I´m sure Italy would be more than pleased to add Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Iceland and Austria to their qualifying group, if it means 4 1/2 qualifying spots, and playing New Zealand in a play-off, instead of 1 1/2 with Spain and playing Croatia, Ukraine or Wales in that play-off.
World Cup 2018 Qualifiers
- Thread starter DWelbz19
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I´m sure Italy would be more than pleased to add Slovakia, Northern Ireland, Iceland and Austria to their qualifying group, if it means 4 1/2 qualifying spots, and playing New Zealand in a play-off, instead of 1 1/2 with Spain and playing Croatia, Ukraine or Wales in that play-off.
That's actually quite sad as it was always on the cards ever since the draw was made. Oh well...
To be fair, we can still make it on paper. We have to beat Belarus (easy peasy) and Sweden by probably at 3-0 (never gonna happen).
No they don't. But they also do not get 50% qualification (playing off against mighty New Zealand!!)
If they were in a group of ten sides who are not as good, they would fancy their chances. As another poster said, you are not afraid of losing a couple in a situation like this. Personally, I like their system, where even the weakest sides like Bolivia & Venezeula are miles better than the dross in all the other associations. As for playing above sea level & immense heat, surely that is something FIFA should be dealing with. Perhaps not, as Qatar says hello.
As for Argentina, I think it shows how overrated their players are generally. People are constantly criticising English Players, saying we fail to achieve as they are not really that good, so what are the Argentina players excuses.
Argentina have played in 3 major international finals since 2014. They are not comparable with England.
That's assuming Sweden don't batter Luxembourg by more than you beat Belarus.
I know they pulled off the miracle 0-0 against France.
Since when is room for error the measuring stick? How does that make a qualifier more competitive if most teams quickly have nothing to play for?
Just look at the last couple of World Cups. In 2014 three of the five advanced to quarters and that was after the other two were eliminated by Conmebol teams in the second round.
If Luxembourg manage a similar upset against Sweden I will tattoo their flag across my chest.
Good thing their flag is nearly identical to ours I suppose..
4.5 spots means the qualifiers are more forgiving but doesn't downplay the difficulty of games.
We don't get the chance to play the likes of San Marino, Lativia, Gibraltar, Liechtenstein or the other lower tier UEFA team.
I was going to say that would be even more painful if they pull it off and you fail to beat Sweden in the last game.
However, I guess their flag is just basically a lighter colour version of your flag so it's not too bad.
How does that help anyone?
Anyone who'd realistically qualify will beat them home and away anyway. If Suriname and Guyana were added to Conmebol (never understand why they aren't), that should just mean every other team have 6 more points?
How does that help anyone?
Anyone who'd realistically qualify will beat them home and away anyway. If Suriname and Guyana were added to Conmebol (never understand why they aren't), that should just mean every other team have 6 more points?
Guarantee 6 points unlike Bolivia or Venezuela .
It'd be interesting if we moved away from continental qualifiers to world qualifiers.
It'd throw up some interesting groups.
It'd throw up some interesting groups.
No chance. FIFA wants to gift spots to AFC, CAF, CONCACAF. With world qualifiers we wouldn't have the proposed ratio for WC 2026.
What's your point? Did anyone compare the likes of Bolivia or Venezuela to San Marino?
Agree those teams have no material impact on standings (different from Bolivia or Venezuela). But, answering your question:How does that help anyone?
Anyone who'd realistically qualify will beat them home and away anyway. If Suriname and Guyana were added to Conmebol (never understand why they aren't), that should just mean every other team have 6 more points?
1) They would be handy to clear up yellows, try new players, etc.
2) The number of pushover teams in Europe effectively means most groups consist of three teams fighting for one place and a playoff place. That isn't really all that different from Conmebol, particularly when Conmebol should realistically be two dead certs plus the other 8 fighting for 2+1 slots.
It's just occasionally you get this Spain-Italy type situations, but most groups have an obvious winner and runner up from the day they are drawn.
Chile have just won two Copas in consecutive years and are 6th. Let that sink in.
In short, European qualifiers are generally kinder on the big teams but probably harsher for the likes of Sweden as after two years of games you know it will boil down to luck of the draw and two knockouts.
Last edited:
No chance. We've never lost a home qualifier in our history and we're not about to throw one just to screw over our rivals.I'm not saying they'll roll over, just that Argentina will get the result when they really need it.
As for Chile, Brazil might gift them the game if it could knock the Argies out.
Again, playing off against New Zealand is as easy as it gets. So you should have 2 dead certs and at the same time 3 also-rans who causes the occasional problem (at high altitude) but hardly ever realistic contenders, and 5 teams fighting for 2.9 slots.
If you looked at the Fifa ranking at the beginning of qualifying, there are 4 teams ranker 50 or lower in Conmebol and you'd be into Pot 4 in Uefa by the time you get to 50.
