Who’s in? Who’s out? Should Norway celebrate? How’s Alvaro’s bets looking right now? So many questions, answers to come.
The updated National Team Rankings can be found here.
Full qualification chances can be found here.
NEWI’ve posted the raw data from each of the 10,000 sims in a file in .csv (comma-delimited) format. The file is a little under 4 MB. The top line are column headings that explain what the column means, and then each new line represents a new sim. Right click on the file below and save the link (some browsers will display the .csv file as a text file and that might annoy you and will certainly annoy my web host):
http://vorosmccracken.com/qualsims091709.csv
I’ll note that unlike the other files, this one won’t stay up forever (too big). I’ll simply replace it after the next round of sims.
Now onto the show!
In
Spain, England, Paraguay = 100.00%. All three have officially qualified and so all three qualify here too. An interesting note: the Ivory Coast has not officially qualified yet (no games were played in the group since the last update). However, another 10,000 sims were run, and once again they won the group all 10,000 times. In other words, official or not, 20,000 for 20,000 means they’re going.
Out
Saudi Arabia, Scotland, Finland, Romania, Lithuania, Belarus, Trinidad and Tobago = 100%. Romania earns the dubious distinction of being the highest ranked team (17th) to get eliminated (though apparently there’s still some remote mathematical chance). However Portugal, Denmark and Sweden are all currently ranked above them so it’s unlikely they will keep that title. Romania’s misfortunes are an object lesson as to how quickly qualifying get away from you. The Saudis didn’t hold serve at home (drawing 2-2 and losing on the dreaded away goals rule) and so they’ll miss the World Cup. We’ll get to Scotland in a bit. The others have been all but dead for a while, so this is just a formality now.
UP
Bahrain =72.23%; Ecuador =48.00%; Portugal = 40.47%; Slovakia = 92.06%; Cameroon = 71.99%. Well that sure helped Bahrain’s cause. They once again return to the final hurdle, hoping to do better against the Kiwis than they did against T&T in 2005. Cameroon sweeps Gabon to surge into pole position in their group. All of South America and Europe will be dealt with below.
DOWN
This is not the group to be in at this stage. Saudi Arabia = 0.00%; Costa Rica = 47.13%; Colombia = 6.54%; Argentina = 78.58%; Gabon = 17.57%. The Saudis and Gabon are the victims of the improved fortunes of Bahrain and Cameroon. Gabon is still alive, Saudi Arabia obviously is finished. The rest covered below.
Gamblers Anonymous Update
In this post in July commenter Alvaro had this to say:
Im trusting you man, I placed bets on Serbia and Denmark to win their group. :p
Well let’s see how Alvaro’s stock portfolio looks:
Denmark: From 94.24% to 92.00%
Serbia: From 56.03% to 79.65%
The Danes have had some uneven results and could have put this away by now. However two draws or (very likely) one win should still do the trick. Both games are at home, though both opponents are capable. The Serbians are a win away from finally putting away the French. We’ll see what the Romanians come up with in Serbia to try and spoil the party. Two draws might do it, but the French do have an opportunity to run up a score on the Faroes if they can, which would negate Serbia’s current goal advantage.
So I think Alvaro is in good shape to come out ahead, since it would seem he got better than even money on the Serbs.
UEFA Group 1
It’s now Sweden or Portugal who remain in the way of the Danes. The Portuguese have righted the ship and now are favored to snag second ahead of Sweden as they have two home games remaining and the Swedes have the big one in Denmark. The home loss to Portugal essentially finishes Hungary off barring a miracle, and it can’t be overstated what a huge result that was for Portugal. One small pitfall for Portugal is that they remain one of the possibilities (albeit very small) for worst 2nd place team. They can fix that with two wins and a Sweden loss in Denmark. For their part, Sweden would be wise to take the Albanians seriously on the final matchday. They’re one of the main reasons Portugal has had to come from so far back as they held the Portuguese scoreless in Portugal earlier.
UEFA Group 2
A 90th minute equalizing goal from Moldovan midfielder Valeriu Andronic kept Greece from getting right back in it. Instead, despite a Swiss draw in Latvia, Switzerland now is about five and a half times more likely to win this group than Greece. Israel still has a way outside shot to win the group, but Switzerland is in command. As for second place, Greece remains overwhelming favorite here and didn’t place worst 2nd a single time. Israel’s chances here are a little better, with their total chances a little under 3%. Israel did finish worst 2nd a few times, but not many.
