Thought I'd just start a thread on this as the draw's looming ever closer and seeing as Scotland's out of Euro 2008 I've got nothing else to do :p

How do you think your team will do? will they qualify? It's 3 years away, can you be sure your team will measure up? Who would you like to avoid?

As a Scot there's one main team I'd like to avoid, and that's Italy, but that's just cause I'm still bitter ;)

wow, thanks for the reminder. I really thought the draw would be next year.

As long as Germany is in the first pot i think we won´t have any problems to qualify.

England should (SHOULD!) qualify, and we want to avoid any team that might give us a challenge (basically everyone!) :lol:

The team i really want to qualify is N Ireland, but i don't think, like tonight, they will quite do it.

I'm cautiously optimistic about Australia's chances to qualify.

The main problem with Australia is that FIFA insist on them playing some South American team in addition to their normal group. They're always going to top the Oceanic(sp?) group, they should go through automatically in my opinion.

We shall qualify!

Group of my dreams:

Greece
Norway
Finland
Cyprus
Liechtenstein
Estonia(just because of the short distance)

And this group is actually possible!

The main problem with Australia is that FIFA insist on them playing some South American team in addition to their normal group. They're always going to top the Oceanic(sp?) group, they should go through automatically in my opinion.

We're part of Asia now, so we don't have to do that anymore.

When are the qualifying groups announced?

As for Poland, we were the first team to qualify last time around, Leo Beenhakker is sticking around, and our team is young, so I'd say we have a good chance.

USA should easily qualify.

The draws are 25/11 but I can't find out if the nations are ranked into different groups yet.... Hitti-litti did you make up that list from some ranking?

We're part of Asia now, so we don't have to do that anymore.Quite frankly, winning against the 5th Conmebol team isn't such a hard qualifying path. But anyway, I like it better the way it is now. If Australia could prevent Saudi Arabia to qualify, I would only be glad. Saudi Arabia conceded 26 goals during the last three world cups.

By the way, OFC as a whole should be part of AFC. Being part of AFC wouldn't prevent them from organizing an Oceania Cup. I can't see any real reason to maintain the independence of OFC... why not a Carribean independent confederation? Anyhow, my view may sound extreme, but I would also support a merge of Concacaf and Conmebol.

The draws are 25/11 but I can't find out if the nations are ranked into different groups yet.... Hitti-litti did you make up that list from some ranking?You can find all the needed informations here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification :)

You can find all the needed informations here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification :)

Ok, thanks, the seeding will be based on the next fifa-rankings coming 23/11...

I suspect Sweden won't make it to South-Africa, unless they get an easy group.

Sweden is a pretty good team even if some old lads retire. I'm pretty sure that you have some promising youngsters preparing to rise to the highest level. :)

Polands getting in no doubt about it, unless we get stuck in this group:

Italy
France
Scotland
Poland
Faroe Islands
Georgia
(do i need to go on?)
----
Also about Georgia and Armenia, Fifa is banning the use of stadiums in high altitudes as it's been proven it does effect the players! So no more bad games vs armenia and no more scotland 0-2 georgia games!

^^^noooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!! we can't them twice surely!? i'm looking forward to seeing who greece and turkey get- they always seem to get each other lately!

A Fifa official said last month on the Scottish radio that Scotland were in a 2nd seed position, and that if they beat Italy and Georgia they'd go into top seed. I dunno what that means now. The seedings will be based on world rankings, so unless Scotland's terrible results lead to a dramatic fall, Scotland should be a 2nd seed. I hope we don't get third ... that would be disastrous.

A Fifa official said last month on the Scottish radio that Scotland were in a 2nd seed position, and that if they beat Italy and Georgia they'd go into top seed. I dunno what that means now. The seedings will be based on world rankings, so unless Scotland's terrible results lead to a dramatic fall, Scotland should be a 2nd seed. I hope we don't get third ... that would be disastrous.

If the scotts get to 3rd seeding i'd be glad... It makes the group above impossible :)

If the scotts get to 3rd seeding i'd be glad... It makes the group above impossible :)

Poland will be a 2nd seed, and so will only get Scotland if Scotland are 3rd.

The process isn't that mysterious. It is based on Fifa rankings, so thinking about results in the last month you can guess pretty closely.

Scotland are currently ranked 13th in the world and 11th in Europe; Poland are 20th in the world and 14th in Europe. The cut off point for 2nd seed lies between 16th and 17th; Poland's position will rise or be stable; Scotland's position will fall slightly. So meeting each other is quite unlikely.

I'd worry more about good teams with temporarily low rankings.

I'm pretty certain my country will classify, because we classified for every single World Cup in the history of World Cups :p

We're part of Asia now, so we don't have to do that anymore.

Really? outstanding. I love the Aussies ever since they had to beat Uruguay to qualify for 2006. I saw the two commentators and one was in the suit and tie and the other guy had the hawaiian shirt on with shades on top of his head. When they scored he just went mental. Completely bias, was brilliant :)

FIFA-rankings? :lol:

Oh man, how ridiculous. :D

I HOPE my teams qualify. IN ORDER

Israel
Ghana
Canada

All are possible, but nowhere near definite. especially those last 3.

The rankings aren't exactly that great but they're better now than they were. Remember when USA was in the top ten? just because they played teams like Panama and walk it?

And stop putting down the FIFA rankings :mad: Scotland are higher than they've ever been before, THAT MAKES THEM MATTER!!!! :p

I think the new list comes out today. Wonder how Scotland's games against Italy and Ukraine and England's game against Croatia will affect them.....

England and Scotland are seconds seeds :(

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/7108764.stm

England and Scotland are seconds seeds :(

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/7108764.stm
Pity.
That means Sweden in the second seed-group, can't get England as the first seed team to play. And they always do well against England.;)

Sweden is a pretty good team even if some old lads retire. I'm pretty sure that you have some promising youngsters preparing to rise to the highest level. :)
Weeel, that's the problem see. The team is so long in the tooth, when the coach put Rosenberg on the field in the last match against Spain, he alone shaved almost an entire year off the average age of the team.

The present generation has done well for itself, and the coach has stuck with them. Very few younger players have even been given an airing in the national team.
Which, considering the structure of Swedish club-football (which is crap btw), means fewer young Swedish footballers have been able to show themselves to an international audience, hurting the rate with which they have been going professional out in Europe, which is necessary for them to get really good.

Sweden is in for one hell of a generational "changing of the guard". The average age of the team is almost 30. Age-wise, in a couple of years Sweden should be expected be able to rely only on the goalie Isaksson, and the strikers Ibrahimovic and Elmander, oh and Källström on the midfield, whom I like as a player, with great potential, but with a strange tendency to underperform in the national team. Two thirds of the team might get replaced in one go.

Possibly the defenders Mellberg and Edman might still be able to hack it for a while longer, but both will be turning 30. And that still means half the team is on their way out.

