England not one of the top seeds for South Korea and Japan.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Answers

Spain get the eighth and final seeding as announced this AM.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Other seeds are Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy and the two co-hosts Japan and South Korea. Draw is from 10am UK time this Sat.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Does this mean I can grow my own World Cup?

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

England and Sweden in the same seed group so we cant face each other, not in the group play anyway. Lucky you.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Germany are seeded!

What a Joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Apparently seeding is based on the last 3 world cups..94 definately wasn't Englands finest hour.

But what resemblance to todays team did the 94 lot have. It is ridiculous to use that as a current Criteria. I know they have to have something to go on but with this system 7/8 yrs out of date you may as well just throw all the names into a hat.

And how do Japan and Korea deserve a seeding..They wouldn't even qualify if it wasn't for providing a few grounds for us to play on. Surely it was enough to let them join in the fun without the aggro of qualifying.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

FIFA are obviously a bunch of morons.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Howay Bob, it's a bit hard on Korea to expect them to be in the same group as France or Italy. If the host gets knocked out too early, the competion will suffer.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

The only real alternative is to use the FIFA rankings, which are total bollocks for all sorts of reasons, or maybe to only take into account the last World Cup. Either way we wouldn't be seeded so no point in grumbling about it. The equation is simple, the better you perform the more likely you are to be seeded.

Also, it's worth pointing out that they use a weighted average to determine the seedings. The most recent World Cup performance counts for more than the oldest one, which is why our semi final performance in 1990 doesn't count for too much now, and will drop out of the equation altogether for 2006.

South Korea and Japan are seeded as hosts, and that's always been the case for as long as I can remember. That would include France being seeded despite not having qualified in 1994 or 1990 (I think), the US being seeded despite being plainly rubbish, and England being seeded for Euro96 despite our abysmal performances in competitive matches in the preceding 4-6 years. Fair's fair, you can't just scrap that rule just because Korea are minnows.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Oh, and Japan qualified last time around, although admittedly they didn't do very well (Nakata looked superb though). And Korea are regular qualifiers.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

With any luck we will be drawn in the same group as South Korea - fingers crossed - where's Uri Geller when you need him....

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2001

Oh and we still CAN be drawn against Sweden.............

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

What are they trying to do? Make it as hard as possible for good teams to qualify?

A group featuring Argentina (2), England (10) and Portugal (4) would not only be a disaster for those countries involved, it would also be a disaster for the World Cup. Stick France (1), Paraguay (14), Mexico (9) and Sweden (16) in a group as well and the world cup is fast becoming a luck of the draw competition.

Of the top 16 teams in the world 3 didn't qualify for the World Cup (it's not Europe's fault there are more good teams) if the above groups came about a further 3 wouldn't qualify for the knock out stage.

The world cup is about being the best in the world - bloody Swiss couldn't organise a cheese feast at a dairy farm.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

But they are very efficient at hoarding nazi gold...and making watches.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

Think you're being a bit harsh Kegsy - the group stage isn't supposed to be about making sure the best teams get through, or we would just have a 16 (or even 8) team World Cup and just go straight into the knock out stages. Aside from anything else, if they really are the best sides then they will go through anyway. The group stage is supposed to be about making sure that, it being the World Cup, teams from different parts of the world get to play each other, hence the separation in the draw of the non-seeded European, African and South American teams. So what if some of the top 10 sides didn't make it? As far as I can tell the only country that can really feel unlucky is Holland, for drawing such a tough group - but again, if they were that good they would have qualified.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

Do you remember when S Korea were dismissed as a joke side in USA '94 and then provided one of the games of the tournament against Romania? Thought the USA aquitted themselves superbly against Brazilas well although class shone through in the end.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

I think people bashing the US based on the pitiful performance in the last WC are in for a surprise this time around. Not claiming the US will win, if anything I'll just be thrilled to see us get beyond the group stages. Providing all first choice players are healthy, this is a team that can cause problems.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

A very poignant and well thought out argument ADK.

Remind me why Oceania should NOT have a team directly into the finals using that arguement?

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

'Course if the US, England, and Ireland all get drawn in the same group, I'll be supporting Senegal. Or giving up football to watch teh world knitting championships. ;-)

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

But hasn't baseball finished already ciara?

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

LOL! Thankfully....but the knitting competition is far more action packed. ;-)

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

England aren't realistically in with a shout anyway, barring a miracle. We have one decent defender in Rio Ferdinand and shit forwards if Owen is injured.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 2001

As I said - it's the luck of the draw. For England to win the World Cup - they would have to play a good team in EVERY Game.

Brazil should get to the quater final without playing ANY good sides....

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2001

LOL Gus, wondered if that comment would be thrown back at me! Oceania doesn't deserve an automatic place because it's a footballing backwater that hasn't done anything to deserve one.