UEFA Group 3
Well this is kind of a mess. The simple part is that either Slovakia or Slovenia will win the group, with Slovenia needing to win in Slovakia to keep things alive. That means Slovakia is about an 89% favorite now, and they’re guaranteed at least a playoff. Well done from a team that was not necessarily one of the favorites when this group began. At this point the Czechs and Slovenia have roughly an equal chance of taking 2nd place. The bad news for the Slovenians: the system does not consider them a particularly strong team and does not really like their odds of winning a playoff. Bad news for the Czechs: while not a big deal, the Czechs are the third most likely team to worst 2nd, and are one of only three teams with better than a 1% chance of that happening. Poland and Northern Ireland are still in this in theory, but the chances are very slim now. The Northern Irish in particular are in real trouble as their final game is in the Czech Republic against what will likely be a very motivated team.
UEFA Group 4
This one is much easier. It’s either Germany or it’s Russia, and the loser goes to the playoffs (almost certainly as a seeded team if seeding is used). The system says Germany = 64.42%; Russia = 35.58%. I’m going to do an entire post on this matchup and demonstrate exactly how the ratings are used to simulate the results of a game. So I’ll stop here and simply say that Germany needs either a win or a draw while the Russians need the win. I’ll refrain from making a WWII related joke about German trips to Moscow. 
UEFA Group 5
The Spanish finally put the finishing touches on what was a race severely lacking in suspense. Now the real business needs to be settled. Turkey needs two wins, which looks somewhat doable. Bosnia-Herzegovina needs just one to offset that possibility, and they can get it either by beating Estonia in Estonia, or by beating the Spanish team in Bosnia and it’s always hard to tell how excellent teams with nothing to play for will react to those sorts of situations. The system has the Bosnians as an over 80% chance of finishing 2nd and only a tiny chance of being worst 2nd.
UEFA Group 6
England is in and now we need to find out who is second. It’s going to either be Croatia or Ukraine, and neither will finish worst 2nd. Right now it’s pretty close with Croatia up 57 to 43, but the system again can’t really predict how England will approach their upcoming match in Ukraine. Should Ukraine pull out the win there, Croatia is in BIG trouble as Andorra has been an automatic three points for everyone.
UEFA Group 7
France and Serbia were one and two all but eight times (Austria the only other team to finish in 2nd) and if my calculations are correct the worst 2nd place team will not come from this group, though theoretically it could if Romania is that team. Romania is almost certainly not going to be that team (the chances of their finishing ahead of both the French and Austrians need a series of improbable results to occur) so it isn’t going to happen. The good news for the French is that the system had them qualifying via the playoff’s 57.50% of the time, meaning their qualification chances (roughly 78%) are still quite good.
UEFA Group 8
Italy wins this group 98.08% of the time with the Irish taking the rest. Bulgaria did finish 2nd about 7% of the time, and if they finish 2nd they will not be the worst 2nd finisher. Ireland however is in a different situation, which brings us to…
UEFA Group 9
The Dutch won this group roughly two minutes after the group was announced, so the only drama was who would finish 2nd and how many points they would post. After Scotland conceded a late goal to young Dutchman Eljero Elia, it was Norway who would finish second, but with only 10 points. But where does that put them? In really bad shape unfortunately for them. The Norwegians finished as the worst 2nd place team an astounding 93.66% of the time. To further complicate things, even should they manage to escape that, if Europe seeds they likely will draw someone like the Portuguese, Czechs or Russians/Germans. Who is their best shot to finish ahead. Turns out it’s the Irish. The Irish have two wins over Georgia, currently sitting in last in that group. They also have 16 points and a less than impressive goal differential. If Ireland loses twice, they are out, even if they manage to still hold onto second in the group. Ireland finished as the worst 2nd place team 2.89% of the time. That doesn’t sound like much, but it’s Norway’s best chance. The Czech Republic finished worst 2nd 1.92% of the time. Their route to 16 points is actually much more likely than Ireland’s. The problem is San Marino would need to pull off an improbable draw against Slovenia for that to occur (otherwise Slovenia will finish with at least 17 points). Despite their impressive run here, Slovenia is not normally a great team, so I suppose there’s some small chance, but I think the system is a little kind to San Marino’s chances because of an imperfect home field advantage adjustment.
To summarize all that, Norway needs an awful lot of things to go their way, and they should probably focus on the Irish as their main concern.
CONMEBOL
Paraguay zoomed out to a fast start and then faltered a little, but the big 1-0 win at home versus the Argentines finally did the trick and they’ve now finished off what has been a very long run of “almost there.” I’m not sure what I’m missing, but Chile’s situation looks slightly more precarious than the sims say they’re in. I suspect the sims are right and my mind is playing tricks on me. Argentina is making this a lot more difficult than it needs to be, and now Ecuador has control of their own destiny. If Ecuador wins out, there’s nothing Argentina can do about it. Ecuador winning out isn’t going to be easy though. So Argentina probably wants Chile to lose in Colombia to keep their interest up for the final matchday at home against Ecuador. Argentina will almost certainly have 25 points going into the final match, but Uruguay on the road sure won’t be easy.