I think there's something like a zero chance someone like Ljunberg lasts much longer physically. Apparently the man is in near constant agony by now. Who's supposed to replace him? I've no idea...

Dream draw:

*Greece (or perhaps Portugal, Czech Republic or Croatia)
*Scotland
*Northern Ireland
*Moldova
*Iceland
*San Marino

Nightmare draw:
*France (or Spain, Germany, Italy, Netherlands)
*Scotland
*Ukraine (or Belgium, Serbia or Denmark ... any of those would seriously suck)
*Bosnia (wouldn't want Belarus, Hungary or Lithuania either)
*Austria (or Slovenia)
*Estonia

Last draw ... we were 4th seed and seriously drew the best team in the seeds 1 to 3 (without a shadow of a doubt!); while Lithuania and Georgia for seeds 5 and 6 were hardly much better. So it can't go any worse than last time. Hopefully we are cut some slack this time around.

It can't possibly be worse than drawing the two world cup finalists and a world cup quarter-finalist! :please:

I think the new list comes out today. Wonder how Scotland's games against Italy and Ukraine and England's game against Croatia will affect them.....

We've fallen one place. The tragedy is that because England messed up one win from our two would have put us to 11th and we would have been a No 1 seed. :cry:

Dream draw:

*Greece (or perhaps Portugal, Czech Republic or Croatia)
*Scotland
*Northern Ireland
*Moldova
*Iceland
*San Marino



Awww NI would be AMAZING. the atmosphere at Hampden would be jumping!

Weeel, that's the problem see. The team is so long in the tooth, when the coach put Rosenberg on the field in the last match against Spain, he alone shaved almost an entire year off the average age of the team.

The present generation has done well for itself, and the coach has stuck with them. Very few younger players have even been given an airing in the national team.
Which, considering the structure of Swedish club-football (which is crap btw), means fewer young Swedish footballers have been able to show themselves to an international audience, hurting the rate with which they have been going professional out in Europe, which is necessary for them to get really good.

Sweden is in for one hell of a generational "changing of the guard". The average age of the team is almost 30. Age-wise, in a couple of years Sweden should be expected be able to rely only on the goalie Isaksson, and the strikers Ibrahimovic and Elmander, oh and Källström on the midfield, whom I like as a player, with great potential, but with a strange tendency to underperform in the national team. Two thirds of the team might get replaced in one go.

Possibly the defenders Mellberg and Edman might still be able to hack it for a while longer, but both will be turning 30. And that still means half the team is on their way out.

I think there's something like a zero chance someone like Ljunberg lasts much longer physically. Apparently the man is in near constant agony by now. Who's supposed to replace him? I've no idea...

Well, your club football is way better than Finnish club football. You have good teams like Elfsborg and Helsingborg currently doing well in UEFA Cup(at least they're in the group stage). We don't have any, though I think that TamU may be near either CL group stage(if some easy opponents in qualification) or UEFA Cup group stage.

And about your teams age, Finland is even older. Jääskeläinen is 32 IIRC, almost the whole defence is over 30, Kolkka and Litmanen are both over 30(Litmanen is 36!), Kuqi and Heikkinen are almost 30. And we've got only few promising youngster at the moment, Roman Eremenko and Perparim Hetemaj are someone to rely on future. After them the distance to next promising is still quite big.

Whats the lowest seeded team to ever actually qualify for a world cup? Do 5th or 6th seeders ever pull it off?

Finland almost did, at it was in the 5th seed.

Well, I just read that England is not going to be a 1st seed.

Heh.

Hah, Northern Ireland and Ireland are both 3rd seeders :D

Big movers include South Africa up 25 places to 77th and Belarus, whose 2-1 win over Holland in midweek sees them rise 34 places to 60th.

:eek:

And because of those scottish and english screwups poland lost 4 places...

In the South American qualifiers, has Ecuador really screwed up as badly as it looks? I mean, as is, it seems like they're not going to qualify for this Cup. A pity, too, I kind of liked them. :(

Quite frankly, winning against the 5th Conmebol team isn't such a hard qualifying path.<snip>

From Wikipedia;
1986 - Australia lost to Scotland in the Intercontinental Play-offs. This is the first World Cup where Oceania was its own continent and thus did not partake in Asian qualification.

1994 - Australia beat Canada, then lost to Argentina in the Intercontinental Play-offs.

1998 - Australia lost to Iran in the Intercontinental Play-offs.

2002 - Australia lost to Uruguay in the Intercontinental Play-offs.

2006 - Australia beat Uruguay in the Intercontinental Play-offs to qualify, progressed through group stage, lost in round of 16 to Italy. This is the first time any Oceanic country made it past the group stage.


Not quite as easy to qualify as it sounds...

Especially since as "preparation", the Australians played against such oh so challenging teams as American Samoa, whereas opponents like Uruguay have just been playing against Brazil and Argentina.

From Wikipedia;
1986 - Australia lost to Scotland in the Intercontinental Play-offs. This is the first World Cup where Oceania was its own continent and thus did not partake in Asian qualification.

1994 - Australia beat Canada, then lost to Argentina in the Intercontinental Play-offs.

1998 - Australia lost to Iran in the Intercontinental Play-offs.

2002 - Australia lost to Uruguay in the Intercontinental Play-offs.

2006 - Australia beat Uruguay in the Intercontinental Play-offs to qualify, progressed through group stage, lost in round of 16 to Italy. This is the first time any Oceanic country made it past the group stage.


Not quite as easy to qualify as it sounds...You see, all of the teams which got through instead of Australia performed poorly during the following world cup. Scotland 1986, Iran 1998 and Uruguay 2002 have all been eliminated during the 1st round. The only exception I'll concede would be Argentina in 1994, but they've still made a poor world cup, being eliminated against Romania in the 2nd round after having finished 3rd during group stage.

Just as a comparison, in 1994, France also failed to qualify, and both teams who got through in its group, Bulgaria and Sweden, finished semifinalists during the following world cup. Now that's what I consider as a tough path to qualify.

The 5th conmebol team is not really top notch. It has rarely the potential to pass the group stage. Well, you will tell me that the same is also true for any Asian qualified team though. Anyway, as I've said, if Australia can avoid Saudi Arabia to qualify for 2010 that would nevertheless be a good move.

However, I do agree with North King, that it's been a good move for Australia to move to AFC not because the OFC qualifying path is "impossible", but because Australia will have the chance to play more regularly against professional squads.

Well, now we actually play against decent competition, so it should get easier to qualify.

Marla, the system Australia used to play under was blatantly unfair. They got no proper competitive games until one or two one-off lucky dip make or break ties came around.

Everyone knew in the 1990s that Australia were a very decent team; they were a better team than Iran, but the better prepared Iran side got a lucky fight back and knocked out Australia on away goals. Now, the reason this system continued in operation was because no-one wanted to give Australia a guaranteed place at the finals either. The current way is probably for that reason the best solution; though I don't quite understand why North America should get so many guaranteed places, with Oceania none.

