FIFA 2014 World Cup - Official Discussion Thread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:06:35 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Off-topic Board (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, The Mikado, YE)
  FIFA 2014 World Cup - Official Discussion Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66
Author Topic: FIFA 2014 World Cup - Official Discussion Thread  (Read 113954 times)
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1600 on: July 18, 2014, 07:47:08 AM »

FIFA rankings are generally worse than ELO rankings, as I recall.

Agreed


Also, some of the hate comes from the fact that FIFA used to be really, really horrible. I think the classic example is Honduras being ranked number 1 about a decade ago.

Honduras's highest ever FIFA ranking was 20 (Sept 2001).

The list of #1 ranked sides is limited to Germany, Brazil, Italy, France, Argentina, Spain, and the Netherlands.

Hm, Wikipedia seems to agree with you. I wonder why I thought this.
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1601 on: July 18, 2014, 12:19:37 PM »
« Edited: July 18, 2014, 12:28:05 PM by A.G. Snowstalker »

Speaking of North America in general, is it time to shake up continental representation a bit for the next World Cup? I'd take one slot from the AFC and give it to CONCACAF or CONMEBOL to start off, and merge the OFC and AFC.
Logged
Јas
Jas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,705
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1602 on: July 18, 2014, 03:37:26 PM »

Were I to set the criteria for confederation allocations, I'd probably do something like:
a base of 1 slot per confederation (6 slots);
1 slot for each confederation team that finished in the top 3 of the previous WC Group Stage (24);
1 additional slot for the confederation of the defending champion (1);
plus the host (1)


If rearranging confederations was on the table, I'd want to merge CONCACAF and CONMEBOL.
Logged
Middle-aged Europe
Old Europe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,178
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1603 on: July 18, 2014, 06:20:43 PM »
« Edited: July 18, 2014, 06:34:34 PM by Planet Earth is blue and there's nothing I can do »

Speaking of confederations, the OFC is a total joke and has no reason to exist, especially since Australia left. It's only because of the OFC that the last FIFA Confederations Cup had so exciting matches like Spain vs. Tahiti (which Spain won 10-0) or Uruguay vs. Tahiti (which Uruguay won 8-0).

Just merge it with the AFC to form a Asian-Pacific Football Confederation or something. The OFC could even be maintained as the sixth sub-confederation of the APFC.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1604 on: July 18, 2014, 06:55:55 PM »

Probably the best way to solve these wrangles is more inter-continental play-offs, there are only two at present and they are on rotation... Here's how I would work it.

1) Merge the AFC and OFC
and
2) Arrange like this:
Hosts - 1
UEFA - 11
CONMEBOL - 4
CONCACAF - 3
CAF - 4
AFC/OFC - 3

And the last six spots to go between
UEFA - 4
CONMEBOL - 2
CONCACAF - 2
CAF - 2
AFC/OFC - 2

or something like that...

Of course this would never happen because FIFA politics.
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1605 on: July 19, 2014, 07:12:47 PM »
« Edited: July 19, 2014, 07:14:49 PM by Platypus »

Three spots for three fifths of the world's population is ridiculous.

Around about page 25 I proposed a way of doing the 40-team comp that has been muttered about, but 42.

Hosts and reigning champions qualify straight into the groups, other 40 go into 1 v 1 plyoffs, the twenty winners going to the group stage, then the losers play each other 1 v 1 with the ten winners also going to the groups. 32 countries in the groups and everything runs as it does now from there.