Argentina remains the favorite to grab 4th place by virtue of the fact that, despite recent setbacks, they’re clearly the best of the teams fighting for that spot and the soft home game remaining against Peru. However “not Argentina” is now a slight favorite over Argentina as their direct qualification chances are now just below 50%. Ecuador stands at about 30% while the Uruguayans made the top four 22% of the time. Colombia and Venezuela are both heavy longshots now.
CONCACAF
How the worm has turned for Costa Rica. In early July their qualification chances stood at just about 94%. Just about everything that could have gone wrong since then has. 4-0 loss at Honduras. A devastating 3-1 loss at home to Mexico. And then a 1-0 road loss to El Salvador. Over that same period of time, Mexico snagged 9 points and the Hondurans and Americans snagged 6. As if that turn of events wasn’t bad enough, to the south every passing matchday the chances of the 5th place team in CONMEBOL being Argentina became more and more likely. A home and home against Messi and company with the World Cup on the line is a tall order for the best of CONCACAF and that title doesn’t seem to apply to Costa Rica right now. What looked to be a comfortable situation has now turned into real danger as they now sit below 50% for qualification with a third place or better finish happening only 26.67% of the time. A real stunning turn of events.
And it’s an ill wind that blows good to no man. Mexico’s recent run of form has them sitting pretty with a 99.90% chance of qualification, 99.69% directly as one of the top three. The US still has a little work to do, but they’re now back up at 96.95% and look well placed to make it from here. Honduras now sit at 86.65% a number they would have gladly taken going in, but they appear to be turning into a legitimately strong side. They would dearly like to hold serve at home against the US to maintain their lead on the Ticos going into the final matchday. Costa Rica would dearly like to see the US win that game, as it would not only deny Honduras points, but it would mean the US will have qualified and would be more likely to send an under-strength squad to the final match. El Salvador needs a miracle, that just doesn’t seem to be in the cards. They’ve done themselves proud nevertheless.
Data Dump
CONMEBOL Percent Brazil 100.00% Paraguay 100.00% Chile 98.53% Argentina 47.38% Ecuador 29.69% Uruguay 22.04% Colombia 1.89% Venezuela 0.47% Bolivia 0.00% Peru 0.00% CONCACAF Percent Mexico 99.69% USA 94.45% Honduras 79.09% Costa Rica 26.67% El Salvador 0.10% Trinidad and Tobago 0.00% CAF - Group1 Percent Cameroon 71.99% Gabon 17.57% Togo 6.89% Morocco 3.55% CAF - Group2 Percent Tunisia 70.96% Nigeria 28.49% Mozambique 0.47% Kenya 0.08% CAF - Group 3 Percent Algeria 74.96% Egypt 24.96% Zambia 0.08% Rwanda 0.00% CAF - Group 4 Percent Ghana 100.00% Mali 0.00% Benin 0.00% Sudan 0.00% CAF - Group 5 Percent Côte d'Ivoire 100.00% Burkina Faso 0.00% Guinea 0.00% Malawi 0.00% AFC - Group A Percent Australia 100.00% Japan 100.00% Bahrain 0.00% Uzbekistan 0.00% Qatar 0.00% AFC - Group B Percent Korea Republic 100.00% Korea DPR 100.00% Saudi Arabia 0.00% Iran 0.00% United Arab Emirates 0.00% UEFA - Group 1 Percent Denmark 92.00% Sweden 6.04% Portugal 1.95% Hungary 0.01% Albania 0.00% Malta 0.00% UEFA - Group 2 Percent Switzerland 83.81% Greece 15.41% Israel 0.78% Latvia 0.00% Luxembourg 0.00% Moldova 0.00% UEFA - Group 3 Percent Slovakia 88.82% Slovenia 11.18% Czech Republic 0.00% Poland 0.00% Northern Ireland 0.00% San Marino 0.00% UEFA - Group 4 Percent Germany 64.42% Russia 35.58% Finland 0.00% Wales 0.00% Azerbaijan 0.00% Liechtenstein 0.00% UEFA - Group 5 Percent Spain 100.00% Bosnia-Herzegovina 0.00% Turkey 0.00% Belgium 0.00% Estonia 0.00% Armenia 0.00% UEFA - Group 6 Percent England 100.00% Croatia 