The draw for the WC 2006 in Germany has just ended and you can see all the groups here (http://livedraw.fifacom.deltatre.it/drawE_content.html).
We got the easiest group :D together with the groups of England and Italy. The Netherlands have the worst group :D They paired with Romania, Finland and... the Czech Republic.

The European groups:

Group 1: Czech Republic, Netherlands, Romania, Finland, Macedonia, Armenia, Andorra

Group 2: Turkey, Denmark, Greece, Ukraine, Georgia, Albania, Kazakhstan

Group 3: Portugal, Russia, Slovakia, Latvia, Estonia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg

Group 4: France, Rep. Ireland, Switzerland, Israel, Cyprus, Faroe Islands

Group 5: Italy, Slovenia, Scotland, Norway, Belarus, Moldova

Group 6: England, Poland, Austria, Wales, Northern Ireland, Azerbaijan

Group 7: Spain, Belgium, Serbia-Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Lithuania, San Marino

Group 8: Sweden, Croatia, Bulgaria, Iceland, Hungary, Malta

The group of Turkey promises to be fun too. :D

The winners of each qualify plus the 2 best runners-up, and the remaining runners-up go for a play-off.

The seedings were the exact same ones of the Euro draw, so I found out that under that scheme, Portugal was still the 2nd best behind France, and ahead of the swedes and the czechs.

The other groups:

ASIA
Group 1: Iran, Qatar, Jordan, Laos
Group 2: Uzbekistan, Iraq, Palestine, Chinese Taipei
Group 3: Japan, Oman, India, Singapore
Group 4: China, Kuwait, Malaysia, Hong Kong
Group 5: United Arab Emirates, Thailand, Yemen, North Korea
Group 6: Bahrain, Syria, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan
Group 7: South Korea, Lebanon, Vietnam, Maldives
Group 8: Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkmenistan, Sri Lanka

OSEANIA:
Group 1: Tahiti, Solomon Islands, New Caledonia, Tonga, Cook Islands
Group 2: Fiji, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, American Samoa
(Australia and New Zealand are automatically qualified for the next round)

NORTH, CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN (sp?)
Grenada or Guyana v USA
Bermunda or Montserrat v El Salvador
Haiti or Turks Caicos Island v Jamaica
British Virgin Islands or St. Lucia v Panama
Cayman Islands or Cuba v Costa Rica
Aruba or Surinam v Guatemala
Antiuga og Barbuda or Netherlands Antilles v Honduras
Canada v Belize
Dominica or Bahamas v Mexico
US Virgin Islands or St. Kitts & Nevis v Barbados
Dominican Republic or Anguilla v Trinidad and Tobago
Nicaragua v St. Vincent & Grenadines

AFRICA
Group 1: Senegal, Mali, Zambia, Togo, Liberia, Congo-Brazzaville
Group 2: South Africa, DR Kongo-Kinshasa, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Uganda, Cape Verde
Group 3: Cameroon, Egypt, Ivory Coast, Libya, Sudan, Benin
Group 4: Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Algeria, Angola, Gabon, Rwanda
Group 5: Tunisia, Morocco, Kenya, Guinea, Malawi, Botswana.

I think Norway should be able to get second place in our group. It'll be a tough fight with Slovenia, I think Scotland are too weak, but that could change (optimistic outlook here :))

Originally posted by MCdread
The European groups:

Group 6: England, Poland, Austria, Wales, Northern Ireland, Azerbaijan



Could Wales qualify for a major tournement after over 50 years they maybe able to get to 2nd

In Italy's gruop, Norway and Scotland are quite tricky..

Slovenia and Belarus too, Inter. Slovenia always do better than you think, Belarus are hard to beat at home. Moldova is a walker. I think Scotland will be fourth behind Norway, they were less than impressive in their Euro group, in the play-off, and in a friendly against Norway in August.

My predictions for Group 6:

1) Italy, 2) Slovenia, 3) Norway, 4) Scotland, 5) Belarus, 6) Moldova.

Thanks for overestimating us. Just what we need...wait...that was underestimating...blast.

