Pointers on those recommendations: although I do agree with the choices, I'd add some discussion of some of the games, for those of you who don't follow soccer. Blind betting is risky, especially with national teams. It's a bit misleading to think of some of those teams as in "must win" situations, so your level of risk needs to be considered more specifically I think. The choices are fine for a fun bet, but some are not for a major bet, IMO.

The Scotland-Latvia game is not actually a typical "must win" for Scotland, although mathematically it is. Mathematically, Scotland have a distant outside chance to finish second (and thus secure a playoff spot) in their group if several events occur, and beating Latvia soundly is indeed one of those events. But the likelihood of the other events occurring is so negligible that even the national team coach has said they're "all but eliminated" and that he's "hoping for a miracle". Which means, it is technically a "must win" but it also has a slightly different psychological feel to it than your typical "must win." Then again, Scotsmen fight well with their backs against a wall.

The Italy-Hungary game is similarly wonky. Italy "must win" to guarantee first place in their group, but actually can still advance as either first or second place team in their group with a loss or draw, provided other (not so unlikely) events occur. Italians are notoriously defensive historically speaking, so the fact that they are guaranteed no worse than second in their group, and the fact that Romania must beat Georgia by 12 (near to impossible) if Italy draw, suggests to me this might be a bit more of a walk in the park for Italy. Risky to call it a "must win," but go ahead and consider a lock for Italy anyway. I'd call it an Italian "must not lose", and even a loss nets them a playoff spot.

England-Greece ... well, the English are geniuses at wresting failure from the maws of success. To beat Greece at home, will pretty much guarantee them first place in their group. For that not to happen, Germany, perpetually consistent performers, must defeat Finland by 6 goals more than England win over Greece, to overtake them as first place in the group: unlikely. But actually, second place "advances," in the sense that they go on to a playoff and are not eliminated. That might be just enough to cause the English, who are hampered by illness and suspension, to falter in their typical way. Although I don't predict that England will lose, betting on Greece is a good outside-chance money-maker. I'd put a medium bet on Greece for that outside chance -- say, $50 if you usually bet $10 a game -- since the payoff will probably be misrepresentatively spectacular.

So, although I agree with all your picks as "likely" winners, I suggest that not all of them are as likely as each other, and therefore urge bettors to hedge accordingly. Me, I'm gonna put my long-shot on Greece just because that's where the odds probably are. What are you getting for Greece in TJ right now? Hey, why bet the locks? There's no fun in that, and seldom much profit either.

I've done well, over the years, on the subtleties of football (soccer) betting. I predicted Italy to beat Holland in the Euro2000 semifinal, and predicted Italy equal to or better than France at 90 minutes (not full time). I got the women's WC1999 championship down to the points in the penalties, France in WC98 (betting in March!), Argentina over England in the Quarterfinal of WC98, and all of those were long-odds to my favor. I tend to look for places where the long-odds are misrepresentatively long, and then load my money there. On soccer betting overall, in this lifetime, I'm probably about 110% to the good -- meaning I've netted 10% after all is said and done.

We'll see how this Greece game goes. That's tailor-made for my style of betting.

book_guy

I agree my list is too long.
Scrap the Scotland-Latvia game as well as Italy-Hungary.
By order of easy pick:
Portugal-Estonia
Rep Ireland-Cyprus
England-Greece
Denmark-Iceland
Denmark had been undefeated for over 10 games before losing to France in friendly, I never trust scandinavian teams so I'll stick to first three games for parlay.
You are mistaken England must win or play Ukraine in playoff in nov, no gimme at all. I never bet for fun, only to win some dinero.

regarding England: they're currently tied with Germany for points, but have a greater goal-difference. If they draw but Germany lose, England still advance as group leaders. If by some strange arrangement England end up group second-place, they "advance" in the sense that they go to a playoff. Advance to the next round of qualifying hurdles. Not advance to Japan/Korea, yet. So your statement about England is true IF you assume Germany win.

regarding betting: nobody bets for fun. It wouldn't be betting if there weren't some promise of money on the other end of the line.

regarding Denmark: yeah, I don't trust Scandihoovian teams either. They tend to have a limited arsenal. They're effective at what they do best, and utterly ineffective at EVERYTHING else. Remember Norway-Brazil in 98? Did that teach us ANYTHING about Brazil? Noooooo ...

regarding Greece: what are the odds they're giving for Greece to win?

Caliente odds
England -650
tie ??
Greece ??
Portugal and Ireland games off the board.
EuroCaliente not available yet.
I'll stay away looks like.
Germany plays at home and I expect them to win, if they don't they'll get beat in Kiev in Nov. Ukraine is a tough place to play any time between Nov to March, either a swamp or freezing hell.

... presuming Ukraine advance as second-place finishers, and not Belarus. Heh.

book_guy
Did you put money on Greece tying England +500???
Boring first half but entertaining second half, England very lucky to escape with ticket to Asia with a last minute goal, great game from Beckam though.
Germany plays Ukraine in playoffs.
Russia qualified, Slovenia in playoff
Italy-Hungary is on ppv in an hour an half.

Holy Frijoles I was close with that Greece prediction, hunh?

But I forgot that the draw was an option ... I didn't realize that just because these are the last games in the group, they don't have to play to an overtime result. Nobody was offering draws as a choice down here. It didn't even come up here in our Club Hombre discussion, dang it. I'll bet my bookie was shitting bricks, though, heh ... he gave me 40:1 for a $10 bet on Greece, just for laughs. He's gonna think twice next time I walk into his office ... ... Not that he can't cover a mere $400 loss, child's play for him, but the HONOR and COJONES of it all, ooh ooh ooh.