0.00% Ukraine 0.00% Belarus 0.00% Kazakhstan 0.00% Andorra 0.00% UEFA - Group 7 Percent Serbia 79.65% France 20.35% Lithuania 0.00% Austria 0.00% Romania 0.00% Faroe Islands 0.00% UEFA - Group 8 Percent Italy 98.08% Ireland Republic 1.92% Bulgaria 0.00% Cyprus 0.00% Montenegro 0.00% Georgia 0.00% UEFA - Group 9 Percent Netherlands 100.00% Norway 0.00% Scotland 0.00% Iceland 0.00% Macedonia FYR 0.00% UEFA - Playoffs Percent France 57.50% Greece 43.98% Russia 39.21% Portugal 38.52% Croatia 36.14% Ireland Republic 32.04% Germany 26.84% Czech Republic 22.31% Ukraine 18.62% Bosnia-Herzegovina 17.74% Sweden 15.10% Serbia 11.76% Slovenia 8.76% Turkey 7.87% Switzerland 7.24% Slovakia 3.24% Denmark 2.98% Norway 2.50% Bulgaria 2.44% Poland 1.87% Israel 1.83% Italy 1.18% Hungary 0.13% Northern Ireland 0.11% Latvia 0.07% Austria 0.02% AFC/OFC - Playoffs Percent Bahrain 72.23% New Zealand 27.77% CONMEBOL/CONCACAF - Playoffs Percent Argentina 31.20% Costa Rica 20.46% Ecuador 18.31% Uruguay 13.38% Honduras 7.56% Colombia 4.65% USA 2.50% Venezuela 0.84% Chile 0.82% Mexico 0.21% El Salvador 0.07% UEFA - Playoff Losses Percent Bosnia-Herzegovina 64.75% Ireland Republic 56.18% Greece 35.64% Slovenia 31.42% Russia 25.21% Portugal 25.16% Ukraine 23.62% France 22.07% Croatia 21.62% Czech Republic 18.45% Sweden 14.88% Turkey 9.26% Germany 8.74% Serbia 8.59% Slovakia 7.94% Switzerland 6.88% Bulgaria 4.53% Israel 3.87% Norway 3.84% Poland 3.24% Denmark 2.02% Italy 0.74% Hungary 0.49% Northern Ireland 0.46% Latvia 0.34% Austria 0.06% AFC - Playoff Losses Percent Saudi Arabia 100.00% AFC/OFC - Playoff Losses Percent New Zealand 72.23% Bahrain 27.77% CONMEBOL/CONCACAF-PlayoffLoss Percent Costa Rica 52.43% Ecuador 13.96% Honduras 13.04% Argentina 6.48% Uruguay 5.58% Colombia 3.09% USA 3.05% Venezuela 1.04% Chile 0.65% El Salvador 0.58% Mexico 0.10% Worst 2nd Place UEFA Percent Norway 93.66% Ireland Republic 2.89% Czech Republic 1.92% Portugal 0.65% Bosnia-Herzegovina 0.32% Poland 0.28% Israel 0.15% Turkey 0.06% Sweden 0.05% Hungary 0.02%
32 responses so far ↓
1 Mitz // Sep 18, 2009 at 2:29 am
Truly outstanding analysis – I take my hat off to you, not just for crunching the numbers but for presenting the results in a very accessible manner.
Interesting that you give Hungary next to no chance – I know that they have two tough away games, but they will have a lot to say about the outcome of Group 1. If I was a betting man (and I’m not) I would say Sweden making the playoffs is way more likely than Portugal.
Regarding South America, if your sims say that Chile are looking shaky, then there is a glitch – they will be fine, no doubt about it. However, I would assert that if anyone is going to dump Argentina into the playoff it will be Uruguay, not Ecuador. That said, Argentina missing the World Cup Finals for the first time in 40 years? Not going to happen.
I’d laugh very hard if it did though…
Keep up the extraordinarily good work, and do something to improve your Google search ranking – it was tough to find you!
2 Voros // Sep 18, 2009 at 7:26 am
The sims like Chile just fine (they’re up over 98% to qualify). My eyeballing it though it looks a little dicier. There’s a good chance they won’t be qualified yet going into the final matchday and that’s always a little uncomfortable.
But if you were to bet on my eyes or the sims, bet on the sims every time.
As for Hungary I think their chances to make the playoffs went with the two home losses to their biggest competitors for that spot. Now they have to play what are probably the two best teams in the group on the road, and are currently in 4th place. A really bad spot.
3 Mitz // Sep 18, 2009 at 8:11 am
Yes, looking it again, Hungary are in pretty deep doo-doo. But I would maintain that it’s not beyond them to get a draw in Portugal, thus easing the way for Sweden somewhat.
