Three more teams are in, the final six will be known by tomorrow night.
The updated National Team Rankings can be found here.
Full qualification chances can be found here.
In
New Zealand, Cameroon, Nigeria = 100%. The Kiwis saved a penalty in their match that would have knocked them out. A lot has been said about their relatively easy qualifying schedule, but starting off qualifying knowing that you’ll have to win a home and home playoff regardless is not necessarily the easiest thing to do. They also could have faced a tougher Asian team like Iran, but Iran failed to deliver when they needed to and then Saudi Arabia stumbled late leaving Bahrain as the final Asian team. Bahrain could have also managed to score a goal in one of the two games, but they didn’t. So ultimately, New Zealand (unlike many teams who will qualify) didn’t finish behind a single team they got to face so they’ve passed every test they’ve been given. Cameroon did what was asked of them in the final match, but the big match was the road win in Gabon which completely reversed the trend of the group. Nigeria gets a bunch of help and manages to jump into the World Cup at the last possible second. They should consider themselves quite fortunate, but as one of Africa’s strongest sides have the ability to put together a run if things go their way.
Out
Bahrain, Gabon, Tunisia = 0%. It’s a real tough time to be part of this group. Bahrain, as mentioned, had lots of opportunities to finally qualify and they squandered them, and now have to regroup and hope they get another chance in 2014. Gabon ultimately finished behind the better team, but nevertheless had a golden opportunity to get it done and didn’t take it. And Tunisia needed a road win in Mozambique to knock out the Nigerians and couldn’t come up with it.
Ireland vs France
France = 93.46%, Ireland = 6.54%. Losing 1-0 at home was not what the Irish needed and now they are the longest shot of the remaining teams. Why them and not Costa Rica? Well France for a while now has been a team who has had a lot more trouble scoring goals than preventing them. Because such a profile leads to relatively more draws, this makes them a weaker team in group stages and a stronger team in playoffs and knockout stages. Ireland has had a similar profile. The end result is now that a team whose defense has been better than their offense now has to go on the road and score a goal against a team who fits the same profile. Uruguay and Costa Rica have opposite profiles (offenses stronger than defenses) meaning that Costa Rica is more likely (according to the system anyway) to score a goal in Uruguay than Ireland is in France. Neither team is in good shape at any rate.
Portugal vs Bosnia-Herzegovina
Portugal = 85.67%, Bosnia-Herzegovina = 14.33%. Bosnia-Herzegovina failed to get a road goal, but did manage to hold the Portuguese to just one. That probably won’t be good enough, but you never really know, and they certainly aren’t in a position where they should give up. The Portguese are looking simply to survive this and then get healthy in time for summer 2010.
Greece vs Ukraine
Ukraine = 57.17%, Greece = 42.83%. The good news for the Greeks is that they didn’t allow a road goal. The bad news is that they didn’t score one themselves. So their chances have probably decreased but only slightly. This remains the closest of the remaining qualification battles, though there have been reversals in others.
Russia vs Slovenia
Russia = 71.74%, Slovenia = 28.26%. If Slovenia had to lose, that was the way to do it. Nejc Pe?nik’s 88th minute road goal keeps this one at roughly the same chances going into the 2nd leg. The Russians probably would have preferred to keep the clean sheet and now face going out with a 1-0 loss in Slovenia. The Russians should still be a solid favorite, but Slovenia still has a shot here.
Costa Rica vs Uruguay
Uruguay = 89.73%, Costa Rica = 10.27%. Well that’s definitely not what Costa Rica wanted and now have an uphill battle. They have to win in Uruguay and possibly still have to survive extra time and penalties. They have some ability and can score goals against anyone. But they have to be considered longshots now.
Algeria vs Egypt
Egypt = 66.76%, Algeria = 33.24%. Algeria probably has enough to complain about to last them two lifetimes at this point, but they have to somehow put that out of their minds and try to win the playoff in Sudan. Egypt scored very late in stoppage time to force the playoff game as the two teams finished with identical points, goals scored and goals allowed both in the group and head to head. The Egyptians are the stronger team on paper and so are the favorites here, but Algeria is good enough to win this on the right day so don’t count them out just yet.
