Official 2010 World Cup Qualifying Thread

[DFF]

Have I gone insane or are Bolivia leading Argentina 5-1?

They ended up winning 6-1. I managed to catch some highlights on Sky Sports. Basically, Argentina both sucked and were blatantly affected by the altitude/heat combo, and Bolivia happened to have the game of their lives. If it weren't for the keeper it could have been 8, 9 or 10.

[Matt]

Don't Bolivia win all their home matches because of the altitude?

[DFF]

Don't Bolivia win all their home matches because of the altitude?

I think it's more, they 'are more likely to win yet still don't a lot of the time because they usually aren't very good', to be honest.

Just checked their qualifying stats thus far.

Home

0-0 Colombia

0-2 Chile

4-2 Paraguay

3-0 Peru

2-2 Uruguay

6-1 Argentina

Away

0-5 Uruguay

0-3 Argentina

3-5 Venezuela

1-3 Ecuador

0-0 Brazil

0-2 Colombia

Hmmm... Paraguay lead at the moment, so that's also a big scalp, but their only other win is against bottom side Peru.

I'm guessing it does play a factor, but surely not as much a 6-1? The commentators made a very good point about it saying that, yes, it's more difficult playing at altitude, but Argentina's previous sides have done it before, what's so (un)special about this team?

EDIT:

Thought it might be fun to look at which teams would be in the WC based on their current group positions, as well as who would be in play-offs etc. (Bear in mind some are not going to be too accurate due to play not many games/unequal number of games)

South America

Paraguay, Brazil, Chile, Argentina. Play-off: Uruguay

Oceania

New Zealand are through to their play-off.

CONCACAF

USA, Costa Rica, Honduras. Play-off: Mexico

Europe

Denmark, Greece, Northern Ireland, Germany, Spain, England, Serbia, Italy, Holland. Play-offs: Hungary, Switzerland, Slovakia, Russia, Bosnia, Croatia, France, Republic of Ireland. With Scotland missing out as lowest ranked second place team.

Asia

Australia, Japan, Korea Republic, Korea DPR Play-Offs: Bahrain, Saudi Arabia

Africa

Gabon, Tunisia, Egypt, Ghana, Cote D'Ivoire

Which would give us inter-continental play-offs of:

Mexico v Uruguay

Bahrain or Saudi Arabia v New Zealand

I think that would be a fun World Cup, with a few smaller names getting through. Obviously, Slovakia are more likely to win their group as they have two games in hand over Northern Ireland, and Africa has only played 1 game in their final round.

Still, I thought it'd be fun to take a look.

One final thing. Does anyone think the current qualification system could be improved. Like the number of teams each continent gets? For example, I can't see Africa justifying 6 entries (South Africa as hosts, plus 5), when teams from other continents (Europe for example which, granted gets a lot) that are better, generally, than them and don't make it. Thoughts?

Edited April 2, 2009 by DFF/WFS

[therockbox]

I haven't seen much of them under Maradona, but don't Argentina play a fairly high tempo pressing game? Apparently Mascherano was having trouble breathing during the match, so if the rest of the team were in a similar way then the score isn't so surprising.

[Matt]

Don't Bolivia win all their home matches because of the altitude?

I think it's more, they 'are more likely to win yet still don't a lot of the time because they usually aren't very good', to be honest.

Just checked their qualifying stats thus far.

Home

0-0 Colombia

0-2 Chile

4-2 Paraguay

3-0 Peru

2-2 Uruguay

6-1 Argentina

Away

0-5 Uruguay

0-3 Argentina

3-5 Venezuela

1-3 Ecuador

0-0 Brazil

0-2 Colombia

Hmmm... Paraguay lead at the moment, so that's also a big scalp, but their only other win is against bottom side Peru.

I'm guessing it does play a factor, but surely not as much a 6-1? The commentators made a very good point about it saying that, yes, it's more difficult playing at altitude, but Argentina's previous sides have done it before, what's so (un)special about this team?

Do they play all the games at the same high altitude ground? I'm sure I remember hearing something about them winning 5 consecutive games at a certain ground or something. I could be wrong, though.

[IAceI]

Ecuador are the ones who play at ridiculous altitude and win most of their home games I believe.

[DFF]

Don't Bolivia win all their home matches because of the altitude?