All groups other than the UEFA 9 group, were just plain old standard results, predictable, and most of them were dreadful games. Except the goal-fests in group 3, if you like watching powerhouse sharks as they tote up their necessary goal differences against the minnows; I frankly find that kind of football vulgar and boorish.

What about the historical apotheosis going on in group 7, Austria vs. Israel? Postponed, since the plane that was shot down and/or blown up over the Black Sea had taken off from Tel Aviv, site of the game. But the Nazis against the Jews can't come at a worse time in Middle Eastern political developments; furthermore, the winner goes on to play the Turks. Does it look to anyone else like we're fighting the seige of Vienna, and the Crusades, all over again?

Now then, on to CONCACAF. Who's betting on Costa Rica to BEAT MEXICO at noon tomorrow? The USA has plummeted in the standings, but frankly I still think we have the advantage over Honduras and Mexico. With CR qualified, there are 3 teams (USA, HON, MEX) playing for 2 spots -- but WE don't play either of THEM, while THEY do play one another. So, the points will be split among them (or, they'll draw, which is even better for the USA), while we have the mathematical chance of gaining full points.

We'll see how it pans out. Mexico is in a must-must-must-must-win against Costa Rica, but the game is in San Juan, and Costa Rica is on a national high, having guaranteed their first qualification in about two decades, and having recently beat Mexico AT AZTECA. I think it will be a blood feud. Anybody taking odds on the number of bookings reaching a new WCQ record?

My guesses:

October 7
Mexico - Costa Rica, 2-2 draw. I just gotta throw that draw in there for the sake of chastising myself.
Honduras - Trinidad & Tobago, 6-0. Desperate sharks at home against already eliminated minnows.
United States - Jamaica, 2-1. More desperate sharks, more eliminated minnows. But the USA team still looks like shit.

Book_guy
Made the mistake of watching Italy 1 - Hungary 0 on ppv, pretty boring but I wanted to see Italy play, same team as least year.
The Germans were unlucky with Bierhoff hitting crossbar and post.
England is too slow on D.
Nov playoffs are set for 4/5 places.
Germany - *Ukraine
Belgium - *Czech Republic
*Turkey - Austria/Israel
Slovenia - *Romania
*Ireland - 3rd place Asian team.
I put the star on my picks.
I don't know where you place your bet but in TJ, you have 3 choices with extra time not counting unlike American sports so you can pick winner 1, winner 2 or tie. So if game goes in extra time, this is a tie.
For CONCACAF, I expect Costa Rica to just play defense as they are already qualified. I hope Mexico wins.
Jamaica is not very good but USA is not much better either so I hope USA can win 1-0.
Friendly France 4 - Algeria 1 was interrupted in 75th mn by Algerian fans invading pitch, I guess they did not like the score.
FSW had the german and scotland game live today. I went the ppv route with the england and italy games.

The Scotland game isn't worth watching, unless you like uninspiring ball. Pahars played well for Latvia, and they in general looked the better team most of the match. There were only about 50% of the seats full at Hamden, a national shame. Time for a resignation.

The Germany game was like the current Arsenal team -- tastes great less filling. Post, crossbar, that point-blank save, they just couldn't figure out why fate was against them. Oh well, Kiev in the winter, see what the swamps are like. England is barely lucky -- they were practically booking that flight to Kiev themselves.

I suspected Italy would be lame ... what with the fact that their position in their group sort of allowed a draw to advance them. Any excuse to collapse into the fabled Italian defensive shell ... I'd like to see if it was uninspired defense or brilliant defense, but I know darn well it was defense.

Anyway, I think your picks are pretty accurate, and any other results would be definite upsets. The Ukraine really ought to be favored over Germany, who'd a thunk THAT ten years ago? I'm glad it looks like the Ukranians are going to the WC ... Dynamo Kiev from their UEFA campaign two years ago, Shevchenko, Rebrov, all 'dem boys.

Umm, wait a minute, what about the Czech-Belgium game. To me it's anybody's guess. The Czechs ought to be better, but Belgium often comes up with a remarkably stalwart defense.

Any picks in CONMEBOL? Lowly Ecuador now looks a lock, especially if Argentina beat (who is it, Bolivia?) tomorrow.

Gawd I love football ... those petty pissant wimps over in the other thread discussing the San Diego chargers as though they might have a shot at the "world championship" in January in New Orleans. Ha hahahaha. Yokohama in June is the WORLD championship. The rest is an afterthought.

USA qualifies!

We helped our cause by beating Jamaica (I didn't see the game, ABC was covering the air strikes in Afghanistan), but really Trinidad and Tobago sealed our deal by phenomenally upsetting Honduras. Anyone see either of those games? I had to glue my eyes to the web-cast ... a novel experience.

Correct my math if I'm wrong. The charts currently stand at 9 games played each, one to go, top three teams advance to Korea/Japan.

CRC 20
USA 16
MEX 14
HON 14
JAM 8
T&T 4

It at first appears that Mexico and Honduras could both catch the United States by winning, but those two teams play against one another for their final match, while we play Trinidad. Consequently, since only one team can win that game, only one team can catch the USA even if we lose. We are therefore guaranteed no worse than third in our group. Right?

In related news, anybody notice that they're using the same live feed from Afghanistan, that rocky hillside, that they used when the Mars Explorer spaceship was sending back live pictures of ... a rocky hillside?