Anyways, I still don't understand why it took so long to sort out. Fifa go out of their way to make sure the USA qualify, and we get teams like Jamaica and Trinidad as a result, why wouldn't they want to promote football in Australia?!

Ah yeah, I've got it, the USA has ten times the population! ;)

In fairness, Europe is now the biggest loser in the system. A far larger number of worthy teams will fail to qualify from Europe than elsewhere. 13 teams out of 32 for the next finals, despite the fact that Europe consistently provides the vast majority of last 16 teams. This is why I really hope UEFA will expand the size of the European championships.

Dream draw:

*Greece (or perhaps Portugal, Czech Republic or Croatia)
*Scotland
*Northern Ireland
*Moldova
*Iceland
*San Marino

Nightmare draw:
*France (or Spain, Germany, Italy, Netherlands)
*Scotland
*Ukraine (or Belgium, Serbia or Denmark ... any of those would seriously suck)
*Bosnia (wouldn't want Belarus, Hungary or Lithuania either)
*Austria (or Slovenia)
*Estonia

Last draw ... we were 4th seed and seriously drew the best team in the seeds 1 to 3 (without a shadow of a doubt!); while Lithuania and Georgia for seeds 5 and 6 were hardly much better. So it can't go any worse than last time. Hopefully we are cut some slack this time around.

It can't possibly be worse than drawing the two world cup finalists and a world cup quarter-finalist! :please:


wow, that's close to our office guess. except we have azerbaidjan and lichtenstein. iceland could be tricky.

Marla, the system Australia used to play under was blatantly unfair. They got no proper competitive games until one or two one-off lucky dip make or break ties came around.

Everyone knew in the 1990s that Australia were a very decent team; they were a better team than Iran, but the better prepared Iran side got a lucky fight back and knocked out Australia on away goals. Now, the reason this system continued in operation was because no-one wanted to give Australia a guaranteed place at the finals either. The current way is probably for that reason the best solution; though I don't quite understand why North America should get so many guaranteed places, with Oceania none.

Anyways, I still don't understand why it took so long to sort out. Fifa go out of their way to make sure the USA qualify, and we get teams like Jamaica and Trinidad as a result, why wouldn't they want to promote football in Australia?!

Ah yeah, I've got it, the USA has ten times the population! ;)

In fairness, Europe is now the biggest loser in the system. A far larger number of worthy teams will fail to qualify from Europe than elsewhere. 13 teams out of 32 for the next finals, despite the fact that Europe consistently provides the vast majority of last 16 teams. This is why I really hope UEFA will expand the size of the European championships.Yeah Calgacus, I see your point about Australia.

Actually, both Concacaf and OFC (Oceania) suffer from the lack of competition of their confederation. True the United States are now sure to qualify for all world cups, but Concacaf doesn't offer them the competition needed to really perform great in World Cup. Check Mexico for instance which qualified to nearly all World Cup and never managed to reach the quarter finals outside home.

Overall, I think Concacaf should merge with Conmebol, with 8 qualifying spots. I know that South American teams are totally against it, but outside Brazil and Argentina, I do believe other South American team would also improve in playing more regularly the US, Mexico and to a lesser extent Costa Rica (which is clearly better than some Conmebol team such as Bolivia).

The worst though is probably Oceania. This confederation only marginilizes the teams which are part of it. Considering the relative weakness of the Asian confederation, both AFC and OFC could only improve in merging to one another.

I also agree that Europe is the biggest loser of the system. Many European teams which failed to qualify to last world cup were clearly better than Togo, T&T, Saudi Arabia or Iran. But anyway, it's true that a world cup is supposed to be worldwide, so the argument holds. The outcome though is that it's harder to get through group stage at the Euro than it is at the World Cup. Nearly all group games at the Euro are at the same level as 2nd round games at the World Cup.

Yeah Calgacus, I see your point about Australia.

Actually, both Concacaf and OFC (Oceania) suffer from the lack of competition of their confederation. True the United States are now sure to qualify for all world cups, but Concacaf doesn't offer them the competition needed to really perform great in World Cup. Check Mexico for instance which qualified to nearly all World Cup and never managed to reach the quarter finals outside home.

Overall, I think Concacaf should merge with Conmebol, with 8 qualifying spots. I know that South American teams are totally against it, but outside Brazil and Argentina, I do believe other South American team would also improve in playing more regularly the US, Mexico and to a lesser extent Costa Rica (which is clearly better than some Conmebol team such as Bolivia).

The worst though is probably Oceania. This confederation only marginilizes the teams which are part of it. Considering the relative weakness of the Asian confederation, both AFC and OFC could only improve in merging to one another.

I also agree that Europe is the biggest loser of the system. Many European teams which failed to qualify to last world cup were clearly better than Togo, T&T, Saudi Arabia or Iran. But anyway, it's true that a world cup is supposed to be worldwide, so the argument holds. The outcome though is that it's harder to get through group stage at the Euro than it is at the World Cup. Nearly all group games at the Euro are at the same level as 2nd round games at the World Cup.

I totally agree that North and South America should be merged. I think Europe should get 16 teams/15 + host ... half ... that's the correct balance between quality and international balance.

A problem with an AFC and OFC merger would be if ... say ... American Samoa had to play Uzbekistan or Jordan or something. To send 20+ players from American Samoa to Tashkent is not cheap ... and would be arduous. Many of those Oceanic countries are amateur with small budgets ... though that could be sorted by dividing into regional preliminary tournaments.

Asia is very very large. Ideally, I think Asia should split into two zones, east and west, with west incorporating North Africa; thereby sub-Saharan Africa would form a separate association. True, north to south America is just as big as Asia, but much of that is the tundra filled north of Canada and the wastes of southern Argentina and all of the mainland countries are sizable with professional teams. So I'd have:

Host: 1
Europe: 15
America: 6
SS Africa 4
East Asia (with Oceania) 3
Middle East 3

That system would be fair ... and you certainly wouldn't have any joke teams. Any team that could pip Japan, South Korea or Australia would be decent; likewise, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia.

Host: 1
Europe: 15
America: 6
SS Africa 4
East Asia (with Oceania) 3
Middle East 3



I don´t know about 6 places being enough for the Americas, although I agree about merging... I mean you're going to have Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the U.S. plus whatever teams are capable of punching above their weight. For example I would consider Uruguay to be the type of team which could do well if you were to put them in Euro 2008. There are others too like Columbia etc... I'd probably lean to 7 or maybe 8 places and subtract the difference from Europe.

I don´t know about 6 places being enough for the Americas, although I agree about merging... I mean you're going to have Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the U.S. plus whatever teams are punching above their weight. For example I would consider Uruguay to be the type of team which could do well if you were to put them in Euro 2008. There are others too like Columbia etc... I'd probably lean to 7 or maybe 8 places and subtract the difference from Europe.

There are about 20 or more sides in Europe better or similar in quality than Mexico and the USA. I don't see why American teams should get easier qualifying campaigns because of their geographical location.