I think it's more, they 'are more likely to win yet still don't a lot of the time because they usually aren't very good', to be honest.

Just checked their qualifying stats thus far.

Home

0-0 Colombia

0-2 Chile

4-2 Paraguay

3-0 Peru

2-2 Uruguay

6-1 Argentina

Away

0-5 Uruguay

0-3 Argentina

3-5 Venezuela

1-3 Ecuador

0-0 Brazil

0-2 Colombia

Hmmm... Paraguay lead at the moment, so that's also a big scalp, but their only other win is against bottom side Peru.

I'm guessing it does play a factor, but surely not as much a 6-1? The commentators made a very good point about it saying that, yes, it's more difficult playing at altitude, but Argentina's previous sides have done it before, what's so (un)special about this team?

Do they play all the games at the same high altitude ground? I'm sure I remember hearing something about them winning 5 consecutive games at a certain ground or something. I could be wrong, though.

Ecuador are the ones who play at ridiculous altitude and win most of their home games I believe.

Both Ecuador and Bolivia play at altitude. The latter play at around 3km above sea level or something. I'm guessing what you heard, Matt, was more to do with Ecuador, who are a better side.

[DFF]

I haven't seen much of them under Maradona, but don't Argentina play a fairly high tempo pressing game? Apparently Mascherano was having trouble breathing during the match, so if the rest of the team were in a similar way then the score isn't so surprising.

Another good point the commentators pointed out. During the fixture making process, countries barter with each other for deals of who to play when. They said how, if Argentina had been that bothered by it before hand, that they could've tried to push for the game to be the first in a double-header rather than a second - that way they would have had longer to acclimatise to the atmosphere.

Another thing that helped Bolivia's case was that pretty much all their players play at home, so they would've been used it much more.

[Scott McFly]

Europe

Denmark, Greece, Northern Ireland, Germany, Spain, England, Serbia, Italy, Holland. Play-offs: Hungary, Switzerland, Slovakia, Russia, Bosnia, Croatia, France, Republic of Ireland. With Scotland missing out as lowest ranked second place team.

Scotland's group has one less team, so in the other groups the second placed team has their results against the bottom team disregarded. In which case according to the running table at Wiki, Croatia are the bottom ranked second placed team just now. (Y)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_Wor...nd-placed_teams

Edited April 2, 2009 by Scott McFly

[IAceI]

Which pretty much nullifies the point of San Marino, Liechtenstein, Faore Islands. As the results with them don't really come into the grand scheme of things other than deciding if teams like Slovakia are better than teams like Macedonia and the like in the rankings. But when it comes to qualifying, the fact everyone's beating the rubbish teams is rendered useless.

Although I would love it if UEFA just left it as is and the team with one less team were just told "tough luck" and made to fight for it

[TCO]

Oh bollocks, I didn't realise that we we're one of the worst 2nd placed teams. It'll be gutting if we get 2nd and still don't get a Playoff place. Keane is one of the top scorers though!

[Adam]

That's how they do it? I thought they'd have a bit more technical way of doing it, it seems a bit skewed that the 6th place team results doesn't count. I don't know why they don#t just have the otherteam go into a play-off versus another continents team like in the past, why do we need the 4th team from a group of 6 in CONCACAF earning a play-off for instance?

[Grounded Wingman]

Europe

Denmark, Greece, Northern Ireland, Germany, Spain, England, Serbia, Italy, Holland. Play-offs: Hungary, Switzerland, Slovakia, Russia, Bosnia, Croatia, France, Republic of Ireland. With Scotland missing out as lowest ranked second place team.

Scotland's group has one less team, so in the other groups the second placed team has their results against the bottom team disregarded. In which case according to the running table at Wiki, Croatia are the bottom ranked second placed team just now. (Y)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_Wor...nd-placed_teams

Ireland and Croatia have games in hand. I'm sure most Scotland fans will be expecting that we will probably do something stupid like beat Holland at Hampden to finish 2nd in the group, but still not qualify for the playoffs.

OR

Get to the playoffs, get McFadden fit, draw France, 1-0 Scotland at Hampden, 1-0 Scotland in Paris and on to win the World Cup in South Africa.

Those are the only two options I am willing to consider - it's the Scotland way.