Book Guy!!

I've been in Lost Wages this last week for a convention and I was fortunate to
see the US game this morning from the Sports Book at Ceasar's. They get a direct
satellite feed for many sports events on US TV. Plus the game was carried by a
Spanish channel which was also received here.

This hotel even has broadband so I've been spending my time downloading pirated
DIVX movies from the internet. ( not really...wink-wink)

I did "Quite Well" here yesterday with the Euro and S.A games. Thank You
Ecuador. On the other hand I would have made a really big killing, as I had bet
against England..(David Beckham you asshole) vs Greece. England played
atrociously and only by luck and david beckham did they get a result. I also bet
against Germany..but that was a no brainer.

I am kicking myself today for not betting against Honduras. I kinda figured T&T
was due for a win. I almost made the bet but decided to go elsewhere at the last
second. Dammit!! I bet for the US but only as a token of my support. My gut feeling was
to bet against. I'm glad I bet against Mexico.

LV is really weird today really subdued, a lot of the pits are vacant, even in
the big casinos!!!.

The sport book is the only one seeming to have a lot of business. And amazingly
enough, they are here not to bet on college football, but real Football. There
were a lot of Euro's and South Americans at the sport books yesterday. There
were several big rollers too. One guy next to me put down a $10K bet on the goal
spread on the brazil game.

As a lot of the Euro Games were minnows against giants the only real money to be
made was the goal spread. I did get the Croatian/Belgium game though.

Most of my bet were small (under $40) but I made a lot of them, and the few big
winners really outgained the small losing bets.

I think the last time we had disagreements over the quality of Concacaf
football. Apparently whoever made book for the Concacaf games need to read this
board. While the Euro games are handicapped fairly well, and Vegas gets its odds
directly from London, the South American and particularly the Concacaf games are
real wild. I think the bookies ate their lunch on some of the spreads.

Being a true monger, I took most of my winning and intended to go to one of the
"Ranches". Instead I ended up at cheetahs and OG's for a couple O' Laps. One of
the girls, a pretty cute blonde, told me that business is really off at all the
clubs.(I even hears this was true at some of the brothels). She then offered me a
covered blowjob if I would go to the VIP (Min $100). I kinda chuckled because
it sounded SOOO MUCH like Nogales. LOL. I made a counter offer and ended up
getting a hand job way to the back for about 2 dances(@20 apiece),

I think Hunter Thompson made a remark about that in his seminal work "Fear and
Loathing in Los Vegas". The high rollers get the $1000 hookers and the limos.
everybody else settles for handjobs at the bar. or something to that effect.

A good friend of mine (known him over 25 years) got together again at this
convention, He's English, divorced and goes on mongering holidays in Eastern
Europe, we compared notes and I turned him on to this site. He called me about
6:00 am this morning saying his company had booked him a flight out. LV-LAX-UK.
We were scheduled for some heavy duty lap dancing today after the games. He
then told me his company ordered him home as the US was going to war and his
company didn't want him stuck here. (in the US or Vegas???)

The funny thing was that this was hours before the first strike. How did his
company know this!!!. I rolled over and went back to sleep.

I woke up to go downstairs to the Sports Book to view the US/Jamaica Game.

War has broken out.

The rumour in this crazy town is that one sports book is offering odds as to
WHEN Osama bin Laden will be caught/killed. I'll try to run this one down as I
want to get a bet on this!!!!

Nothing like a good war to wake you in the morning.

OG

How much has changed, OG. Well, recently game results and, more important, performances, especially among formerly great European teams, had begun to convince me a little bit more of the power of CONCACAF and the relative disparity of WC positions. But then this most recent round of CONCACAF games just flipped my attitude back to what it was originally. Sure, Holland looked like shit against Ireland, and if they play like that for the big games then they damn well deserve to stay at home come June; but then, it's probably the case that the USA, Jamaica, Trinidad, Mexico, and Costa Rica all looked like shit, too. The only team I think acquitted themselves well in CONCACAF was Honduras, and they got a loss. Wish I could have seen more of the USA game.

As far as I figure it, USA is guaranteed a qualification spot. None of the websites, not even FIFA, seem to have figured that out just yet, but to me it's a mathematically guaranteed deal. Because the other two teams that might supplant us, have to play one another for their last remaining game, it is possible for only one of those two teams to succeed. Right? I mean, am I going crazy here or something?

Saaaay, how DID that guy's company know? Hunh? Was there some insider trading going on? Who does he work for?

Book Guy,

It has been a weird qualifying. I still hold by my theory that Concacaf is underrated or they are at least undeserving of the way the qualifying rounds are held in the region. Did UEFA hold qualifying to "eliminate" teams. How in the world did teams like Andorra,Litchenstein,and Malta get to the final group play. My opinion is that teams like El Salvador and Panama are way better than the Faroe Islands, but never made it as far as the qualifying round simply because UEFA wanted the minnows to fill out the groups to justify the padding of Europena Teams in the World Cup.

Most of the European paper sites all have the US qualifying as Todays lead-in soccer story, Its just the US papers who really don't understand until the results are explained to them that they'll post it.

I think no one expected Honduras to lose today, so it takes a while to sink in that they don't get three points that everybody kinda gave them already.

Mexico is in the catbird seat now. At home at Azteca and needing only a tie to go to the WC.

I almost wan't to bet they'll blow it!!! LOL

One thing that I'll have to concede on Concacaf is the seemingly real lack of depth in key positions.