Originally posted by Suppersalmon
Could Wales qualify for a major tournement after over 50 years they maybe able to get to 2nd

Wales could be 2nd only if England finishes on 3rd place, because we won't be any lower than 2nd. :D:cool:

[cough] Latvia [end of cough]

NORTH, CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN
Grenada or Guyana v USA


SWEET!!! We've a bit of history with those Grenadians. :ar15:


BTW, what the hell is a South American nation doing in CONCACAF. And there is a second, Suriname.

The other South American nations don't want them, on account of them being too poor.

What's an American doing being interested in men's soccer (thought I'd never use that word)?

The Czech Republic, again... :ack:

Originally posted by MCdread


Group 2: Turkey, Denmark, Greece, Ukraine, Georgia, Albania, Kazakhstan

The group of Turkey promises to be fun too. :D



Yes other countries will have great fun when they see ud beatem by Kazakhstan and Albania(I am not mentioning Greece factor).:) But of course that will happen if current manager does not resign.

I think Group 6 would be more fun if Scotland were drawn to it. :p

Our group sucks :(

Group 6: England, Poland, Austria, Wales, Northern Ireland, Azerbaijan

jeriko one
I think Group 6 would be more fun if Scotland were drawn to it

And even better if Ireland was drawn in it too. (Could theoretically have happened).

England’s group looks OKish and we ought to qualify. “Not Poland again” I thought (we play them sooooo often). Still, we usually beat them so I can’t complain too much. :)

I worry about the potential hooligan problems playing Wales and of course England playing in Belfast :eek: Will that happen? Will they have to play at a neutral ground?

Man we gotta have the toughest group in this qualification :S

Group 1:
Czech Republic ---> AGAIN???!!!
Netherlands ---> they rock :p
Romania ---> 3rd pot? WTF! Chivu, Lobont...says enough
Finland ---> keep your eyes open or you're dead...Litmanen, Nurmela, Forssell, Hyypia, Pasanen...
Macedonia ---> hmmm....England?
Armenia ---> that's not even Europe!
Andorra ---> they can still bring up 11 players ay?

No France or Italy... So why complain?

I like our group.

Hey our group is not that easy. I would have prefered France's

Originally posted by Hitro
I like our group.

You should. If you don't qualify the world must go upside down. :p

You never know...

well, actually they're already qualified. It's just that if they're not present on the WC, it must be because of some war or something. :p

Although then again there probably wouldn't be a world cup either in that situation...

yes exactly. No Germany, no world cup. :goodjob:

Originally posted by Zwelgje
The Czech Republic, again... :ack:

Indeed :aargh:.

Against Romania should be interesting, though IIRC we beat them comprehensively the last time we played (before Euro 2000 I think ?). Finland is going to be tough too, though I'm not sure Litmanen is going to continue as an international by the time the matches start.

I'm also wondering which of the current crop of Dutch internationals are going into internatonal retirement after Euro 2004 - the Dutch team may not be as strong then as it is/should be now.

De Boer, Hooijdonk, Bosvelt....those type of guys. They're time has come.

My opinion is: for all that weren't in position 1 (I mean in the best quality footy nation in this draw) - only important thing is not to be in group with Italia, England (and Germany, 'tho not this time) becouse that mean one place for final turnament 100% occupy!
ALL the rest of solution are more or less with good chance for qualify, if the Country (anyone) is in first 3 or 4 quality group.
Well...it's more fact than my jugment :p

Hmm well that post left me confused...

Originally posted by Håkon
Slovenia and Belarus too, Inter. Slovenia always do better than you think, Belarus are hard to beat at home. Moldova is a walker. I think Scotland will be fourth behind Norway, they were less than impressive in their Euro group, in the play-off, and in a friendly against Norway in August.

My predictions for Group 6:

1) Italy, 2) Slovenia, 3) Norway, 4) Scotland, 5) Belarus, 6) Moldova.



Norway weren't exactly great in that match either. I mean, they came across one of the worst defences in northern Europe, and failed to score :eek:

Originally posted by Dell19
Hmm well that post left me confused...

Don't know what is confusing?

Let me clear.