This was the last time I will have to have run sims as we will know all 32 teams by tomorrow night. Thanks to everyone who came here to read these updates as well as all the good suggestions I got to improve them. I hope you stick around as I’ll soon start to simulate the actual World Cup (I’ll try and do one before the draw and after). Thanks again for visiting.
20 responses so far ↓
1 dorian // Nov 17, 2009 at 11:23 am
Voros, thanks for all the updates! Looking forward to your World Cup simulations!
2 Mitz // Nov 17, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Echoed here – thanks very much indeed Voros. I’ve enjoyed hugely both the stats and the delivery.
Roll on tomorrow night for the last 6 places. Next big date: December 4th!
3 california viola // Nov 17, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Thanks for all the updates – I’m looking forward the pre and post draw updates.
It is true that New Zealand didn’t finish behind any of the teams they encountered, but when the teams you face are ranked #61 and below (some well below) that’ s hard to do. While New Zealand goes to the big dance, very likely Ireland will be watching on tv. Why? First they finished second to the World Champions (rather than beating Fiji). Then they (probably) finished second to the World Cup runners up (rather than beating Barhain).
I wouldn’t discount Bosnia. When you’re able to hit the posts three times in Portugal anything can happen at home.
The best match seems to be Ukraine vs Greece and I’m glad to hear ESPN2 will show the match live in the U.S. (10:00 a.m. Pacific time).
I’m looking forward the war – oops match – in Sudan, but I wonder if that’s going to be the final word on the qualification. FIFA has been strangely silent on the Algerian bus incident but today issued a statement saying that what happened will be reviewed after the match in Sudan (probably not to raise temperatures in Northern Africa). I think it is entirely possible that FIFA may severely punish Egypt if they feel the attack happened and the Algerian players were injured, or severely punish Algeria if it is determined that the injuries were faked. And by severe punishment I mean kick them out of the World Cup even if they win in Sudan.
I’m looking forward the December 4th draw. I hope Italy gets Honduras, New Zealand, and … San Marino! (Actually, I’d rather avoid San Marino because a derby is always a little tricky. Make the third team Greenland or Tibet.)
4 scaryice // Nov 17, 2009 at 7:50 pm
You have the wrong url for the qualification chances.
5 Sanchotene // Nov 18, 2009 at 1:55 am
Anyone believe there will be at least one upset? If so, who?
I know this is more feelings than any other reason, but I can’t imagine CRC and IRL at the World Cup.
I don’t think a GRE or ALG win is a real upset.
So, it would be just between Bosnia ans Slovenia to put the favorites down. Both? That would be fun, but I think Bosnia is more able to do it, besides the numbers.
—
Voros,
Thank you for the analysis. I can’t wait today games, the draw, and the Finals.
Best wishes.
6 Sanchotene // Nov 18, 2009 at 2:03 am
Viola,
Slovakia is in beating football powers as Northern Ireland, San Marino and Slovenia; they also won over Poland and Czech.
Ireland was behind Italy, it’s true, but being ahead of Bulgaria, Cyprus, Montenegro and Georgia is hardly a feat! And they could be facing Russia, Portugal or Greece, not France, in the playoffs.
Actually, being in the OFC is more a burden than something good. That’s why Australia moved in the first place.
Best regards.
7 Voros // Nov 18, 2009 at 6:28 am
Link fixed. The correct qualification chances were there, I just had the link pointing to the wrong spot.
8 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 18, 2009 at 12:00 pm
The two non-upstes have happened!
Algeria and Greece are in…
9 california viola // Nov 18, 2009 at 6:56 pm
I hope you’re kidding. If you’re comparing Poland, Czech Republic, and Bulgaria to Bahrain, Fiji, and New Caledonia then there is no reason to even have soccer discussions.
10 jjf3 // Nov 18, 2009 at 7:02 pm
great work, Voros, looking forward to more as WC10 sets up. (and watching UEFA/FIFA deal with a possible Ireland-France replay, much less the stuff in the Algeria-Egypt matchup..)