Take Reyna out of the lineup (and Mathis) and the US looses. Although Reyna number 1 backup Mathis,#2 O'Brian, were out too, most European Squads have depth at Key positions of around 5 players.

You can almost see all the Concacaf teams struggle with their key players are injured or suspended.

When all players are healthy the level of play goes way up and they can be competitive with anybody in the world.

The US/Jamica game may be replayed tommorrow on ESPN.

Apparently while we were sleeping, there were all sorts of warning going on in Europe/Asia.

I beleive my friends company (import/export) is next to a UK military airbase. I guess when you see an unusual amount of LOADED bombers taking off in the middle of the night, you might be forewarned. That just my take anyway.

OG

Yeah, full agreement here on the issue of depth in the US squad. Without Reyna, we were trash against Honduras. But then, almost the same can be said about England without Owen, or Germany at about any position recently ... I'm not familiar with other CONCACAF benches, or I'd comment on their depth more specifically. Mexico has loads of depth -- about three full squads worth of rapidly replaced players (and coaches!) have all been fully capable of appearing exactly as much like shit as their benched teammates throughout these qualifying rounds. Evidently Honduras has real depth, but fat lot of good it did them.

I understand what you're saying about the "final" rounds in Europe being stuffed with pseudo-teams. Nobody really credits the Maldives or Skagerrak with any chance of upsetting Sweden. But really, it's not so much of an issue to me. They aren't going to the Cup, either way. There are lots more groups in Europe, but fewer teams from each group advance ... so who cares if the pseudo-teams get to play lots more rounds or not, they're getting eliminated either way. It's just an issue of semantics, really; of where you draw the line between "preliminary elimination" and "secondary elimination." It's elimination all the same. Except of course I guess the home fans get to see a few more dismal games. CONCACAF's smaller nations deserve the chance to root their teams more often, you're right.

I think in the long run about seven of the European sides (out of their 14 or 15) will be real "contenders," while none of the CONCACAF sides will be. Maybe Costa Rica, MAAAAAAAAYYBE. So, to me, it's not an issue of whether you eliminate the European pseudo-teams early or late, as long as the spots at K/J02 are filled with "legitimates" and not the old El Salvador of 82. WhoEVER turns out to be legitimate.

I think I've made that point before. Well ... In my imaginary future, qualifying takes place across continental boundaries, with a pre-tournament in the host nation starting in April, and then some of the bigger seeded nations arriving in May, for a standard tournament in June. Staggered tiers of tournament, all leading up to many more "losers' brackets" (currently there's just the third-place game) of as many as eight teams each; plus the real championship. Talk about development potential; chances to try out other players; scouting showcases; the whole nine yards. That would REALLY develop footballers in the weaker nations. Modern air travel (terrorists notwithstanding) and telecommunications would make it possible for fans to be fully involved in the experience.

Anyway, I'm sorry for Honduras. They've looked almost equal to Costa Rica for most of qualifying, but stumbled earlier and so didn't have that fluke loss to give to Trinidad. How many times did they hit that crossbar? Unfortunately, it looks like a largely self-destructed Mexico will supplant Honduras. I'd almost volunteer USA's spot to Honduras, if I were speculating strictly on which nation would present a "legitimate" level of competition in June.

One final point about the Mexico-Honduras game. Before you lay your bets, check which players are suspended. Mexico collected three yellows and an outright red against Costa Rica, and haven't been the most disciplined throughout. Honduras has that much in their favor.

Yet another Venganza en Azteca, on el Camino a la Copa. Or whatever the Spanish would be ...

BG

Yeah, Honduras was looking very good, it was showing that their Copa America run was no fluke. From what I understand of the H-TT game it was a very physical affair with numerous fouls, Yellows and both teams finishing with 10 men. With the many English league players that T7T had I expected them to do much better, but the Yorke thing threw them off and the never played cohesively..until now.

I think FIFA will only look at formats that 1) make them the maximum amount of rights fees, 2) make the television/networks happy.

Japan and South Korea faced an uphill battle to host simply because of the time difference for the Euro audiences. More people will watch it on TV in asia but the rights fees are but a fraction for Europe. FIFA made IMHO a good call in allowing Asia, one of the most developing soccer area, to host the World Cup. It is planting goodwill seeds for the future of Asian football.

NO world Cup past present or (near) Future made FIFa as much money as the US's 94 WC. FIFA was reluctant to hand it to the US, it having no pro league, but it was rewarded handsomly by extraordinary attendence, Humoungous viwership and astronomical rights fees, that has not been duplicated since then. Should the US mount a credible effort to bid for the WC again, it would undoubtedly get them, no matter whose turn it is.

I digress, but your format makes sense, looks sound and logical, so I suspect it will never see the light of day as far as FIFA is concerned.

I still like Mexico's chances, but it will be interesting to see ifthey can rise to the occasion. Their qualifying effort took an abrupt U-turn after they beat the US, who played terrribly, were missing key players, and were away, but still only loss by a single goal, a long range strike that even the mexicans admitted was lucky. Still the win did wonder to their morale and reinvigorated the team, along with the coaching change.

I kinda expect Mexico to blow it though, if it turn out to be a close game. If it is a wild affair I will go with Mexico, who do well in wide open games.

My flight leaves in 3 hours and the airport is right across the street so I gotta leave now if I want to get on my flight...geeesh.

I think I need a trip to Nogales tonite!!


OG

So here is the bottom line, Mexico needs a tie against Honduras in estadio Azteca. Just check meseros and chicas mood on wed night and you'll know who won the game. Go Mexico.