Norway are so dead. Italy are the all time best at playing for a draw and will be quite happy to settle for that against the Irish, and even so Ireland will get at least a draw at home to Montenegro. Slovenia, let’s be honest, will beat San Marino. Similarly, Greece absolutely will beat Luxembourg. And if France doesn’t beat the Faroe Islanders I’ll have a dolphin on toast for breakfast. There is no-one else that can finish with fewer than 10 points (adjusted) so that about wraps it up for Norway. This gives me no pleasure, even as an Englishman whose boys once took one helluva beating.
Just had a scan for the biggest potential upset for your sim. Africa Group A – Togo only 6.89%, despite a talented bunch of players and the fact that their fate is in their own hands. Cameroon away will be tough, but not impossible, and I would expect them to beat Gabon at home. Do that and they are through.
4 california viola // Sep 18, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Thank you so much for the great update.
I believe Chile’s chances are so high due to the two matches remaining between Ecuador and Uruguay and between Uruguay and Argentina; they will inevitably take points away from each other and favor the Chileans who are still four points ahead of fourth place and have a great goal differential. Hard to believe that Maradona is taking two weeks off to get some dieting treatment with Argentina still in the middle of the battle!
What has happened to the mighty Nigerians? With both head-to-head matches gone, the Tunisians look virtually certain of a trip to South Africa.
I saw both Saudi Arabia vs Bahrain games and Bahrain looked very good, but who knows what can happen in the play-off? I wonder what the weather is going to be like in the two countries when the games will be played. It could be the decisive factor between the arabs ad the kiwis.
A job well done (almost) for Slovakia. I would not have bet a euro on them distancing their Czech neighbors, but it looks like they are about to clinch a place in the World Cup. The sad news from Europe is that seven of the top 32 teams in the world will or could be out soon. Looking at the numbers this includes Croatia (semifinalist in 1998), Ireland, Czech Republic, Turkey (semifinalist in 2002), Israel, Bulgaria (semifinalist in 1994), and Romania. And the list doesn’t even include teams like Sweden, Ukraine, Poland, or Belgium. Frankly five spots for Asia/Oceania (who do they have beside Australia?) and only thirteen for the strongest confederation are ridiculous.
Forza azzurri for the big match in Dublin in October!
5 Alvaro Valenzuela // Sep 18, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Not only Im a gamler but Im also a chilean, here is my detailed analysis. For the sake of the argument Im going to suppose Venezuela cant overtake us in GD.
Results that get us in right away:
Matchday 17:
Uruguay beating Ecuador.
Argentina not beating Peru.
Chile beating Colombia.
Matchday 18:
Ecuador not beating Chile.
Argentina not beating Uruguay.
Thats a total of 5 results, the chance of all of those 5 results not going our way has to be around 5% or something.
If you want to add to that, a draw against Colombia gives us the following results in order to make it:
Matchday 17:
Ecuador not beating Uruguay
Matchday 17&18:
Argentina has to overtake us in GD. We have 8 goals ahead of them. It doesnt look that likely for them to overtake us because they can beat Peru 5-0 but if we lose to Ecuador by a goal and they beat Uruguay by a goal we still make it.
And finally if we lose against Colombia and Ecuador draws against Uruguay, they have to overtake a 9 GD against us. That means that if we lose 3-0 against Colombia, they still have to beat us 3-0.
I dont know the math of that but I think you eye is wrong 😉
6 Voros // Sep 18, 2009 at 7:16 pm
I guess my eye just drifted to the fact that there’s a good chance Chile won’t be qualified when the final matchday comes (all three of the necessary results are not the most likely outcomes), and I focused on that game because it’s so huge for Ecuador.
Obviously Ecuador would probably prefer Chile be qualified by then to give them a better shot at a result there. I think the real problem for both Ecuador and Uruguay is that despite their recent struggles, I suspect Argentina is going to run up a crooked number at home against a generally woeful Peru side. A draw against Uruguay would probably get them in then.
I also think the Argentines have farted around with Maradona enough. It was a silly idea to begin with and the wisdom of it hasn’t improved over time. One of the five greatest players ever, a little overmatched as a coach at this level (for now anyway). I’d have pulled the trigger already, and dealt with the guilt of firing a national hero later.
7 Voros // Sep 18, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Just to summarize, it appears Chile’s only danger is Ecuador and Argentina winning out and Chile dropping their final two. It does seem like having to have all five of those matches go a specific way is kind of a longshot.
8 Cramer // Sep 19, 2009 at 1:42 am
@ Cailfornia viola
Looking at the number
You can off course be right that Asia maybe have a spot to much if you include the playoff against oceania. Maybe they should have met an other playoff team than New Zealands.
But some of the european teams you mention doesn’t have a team, that’l make a big impression anyway. Croatia and Turkey are the only team, i think will be a bit missed, should they noy quailfy. Croatia has a tough group while Turkey can only blame themselves.