There are about 20 or more sides in Europe better or similar in quality than Mexico and the USA. I don't see why American teams should get easier qualifying campaigns because of their geographical location.

I don't think Mexico or USA are "great", but I do think there is some quality in the lesser South American teams. Hence my example of Uruguay, the type of team which might be better than people generally acknowledge. Perhaps I'm biased because I follow South American football more than European lately...

I don't think Mexico or USA are "great", but I do think there is some quality in the lesser South American teams. Hence my example of Uruguay, the type of team which might be better than people generally acknowledge. Perhaps I'm biased because I follow South American football more than European lately...

Well, there would be 4 places realistically available to the Uruguays, Colombias and Paraguays of this world. I mean, there only are 10 CONMEBOL teams. It's not that American football is bad ... it's good, but the number of high quality European and African sides has been increasing too. If anything, SSAfrica's might increase.

I totally agree that North and South America should be merged. I think Europe should get 16 teams/15 + host ... half ... that's the correct balance between quality and international balance.

A problem with an AFC and OFC merger would be if ... say ... American Samoa had to play Uzbekistan or Jordan or something. To send 20+ players from American Samoa to Tashkent is not cheap ... and would be arduous. Many of those Oceanic countries are amateur with small budgets ... though that could be sorted by dividing into regional preliminary tournaments.

Asia is very very large. Ideally, I think Asia should split into two zones, east and west, with west incorporating North Africa; thereby sub-Saharan Africa would form a separate association. True, north to south America is just as big as Asia, but much of that is the tundra filled north of Canada and the wastes of southern Argentina and all of the mainland countries are sizable with professional teams. So I'd have:

Host: 1
Europe: 15
America: 6
SS Africa 4
East Asia (with Oceania) 3
Middle East 3

That system would be fair ... and you certainly wouldn't have any joke teams. Any team that could pip Japan, South Korea or Australia would be decent; likewise, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia.



I agree mostly everything, except for the OFC. OFC weak? yes. OFC small? Yes, OFC represented enough? no. OFC teams already have a hard enough time with New Zealand in it and having to face 1 south american team, (wich would be either Paraguay or Uruguay or Colombia most likely). I think that a better way to divide is this:

Host: 1
Europe: 15
America: 5.5 (face of with African team)
SS Africa: 3.5 (face of with American Team)
East Asia: 3
West Asia + north Africa: 3
Oceania: 1

let's think of it this way. Europe obviously needs 15.
America: Argentina, Brazil, America, Mexico, Paraguay/Uruguay/Costa Rica +1 possible extra. 5.5 works well here.
SS Africa: Nigeria, Cameroon, South Africa, Senegal/Ivory Coast/Ghana/
East Asia: Japan, South Korea, a third Asian Nation.
West Asia and North Africa: This is where it gets hard.
Here's the list:
Iran
Iraq
Uzebekistan
Morocco
Tunisia
Egypt
Bahrain
Saudi Arabia
Kuwait
Algeria
--- How can we fit 10 very good teams into 3 spots?

and we get teams like Jamaica and Trinidad as a result,

Disagreed. Trinidad's coach was Beenhacker. Beeenhacker got trinidad into the world cup :)

Asia is very very large. Ideally, I think Asia should split into two zones, east and west, with west incorporating North Africa; thereby sub-Saharan Africa would form a separate association. True, north to south America is just as big as Asia, but much of that is the tundra filled north of Canada and the wastes of southern Argentina and all of the mainland countries are sizable with professional teams. So I'd have:

Host: 1
Europe: 15
America: 6
SS Africa 4
East Asia (with Oceania) 3
Middle East 3

That system would be fair ... and you certainly wouldn't have any joke teams. Any team that could pip Japan, South Korea or Australia would be decent; likewise, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia.

I disagree completely on the Middle East thing. Three would be far too much for that region. If you take out Israel (and even if not, they never managed to qualify in Europe, so they obviously aren't strong enough) all at least acceptable teams of that region would be Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Iran and possibly Iraq. Add a random Arab peninsula team if you like.

Three spots for that would give each of those teams a de facto 50% chance to qualify. And that although none of them is significantly better than, say, Ecuador, Belgium or Ghana, who would all have a very hard time and get nowhere close 50%.

I'd say leave Africa as Africa, combine Asia and Oceania with regional first rounds and if necessary FIFA sponsored second rounds (which all those small island nations wouldn't reach anyway, only Australia and potentially New Zealand would) and combine all the Americas.

Then make it:

Europe: 16
Africa: 6
America: 6
Asia&Oceania: 4

Hosts would be deducted from the local share.

By the way, as for the European draw, I would like:

Germany
Scotland
Northern Ireland
Lithuania
Austria
Liechtenstein

England/Scotland, N ireland and Wales in the same group would be very interesting, and this happened with the last world cup qualifers, (remeber N Ireland beating England!)


Dream Draw

Greece
ENGLAND
Belgium
Moldova
Iceland
Luxembourg

Nightare draw (ie the one that will happen!)
Germany
ENGLAND
Serbia
Macedonia
Slovenia
Estonia

Heh, why must we do this to ourselves. we post the dream draw and the nightmare draw beside one another. we are helpless to think of it any other way. the folly of football fans.

I'm of the opinion that any group England get will be bad...... UNLESS, they get the confidence back. This campaign has ruined the morale and it will require rebuilding. I think the new manager (who ever that may be) will need to get some friendlies organised and quick to get the team jelling again in time for the kick off of the qualifiers.

Northern Ireland and Scotland are hungry at the moment. written off at the start of their 2008 qualifiers they gave it their all, but England really need to just break it all up and start from the bottom. get the foundation of a team back, one that'll fight for one another and has the confidence to get going again.

I agree with merging Oceania with Asia, and North America/Caribbean with South America as a means of improving the quality at the World Cup but I don't think it goes far enough. I might be the only person in favour of internationalising the qualifying process.

The dominant reason why European teams have the best record in the World Cup - the reason why everyone is allocating about 50% of places to European sides - is that these teams play each other in competitive competitions on a near-constant basis. African and Asian teams only play against the top international teams - the Europeans and South Americans - once every 4 years. How many times have African teams of talented players imploded on the world stage due to a naivety resulting from not being used to playing competitively against the best sides? Less talented European sides are expected to fare better because they are more experienced.

Europe will still be the most represented continent due to better infrastructure, but the Asians and African teams that qualify will be more capable of challenging.

Thedrin I fully agree with you. If you let teams regularly play teams from around the world, you will begin to see less and less disparity (I believe). This has already happened in other professional sports (FIBA and the currently far from invincible United States). Europe benefits from great infrastructure and also basically having the best professional leagues in the world. Other regions would improve from increased regular competition with Europe. It's the same principle in combining the Americas.

European draw........ here we go..........