Go Honduras...I want Mexico to lose so bad...A longshot in Mexico City, no question, but...

I would love to see Mexico shut out of the Cup...

YoungBrig

What is it with Mexico and World Cups? They're one of the few nations to host it twice, but they've never even come CLOSE to being favorite to win. They have a very high world ranking, again; but are on the verge of not qualifying, again. Historically, they've played a very large number of games overall -- top ten among nations in participation, I think -- but relative to the nations which surround them in that list, Mexico's win-to-loss ratio is abysmal. They're the spike in the statistical curve on lots of fronts. What IS it with Mexico and World Cups?

Attn Organgrinder.....You wrote about Mexico Usa game...Their qualifying effort took an abrupt U-turn after they beat the US, who played terrribly, were missing key players, and were away, but still only loss by a single goal, a long range strike that even the mexicans admitted was lucky.
From what I remember,the goal was a header by Borgetti from a free kick.And I never read about Mexico admitting it was lucky.The USA team sucked big time....just like they did against Costa Rica and Honduras.

Book Guy

Only 7 nations have ever won the World Cup, 4 European: Germant,Italy.France and England, and 3 South American: Brazil, Argentina and Uraguay.

Like most Central American teams, they do not travel well, especially to Europe. Most of the Central American teams do abysmal when they have to travel long distances. That is why you seldom see a lot of CA teams traveling to Europe for friendlies. Instead they come to the US to play foreign teams. The particularly like LA because its like playing at home. They need to play more in front of Hostile crowds in bad (cold) weather, if they wish to advance in WC play.

Texasbob--The mexican team coach even admitted as much, the set play was designed to be put into the box. Instead the kick was so bad and off-target, that Borgetti, who is not known for his stellar aerial play, and was put outside to try and get a rebound, jumped for it and slightly redirected it when he was 5 YARDS OUTSIDE THE BOX!!!. The US goalkeeper Freidel, was caught flatfooted as he was slightly poaching at the other side of the net. This was not the result of stellar offensive play.

In Its losses the US was without Reyna, O'Brien,Pope,Woff,Mathis and I think Moore. All starters and scored 80% percent odf the goals in the preceeding matches. In addition injuries and suspension in the defensive backfeild made arena put people in position they shouldn't have been in and it showed.

The US was simply playing (badly,I agree) for a tie against Mexico, but their lack of offense and midfielsd play meant they had to continually play a bunker defense. (Bunker defenses, by the way are usually only defeated by set plays)

To win by only a single goal, home at Azteca, against a team decimated by injuries was not a great moral victory. But Mexico was searching for some answers. That they got it and against a US team that had punished them in 4 previous games, this was, say the least a BIG boost.

Remember Mexico had lost for the fist time at Azteca in a Qualifying match the previous game against Costa Rica. They looked like they were rapidly disintegrating as a team.

The US on the other hand in its first five games could do no wrong and only needed a win or two in its last 5 games to advance. They may have been to relaxed, but the loss to Honduras was the wake up call for the US, not the loss to Mexico.

OG

OG, I fully agree. You're right on the money with some of those comments, especially about travel for Latin sides. Glad to see someone else noticed how the injuries and suspensions hampered USA's play. With our full squad we're a formidable force; but we lack depth, which is a serious handicap that no doubt will come back to haunt us at the Finals.

Anyway, Mexico. Aah, self-immolating, death-wish Mexico. To make my point, here's a fun game to play (or just imagine playing it; I'll tell you the results).

Go to the FIFA website (http://www.fifa.com, as though I have to tell you, hah!), and follow the links to the historical overal World Cup participation statistics. You will eventually get to a page which offers a chart of all the nations that have ever played in a World Cup Finals. This list excludes preliminaries and qualifying rounds -- just the Finals. You know, Brazil has played 173 total games, has a 2.3 goals-per-game average, USA has played 17 total games, etc. etc.. Now crunch some numbers.

Sort the list by the third column -- total number of games played. And scan downwards. Let your eyes catch the anomalies. You'll find out some interesting things. First, obviously, is that the teams which have won many World Championships have also played in most of the Finals. So it's no surprise that the perennial powerhouses -- Brazil, Germany, Italy, Argentina -- are right at the top for having played the most total games, and for having won the most games. That's no surprise. Scan down the list and there are some interesting surprises -- how poorly Bulgaria has done; how well Sweden has done; etc. etc.. But here's the point. As you scan down that list, down from the nations with lots of total participation to nations with very little, the ratio of wins to losses, one might guess, would naturally decrease. The more you win, the more chances you have to play another game; consequently, it would stand to reason, that more wins would lead to more total games, right? Yup, that's a fair generalization for almost every nation in the top twenty ... except Mexico.

Explain please. I mean, I know there are some good specific reasons for Mexico to have been there a lot. They have hosted twice, which has meant automatic qualification regardless of ability. And they have historically dominated CONCACAF, so had a fairly easy ride to the Finals even if they didn't host, given their region's lack of competitors. But what's with all the LOSSES once they GOT there? I had thought that this syndrome was limited to Spain, but historically Mexico is even WORSE about shooting themselves in the proverbial foot.

I spent last night memorizing the match-ups and hosts for the Finals. 1958, in Stockholm, Brazil beats Sweden 5-2. 1998, in Paris, France beats Brazil, 3-0. 1966, at Wembley, ...