England, Italy and Germany were everytime at final turnament. They are by far the best Foot.Nat.Team no matter what are opinion of some people on this site or alse (you may like 'em or not but that another question). So they are very quality and very "stable" in that quality (hope I choose the right word) so I don't see this three, in this case two, team not qualify for this tournament which mean in those group will be very hard to go further than in the others.

Beside that expiriance from national team of my country were like that. We qualify several times against France or Spain etc. as a leaders in qualification but I can not remmember that we do such thing among those three teams or at least we qualified both.
I can not imagine that they will be fail right now for the first time.
Thats why I think the group with England and Italy are the tuffest of all.
On the other hand second example for my statment are all other group: G2 -> All four first team have the same chance to succssead Tur. Den. Gre. Ukr. ! And same for others non Ita. or Eng. group.

Is that clear now dell :) ?

And excuse me if I'm wrong.

Ok that explains it now, I wasn't sure what you meant in your second paragraph...

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
well, actually they're already qualified. It's just that if they're not present on the WC, it must be because of some war or something. :p

Hm. Most of the times there is no WC when Germany is at war.
Anyway, czech republic AGAIN! I think the dutch and czech team are fairly even, so I'm not complaining... but what are the odds that you get them 3 times in a row? Disturbing...

Its odd because even with the teams being in separate pots, there is no real reason for them to be drawn together unless there is a far more complex drawing system where teams are drawn together on ability... So you must just be unlucky...

Actually, there was. England, Italy, France and Spain weren't allowed to be in groups of seven teams, they had to be in groups of six. Think it's due to these nations having extremely good club teams, so players won't get overworked. Anyway, it caused Norway to get Italy instead of Turkey (I think)...and when the Netherlands were drawn into group 1, they had 1/4 of a chance of drawing the Czechs, instead of 1/8 as it should have been. However, had they been drawn into groups 4-8, they'd be almost certain to draw either France, Italy or Spain - I dunno what you'd prefer :)

Ah so that goes so far in explaining why some teams do tend to be drawn together quite often.

I think this system was new for this World Cup...I've never heard of it before, and neither had the TV commentators, I just figured it out off the Internet afterwards :)

It's a stupid system.
A large portion of the Dutch players plays abroad in those heavy competitions. Same goes for quite some other smaller countries. Blah...

exactly, but the UEFA never makes up a good system....

Hey, actually, it doesn't put anybody at a disadvantage - it just rigs the draw a bit more. But, considering that Groups 1, 2, 3 were just as likely to contain more "difficult" teams than Groups 4,5,6,7,8 it doesn't give these four teams (ENG, ITA, FRA, ESP) an unfair advantage.

well, they have to play less games

Is that an advantage? It's just against Andorra, San Marino or Luxembourg anyway - you could put out RBC and win that game.

:lol: probably

still, why would they do something like what they did...

That is indeed the question. It doesn't make much sense, it just made the draw possibilities a bit more obvious once the first six pots were completed.

Well, however they were drawn, it will be interesting to see some of the "local" rivarly matchups.

Group 2 : Turkey-Greece :eek:
Ukraine-Georgia-Kazhakstan

Group 3 : Latvia-Estonia
Luxemborg-Liechtenstein :lol:

Group 6 : England-Wales-N.Ireland go hooligans go

Group 7 : Serb-Montenegro v. Bosnia-Herz :mad: :eek:


Of course, as an American, I feel sorry for our poor brothers to the north. Home-Away v. Belze (shouldn't be too rough) but then dumped into a group with Honduras, Guatemala and Costa Rica !!! 4 decent teams, only 2 can advance.
If the FIFA rankings are to be believed :rolleyes: that means this group is actually tougher than some of the Euro groups.

Originally posted by Alone

England, Italy and Germany were everytime at final turnament. They are by far the best Foot.Nat.Team no matter what are opinion of some people on this site or alse (you may like 'em or not but that another question). So they are very quality and very "stable" in that quality (hope I choose the right word) so I don't see this three, in this case two, team not qualify for this tournament which mean in those group will be very hard to go further than in the others.


:hmm: Italy only failed to qualify in 58 and Germany qualified everytime they entered the tournament (in 30 they didn't play and in 50 they were still in a mess cause of WWII), but England? cough, WC 94, cough; cough, seventies, cough. Not to mention the Euro... Belgium has had a better record than England in last 25 years.