15 UEFA
8 CAF
6 AFC
5 CONMEBOL
5 CONCACAF
1 OFC

or 15.5 UEFA, 7.5 CAF, 6.5 AFC, 5.5 CONMEBOL, 4.5 CONCACAF, 0.5 OFC.
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1606 on: July 19, 2014, 07:27:51 PM »

16 UEFA
8 CAF
6 CONMEBOL
5 AFC (swallows up OFC)
5 CONCACAF

Let's face it, Asia is not very good at football.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1607 on: July 19, 2014, 07:53:40 PM »

The AFC's record in 2014 was 0-3-9 and those 3 draws included two goalless games which were among the very worst games in the tournament and a game that was heading that way until a horrible goalie mistake gave the Koreans a goal. Australia, admittedly, were unlucky with their group but the other three, those that got 1 point, were in groups in the weaker groups.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1608 on: July 19, 2014, 08:10:11 PM »

I'm all supportive of adding CONCACAF berths for obvious reasons
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1609 on: July 19, 2014, 09:21:46 PM »

Yeah, I like the logic "Give Asia more berths because they have more people" despite, you know, not caring about, and sucking at, the sport nearly as much as any other confederation (not counting the joke OFC).
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1610 on: July 21, 2014, 08:02:51 AM »

I proposed my metric in the past and I think it is a decent proxy. If all qualifications are equally competitive you'd expect the marginal team from each confederation to be equally strong. If that's true then half of the teams should advance from the group stage from each confederation.

Since the seedings at the world cup is mostly based on confederation it works pretty well to apply this.

Based on that I'd do:

UEFA 17.5
CONMEBOL 7
CONCACAF 3
AFC + OFC 1.5
CAF 2

-------------------
31 + host nation

I agree with Gully that more play-offs would be good though so I'd gladly amend it in that direction.

------------------------

AFC/OFC has had 6 teams making the last 16 since 1986. That is an average of less than 1. There is just not much room for those teams at the top level.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1611 on: July 21, 2014, 08:08:52 AM »

Less than half of UEFA's qualifiers have made it through the group stage in the last two world cups  (6/13 both times). The days in which the likes of Denmark can automatically be thought of as better to the US or South Korea are well over.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1612 on: July 21, 2014, 08:10:08 AM »

Less than half of UEFA's qualifiers have made it through the group stage in the last two world cups  (6/13 both times). The days in which the likes of Denmark can automatically be thought of as better to the US or South Korea are well over.

Yes to the US....but I think Iceland would have beaten South Korea this year...
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1613 on: July 21, 2014, 08:10:31 AM »

Less than half of UEFA's qualifiers have made it through the group stage in the last two world cups  (6/13 both times). The days in which the likes of Denmark can automatically be thought of as better to the US or South Korea are well over.

Yes to the US....but I think Iceland would have beaten South Korea this year...

Russia didn't... and Russia won their qualifying group, ahead of Portugal.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1614 on: July 21, 2014, 08:11:16 AM »

Less than half of UEFA's qualifiers have made it through the group stage in the last two world cups  (6/13 both times). The days in which the likes of Denmark can automatically be thought of as better to the US or South Korea are well over.

Yes to the US....but I think Iceland would have beaten South Korea this year...

Russia didn't... and Russia won their qualifying group, ahead of Portugal.

Well, Russia also drew Algeria.

But then again, we did too after 90 minutes. Smiley
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1615 on: July 21, 2014, 08:11:21 AM »

Less than half of UEFA's qualifiers have made it through the group stage in the last two world cups  (6/13 both times). The days in which the likes of Denmark can automatically be thought of as better to the US or South Korea are well over.

In fairness, South Korea is an awful team whose popularity with the refs took away our rightful World Cup in 2002.

As for Russia, that can be blamed on Capello being a godawful coach and Akinfeev's mistake.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1616 on: July 21, 2014, 08:14:01 AM »

Less than half of UEFA's qualifiers have made it through the group stage in the last two world cups  (6/13 both times). The days in which the likes of Denmark can automatically be thought of as better to the US or South Korea are well over.

Yes to the US....but I think Iceland would have beaten South Korea this year...

Russia didn't... and Russia won their qualifying group, ahead of Portugal.

Well, Russia also drew Algeria.

But then again, we did too after 90 minutes. Smiley

Yes but my point is that Russia were a) awful and b) managed to quality out of UEFA. I didn't make much claims about South Korea who were also pretty bad but they drew with Russia and barely lost to Belgium so much for UEFA dominance...