I need to get a life.

book_guy
Home teams need to do well for drawing big crowds.
1930 Uruguay won first world cup in Montevideo.
1934 Italy won in Rome
1950 Brazil lost at home in semi
1958 Sweden lost in finals
1962 Chile reached semi I believe
1966 England wins at home against Germany on a phantom goal in OT.
1970 Mexico reaches 1/4 final
1974 West Germany wins at home, one of biggest upset in history beating Holland 2-1
1978 Argentina won or bought their way through as Peru lost 6-0 after being paid by Argentine government. I could not sleep after Holland lost in finals hitting post in last mn of game.
1986 Mexico reaches 1/4 losing on pks to West Germany
1990 Italy loses in 1/2 on pks
1994 USA reaches round of 16
1998 France wins at home, only Paraguay put some fear into them.
Why are you always trying to boost Mexico??? Wait for games being played. Mexico should do well in Asia as it is very hot and humid so european teams should suffer but still Mexico has no chance of ever winning wc in my lifetime. Mexicanos players are too small, play small field.
Viva las chicas.

Well Mexico and Honduras for the last Concacaf WC spot.

Although Mexico has every conceivable advantage:
At Home in Azteca needing only a tie to advance, with virtually everyone healthy and only a 2 would-be starters sidelined because of red cards..... I still pick Honduras.

Call me crazy, but I think with 7 Euro players in midseason form in the lineup for Honduras, they have the edge over Mexico. Also factor in the wake-up call that Honduras got in T&T and you wont see them being complacent.

I think a physical game, which this no doubt will be, favors Honduras.

OG

OG:

I really want to see Mexico lose...I take some comfort in your analysis, but the fact that it is in Mexico City will make it extremely tough for Honduras...

We'll see...

YoungBrig

I'm more concerned about Brazil. They just lost in La Paz (altitude sickness strikes again) and now can't even guarantee a playoff spot against Australia. They should hire me as coach.

Fortunatly for Brazil, the have lowly Venezuela in their final match, while Uraguay has to take on table leader Argentina. Venezuela has one its last two games and does look dangerous at times. It would be a feather in their cap to knock off Brazil and out of the WC. The question that the Venezualan coach is probably asking: "Are there any stadiums at altitude ??"

Germany is barely alive with a tie at the Ukraine.

A World Cup without Brazil and Germany?? Could happen!!!.

OG

A World Cup without Brazil, Germany, and Holland. Could happen.

But I question Germany's trouble. I think they're in good shape. They got a draw for the away-match, and they scored the all-important away goal. Ukraine now effectively must win in Dortmund.

Great game for Mexico against Honduras. The Mexicans finally showed their class. Although technically it could have gone either way at halftime, I do believe Mexico dominated the first half play. They certainly look great in the final third, all that tippy-tappy Latin stuff that gets annoying if it doesn't connect. All their goals were deserved. And did anyone else notice, EVERY SINGLE ONE of the on-sides or off-sides calls by the right-side linesman was incorrect? Every replay, out of ten, showed him missing it -- eight on-sides he called illegal; two off-sides he called legal. Pathetic.

This was my post from last June.

"No way Athos. Mexico hasn't beat anybody since Cauhtemoc Blanco got injured. Costa Rica has been playing very well. Costa Rica 2 - Mexico 1"


The big change for Mexico has been that Blanco is playing again. I haven't kept track but I'll bet he's out scored the entire rest of the Mexican team since he's been back. He scored 2 of the 3 goals aginst Honduras.

How Mexico does in the World Cup will depend on Blanco. When he was playing they were winning almost all their games. That stretch where they were loosing all thier games, and were in danger of not qualifying, was when Blanco was recovering from knee surgery. Since he's been back Mexico has been back on track.

Just checked results, sorry to see aussies get trashed by Uruguay.

Here are the probable seedings for next sat draw in Zurich.

Probable seeding groups:
GROUP 1 : Brazil, Italy, Argentina, France, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan.
GROUP 2: England, Republic of Ireland, Croatia, Denmark, Portugal, Sweden, Belgium, Russia.
GROUP 3: Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, Slovenia, Poland, Turkey, Ecuador, China, and Uruguay.
GROUP 4: Mexico, U.S. Nigeria, Tunisia, South Africa, Costa Rica, Cameroon, Senegal.

Best chance for USA is to end up in South Korea group, 1 chance out of 8.
Mexico and Costa Rica can pass first round with rigth draw.

I'm continuing this from the previous soccer thread.

Glad to see the "right" team triumphed between Australia and Uruguay -- not that I rooted for either, but the results are decisive, which is nice to know, for a neutral.

How did you find out the seeding groups, Athos? Just wondering. I was under the impression that, although hosting, S Kor and Jap were not guaranteed the right to be a seed. As I understood it (and this was just hearsay) the 8 seeded teams would be

top-Concacaf or Asia (CR)
top-Africa (Nigeria? S. Af.?)
4 from Europe (probabaly Italy Sweden Spain Portugal)
2 from Conmebol (probably Argentina and ___?)

I think I heard this when someone was discussing the scandal of the 98 seeds, in which "past performance at a finals" (like, in 1934!) figured larger than recent qualifying history, thus allowing Italy to finish qualifying lower than England, but be seeded higher.

I do see from the FIFA website that they've worked out the competition so that EVERYONE who advances has to change countries, except for S Kor and Jap who stay at home for the whole thing. Presuming S Kor doesn't make it to the final. Which isn't presuming much.

I've created a new soccer thread, "Soccer 2", and continued the conversation there.

OK, gotta correct myself. 4 from Europe would have to include France.