Chezh Republic are not what they used to be. Koller, Poporsky, Nedved are gone and Rosicky and Baros haven’t been top class lately.
Bulgaria and Romania have both failed miserably in this qual and haven’t convinced anyone, that they should participate.
Israel simply aren’t good enough.
Ireland have improved and it could be interesting to se them or NI in WC or EC in a couple of years but right now i don’t think they will be able to much.
9 My Name // Sep 19, 2009 at 4:14 am
Croatia has a tough group!? HAHAHA
When you don’t manage to beat Ukraine in two matches, and you lose to England with 4-1 at home, and 5-1 away (9-2 agg.), you don’t deserve to play in World Cup! On the other side, Turkey doesn’t deserve to play in World Cup, because Bosnia and Herzegovina played better than they did…
10 california viola // Sep 19, 2009 at 8:47 am
Cramer, let me be clear. Asia does not have one spot too many right now. It has four spots too many. The only Asian team able to stay in the top 32 (FIFA Rankings) is Australia. And the performance of Asian teams in the World Cup has always been ridiculous. The only Asian team ever to reach the semifinals was South Korea in 2002 and we all saw what happened in the games against Portugal, Italy, and Spain. In 2006, the South Koreans crashed out in the first round as usual. On the other end, European teams continue to dominate the scene. There are constantly 20-21 UEFA teams in the top 32 of the FIFA World Rankings. On average, three European teams end up in the top four at each World Cup. Eighteen European teams have managed to make it to the semifinals or better in the history of the World Cup. If some teams don’t appear that strong, you can’t forget how tough the competition is in the UEFA region. I have my doubts that the strongest North Korean or Bahraini teams can compete with teams such as Croatia, Czech Republic, Sweden, or Turkey. Let’s face it, should FIFA use merit to select the teams participating in the World Cup (instead of politics) there would be a lot more strong European teams and a lot less Asian minnows. I think it’s great that FIFA pushes for a globalization of football and gives more opportunities to Asian and African teams, but I think it is a disgrace that UEFA has now less spots in the World Cup than when the competition was first expended to 24 teams (14 European teams at Spain 1982 but only 13 at South Africa 2010). However, until Yemen, Singapore, Laos, and Sri Lanka’s votes count as much as Italy, Germany, England, and France’s this is the sad reality. In my opinion the fairest spot distribution needs to take in consideration geography and merit and should be as follows: four teams each to the Americas (CONCACAF plus CONMEBOL), Africa, Asia/Oceania, and Europe, plus the remaining sixteen spots assigned on merit. This would probably mean a total of seven spots for the Americas, five to Africa, four to Asia/Oceania, and eighteen to Europe. Just my opinion, of course, but based on numbers.
11 Cramer // Sep 21, 2009 at 1:09 am
@ california viola
I’m not sure i understand you. First you write that there are 4 places too much and in the end you end up with giving asia/oceania 4 places anyway. So in the end you agrees with me. Australia, Japan and South Korea can all pass a group stage in a world cup. And the last place could swift between Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and so on.
In this qual i would give the worse second place a playoff as well.
12 Daniel Burnier // Sep 21, 2009 at 1:15 am
Well… I would say: One spot less for Africa and 2 for Asia. 2 spots more for Europe and 1 more for South America. Even the worst south american team is way better than most asian teams and many of the average european teams.
13 Mitz // Sep 21, 2009 at 3:13 am
Sorry, Viola, but I’m a bit confused by one of your arguments: if the votes of Germany, Italy, England and France have more weight in deciding World Cup allocation than those of smaller nations from Asia, then surely the number of European slots would have increased since 1982, not dramatically decreased in proportion to the total number of slots available?
14 JF // Sep 21, 2009 at 9:16 am
Not that it matters but Costa Rica’s home loss to Mexico was 3-0, not 3-1.
Excelent analysis as always, I can’t wait to read the next update!
15 Cramer // Sep 21, 2009 at 10:06 am
There’s something else in your comment i don’t understand Viola. First you wrote:”Asia does not have one spot too many right now. It has four spots too many”, but when you give your nubmers at the end you write 4 places for asia and oceania. What do you actually mean?
16 california viola // Sep 21, 2009 at 4:58 pm
For Mitz: I said the exact opposite. Since the votes of the major European teams count as much as the votes of small Asian (and African and Carabbean) nations, FIFA tends to reward confederations based on their political power rather than on their strenght. UEFA has 53 votes, but Asia, Africa, and CONCACAF combined have triple that, while CONMEBOL only has ten (in spite of having two superpowers such as Argentina and Brazil). If you check how spots in the World Cup have changed since 1982, you’ll see that while the number of European teams has declined, the number of Asian, African, and North/Central American teams have increased. Yet, only South Korea in 2002 made it to the semifinals among these confederations.