11 Sanchotene // Nov 19, 2009 at 4:12 am
Viola,
First of all, I left Poland and the Czechs out of the picture, in a separated group from NIR and SMA. Maybe I underrated SVN, but that, only, don’t invalidate my point.
Second, I’m not comparing the European weak teams and Oceania’s as direclty equals, but in a relation, in example, Ireland:Georgia = New Zealand:Fiji. And I do believe I have a point on this.
That said, I also believe that the All Whites would have a shot against either Bulgaria, Cyprus, Montenegro or Georgia (Irish opponents in group stage).
I think you misunterstood me. I didn’t want to offend no one.
Best regards,
Paulo Roberto
12 california viola // Nov 19, 2009 at 9:32 am
Paulo Roberto, first of all I wasn’t offended at all.
Second, you can’t take the weakest teams faced by Slovakia and compare them to the strongest teams faced by New Zealand. You need to compare them all. Slovakia had to face five opponents to qualify for the World Cup. New Zealand had to face only four. So in order to compare them either we take the top four opponents (leaving San Marino out) or – for the sake of argument – we add an extra fictitious opponent for New Zealand (probably Solomon Islands who missed qualifying for the last stage by losing a play-off game against Vanuatu). Well, here is the comparison using FIFA rankings:
Teams faced by Slovakia:
Czech Republic – 11
Northern Ireland – 30
Slovenia – 49
Poland – 56
San Marino – 203
Top four teams’ average: 36.5
Five team average: 69.8
Teams faced by New Zealand:
Bahrain – 61
Fiji – 108
New Caledonia – 141
Vanuatu – 159
Solomon Islands – 173
Top four teams’ average: 117.2
Five team average: 128.4
There is a huge gap right there. By the way, the strongest team faced by New Zealand is weaker than all top four teams faced by Slovakia.
As far as your contention that New Zealand “would have a shot” [at second place, I imagine] in a group with Italy, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Montenegro, and Georgia, this is a very common mistake. Many people assume that the “weaker” European sides would be easy to beat for top non-European opponents. I had the good fortune of watching all the teams in Italy’s group twice during qualification and New Zealand twice against Bahrain. Trust me, there is a big difference between the Kiwis and Bulgaria, Cyprus, and Montenegro. New Zealand looked decent against Bahrain, but missed tons of passes in both games. These are mistakes European teams make you pay for it over and over again. Had New Zealand been placed in Ireland’s group, they would have fought with Georgia to avoid last place in the group. I have no doubt about that.
One more statistics to ponder about:
In the last seven world cups (since the enlargement of the tournament) twenty-eight nations have made it to the quarterfinals or better. Of these, twenty-one (three/fourths of the total) were European teams. That means that almost forty percent of all UEFA teams (that includes San Marino, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, etc., etc.) have reached the top eight in at least one of the last seven world cups. In other words, don’t assume that second and third tier UEFA teams are push-overs. They are not.
13 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 19, 2009 at 10:24 am
Viola,
First of all, that’s a very nice conversation we are having. I’m pleased to share this thoughts with you.
Some points:
You still missed the fact that New Zealand can only face who they are scheduled with.
Second, New Zealand lacks depth in international matches, a lot because they are stucked in OFC.
Third, UEFA teams are always playing against each other, and that helps developing National Teams’ football.
Forth, I didn’t say that New Zealand would be second place in Ireland’s Qualifying group, but they would fight hard for it. And they would get better year after year, if they actually do so.
Fifth, FIFA rankings love UEFA teams, and matches between them worth more than any other intraconference match-up.
Sixth, I do believe that EuroCup is a tremendous tool for European Teams getting used to knockout tournaments like the World Cup Finals, unmatched by Copa America or Gold Cup (a merge between them would help a lot), and that makes European teams more suitable to go further.
Seventh, 40% of the WC teams are from Europe. Since there is no indication of who’s going to do well in the finals and who is going to sink, this is a huge advantage over CAF, for instance. Who knows Egypt, Gabon or Tunisia wouldn’t be better in South Africa than those that qualified?
Eight, if six European teams are at the quaterfinals, that also means that seven or eight are not.