More info from FIFA. The Coca-Cola rankings of the teams that qualified, November 2001:

1 France
2 Argentina
3 Brazil
4 Portugal
6 Italy
7 Spain
9 Mexico
10 England
11 Germany
12 Yugoslavia
14 Paraguay
16 Sweden
17 Denmark
18 Ireland Republic
20 Belgium
20 United States
22 Russia
23 Turkey
24 Uruguay
27 Slovenia
28 Tunisia
30 Saudi Arabia
31 Costa Rica
33 Poland
34 South Africa
35 Japan
37 Ecuador
38 Cameroon
40 Nigeria
43 Korea Republic
55 China PR
67 Senegal

Notable absences:
5 Colombia
8 Netherlands
13 Czech Republic
15 Romania
19 Croatia
25 Norway
26 Honduras
29 Iran
31 Trinidad & Tobago
36 Morocco
39 Chile
41 Egypt
42 Peru
and I won't list the rest.

I think the World Ranking absences suggest, that European football will be under-represented at K/J-02, and Asian and African will be over-represented. Of the world's top 32 who do NOT go to the Cup, 5 are European; 1 Asian; 2 Concacaf; 1 Conmebol; NO African. The case for more spaces for Latin football is partly made by Colombia's presence as the highest non-qualifyer, but I'm not convinced ... I think any of those European teams in the top 32 who did not qualify, could be relied upon to provide adequate opposition and spectacle if they were to go. I don't think you can necessarily say that for Honduras or Colombia or Trinidad ... but that's a subjective call.

So, it's shaping up. Draw on December 1 will set the rest of the plans in stone.

7 of the top 8 seeds are set in stone, only 8th spot is being debated(2 hosts, france, brazil, argentina, italy, germany).
They don't use region but combo of ranking, past history, dinero as in tv rating and fees.
I usually check soccernet from espn and also different international yahoo.

Yeah, you got it right, Athos.

Don't know what I was thinking of, but I thought I had heard the good news that S. Kor. would be host but not seeded. Unfortunately that's not the case. The FIFA website now tells us the following:

pot 1 (8 seeds): FRA, JAP, KOR, GER, ITA, BRA, ARG, ESP. (Spain was your missing team.) Draw one each group, ABCDEFGH.

pot 2: remaining 11 European nations. Draw one each group. Remaining 3 draw to a group with a non-European seed (hence no three-Euro groups).

pot 3: remaining 3 CONMEBOL + 2 Asia. Draw one to each group that has 2 (hence all groups now have 3).

pot 4: 5 Africa + 3 CONCACAF. Draw 1 each.

By this sequence, the USA could end up in a hell group with Argentina, Portugal, and Paraguay, for example. Or a heaven group with South Korea, Denmark, and China.

I dunno ... seems to me even the heaven could be hell for USA, if we don't get our injured Cracker strikers back on the pitch.

Smart money today was on Portugal, at 31:2.

Actually the US will have a 7/8 chance of playing TWO European teams in the first round. The US will also have a 22 percent chance of facing brazil or Argentina and 2 european teams in the first round.

The Best case scenarios have the US (13) play S. Korea(25), Poland (29) and Ecuador (30).

The worst case scenario has the US (13) play Braxil (1), England (8) and Croatia (9).

The US must hope that the two Europena teams it will probably face are not ranked above it: Italy.Germany. France and Spain from bowl one AND
England, Croatia,Denmark or Sweden from bowl 2.

I do like our chance against Germany which we have had great success against recently, or England Denmark and Sweden, which I think the US has a fair chance of beating/drawing.

I do not expect an easy draw for the US.

Draw starts on Sat 1:55 AM, am sure AB/CC will show draw.
More details: France (Group A), S. Korea (Group D), Japan (Groupe H).
Best case scenario is play S. Korea, Belgium, Saudi Arabia where USA or Mexico could finish first and even pass round of 16.
Worse case scenario is France, Portugal, Uruguay where best results would be to beat Uruguay for either US or Mexico.
They used previous last 3 world cup and last 3 years rankings to decide top seeds. The fact that there are 2 cohosts could create imbalanced seedings, typically the best teams like to cruise in first round, some teams will not have that luxury.

For those wanting to check draw at home, check soccernet from espn.com as it will have live results from draw. Probably my choice unless espnews shows draw live.

1:55 am Pacific time Saturday morning (late late Friday night), I take it? That's ... umm ... I can't do math ... when Eastern?

Oh, and who says "Braxil" is number 1, Organgrndr? Geez, at their form lately I think the USA would be HAPPY to avoid Argentina, Portugal, or France, to play Brazil instead. Even if the USA are 20th and not 13th like you listed.

Smart money's still on Portugal at 16:1.

Rigth ON!!!!
Group D
S. Korea
Poland
USA
Portugal

Group of death F
Argentina
Nigeria
England
Sweden

Group G
our neighbours
Italy
Ecuador
Croatia
Mexico

The USA is in the easiest group by far, has a chance.
Mexico and CR can also pass first round.

Rounding it up
Group A Fairly easy group
France
Senegal
Uruguay
Denmark

Group B Easy group
Spain
Slovenia
Paraguay
South Africa

Group C Fairly easy group
Brazil
Turkey
China
CR

Group E Fairly easy group
Germany
Saudi Arabia
Rep Ireland
Cameroun

Group H Difficult - most balanced group
Japan
Belgium
Russia
Tunisia

USA - Portugal June 5 2:00 AM Pacific time
S Korea - USA June 10 10:30 PM
USA - Poland June 14 4:30 AM

Croatia-Mexico June 3 10:30 PM
Mexico-Ecuador June 9 10:30 PM
Mexico-Italy June 13 4:30 AM

10:30 PM kickoff are a day early

I guess next weeks match against S. Korea takes on a whole new importance!!!. Strategicaly, teams usually avoid playing each prior to the WC if they are in the same group!!. I don't think the US will give away anything as the whole team is comprised of MLS players with the Euro-players staying with their clubs.

