home base for them as well. I really can't see any other winner unless some other nations really start to tick. Fingers crossed that we find some kind of harmony and team spirit. |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-24 - Current Seeding (October 24 Edition) |
| Posted by Anonymous |
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%28UEFA%29#Current_seeding |
| Permanent Link |
2007-10-24 - Sorry, it was taken off the link |
| Posted by Anonymous |
Current seeding
This is the current seeding for the European 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification according to the October edition of FIFA World Rankings. Note that this isn't the final seeding. The seeding is likely to change slightly with the introducing of the November edition.
Pot 1
* Italy
* France
* Germany
* Spain
* Netherlands
* Portugal
* Czech Republic
* Croatia
* England
Pot 2
* Romania
* Scotland
* Greece
* Russia
* Poland
* Norway
* Ukraine
* Sweden
* Serbia
Pot 3
* Turkey
* Denmark
* Republic of Ireland
* Bulgaria
* Northern Ireland
* Israel
* Switzerland
* Finland
* Hungary
Pot 4
* Bosnia and Herzegovina
* Slovakia
* Belgium
* Cyprus
* Wales
* Moldova
* Albania
* Georgia
* FYR Macedonia
Pot 5
* Slovenia
* Iceland
* Armenia
* Latvia
* Austria
* Lithuania
* Belarus
* Azerbaijan
* Liechtenstein
Pot 6
* Kazakhstan
* Estonia
* Malta
* Luxembourg
* Montenegro
* Andorra
* Faroe Islands
* San Marino
|
| Permanent Link |
|
About Me
This weblog will list the latest interesting issues in international football to do with tournaments and results in general.
Friends
|