There isn't really an argument to claim that UEFA is underrepresented at the world cup now. Anyway, in all likelihood they will have 14 teams next time.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1617 on: July 21, 2014, 08:20:28 AM »

Gully, that's only the two last world cups. I would argue both of those featured some anomalies working against Europe.

I also think the comparison you make is misleading.

For example: South Korea has played in the last 8 world cups. The only UEFA teams with a similar or better qualification record are Germany, Spain and Italy. Do you really think South Korea is better than Netherlands, France, England or Portugal? In fact, Mexico, the US and Japan fall into the same category of having longer streaks of world cup qualification  than all European nations but the above 3.

My point isn't that the best Asian teams can't compete with mid-level European teams. They can. My point is that it's unfair that a team of that quality is guaranteed world cup play if it qualifies from Asia and is far from it if it tries from Europe.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1618 on: July 21, 2014, 08:21:54 AM »

Holland missed the 2002 world cup, while making the semi of the euros in 2000 and 2004. The reason of course being that competition for spots is so stiff in Europe. I doubt Holland could ever miss qualifying if they played in any other confederation (save maybe CONMEBOL).
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1619 on: July 21, 2014, 08:24:54 AM »

UEFA's group record:
A - Croatia. 3 Points 1-0-2 defeats to Brazil and Mexico, victory over Cameroon
B - Spain. 3 points 1-0-2 defeats to Netherlands and Chile, victory over Australia
   - Netherlands. 9 points 3-0-0 victories over Spain, Australia and Chile
C - Greece. 4 points 1-1-1 Won vs Ivory Coast, Lost vs Colombia, drew vs Japan
D - England. 1 point 0-1-2 Drew vs Costa Rica, Lost vs Italy, Uruguay
   - Italy. 3 points 1-0-2 Won vs England, Lost vs Costa Rica, Uruguay
E - France. 7 points 2-1-0 Won vs Switzerland, Honduras, Drew vs Ecuador
     Switzerland. 6 points 2-0-1 Won vs Ecuador, Honduras; Lost vs France
F - Bosnia. 3 points 1-0-2 Won vs Iran; Lost vs Argentina, Nigeria
G - Germany. 7 points 2-1-0 Won vs Portugal, USA; Drew vs Ghana
   - Portugal, 4 points 1-1-1 Won vs Ghana, Drew vs USA, Lost vs Germany
H - Belgium. 9 points 3-0-0 Won vs Algeria, Russia, South Korea
     Russia. 2 points 0-2-1 Drew vs South Korea, Algeria; Lost vs Belgium

UEFA vs Non-UEFA group record: 13-7-9 (45% win ratio)
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1620 on: July 21, 2014, 08:28:20 AM »

Holland missed the 2002 world cup, while making the semi of the euros in 2000 and 2004. The reason of course being that competition for spots is so stiff in Europe. I doubt Holland could ever miss qualifying if they played in any other confederation (save maybe CONMEBOL).

Holland missed that world cup because they were awful (and Louis 'genius' Van Gaal was coach then). I remember that because I remember Ireland easily beating them.

I mean on paper perhaps they were better but on paper France should easily have topped their 2002 group with Senegal, Uruguay and Denmark. Instead they got 1 point and 0 goals. (and people complained before the tournament 'Holland should be here instead of Senegal'... there's no way of knowing how these teams comparing without them, you know, playing against each other).
Logged
Јas
Jas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,705
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1621 on: July 21, 2014, 01:28:48 PM »

There isn't really an argument to claim that UEFA is underrepresented at the world cup now. Anyway, in all likelihood they will have 14 teams next time.

For want of an argument...

i. The ELO rankings place 19 UEFA sides within the top 32 in the world.
(with 6 CONMEBOL, 3 CONCACAF, 2 CAF, and 1 AFC)

ii. A reasonable determination of the sides that are presumably least deserving of their spots might be those that come bottom of their groups. In this WC, only 1 UEFA side (England) came bottom. (4 were Asian, 2 African, 1 North American.)

iii. You noted UEFA's group stage record as 45%. But only CONMEBOL did better (72%). (Asia 0%, Africa 20%, North America 36%)


I think that the case for greater CONMEBOL representation is not unreasonable (presuming one wants a tournament of the best teams). But based on this data, it's the AFC and CAF that would be called on first to yield space.