Group 1 Portugal, Sweden, Denmark, Hungary, Albania, Malta

Group 2 Greece, Israel, Switzerland, Moldova, Latvia, Luxembourg

Group 3 Czech Republic, Poland, NORTHERN IRELAND, Slovakia, Slovenia, San Marino

Group 4 Germany, Russia, Finland, WALES, Azerbaijan, Liechtenstein

Group 5 Spain, Turkey, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Armenia, Estonia

Group 6 Croatia, ENGLAND, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Andorra

Group 7 France, Romania, Serbia, Lithuania, Austria, Faroe Islands

Group 8 Italy, Bulgaria, Republic of Ireland, Cyprus, Georgia, Montenegro

Group 9 Holland, SCOTLAND, Norway, FYR Macedonia, Iceland

Holland :S

least it wasn't Italy ;)

oooh!:lol: group 6....

pity about us getting holland. the group is otherwise promising. (though i'm *still* concerned about iceland).

Well, not the worst possible group, but not the best possible.

Group 2 would have been the best ever.

Not sure what to make of this draw. No weak teams at all in our group ... though it makes it very, very possible for us to qualify ... in first place if the Dutch don't play at top form.

The Greece and Czech groups are rather weak, but it's all rather balanced for once. Portugal have gotta be careful ... they can't be their normal flakey selves in a group with Sweden and Denmark.

spot on, hitti. that would have been our dream group, too. (and probably the one we'd totally cock up!)

Scotland has a fair chance in thier group. But remember, the second places will play against each other, and there the "better" four against the "worse" four. After FIFA ranking which we all know is debateable (Switzerland was only in the third pot because we are the host for next years EC and non-competitive matches don't count for anything big in the ranking...).

But I have no right to complain, our group with Greece and Israel is certainly doable...!

It'll certainly be interesting how Croatia and England will fare with each other, the first now being the favourite... ;)

m

Group 2 is a dream group indeed :)

Greece, Israel, and Switzerland are far from the most talented teams in the world, but they do rank amongst the most over achieving teams in international football. They are all very difficult to play against and given the choice between Ireland's current group (Italy and Bulgaria) and being inserted into group 2 along side those 3 sides, I would gladly choose our current one.

Group 6 and 7 oth seem tough, and 9 will probably be a close one too. ...and group 1 also for the matter, atleast it shouldn't be impossible for Sweden to qualify, the opposition fits us but we need a few new good players, a new Ljungberg and a couple of defenders.

Group 1 Portugal, Sweden, Denmark, Hungary, Albania, Malta

Group 2 Greece, Israel, Switzerland, Moldova, Latvia, Luxembourg

Group 3 Czech Republic, Poland, NORTHERN IRELAND, Slovakia, Slovenia, San Marino

Group 4 Germany, Russia, Finland, WALES, Azerbaijan, Liechtenstein

Group 5 Spain, Turkey, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Armenia, Estonia

Group 6 Croatia, ENGLAND, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Andorra

Group 7 France, Romania, Serbia, Lithuania, Austria, Faroe Islands

Group 8 Italy, Bulgaria, Republic of Ireland, Cyprus, Georgia, Montenegro

Group 9 Holland, SCOTLAND, Norway, FYR Macedonia, Iceland

How do the playoffs for the 2nd ranked teams work?

6 teams out of 9 qualify.. right? but how?

Here's hoping that Canada can somehow qualify for the World Cup.


Aww, who am I kidding. Thats never going to happen.

Group 2 is indeed a joke. The third pot team is in my view the strongest...

Anyhow, due to that happening they are indeed rather well distributed compared with previous draws (not to mention what might happen next week...).

The German group is a rather good one. That is unless Russia for some reason suddenly get their act together. But the Russia of this qualification was one of the worst teams in that pot (besides their "group mates" Israel, I guess). Finland aren't bad but a team that should be a good opponent for Germany given their style of play. Wales shouldn't be strong enough and everyone should beat Aserbaijan and Liechtenstein.

How do the playoffs for the 2nd ranked teams work?

6 teams out of 9 qualify.. right? but how?

It's four out of nine, only 13 overall. :rolleyes: @FIFA

So the worst second placed team will be screwed and the other eight will have playoffs for the four remaining spots.

No!!!! Why Switzerland Again????

Hitro@ Azerbaijan isn't that easy nation anymore. As isn't Armenia, Georgia or Kazakstan. Those nations will rise to be competent against teams like Belgium, and then they'll be challenging to big nations as well. For example Germany.

In EURO 2008 qualifiers no team won Armenia in Jerevan. Not Portugal, Poland, Finland or Belgium. That's a rather good achievement.

Group 1: Meh. Denmark honestly aren't there best. i think it's Sweden and Portugal
Group 2: Greece qualifies. Switzerland will handle the screw ups, Isreal can be an interesting team.

Group 3: Could be worse! It's Czech and Poland. Northern Ireland will take points and at the end will likely come 3rd.

Group 4: Tough. Germany for sure. Finland vs Russia.

Group 5: HONESTLY THE HARDEST GROUP EVER!!!!
A flaky Spanish side, a strong Turkish side, a belgium side that will be 3x better by 2009, a decent bosnian side, a point stealing Armenian side (look at group a's results...) and a decent estonian side.

Group 6: LOL LOL LOL Croats and English again???

Group 7: Unlucky serbia... France and either Romania or Serbia.

Group 8: Tied with group 5. THIS IS ALSO INCREDIBALY HARD!!!
a STRONG italian side, Decent Bulgarians, Flaky Irish, Point Stealing Georgia (georgia 2-0 scotland....) an ok cyprus side(think greece combined with turkey :D ) plus a mysterious montengro. Montenegro is in pot F because there a new nation with little points. BUT they'll probably be as strong as Bosnia. Group 8 is very unlucky to get Montenegro instead of azerbaijan or something.

Group 9: Dutch, Scots and Norway. What else can you say?

all in all, Group 8 and group 5 are the two "Group of Deaths"

Hitro@ Azerbaijan isn't that easy nation anymore. As isn't Armenia, Georgia or Kazakstan. Those nations will rise to be competent against teams like Belgium, and then they'll be challenging to big nations as well. For example Germany.

In EURO 2008 qualifiers no team won Armenia in Jerevan. Not Portugal, Poland, Finland or Belgium. That's a rather good achievement.

And the Georgia 2 - 0 Scotland to. It Tbilisi's i believe.

might be the right chance for Israel

So the worst second placed team will be screwed and the other eight will have playoffs for the four remaining spots.

This seems like a very bad compromise although rewarding the worst second placed team with a qualifier against a team from another continent might have made it more beneficial to be the worst second best team.

No!!!! Why Switzerland Again????

So, you are from Israel? (I'd say?) Might I ask why you are so terrified by us? ;)

btw. I don't see Greece as the clear victor of group 2, I just don't see why they should, but some posters in here think so?

But of course, looking at the group, this is the chance to be for once directly qualified or - for Israel - to be qualified for a first time...