Anyway, regarding the groups with seven teams, I'm quite happy that we were drawn into one, cause that means more official matches and even if they are against Liechtenstein and Luxemburg, it is still a good oportunity to improve the team... I hope...

well...Belgium did not manage to qualify for a lot of euro's....the only reason they were there in 2000 is because they were qualified automatically.

The world cup is a different story though. They do a better job on those. :)

Bye Bye WC2006.
Israel sucks.
The only WC we'll ever get to never smells too good.

Originally posted by MCdread


:hmm: Italy only failed to qualify in 58 and Germany qualified everytime they entered the tournament (in 30 they didn't play and in 50 they were still in a mess cause of WWII), but England? cough, WC 94, cough; cough, seventies, cough. Not to mention the Euro... Belgium has had a better record than England in last 25 years.

...

I got your point about England, but I still standing on my words. The only change is almost always not always and they are with Italy "must" in future WCs before than Spain, France, Chehs etc. I can easely see Belgium and Serbia&M. before Spain in Germany. I cannot see Wales and N.Ireland insted of England. I don't say that Spain is not goin, to qualify but I can easely imagine as possibile and oposite for England.

PS I don't see the reason for France and Spain to be protected becouse of theres clubs (in this draw) (if that is the reason, if I understand correct) I think much more national team player from Chehs or Holland or Portugal etc. are involved in very hard competition than some of those nation. Example: How many Spanish national team player are in Barselona or Real and how many from others country. Well it's all not important at all, those are just some of my thoughts about this issue. Tho some says it's most immportant unessential thing in the world (football).

well, at least Israel isn't like Andorra

Damn, we have to play 5th best S.American side.. More bull crap!! After already robbing us of a spot.

I'd like to see Oceania combined in Asia, if they aren't going to treat us as a real zone.... Cos after playing the llikes of Tahiti, Fiji, NZ to come up against a side from S.America which has played 18 tough internationals is total b.s ... we need gaming experience and cohersion...

Those clubs better let our lads come out and play - but no doubt they won't... No wonder Soccer is so FUBAR in this country

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
well, at least Israel isn't like Andorra

At least Andorra is next to Georgia and Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan surely wins any award of the most non European country playing in the Euro qualifiers. Now I wonder if this is something to do with making sure that the European qualifying groups have the most teams so that in the future they can justify having the most WC qualifying places.

Kazakhstan is a member of UEFA because:

UEFA Congress: Kazakhstan joins UEFA
Thursday, 25 April 2002
Kazakhstan has been admitted as UEFA's 52nd member association. The former Soviet republic joined the European confederation at the XXVI Ordinary UEFA Congress in Stockholm.

Executive Committee's recommendation
Delegates from Europe's national football associations approved a recommendation by UEFA's Executive Committee to bring Kazakhstan into the European football family.

Status report
The Executive Committee announced its support for Kazakhstan's request for entry into the European football union last December, after studying a status report produced by UEFA officials who visited Kazakhstan. The Football Association of the Republic of Kazakhstan withdrew from the Asian Football Confederation in June last year

Central Asia
Kazakhstan is situated in central Asia and is the second largest of the former Soviet republics, covering 2,724,900sq km. It borders five countries - China, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Russia - and has a population of 14 million.

Glad to be back
Association president Rakhat Aliyev told uefa.com: "I am very happy. Ten months ago, UEFA President Lennart Johansson said in the media that Kazakhstan would be welcome in UEFA. We were in UEFA previously as a part of the USSR, and are glad to be back."

Better future
"Practically speaking, it means more contacts with Europe and more investment projects," he added. "It will also lead to a better future for players and especially young people in the country. It will lead to a higher professional level."

Eliminated from World Cup
Kazakhstan were eliminated in the first round of the Asian confederation's qualifiers for the 2002 FIFA World Cup finals. They missed out narrowly, on goal difference, having finished unbeaten and with an identical record to group winners Iraq, who went on to contest play-offs against the Republic of Ireland.