It seems to me that UEFA's number of places is about right (but in the binary, more likely slightly under-, rather than over-represented).
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1622 on: July 21, 2014, 01:56:55 PM »

Holland missed the 2002 world cup, while making the semi of the euros in 2000 and 2004. The reason of course being that competition for spots is so stiff in Europe. I doubt Holland could ever miss qualifying if they played in any other confederation (save maybe CONMEBOL).

Holland missed that world cup because they were awful (and Louis 'genius' Van Gaal was coach then). I remember that because I remember Ireland easily beating them.

I mean on paper perhaps they were better but on paper France should easily have topped their 2002 group with Senegal, Uruguay and Denmark. Instead they got 1 point and 0 goals. (and people complained before the tournament 'Holland should be here instead of Senegal'... there's no way of knowing how these teams comparing without them, you know, playing against each other).

I still think you're missing my point. Mexico was awful in this qualifier but they still qualified, narrowly getting the play-off spot and winning a play-off against New Zealand. A team of Mexico's calibre performing as poorly as they did this qualifier would have missed it had they been in UEFA. I also feel like you ignored the other points I raised. Tongue

I agree that CONMEBOL is maybe more deserving of extra representation, but I still think it's safe to say that UEFA is underrepresented.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1623 on: July 21, 2014, 02:34:22 PM »



It seems to me that UEFA's number of places is about right (but in the binary, more likely slightly under-, rather than over-represented).


Actually I would agree with this.

I just don't see how UEFA should have 17 places when quite a few of its sides did rather badly. In both 2010 and 2014 only 6/13 have qualified from the group stages and has included some awful rubbish at the same level: Russia, Slovenia, France... Of course, this isn't to say there isn't rubbish from the other confeds.

I still think you're missing my point. Mexico was awful in this qualifier but they still qualified, narrowly getting the play-off spot and winning a play-off against New Zealand. A team of Mexico's calibre performing as poorly as they did this qualifier would have missed it had they been in UEFA. I also feel like you ignored the other points I raised. Tongue

Ah but under your proposal Mexico wouldn't have qualified either. CONCACAF top three was Costa Rica, USA and Honduras.

I don't know what other points I missed. I disagree that the confederations should be made equally difficult to qualify out of because we have no good way of measuring that except at the world cup itself.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1624 on: July 21, 2014, 07:37:31 PM »



It seems to me that UEFA's number of places is about right (but in the binary, more likely slightly under-, rather than over-represented).


Actually I would agree with this.

I just don't see how UEFA should have 17 places when quite a few of its sides did rather badly. In both 2010 and 2014 only 6/13 have qualified from the group stages and has included some awful rubbish at the same level: Russia, Slovenia, France... Of course, this isn't to say there isn't rubbish from the other confeds.

I still think you're missing my point. Mexico was awful in this qualifier but they still qualified, narrowly getting the play-off spot and winning a play-off against New Zealand. A team of Mexico's calibre performing as poorly as they did this qualifier would have missed it had they been in UEFA. I also feel like you ignored the other points I raised. Tongue

Ah but under your proposal Mexico wouldn't have qualified either. CONCACAF top three was Costa Rica, USA and Honduras.

I don't know what other points I missed. I disagree that the confederations should be made equally difficult to qualify out of because we have no good way of measuring that except at the world cup itself.

Yeah, that's my point? I'm proposing to change the system because in the status quo I don't think it's fair that Mexico could qualify this time (for example). I think that if the CONCACAF group was 3 spots it would be more fair.

I am using the cup itself as my metric. I'm just not putting as much weight on the last to world cups as you are. The way the world cup is organized, imo, facilitates using it as a metric.

What I felt you ignored was the comparison between say Mexico and Japan versus England and  Portugal. Is it really fair that the best teams in Asia and North America are guaranteed spots when only the top 3 teams in Europe (roughly speaking) are?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 13 queries.