17 california viola // Sep 21, 2009 at 5:13 pm
For Cramer: Asia right now deserves only one spot in the World Cup. They are the weakest confederation (numbers speak for themselves) beside dying Oceania; they only have one semifinalist in the history of the World Cup; they only have one team in the top 32 in the world. However, I propose a system that takes in consideration both geography (read: the need to keep expanding the game worldwide) and performance. Divide FIFA in four confederations: UEFA, CAF, Asia+Oceania, Americas. Assign half of the spots equally (four each). Then assign the other half according to performance. Any system can be used, but it has to be based on actual results, not on politics. If, for example, we take in consideration the FIFA rankings and assign extra spots based on the number of teams in the top 32 outside the first four “given” due to geographical consideration, you’ll see that the Americas gain tre extra spots, Africa gets one more, and all the others would go to UEFA’s teams, with Asia/Oceania getting nothing.
18 Mitz // Sep 25, 2009 at 2:14 am
Hi Voros,
At the risk of over-obsessing and coming across as a Norway doom-monger, I just noticed something:
You say “If Ireland loses twice, they are out, even if they manage to still hold onto second in the group.”
Not so fast. It would still be possible for Montenegro to finish bottom of the group, even if they beat the Irish. Admittedly, it’s not terribly likely, as Georgia would have to win their final two away games (at Montenegro and Bulgaria), and Cyprus would also have to win one of their two remaining games, but surely not completely out of the question. In that scenario, Ireland would finish second and be on 16 points, with a worse goal difference than Norway, but having drawn once and lost once to the bottom team in the group they would only sacrifice 1 point in the playoff reckoning, and so would have a completely comfortable 15.
There are a couple of other fairly outlandish scenarios (eg France finishing second in group 7 on 15 points having lost to Faroe Islands, with F.I. nevertheless finishing bottom) that may well have been totally discounted in the sims.
I’m sure your simulations have taken this into account, but I did want to check – at the end of the group games, you won’t always need to take 6 points off the team finishing second before comparing them to Norway…
19 Voros // Sep 25, 2009 at 11:59 pm
No, the system does actually look at the results versus the last placed team (what it actually does is multiply the points and goals earned in each match in the group by a number, 0 if the last place team in the group was involved, 1 if they weren’t. So the 2nd place team won’t necessarily lose six points off their total (this contributes a little to Norway’s dire situation).
Honestly it didn’t occur to me that Ireland could lose out and Montenegro could still finish in last place, so I suppose it’s possible. I’m sure it occurred to the sims though. I’m guessing that scenario (the Irish lose both and Montenegro finishes last) probably didn’t happen in the sims too often.
20 Voros // Sep 26, 2009 at 12:01 am
I should note that getting the “worst second place finisher” part right was easily the most difficult thing to pull off in the code. It took me a couple of tries to get it working right.
21 Mitz // Sep 28, 2009 at 1:18 am
Don’t worry – I had faith in you!
22 Conor // Sep 30, 2009 at 5:23 am
FIFA have just announced they are seeding the playoff draw, how does that affect qualification chances?
23 Mikael // Sep 30, 2009 at 6:13 am
Hey Voros. It has now been decided that there will be a seeding of the second placed teams in Europe. The FIFA ranking wil be used to seed the teams. It looks like Germany/Russia, France, Croatia and Greece could be the seeded teams.
24 Voros // Sep 30, 2009 at 5:24 pm
That’s actually good news, because that was the assumption I’ve been working under. So the percentages don’t change at all (I actually have it programmed to look up the FIFA ranking and then sort the pots).
Sweden’s qualification chances would be better without their relatively poor FIFA ranking (compared to their actual quality).
25 Mitz // Oct 1, 2009 at 8:30 am
Just found something a little ironic.
As Voros stated in his analysis, according to FIFA, Romania have a mathematical chance of qualification, despite the fact that the sims give them no chance. Well, here is what they need to happen:
France must lose to Faroe Islands and Austria.
Austria must draw with or lose to Lithuania.
Romania must beat Lithuania and Faroe Islands.
Somebody (anybody!) from groups 1, 2 or 3 must finish second on 15 points and with an even worse GD than them (they are currently on -3).
On this one, I’m going with the sims: 0% chance.
The irony is that Lithuania have the same points as Romania, so need alot of the same stuff to happen, i.e. France losing both games and they themselves winning both. The difference is that if this happens they will not be the worst runner up, because they lost to Faroe islands, and so their adjusted points tally would be 12, not 9. In other words being rubbish against the most rubbish team in the group has in the end given Lithuania their best and only shot of making the playoffs.