Change in domestic game
The domestic game in Kazakhstan is undergoing various changes, with the switch from one 17-team professional league to two divisions of 12 sides, called the Premier League and First League. Zhenis Astana, a team based in the Kazakh capital of Astana, were the country's 2001 champions.

Now, where is Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan?

Interesting article, I assume that this also means that they will be trying to qualify for Euro 2008 but it still doesn't truely explain the motivation of UEFA as simply being formerly a part of the USSR isn't the best reason to let them join as like Hakon says, is this going to open the door for more countries to join UEFA.

are we heading towards a multi-federation football world, where the UEFA becomes a counter-part of the FIFA and hosts its own world cups?

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
are we heading towards a multi-federation football world, where the UEFA becomes a counter-part of the FIFA and hosts its own world cups?

They do already! It's called the European Championship :p

Seriously, I doubt that very much. Kazakhstan wanted to join in because they thought it would improve their skills playing against better nations. (might have something to do with the AFC not being too well organised as well, because they actually went out of AFC first before applying to join UEFA). If that does happen, however, I will most definitely stop following football and become a full-time cricket fan ;)

Never underestimate Blatter's arrogance when it comes to dealing with UEFA.


Originally posted by Tsargrad
Damn, we have to play 5th best S.American side.. More bull crap!! After already robbing us of a spot.

I'd like to see Oceania combined in Asia, if they aren't going to treat us as a real zone.... Cos after playing the llikes of Tahiti, Fiji, NZ to come up against a side from S.America which has played 18 tough internationals is total b.s ... we need gaming experience and cohersion...

Those clubs better let our lads come out and play - but no doubt they won't... No wonder Soccer is so FUBAR in this country

Yeah, the Aussies were bent over again. I agree, it makes more sense to group them with Asia, historically, geograpically.... I guess Canada/Honduras has more pull :crazyeye:

Where do most Australians play ? Will they have a lot of Euro friendlies ? A home-away against NZ is no prep at all for Peru.

Originally posted by Zamphyr
Where do most Australians play ? Will they have a lot of Euro friendlies ? A home-away against NZ is no prep at all for Peru.

Perú? Are you kidding...perú is playing terribly. The 5th spot might get it Venezuela who's playing very well in these qualifications.

Originally posted by Inter32


Perú? Are you kidding...perú is playing terribly. The 5th spot might get it Venezuela who's playing very well in these qualifications.

Impressive. Don't Venezuela usually finish last in the qualifications?

Originally posted by Håkon


Impressive. Don't Venezuela usually finish last in the qualifications?

Last qualifications they ended up 6th. winning the last 4-5 games, beating teams like Colombia, Uruguay..

The last two games were these:

Colombia 0 - Venezuela 1
Venezuela 2 - Bolivia 1

thess are the current standings.
http://espndeportes.espn.go.com/futbol/standings?leagueCup=FIFA.WORLDQ.CONMEBOL

Originally posted by Inter32


Last qualifications they ended up 6th. winning the last 4-5 games, beating teams like Colombia, Uruguay..

In the last game Vzla. beat Colombia 1 - 0 in Colombia.

Looks like they're up and coming...was talking about a bit further back though (dug this out of a website):

'98 - 9th place out of 9 with 3 points (3 draws)
'94 - 5th place out of 5 with 2 points (a win in a meaningless match against Ecuador)
'90 - 3rd place out of 3 with no points
'86 - 4th place out of 4 with 1 point
'82 - 3rd place out of 3 with 2 points (a 1-0 home win over Bolivia)
'78 - 3rd place out of 3 with 1 point
'74 - withdrew
'70 - 4th place out of 4 with 1 point
'66 - 3rd place out of 3 with no points
'58 - withdrew

I call that usually finishing last...even Norway have better statistics than that I think.

well..yeah they always came up last :lol:...but things are changing ;)

Only four games played so far though, anything could happen :p

maybe they end 5th :p

Maybe they don't :p


<edit> I know Inter wants to see more warnings around here :mischief: <edit>

I know there are still 14 matches to play..but being 5th right now it's a good sign for Vzla. :)

The Aussie players are scattered through Europe..


Kazakstan in UEFA.. Crazy... They are so totally in Asia... MMMM maybe Fiji will sign up next year..