The US had a great chance of advancing. Poland plays a similar style to Germany and the US has great success with Germany winning the last 3 times they have met.

Meeting Portugal first is a mixed blessing. If the US were to get blown out, it could affect the teams confidence a la France in '92. OTOH, should the US play Portugal well and get a result, and knowing that the team has to play the weaker teams to advance, this would be a "good thing".

The US, I beleive got a good draw. S. Korea would have never qualified for the WC had it not hosted it, and Poland is considered by some to be one of the weaker European teams.

Portugal has not played outside Europe frequently, they may be susceptible to an upset in the first game, should they not be prepared.

The group is not a pushover and the US will need to be healthy and prepared to advance, but I like our chances

Actually Poland has been one of the hottest teams in Europe and Portugal should be a number one seed...but they lost to Ireland. Only one easy game for U.S. here. Mexico received a much easier bracket. Poland might be the Eastern European team that surprises everyone in the cup. As you Know Athos, there is always one goat herder team in every World Cup that advances much farther than expectations. Hopefully this year it's not Poland.

On paper, Portugal easy group winner followed by Poland. But S. Korea plays at home and either heat or humidity should affect Central European Poland. USA is used to bad conditions. I expect goals difference for second place. I expect USA and S. Korea to cancel their friendly.
The problem with Portugal, any time they have the ball inside the 30 yards, they can score. I don't think USA is prepared for that.
In a typhoon, anything goes.
I was excited then not too excited for France's draw, easy first round then play second of group of death Argentina or England/Nigeria/Sweden, 1/4 final probably would face 1st team of group C Brazil, then semi possibly first of group F or group H which could be Argentina. So the first 4 teams of top half are France, Argentina, Brazil, throw in dark horse England. Lower half has mostly European teams like Portugal, Germany, Spain, Italy, easier path to the finals.
If the USA, which will be underdog, finishes second, they will probably play Italy unless Mexico can find a way to win that group.
Mexico can do very well next year as accustomed to tough conditions as well as CR.
Senegal has more players playing in France on its roster than France but I still expect an easy opening match.
Should be the world cup of the fittest, team which can use all their players may end up winning tournament.

Blazers
I have always loved Poland but players are not used to extreme heat. Old name from the past Boniek is in charge of Polish soccer. That guy could play.
I still have US as underdogs in all their games as S. Korea will play hard at home, Poland qualified easily, Portugal can win the whole enchalada, Figo, Nunes, midfielder Rui Costa. The key is to start well, not be intimidated by Portugal and try to lose like 1-0.
Bruce Arena needs to give the green light to Landon Donovan or they might not score a goal.
Good friendlies for US against Italy and Germany.

I'm disappointed that USA drew Poland, since Poland is my "favorite" emotionally speaking. My allegiances will be torn. But the way things stood at the time they were drawing, we could have ended up in the group of death, F (ENG SWE ARG NIG).

I'm sorry to see England must (again) attempt to survive utter Hell ... but then, they're good at that. They look their best, and get their best results, when their backs are up against the wall.

I think France is in the easiest group of the lot. The official kick-off game, France-Senegal, pits the world-#1 and reigning champions against the lowest-ranked team to qualify -- a real mismatch. But that's a great stat, thanks for the info that more Senegalese play in France than do the Frenchmen. LOL.

I think Group B (PAR, RSA, ESP, SLV) is a bizarre situation. I can't call it at all. South Africa seems to be the minnows, but any of those teams can beat any other in the group, given a good day and the right conditions.

Also, Group H (JAP BEL RUS TUN) is tough to call, for the opposite reasons. Any of those teams can LOSE to any other in the group, given a bad day and the wrong conditions. LOL.

Finally, about USA opening against POR. I think it's a stern test for Arena's and Reyna's leadership capabilities. In France98, the USA looked dreadful against Germany, although for a while the result wasn't really all that woeful. But the confidence factor was obviously way way down. If we look dreadful against Portugal, can we take it as a LEARNING experience and bring up our game to womp on Poland and Korea, which will be required if we're to advance after a loss to Portugal. Or will we crumble like Sampson let us do in 98, in the absence of the leadership that Harkes could have provided. (What a fuckin' idiot Sampson was to leave Harkes at home.)

I also think it's good that we drew Korea rather than Japan as our location (never mind the fact that they're a radically inferior opponent). The military bases will all get passes and probably will be expected to support us in mass ... whereas in Japan, Americans are just another type of Western tourist, just like the Germans, English, etc. etc.. To be from the USA has a type of "identity" in Korea ... maybe we can work that to our advantage?

Also, I'm glad this little event took place to rearrange my head about time zone differences. I was all set to wait up TONIGHT for it, because I added 14 instead of subtracting 10 for Eastern Time zone. I got the 9am correct, I just got the wrong day. LOL. Glad I didn't miss a game because of it.

Gawd I love football. Do ya really think Korea's gonna go ahead with the Dec. 9 friendly vs. USA, and what about their participation in the Gold Cup upcoming in February? We really oughta rethink that ...