And, ninth, finally!, most of the WC are played in Europe, and that makes a hell of a difference!
Of course, second and third tiers from Europe are strong, maybe on the same level of second (URU, ECU, CHI and COL) and third (VEN, BOL and PER) South American tiers. But it’s just not THAT strong…
14 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 19, 2009 at 11:08 am
P.S.: Ireland, Poland, Czech, etc. are second-tier teams to me. So, what is in debate are third, fourth and fifth european tiers…
15 california viola // Nov 19, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Paulo, why do you think UEFA games are worth more than other confederations’ games?
The formula of the European Championships is copied EXACTLY by all other confederations, yet I don’t see other confederations bringing 6 or 7 out 8 quarterfinalists in the World Cup as Europe regularly does.
The African and the Asian Confederations continue to bring their best to the World Cup and how many teams have they managed to bring to at least a quartefinal in the history of the competition? If you use only one hand you won’t even use all the fingers. I have my doubts the teams eliminated in the qualifications are better than what Africa and Asia can bring.
“if six European teams are at the quaterfinals, that also means that seven or eight are not” – I don’t understand what this mean – the math is faulty. It’s very difficult to bring all thirteen and fourteen Europeans to the quarterfinals.
You’re saying that Uruguay, Ecuador, Chile, and Colombia represent South America’s second tier and that Ireland, Poland, and Czech Republic represent UEFA’s second tier. Fine. First note that 50% of CONMEBOL’s second tier teams will be in South Africa while Ireland, Poland, and Czech Republic will watch it on tv. That should tell you how much more depth UEFA has even than FIFA’s second strongest confederation. Then look at their respective performances: Uruguay hasn’t been able to reach the quarterfinals since 1970; Chile since their home WC in 1962; Colombia and Ecuador don’t even know what World Cup quarterfinals are. On the other hand Czech Republic, Poland, Ireland have missed a grand total of 14 out of 24 possible qualifications since 1982 because the field is so strong in Europe, yet they all made an appearance in the WC quarterfinals.
I can’t speculate on third, fourth, and fifth tier UEFA’s teams because I don’t know whom you’re refering to. However today UEFA announced the pots for Euro 2012 and in pot 3 and 4 (read teams that will likely watch EURO 2012 via small screen) there are nine teams that have made the World Cup quarterfinals.
I love watching the World Cup. It’s great to see Honduras vs Ivory Coast, Chile vs Australia, or New Zealand vs Ghana. But let’s be honest with ourselves, the cream always rises to the top and that cream is called Brazil, Argentina, and Europe. And at the World Cup I’d rather see more cream than foam.
16 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 20, 2009 at 3:01 am
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/r&a-wr/52/00/97/fs-590%5f10e%5fworldrankingpointcalculation.pdf
“C: The strength of a confederation. When calculating intercontinental matches, the mean value of the confederations to which the two competing teams belong is used. The strength of a confederation is calculated on the basis of the number of victories by confederation at the last three FIFA World Cup™ competitions.“
17 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 20, 2009 at 3:26 am
Viola,
Before answering your points let me make clear some things:
Those Europeans second tiers are exemples. I wouldn’t list them all because it’s harder to define them than in South America, but you can add those like Russia, Ireland, Scotland, Denmark, Turkey, Greece, etc.
About quarterfinals, it’s wouldn’t be a math problem, but logic. You can understand it, if you imagine I’m not crazy or stupid. I was pointing that a lot of European teams are out earlier, mainly in first stage: Poland, Serbia, Czech and Croatia, in 2006 (Germany, Europe); France, Slovenia, Portugal, Poland, Croatia and Russia, in 2002 (Japan/Korea, Asia).
Another unclear point is the fact that, if you have 10 African teams you double the continental chances to have teams among the Elite Eight. I can prove this using CAF’s CAN as exemple. Often, teams that doesn’t make good qualifying, but somehow manage to pass through it, play well at the finals; but they don’t go to the World Cup. The Europeans go!