Some asked where Tajikstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Krygztan was... Their in Asia next to Kazakstan, or is that Europe now??

I'm still confused how Israel is in Europe, I can only assume for security reasons, and why is Turkey. I know a bit of Turkey is in Europe, but it looks more as part of Asia to me.... But who knows...

Originally posted by Tsargrad
The Aussie players are scattered through Europe..


Kazakstan in UEFA.. Crazy... They are so totally in Asia... MMMM maybe Fiji will sign up next year..

Some asked where Tajikstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Krygztan was... Their in Asia next to Kazakstan, or is that Europe now??

I'm still confused how Israel is in Europe, I can only assume for security reasons, and why is Turkey. I know a bit of Turkey is in Europe, but it looks more as part of Asia to me.... But who knows...

I asked the Turkmenistan etc. thing - to clarify, I wondered where they were in the process of applying to UEFA.

Israel is there because the Arab nations don't want to play them. Turkey is there because...same reason as Azerbaijan and Armenia and Georgia, which is even further east. And no, I don't know why they are there.

Politics :p like always...:rolleyes:

At the end of the day, Kazakstan probably has a better chance if they went via Asia, but with increased development with Euro soccer the overal big picture in a decade or 3, will probably see them as a stronger side

I apologise also to the Europeans by calling it soccer, instead of football - but its the local way... I imagine it would annoy a few, cos I get annoyed when Rugby League is referred to only as Rugby

Originally posted by Håkon

Israel is there because the Arab nations don't want to play them.

In 1958 no-one from Africa or Asia would play Israel, so Wales were drawn to play them home and away to contest a World Cup qualifying spot. Wales won, and hence were the African and Asian qualifiers for that tournament (!).

I suspect that FIFA don't ever want to go through that sort of thing again.

Hey, Inter, of course it's politics. You're only allowed to enter the FIFA World Cup if you are an identifiable, separate political entity (the UK's 4 teams being the exception). The Basques don't get to enter. The Kurds needn't practice their free kicks. The Bretons don't have to worry about their lack of a left wingback. You need to be a recognised political entity before FIFA will admit you.

A mon avis, it's one of the ways in which the club game is "purer" than the national game - Internazionale doesn't make any pretenses to stand for the whole of Italy, or even the whole of Milan, for example. And there are far fewer artificial rules about who can (and can't) play for whom. I confess to the occasional bout of nostalgia for when, like Celtic in '67, a team could be made up of players all born within 10 miles of the team's ground; but even an old fogey like me has to admit these days are gone, both in the club game and in the national game

Indeed, Internazionale was clearlt founded for socialist reasons :p

Turkey does at least have more of a case to be in the UEFA qualifying groups though as they could potentially join the EU at some point in the future and have been heavily involved in European history and finally part of Turkey is actually in Europe.

Yeah having Istanbul / Constantinople guarantee's that part of the world for European History.

I am no expert on the matter, but Turkey is by far more western than the other countries in the middle eastern proximity?

To stay on topic, I hope we can make this world cup..... Would be nothing prouder as a fan to make it.

I remember when we beat England 3 - 1 last year, man was the nation hysterical about it. It's even on DVD!!

You do realise it was a friendly?

Yeah it was a friendly, but I am sure the teams played properly... Cos was 2 - 0 at half time, which had the alleged stronger players...

It certainly woke us up – IIRC we won 7 and drew 1 of the next 8 games and so qualified for EURO 2004. Thanks Aus! :thumbsup:

Seriously though, football friendlies IMO really are meaningless. They should be banned completely. They mean nothing, they don’t do you any good. If you win, it means nothing, if you lose, it means nothing. And you could get an injury or two. They interfere in the club games, often at an inconvenient point in the season. I think we should stop them altogether.
(The only exception of course is Portugal before Euro 2004 and Germany before 2006 etc.)

Originally posted by Mega Tsunami
(The only exception of course is Portugal before Euro 2004 and Germany before 2006 etc.)

That will be fun for them! They can play themselves over and over again :D

Assuming of course that all nations were to stop playing friendlies.

Woops, forgot about that :)