The fans in Oceania don't support the game and none of the countries that comprise it have managed to put together anything resembling a decent national league. From a purely sporting perspective no Oceania team has managed to make an impact in decades, and this is the route every other region (with the exception of Concacaf and the scandalous lengths Fifa go to to ensure that the US qualifies despite their inadequacies) has had to take to increase it's representation. Africa has more entries that previously because of the successes of Cameroon, Nigeria and Morocco. Same with Asia through Saudi Arabia.

Bottom line is that Oceania is a fairly arbitrary grouping - I think someone else made the point in here that you might as well say that England, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Wight should deserve an automatic place on the same basis. It's composed of small countries with no real interest in the game. Why take away a place from a region where everyone is football daft to accomdate Australia? (And let's be honest, when we are talking about giving Oceania we are talking about giving Australia unquestionably the easiest route to the finals of any nation in the world).

As you've probably gathered, I love this topic, can argue all day about it!!! Maybe the best answer for Australia would be for Oceania to join Asia, taking their half a spot with them, but I really do think it would be scandalous to present such a footballing backwater with an automatic place.

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2001

However, for the advancement of World Football as you mentioned, they should. Also it is the only regional group without direct entry.

Not interested in Oz qualifying, just parity. If OZ qualifies from this group so be it.

FIFA have not got a clue and is run by people chasing their best interest. It has amazed me that South America do not get an extra position to be played for by one of the teams in Europe. As you suggest perhaps split Ociania into Pac Rim competitions, those countries on the West join Asia, on the East join Concacaf.

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2001

You might well get your wish for the next tournament as there should be a number of spots up for grabs that weren't available this year. Fifa announced yesterday that for future tournaments the holders will not qualify automatically, so that frees up one spot. (Personally I'm dead against this - who is going to play in the opening match if the holders don't qualify???) Also, there will only be one host next year so that in theory frees up another place - possibly more. Asia were granted 2 and a half places in addition to the hosts (Iraq lost their play-off) as a compromise when they threatened to boycott the tournament. Unless the Asian sides do well this year there's a good chance they'll go back to having 3 instead of 4 and half places. I would guess that Oceania would be reasonably high up on the list if there are any places to be doled out, though there's always the possibility that they'll go to Concacaf just to make absolutely sure there's no way the US can miss out!

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2001

"... there will only be one host next year" - another rule change eh Adk?

;7)

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2001

Next, year, next time, whatever! I was actually referring to my own brand new competition which I'll be organising to compete against Fifa's version. It will begin next year, shortly after the Japan/Korea event. And I'll decide who will be in it. And who will win. Which will be my team. I expect to have the punters flocking in and all the big tv networks falling over themselves to bid.

-- Anonymous, December 02, 2001

Good on yer mate :-)

-- Anonymous, December 03, 2001

Can the US play in your tournament, ADK? ;-))

-- Anonymous, December 03, 2001

Can I play for your team ADK?

-- Anonymous, December 03, 2001

Yes the US can be in it Ciara - after all, I'll have sponsors to satisfy. I've already decided that they're not going to win though. Actually, it's not sounding a whole lot different to the Fifa version.

Paul, you can indeed be in my team. Your medal is in the post. I'll be scoring the winning goal though, so don't get any ideas.

-- Anonymous, December 03, 2001

Having been a sad statto and looked at how Fifa have done draws before I've always been stunned at the complxity, yet ultimate brilliance of their systems.

Remember when it used to be 24 teams, 6 groups of 4 with top two and best four third placed going through. On paper when you looked at how they said best third of a,c,d,e into one slot then best of b,d, e, f or whatever into the next. Well this was all worked out to ensure you couldn't play a team from your group until the semi, and the top two couldn't meet again until the final.

Anyway..... I have just read that this time for the first time ever they have created two halves to the draw. This is supposed to be to allow Japan and S Korea to stay in their home countries if they go through (oh yeah !!), but it makes a fundamenatl change. In previuos years you could start the tournament with the chance of any two sides meeting in the final. So if for example England and Argentina starting in the same group didn't preclude them meeting in the final as they went into different halves of the draw after the group stage. Not this time.

This means that groups A,C,F and H will provide one finalist and the other groups the other one. A,C,F, and H supply France, Brazil, Argentina and England. The other half Spain, Portugal, Germany and Italy. Now I know you have to beat everyone to win, but the top half could well be absolutely knackered by the time they've won through to the final and be facing a not so brilliant opponent who beats them on the day.

For all of you intending to have a bet on the winners/finalists you need to bear this in mind.

Also much has been made of the runners up in the England group, (Argentina ?), having to play France, then Brazil, then Argentina again. Well the flip to that is that the winner of the group (England ??) would play Uruguay/Denmark then Russia/Turkey are far easier route.

-- Anonymous, December 04, 2001

Argentina - Italy for the final then???

-- Anonymous, December 04, 2001

that would be a nice friendly get together in the sun

-- Anonymous, December 05, 2001