[DFF]

Europe

Denmark, Greece, Northern Ireland, Germany, Spain, England, Serbia, Italy, Holland. Play-offs: Hungary, Switzerland, Slovakia, Russia, Bosnia, Croatia, France, Republic of Ireland. With Scotland missing out as lowest ranked second place team.

Scotland's group has one less team, so in the other groups the second placed team has their results against the bottom team disregarded. In which case according to the running table at Wiki, Croatia are the bottom ranked second placed team just now. (Y)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_Wor...nd-placed_teams

I know they are in the smaller group, I just could'nt be arsed to look up results for each time against the equivalent sides. I just went on average points per game the teams had earned and Scotland were lowest.

[HailtotheYo]

seriously though, LOL mexico/argentina ..... and fuck yes Jozy !

I get the altitude and all that, I really do. Let's be real here though. It isn't like this is the first game Argentina has ever played there, or like all of a sudden they all woke up and Bolivia was a mile in the sky. Argentina on a shit day is talented enough to play an "eat the ball" game and beat them 2-0 or worse.

and WTF is mexico smoking ? how the shit do you expect to get the national team under control when you ax your managers every year ? Who the crap do they think is going to come in there after Hugo and SVE weren't given the time to take the team under their wing and grow them ? Their situation is much like the United States a decade ago. Solid coach with outstanding young talent. Let them grow together and keep the continuity. If the US can f'n do it, ANYONE can.

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

At least now if any English players seem to show bad attitude or whatever I can look at this:

and remind myself that the Scottish captain is even worse.

[IAceI]

Had his captaincy at Rangers stripped too. So I expect he's going to get his cock out on the bench next time

[Matt]

seriously though, LOL mexico/argentina ..... and fuck yes Jozy !

I get the altitude and all that, I really do. Let's be real here though. It isn't like this is the first game Argentina has ever played there, or like all of a sudden they all woke up and Bolivia was a mile in the sky. Argentina on a shit day is talented enough to play an "eat the ball" game and beat them 2-0 or worse.

and WTF is mexico smoking ? how the shit do you expect to get the national team under control when you ax your managers every year ? Who the crap do they think is going to come in there after Hugo and SVE weren't given the time to take the team under their wing and grow them ? Their situation is much like the United States a decade ago. Solid coach with outstanding young talent. Let them grow together and keep the continuity. If the US can f'n do it, ANYONE can.

Bolivia's ridiculously high altitude stadium wasn't allowed to be used for international games until quite recently (like 2 years ago maybe) so it could well be the first/second time Argentina have ever played there.

And it probably was Ecuador that I was thinking of.

[DFF]

seriously though, LOL mexico/argentina ..... and fuck yes Jozy !

I get the altitude and all that, I really do. Let's be real here though. It isn't like this is the first game Argentina has ever played there, or like all of a sudden they all woke up and Bolivia was a mile in the sky. Argentina on a shit day is talented enough to play an "eat the ball" game and beat them 2-0 or worse.

and WTF is mexico smoking ? how the shit do you expect to get the national team under control when you ax your managers every year ? Who the crap do they think is going to come in there after Hugo and SVE weren't given the time to take the team under their wing and grow them ? Their situation is much like the United States a decade ago. Solid coach with outstanding young talent. Let them grow together and keep the continuity. If the US can f'n do it, ANYONE can.

Bolivia's ridiculously high altitude stadium wasn't allowed to be used for international games until quite recently (like 2 years ago maybe) so it could well be the first/second time Argentina have ever played there.

And it probably was Ecuador that I was thinking of.

Ironically, Maradonna was one of the people that campaigned to let Bolivia play there apparently.

[Scott McFly]

Had his captaincy at Rangers stripped too. So I expect he's going to get his cock out on the bench next time

And now they've been suspended by Rangers for 2 weeks without pay and been told they'll never play for Scotland again. Don't get me wrong, they were complete twats for doing what they did but jeez that's a bit of a hasty over-reaction isn't it? Yes, you could argue that if they don't give a fuck about being there then why should they be picked, but surely a year's suspension or something would've been sufficient? Especially for McGregor who only turned 27 a couple of months ago and has his best years ahead of him. No offence to Norwich's David Marshall but I don't think he's Scotland Number 1 material if Craig Gordon should get injured again. I'm in two minds about the whole situation, but I'm just so disappointed in the both of them, it's just so unprofessional even if the gestures were aimed at George Burley or whoever and not the fans or the players.