UEFA needs to find a 54th team and avoid uneven groups!
26 Mitz // Oct 2, 2009 at 1:27 am
Anyway, enough of that. Interesting (to me at least) but academic.
More importantly, who will be seeded in the Euro playoffs? It seems the Irish are up in arms, saying that seeding will hurt their chances of qualification, making it a carve up for the more powerful European nations. There may be some truth in that. But looking closely at what may happen in the groups it might not be so bad for Ireland at all.
The runner up from group 4, Germany or Russia, will definitely be seeded. France are overwhelmingly likely to finish second in group 7 and will be seeded too.
At the other end, Bosnia Herzegovina look favourites for the playoffs from group 5 and looking at Edgar’s provisional rankings will bedown at 50, so certainly won’t be seeded. Similarly, Slovenia look pretty much nailed on from group 3 with a ranking of 56.
The middle four is where the waters are muddied. Group 1 – probably Sweden (rank 35) or Portugal (rank 10). Group 2 – Greece (rank 17) or Latvia (rank 46). Group 6 – Croatia (rank 7) or Ukraine (rank 33). This leaves Ireland, with a ranking of 28 and favourites to come second in group 8, with three 50-50 chances, two of which need to go in their favour if they are to be seeded.
In other words, if two out of Sweden, Latvia and Ukraine make the playoffs (none of which present too much of a stretch), and always assuming of course that the Irish make it themselves, then they will be in the top four with a great chance of progress. The playoff pots could, for example, very conceivably look like this:
Seeded
France (8)
Russia (9)
Greece (17)
Rep. of Ireland (28)
Unseeded
Ukraine (33)
Sweden (35)
Bosnia H (50)
Slovenia (56)
27 california viola // Oct 2, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Taking about uneven groups, does anyone know why the teams in group 9 decided to end their games in September? It seems to me they gave a big advantage to the other groups because now teams bound for second place know how many points they need to beat Norway.
28 Mitz // Oct 5, 2009 at 3:24 am
Very good point Viola. As it happens, pretty much every prospective runner up will be confident of getting ahead of Norway, because Norway’s final tally was so low, but UEFA couldn’t have known that would be the case when deciding the rules and scheduling. I absolutely agree that the final games in group 9 should be played at the same time as the final games everywhere else.
But by far the best solution would be to have even groups in the first place. Sadly, 53 is a prime number! Perhaps there should be a preliminary round like in other confederations: the bottom 10 teams in the rankings are paired up and play each other home and away with only the winners progressing to the group stage – 48 teams, eight groups of six, and the absolute dogs like San Marino, Liechtenstein and Andorra have to first earn the right to compete.
29 Mitz // Oct 5, 2009 at 3:28 am
Addendum:
Assuming UEFA will have to settle for 13 places for the forseeable, the eight group winners and the two best runners up would automatically qualify, with the other six runners up competing in playoffs for the final three spots.
30 The National Team Rating System Explanation // Oct 5, 2009 at 4:01 pm
[…] ratings are then the backbone of the simulations I run. In my next post I’ll show exactly how that is done, with the upcoming Russia/Germany […]
31 california viola // Oct 7, 2009 at 2:48 pm
UEFA is unlikely to decide on pre-qualifications because the weaker federations would have to give up the money they get from the matches against the top federations and won’t have enough money to go on. The system of dividing teams in two tiers (upper and lower) that so far had been used in UEFA’s women soccer has been scrapped for the current Women World Cup qualification possibly for that reason. There is hope though, if you don’t like prime numbers: Kosovo is set to join UEFA in the near future bringing the total to 6×9=54. However, things could change again soon with Gibraltar and – who knows – maybe even Monaco or Greenland (unless they decide to go with CONCACAF).
32 california viola // Oct 7, 2009 at 3:00 pm
I’d like to add that I wouldn’t mind seeing used in sport the Swiss pairings system (currently used in board games tournaments – chess, Othello, go, etc.). There is just one big group and one standing for all. Players/teams are divided in two groups (upper and lower) with each player/team from the upper group playing the first two games against opponents from the lower group. At this point the computer analyzes performance and matches teams with comparable strenght in all future matches basing pairings on matches played. In other words, if you lose a game (and points) you play a weaker opponent in the next match and if you win you get a tougher opponent. No team plays the same opponent twice and – if there is an odd number of players/teams – one gets a bye (but no more than one) and gets credit with a half win. Since byes are distributed among weaker players/teams they don’t really influence the final outcome. This system is incredibly precise in determining an accurate final ranking in just a few games.
Leave a Comment