So basically each Uefa group has at least 3 teams better (ranked higher) than 4 Conmebol teams.
Neymar might think it significantly increases his chances of the Ballon D'or if Messi isn't in Russia. Especially if Real don't do the 3-peat, otherwise it's another foregone conclusion.
See above as I edited in a caveat on playoffs.
Right now only two are 100% out and one has qualified. The other 7 still have everything to play for.
Firstly, I wouldn't use FIFA's ranking to compare across regions, only within regions. E.g. you have Euro qualifiers while we don't have Copa qualifiers.
Second, the World Cup performances speak for themselves. All Conmebol teams usually get into the second round and you typically have 3/8 quarter finalists from Conmebol (actually, last time out this was after Colombia knocked out Uruguay and Brazil knocked out Chile).
Yes, the winners have been European since 2002 (unsurprisingly) but as a cohort the Conmebol teams perform better than the European ones that actually do make it.
Exhibit A - Costa Rica and Uruguay knocking out England and Italy.
It's never going to happen. We don't throw games to screw someone else. Suggesting anyone would is not understanding South American football.Neymar might think it significantly increases his chances of the Ballon D'or if Messi isn't in Russia. Especially if Real don't do the 3-peat, otherwise it's another foregone conclusion.
Brazil is not about to ruin there perfect home World Cup qualifier record just to see Argentina go out. Personally, I want Argentina to get in.
I know, but that's more to do with Chile and Argentina making a complete mess of qualifying than the other sides being very good.
That is a fair point, but doesn't change the fact that it's still one of the easiest qualifying (or should be) for the better sides because there are so many places available.
The last I checked, Costa Rica are not a Conmebol team.
Fair enough
Oh, I know. But it would be much more interesting and fair.
USA and Mexico have it quite easy.
This. I'd love the banter if they didn't make it in, but it wouldn't be the same without them.
How does that help anyone?
Anyone who'd realistically qualify will beat them home and away anyway. If Suriname and Guyana were added to Conmebol (never understand why they aren't), that should just mean every other team have 6 more points?
Definitely an oddity, kind of like Israel being in UEFA instead of the AFC. TBF, both situations seem to have racial overtones. Israel is easy enough to see, what with being surrounded by Arab countries that what to exterminate them, but Suriname, Guyana, and French Guyana aren't Latin in nature, hence being included with the Caribbean islands (i.e. Dutch, English, French). I'm sure CONMEBOL doesn't want to have to fit another 6 matches into their qualification schedule as it is.
I've mentioned this a few times, personally I think everyone should playoff against Uefa. So if they're good enough to beat 2nd tier European teams, they get in, if they're not, quit complaining about Uefa getting so many spots.
Good point, forgot about then.
I'm sure they can have 2 groups instead of 1 if need be, there's no need for everyone to play everyone so often (especially with the Copa America going off all the time as well).
That's where the geographies come in. Europeans complain about hard surfaces while we have that in Paraguay, sweltering heat in Colombia, altitude in Bolivia and Ecuador... Even Peru occasionally moves a game away from Lima to Cusco.
No easy games. It IS more competitive.
It should be for Brazil and Argentina, but historically one has always struggled. Most of their European equivalents go through a far more boring and inevitable procession to qualification.
But both Uruguay and Costa Rica are their respective confederations kings of the playoff spot. Uruguay had to play off with Jordan (easy, I know) but then knocked out both of your "harder qualifiers" representatives.The last I checked, Costa Rica are not a Conmebol team.
Best headline I ever saw was O Globo gloating at them getting knocked out in the group stage in 02.
Full page photo of a downcast Batistuta. Shirt R$ 50, Flight to Japan R$ 4000, Ticket to the game R$ 1000. Seeing Argentina knocked out... PRICELESS
Far more entertaining to both be in it. Everything is forgotten. Messi + 10 becomes 11 world beaters. The fact only Venezuela scored less quickly forgotten. They are the South American England.
Last I checked USA are miles off the pace and level with Honduras.
But will still qualify due to an easy playoff.
Mexico, USA and Costa Rica are pretty much always the victors of these qualifiers.
Yeah but everybody gets those 3 points. Nobody has any advantage.
It's not racial per se, it's how Conmebol evolved over 100 years while those were feeder colonies for European NTs. Nowadays they have nothing to offer to the qualifiers, Copa América or Copa Libertadores. Why involve them?
Honduras was at the last WC, weren't they? I'm sure Jamaica and T&T have been there before.
What's important is there's enough room for these to have a hope in hell, that's what strengthens them.
USA has a play off now, Mexico last time. Goes to show the minors are putting up a fight. Little you can do about the region they play off with being shite at football.
Bottomline is though that it's only three teams fighting for 1+1 slot in most groups.