All in all, it is difficult to assess the team now, as the it is some times until the games will be played...

m

So, you are from Israel? (I'd say?) Might I ask why you are so terrified by us? ;)

btw. I don't see Greece as the clear victor of group 2, I just don't see why they should, but some posters in here think so?

But of course, looking at the group, this is the chance to be for once directly qualified or - for Israel - to be qualified for a first time...

All in all, it is difficult to assess the team now, as the it is some times until the games will be played...

m

Doesn't matter... Greece will likely be the winner of group 2. (comming in 1st) Isreal or Switzerland will come in 2nd and will either be eliminated straight away, or face some teams on the playoffs. And switzerland/isreal will likely not win against england/scotland/poland/sweden etc.

You have no idea, do you? Switzerland beat Turkey last time in these barrages... ;) We had a pretty good WC in '06 and have been continously at the world or European Cup since '04. We would've been in pot 2 if we weren't host for the euro (which makes you drop several places). And as we all know that friendlies are no good in determinating the strength of a team, we cannot assess Switzerland right now (or not we as amateurs). Btw. We were better than Poland at the WC06 ;) (being a group winner rather than third...)

As for Israel, I think they have shown that they are not to be underestimated in the EC Qualifications. Of course, they are no big team, but they can have their exploits.

As for Greece, what have they actually done in the last years since their '04 victory that supports that claim? Not qualifying for the WC? Ok, you can say that they won their quali group for the EC '08 with a "big" lead. But that doesn't make them the clear winner...

Don't underestimate us, really. Or rather, please do.

EDIT: And btw. you haven't brought up a single argument why you think Greece will win big time...

I think the draw has been pretty decent. Except for group 2 and 9, they are all even. Now is the time for Israel and Scotland to qualify.
By the way, I think Greece is highly overrated and should come in at 3rd spot in group 2. (At least that's what I hope for).

The German group seems very boring to me...

You have no idea, do you? Switzerland beat Turkey last time in these barrages... ;) We had a pretty good WC in '06 and have been continously at the world or European Cup since '04. We would've been in pot 2 if we weren't host for the euro (which makes you drop several places). And as we all know that friendlies are no good in determinating the strength of a team, we cannot assess Switzerland right now (or not we as amateurs). Btw. We were better than Poland at the WC06 ;) (being a group winner rather than third...)

As for Israel, I think they have shown that they are not to be underestimated in the EC Qualifications. Of course, they are no big team, but they can have their exploits.

As for Greece, what have they actually done in the last years since their '04 victory that supports that claim? Not qualifying for the WC? Ok, you can say that they won their quali group for the EC '08 with a "big" lead. But that doesn't make them the clear winner...

Don't underestimate us, really. Or rather, please do.

EDIT: And btw. you haven't brought up a single argument why you think Greece will win big time...
oh dear... How i hate to put an "imo" tag in my posts...

about the poland argument, i agree we sucked big time then, dropping all the way down to the 50's in the fifa rankings... But it's different now. Our team has improved tremendously over the last year, and i can't even imagine how good we could be by 2009.

How about we make a quick look at the group and try to see what might the result at the end might be? Of course teams can always screw up... but let's say they didn't in this prediction:

18 points for Greece from beating Moldova, Latvia and Luxembourg twice.
18 points to Switzerland from beating Moldova, Latvia and Luxembourg twice.
18 points to Israel from beating Moldova, Latvia and Luxembourg twice.
from there, Greece will have a hard time playing Israel but still come out on top. probably in a game ending in 1-0 or 3-2 for Greece. 6 points to Greece. greece has 24. Switzerland plays Israel. I'm not sure what the outcome might be. possibly 1 win, 1 draw, or 2 wins (i don't think switzerland will lose twice or lose ounce and tie) getting 22 points or 24 points. Greece plays Switzerland. Greece wins twice. they have 30 points. Greece Tie twice. 26 points to greece, Switzerland either 24 or 26 points. Greece win ounce, tie ounce. 28 points for greece, 25 or 23 points for switzerland. Greece loses ounce, Ties ounce. 25 points for greece, and either 23 or 25 points for switzerland. Greece loses twice, (not sure of that happening...) greece 24 points, switzerland either 30 points or 28 points.

-Remember, that is only my prediction, not including screw ups made by the teams, no mistakes, and just possible outcomes.-
Who knows how different it'd be if greece loses to Latvia or something...

in all of those outcomes, Greece came first 4 times, swtizerland 2. although that list i made above is completely stupid and a waste of a half an hour... And i probably the most innacurate thing ever.... :lol:

Oh and btw, i never said switzerland was a bad team. There's a reason it's in Pot C. :P

I'm from Canada, actually, but yes I'm talking about Israel.

Its just that in 2006 we would have qualified over switzerland if we had scored ONE goal against France (and if im not mistaken we even got one not count too, though I might just be imagining this), so I kind of dont want to lose to switzerland again.

The good thing about group 2 is that it does not have any super team. Both Switzerland and Israel are average teams, and Greece as well. However on paper it would seem (to me, and i am no expert) that Greece is the favourite here.
But we will see anyway ;)

Not to take anything away from Greece, but Group 2 is the weakest for sure.

I think Poland got a really good draw.. Hosting the czechs will be interesting for sure.

Mitsho:
You have no idea, do you? Switzerland beat Turkey last time in these barrages... We had a pretty good WC in '06 and have been continously at the world or European Cup since '04. We would've been in pot 2 if we weren't host for the euro (which makes you drop several places). And as we all know that friendlies are no good in determinating the strength of a team, we cannot assess Switzerland right now (or not we as amateurs). Btw. We were better than Poland at the WC06 (being a group winner rather than third...)

As for Israel, I think they have shown that they are not to be underestimated in the EC Qualifications. Of course, they are no big team, but they can have their exploits.

As for Greece, what have they actually done in the last years since their '04 victory that supports that claim? Not qualifying for the WC? Ok, you can say that they won their quali group for the EC '08 with a "big" lead. But that doesn't make them the clear winner...

Don't underestimate us, really. Or rather, please do.

EDIT: And btw. you haven't brought up a single argument why you think Greece will win big time...

I agree with most of this and that, if I were forced to choose, I would select Greece as the third place team.

You don't give Israel enough credit. They've shown that they're not to be underestimated in the qualifiers for the last World Cup (where they were in contention for qualification and made life extremely difficult for there more illustrious opponents).

Poland should qualify easily. They have one of the most straight forward groups with some extremely weak opposition. I was dissapointed to find out that Beenhacker has taken control of that team since it means it's unlikely that he'll take on the Ireland job.

Here is the draw for Asia, since that is what Australia is in.

