Slightly misleading. North Korea stunk up the joint, but their qualification was a fluke. The #3 team, Australia, went 1-1-1, finished third in their group, and was eliminated on the GD tiebreaker. Hardly a poor showing.

And this was without a single Middle East qualifier. I'm not sure what happened to the Middle East this World Cup cycle. Normally, they churn out a credible side of two.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Gmorgan4982

Member since May 2005

101750 posts

Posted on 6/28/10 at 2:00 pm to Baloo

Yeah, I should have put 1-4-1; for some reason, I thought Australia went 1-2. I just figured if the #4 team looked so bad, I don't see how a 5th team would look better.

Doesn't FIFA have some really complicated formula to figure this out?

This post was edited on 6/28/10 at 2:00 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by RockChalkTiger

A Little Bit South of Saskatoon

Member since May 2009

10535 posts

Posted on 7/4/10 at 9:40 am to Baloo

quote:
Middle East this World Cup cycle. Normally, they churn out a credible side of two.

The Saudis got squeezed out by the Fightin' Kim Jong Ils, and Bahrain lost the playoff to New Zealand (easier to understand now). Iran had an off year. They should have a team or two next time. Japan, Korea and Australia are legitimate WC teams. (Australia's 4-0 blowout to Germany doesn't look so bad now, does it?) They should stay at 4.5 slots, though. There's a pretty sharp drop off after the top 3. Gives everyone else something to play for.

CONMEBOL looked great after the round of 16 and the quarters, but they won't get a team in the finals. It's Germany/Spain vs. Netherlands for an all-UEFA final (again). Explains why the European Championships are the second-most-popular tournament after the WC.

This post was edited on 7/4/10 at 9:47 am

1 ...

Report Post

Soccer Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board