And to finish, Brazil (1958, 1970 and 2002) and Argentina (1986) are the only squads to win outside their own Continental zone! That’s why I can’t wait 2014. I think South America will dominate it. And if Conmebol manage to have six spots, it will be even tougher for the outsiders…
18 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 20, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Viola,
Using UEFA last ranking, I manage to this kind of division fo European forces. It’s totally subjective, but based on numbers:
Europe First-Tier
1 ) Spain 39’964
2 ) Germany 38’294
3 ) Netherlands 37’821
4 ) Italy 35’838
5 ) England 34’819
6 ) Croatia 33’677
7 ) Portugal 33’226
8 ) France 32’551
9 ) Russia 32’477
Europe Second-Tier
10 ) Greece 31’268
11 ) Czech Republic 30’871
12 ) Sweden 30’695
13 ) Switzerland 30’395
14 ) Serbia 29’811
15 ) Turkey 29’447
16 ) Denmark 29’222
17 ) Slovakia 28’228
18 ) Romania 28’145
19 ) Ukraine 28’133
20 ) Israel 28’052
21 ) Bulgaria 27’198
22 ) Finland 26’827
23 ) Poland 26’620
24 ) Norway 26’210
25 ) Republic of Ireland 25’971
26 ) Scotland 25’646
Europe Third-Tier
27 ) Northern Ireland 24’518
28 ) Austria 24’381
29 ) Bosnia-Herzegovina 24’365
30 ) Slovenia 24’221
31 ) Latvia 23’303
32 ) Hungary 23’048
33 ) Lithuania 22’071
34 ) Belarus 21’515
35 ) Belgium 21’426
36 ) Wales 21’274
Europe Fourth-Tier
37 ) F.Y.R. Macedonia 19’409
38 ) Cyprus 18’791
39 ) Montenegro 18’751
40 ) Albania 18’319
41 ) Estonia 17’792
42 ) Georgia 15’819
43 ) Moldova 15’734
44 ) Iceland 15’404
45 ) Armenia 15’164
46 ) Kazakhstan 14’730
Europe Fifth-Tier
47 ) Liechtenstein 13’581
48 ) Azerbaijan 13’500
49 ) Luxembourg 11’872
50 ) Malta 11’517
51 ) Faroe Islands 10’620
52 ) Andorra 9’197
53 ) San Marino 7’783
—
Remembering my view of Conmebol:
a) First-tear: Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay;
b) Second-tier: Chile, Colombia, Ecuador and Uruguay;
c) Third-Tier: Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela.
19 california viola // Nov 20, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Look at the difference:
First tier
All European teams you listed made it at least to the WC semifinals.
In South America you have Argentina, Brazil, and … a team that has never made it even past the second round.
Second tier
More than 70% of the UEFA teams you listed made it at least to the quarterfinals.
Uruguay last saw the QFs in 1970, Chile in 1962, and the other two … probably never will.
Third tier
WC finalists, semifinalists, and quarterfinalists for Europe; lonely quarterfinalist Peru for S. America.
[By the way the pots for EURO 2012 came up today. Had New Zealand been a UEFA team, they would have been placed in the fifth of the six pots, setting up a possible great match up with Andorra or San Marino to avoid last place in their group.]
As we say in Europe, the World Cup is a European Championship with Argentina and Brazil added.
How about this one for a Mini World Cup?
Group A: Brazil, Croatia, Portugal, Serbia
Group B: Argentina, England, France, Switzerland
Group C: Spain, Italy, Russia, Sweden
Group D: Germany, Netherlands, Greece, Czech Republic
20 Paulo Sanchotene // Nov 22, 2009 at 2:55 am
Viola,
Brazil would simply crush group A…
Actually, for us, it wouldn’t make a huge difference, because it’s the same facing Serbia, Greece, Switzerland, Sweden, Ghana, Cameroon, Mexico, Australia, Japan or every single team besides Argentina, Germany and Italy.
We could consider England (because they invented the game), France (mainly because of those three consecutives World Cup defeats), Uruguay and Paraguay (traditional rivalries) as well. But it would be all.
A “real” World Cup would have only Brazil, Argentina, Italy and Germany. The rest is rest, even the Europeans.
So why not bring all continents to the party?!
Leave a Comment