Group 1 Australia, China, Iraq, Qatar
Group 2 Japan, Bahrain, Oman Thailand
Group 3 S Korea, N Korea, Jordan, Turkmenistan
Group 4 Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan. Lebanon, Singapore
Group 5 Iran, Kuwait, UAE, Syria

Now Australia has drawn the group of death with four of the top ten Asian teams in that section of the Draw. Considering that this group has the current Asian champions, the largest nation, this group will not be easy for Australia to get past. You would expect all the other big nations to qualify. Japan and Bahrain should qualify from that group. You would expect the two Koreas to advance, SA and Uzbeks and Iran should qualify, but I do not know which team will join Iran from that group into the forth round. From there the top two from each group goes into a pot and they will be split into two groups of five and the top two from each group will qualify for the WC and the two 3rd place teams face off to have the right to face New Zealand, the most likely winner of Oceania.

well, this qualifiers will be very hard, but France have some good chance to beat the other teams in the groups. (and we will see our good feroans friends once again, hoping to get there much easier than last time.)

Well groups are very homogenous even if number 2 seems easier (but don't underestimate switzerland and Greece, France learn that in Euro 2004 and during the qualifiers for WC). Good luck for Scotland in group 9!!!

What bothers me is the rules for "worst" second place. Just an example: Russia wouldn't have qualified for Euro in a group with Croatia, England and Israel. Even if Russia isn't the most beautifull team in Europe, i find their performance far more impressive and deserving a place in the tournament than, say, Germany in their group...

But you got to find a simple rule to make the qualifiers...

I think the group that had Greece in it was always going to be thought of as 'easy', but that's mainly due to Greeces standings of being the worst of the best (going by positioning, not by skill). It's now up to Greece to show that it's not a case of they won by fluke and see how they can handle being one of the top seeds.

I need to go back and talk about the Croatia/England thing here. People are talkinga bout how they're going to get revenge and how England will qualify this time but isn't this exactly the type of thinking, that it's God given that they'll qualify that set them up for failure last time?

and I had to laugh at the comment from Michael Owen today that 'not one Croatian player would make it into the England team' I'm sorry Michael but stop being a baby. If the Croatians were that bad they wouldn't have kicked your arse would they?

England have a hard group, but I've said it before and I'll say it now, if they can get some bond between the players, they'll do fine.

I'm quite excited about playing the Netherlands, mainly due to the prospect of an away trip to Amsterdam, woooo :)

I noticed that there's a Korean derby. Anyone think that game'll be heated?

edit:

found this comment and thought it warranted an edit-

I think the draw is rigged. Secretly UEFA/FIFA are gutted about England not making Euro 2008 so have 'sorted' an easy draw.

England make too much money for FIFA/UEFA these days to not be included in the World Cup

Inside UEFA are gutted about Euro 2008. FIFA wont let England not qualify for the World Cup.


Come on everyone, get your tinfoil hats out, thar's a conspiracy 'afoot ;)

and I had to laugh at the comment from Michael Owen today that 'not one Croatian player would make it into the England team' I'm sorry Michael but stop being a baby. If the Croatians were that bad they wouldn't have kicked your arse would they?
he said that? :lol: well, actually he's probably right....which might be the reason why england got eliminated :mischief:

as for our draw: we certainly got the easiest possible opponents from pot 1&2, what we'll make of it remains to be seen. I'd say that any of the three teams can easily be on top in the end (but of course I hope it's us :) )
one thing that frightens me a bit is that all opponents are deemed 'solvable' which basically means that we'll be expected to win. Our team usually does best against opponents that are deemed very hard, where even a point can be seen as lucky.
I know friendlies don't mean much but it's kinda telling that we played best against the 'hard teams' (tie against argentina, beat the netherlands) and played utter crap against teams where we were expected to win (Japan, USA, Nigeria) :sad:

I expected Greece and Switzerland,but sadly we did not become them.
We have an easy group.We have to win all matches.

Group 3 and 7 can be interesting.:)

Israle hasa fair chance to finally qualify. The last 2 or 3 qualification rounds showed Israel being dealt with a few strong opponents. This should really be their opportunity!

Not sure what to make of this draw. No weak teams at all in our group ... though it makes it very, very possible for us to qualify ... in first place if the Dutch don't play at top form.

Even when the Dutch don't play at top form, Scotland will be sent home with 0 points :) .

We have an easy group.We have to win all matches.

It is an easy group, but we are not favourites...

^^Sure we are.If after Euro 08 the manager resigns.Otherwise you are right.:)

who's we? :p Turkey?

Iran should qualify, but I do not know which team will join Iran from that group into the forth round.

Pretty obvious... Kuwait. Kuwait imo is the best team between the 3.

Hmm I'm not quite sure what happened there.

I meant to say that Poland isn't favourite to win the group... but that much is obvious, I think. Either way, I say we have a good chance of destroying the czechs at home and tying away.

Even when the Dutch don't play at top form, Scotland will be sent home with 0 points :) .

Let me rephrase that ... if Scotland avoid key injuries and play well, we can top that group. As well as messing up against us, the hope is that you mess up in the other games too. ;)

BTW, you've gotta laugh at Michael Owen. What a bitter loser. :lol: Ironically, I doubt Owen would have gotten into the Croation team these days ... the starting lineup at least. Eduardo is a better player. Not sure Owen is even as good as Olić in the current age.

For some reason, I'm just loving that England got knocked out. I think it's that kinda thing that does it, since I'm not in any way an Anglophobe. ;)

Owen's a joke to be honest. Good player who can score goals when needed but the whole idea he's annoyed at Newcastle because they're kicking up fuss about him getting injured playing for England and seeking compensation..... wtf? they pay your wages pall. If someone came up and broke the leg of one of your horses would you be pissed? aye you would. shut up and stick to football.

I think that's the hardest group England's had in a while, Croatia and Ukraine, both teams who can punch above their weight when need be, they really will need to get down and just kick their arse. A few results, big results, and they should get their confidence back, they just gotta get it back soon...

Group 7 France, Romania, Serbia, Lithuania, Austria, Faroe Islands


Hard group as always. At least we can beat Faroe Islands :) , maybe some draws with favourites at home also. France will be probably #1, though Romania and Serbia are also very good. It will be interesting to see France in Lithuania.

who's we? :p Turkey?


I thought Warpus is turkish:)

He is Polish, who is living in North America, I think in Canada.

He is Polish, who is living in North America, I think in Canada.

i thought he lived in Gdansk for some reason....

I think he lives in America

He's Kanatian (though probably not Kanata, I dont think ANYONE lives in kanata.)

Group 1 Portugal, Sweden, Denmark, Hungary, Albania, Malta

Group 2 Greece, Israel, Switzerland, Moldova, Latvia, Luxembourg

Group 3 Czech Republic, Poland, NORTHERN IRELAND, Slovakia, Slovenia, San Marino

Group 4 Germany, Russia, Finland, WALES, Azerbaijan, Liechtenstein

Group 5 Spain, Turkey, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Armenia, Estonia

Group 6 Croatia, ENGLAND, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Andorra

Group 7 France, Romania, Serbia, Lithuania, Austria, Faroe Islands

Group 8 Italy, Bulgaria, Republic of Ireland, Cyprus, Georgia, Montenegro

Group 9 Holland, SCOTLAND, Norway, FYR Macedonia, Iceland





Group 1. Tight group, but i expect Portugal first Sweden second Denmark third, but Sweden could easily finish first depending on results

Group 2. I think Israel will make it at least to the play offs, if not the finals, because they only lost to Croatia in the last few years (last team before Croatia to beat them at home was France). I think Greece will probably make it as well, because they did have a good qualifying campagin

Group 3. A nice tough group for N Ireland which they will relish, although i do expect them to fall short, they might just pull it off! Czech Republic are the best team there and Poland are pretty solid as well so they will most likey finish first and second

Group 4. Germany, Russia, don't really see any other teams pulling off a shock.

Group 5 Spain Turkey, again i don't expect any shocks here

Group 6 Not the best we could have had, but no where near the worst we could have had. On the current climate i would expect England to reach the playoffs and Croatia to win the group once again, but we are certainly capable, with the right manager and players of winning the group and winning it well, hopefully! If we underesmate our teams in the group, then Ukraine could take it away from us, we just haveto learn our lessons from this year.

Group 7 France to win group, Romania most likey to take second, but Serbia are capable of taking second as well

Group 8 Italy win, Ireland and Bulgaria to fight for the playoff place

Group 9 Holland should win but Scotland could easily win the group, if they keep their current form up and win the games that they should win.

Oh well, what can I say? Maybe we can start looking forward to 2012 or 2014...? :lol:

At least we will have a better for the next qualification round as our current team has an average age of about 23

Joe Harker@ What about Finland in Group 4? We were really close to qualifying in the EC qualifications, and IMO that group was harder than this one.

An easy qualification campaign from the best team of the competition , i predict we climb to the first position of group two with ease.

yeah...all hail moldova, conquerors of group 2!!!

Group 2. I think Israel will make it at least to the play offs, if not the finals, because they only lost to Croatia in the last few years (last team before Croatia to beat them at home was France). I think Greece will probably make it as well, because they did have a good qualifying campagin

Israel lost 3-0 to England recently and they were terrible in that match. Switzerland would be my prediction for top spot.

I believe he meant at home.

Israel's form in recent qualification tournaments has been excellent and, while Greece and Switzerland have also built up very capable sides of late, Israel would be the team I expect to do best.

I just hope youre right.

We have a habit of creating diplomatic incidents revolving around Football. First there was that Ghana-Egypt one about the Israeli flag, then the English-Russian one, and a few others.

What incidents?

I think he lives in America

Never!

Yeah I was born in Poland, lived in Germany for a while, now Canada.
Never lived in Gdansk - but I did go there once.. and IMO.. most beautiful city in the world. at least the old town!

In any case, I think we should wait until after Euro 2008 to start making predictions for WC qualifying.

Sure, it's easy to pick out the favourites, but there will be plenty of new young players entering the scene, new managers, etc.

Joe Harker@ What about Finland in Group 4? We were really close to qualifying in the EC qualifications, and IMO that group was harder than this one.

Finland are one of those teams that will have to punch above their weight to qualify, Russia i think have just enough to fend off any finnish challenge, but if they make a hash of it, then there is no reason why finland couldn't take the play-offs, it just seems to me to be unlikey, i hope i am wrong though!

Israel lost 3-0 to England recently and they were terrible in that match. Switzerland would be my prediction for top spot.

i meant that Irsael have a excellant home record, Greece won their EC group quite comfortable as well, so at the moment, unless Switzterland manage to get 3-4 points off both Greece and Irsael, i don't think they will be strong enough.

hmm, i was really surprised seeing israel in pot 2 of the seeds. how did they manage to do that without qualifying for one of the last cups?

but anyway, i dont see much of a struggling for the swiss team. they played on a high niveau for at least the last 6 years, have an excellent youth programme which pays off and might gather some very positive experiences from their home ec. i think they rather contending with greece for the top spot of the group than struggling with israel for the qualification spot.

Kalif:
hmm, i was really surprised seeing israel in pot 2 of the seeds. how did they manage to do that without qualifying for one of the last cups?

I can't speak for Israel but Ireland were in the first seed pot for the 2004 European Championship qualifying campaign despite only qualifying once, for the 2002 World Cup, in the 4 previous qualifying campaigns. Reason: the seeds were based on results in qualifying campaigns for the 3 previous Summer tournaments. Finishing second in each of the three previous campaigns was enough to see them get a first seed spot.

In short, I'm not at all surprised that Israel have gotten a second seed spot.

From an Australian perspective drawing China and Iraq sucks, it's the Asian group of death. Luckily, though, the qualification path is quite forgiving... we just need to go top two in a 4-team pool in order to qualify for a second round robin stage.

I really hope that Iraq qualifies. They deserve it more than China.

Why?
.

well first of all they won the AFC Championship. That is good enough imo to get you qualified.

England + Luiz Felipe Scollari = 2010 champion.

But I'm thinking about 2014. :D

Saturday 6 September 2008 Macedonia (a)

Wednesday 10 September 2008 Iceland (a)

Saturday 11 October 2008 Norway (h)

Saturday 28 March 2009 Holland (a)

Wednesday 1 April 2009 Iceland (h)

Wednesday 19 August 2009 Norway (a)

Saturday 5 September 2009 Macedonia (h)

Wednesday 9 September 2009 Holland (h)


That's the Scotland schedule for 2010 qualifiers. Holland at home last game, thanks guys, give us another nail biter :(

I'm gonna try to go to the Iceland and Norway Games!!! WOOOOOO SCOTLAND!!!

*cough* heh erm... sorry lost it for a bit there, anyway. How's everyone else's schedules coming on? anyone planning away games?

Group 7:

2008-09-06
Austria v France

2008-09-06
Romania a v Lithuania

2008-09-06
Serbia v Faroe Islands

2008-09-10
Lithuania v Austria

2008-09-10
Faroe Islands v Romania

2008-09-10
France v Serbia

2008-10-11
Faroe Islands v Austria

2008-10-11
Romania v France

2008-10-11
Serbia v Lithuania

2008-10-15
Austria v Serbia

2008-10-15
Lithuania v Faroe Islands

2009-03-28
Romania v Serbia

2009-03-28
Lithuania v France

2009-04-01
Austria v Romania

2009-04-01
France v Lithuania

2009-06-06
Serbia v Austria

2009-06-06
Lithuania v Romania

2009-06-10
Faroe Islands v Serbia

2009-08-19
Faroe Islands v France

2009-09-05
Austria v Faroe Islands

2009-09-05
France v Romania

2009-09-09
Romania v Austria

2009-09-09
Serbia v France

2009-09-09
Faroe Islands v Lithuania

2009-10-10
Austria v Lithuania

2009-10-10
Serbia v Romania

2009-10-10
France v Faroe Islands

2009-10-14
France v Austria

2009-10-14
Lithuania v Serbia

2009-10-14
Romania v Faroe Islands