• Again: Talk about cracks or if a certain mod works on a cracked game and we will cut off your puny little pirate dicks.
  • Note for new users: Please keep your posts English or we will delete them. There's a "No English?" area in our Editing sub-forum for those who prefer writing in their native language.

World Cup 2006 Draw/Groups

Professor Nutmeg

ML Fanatic
3 July 2002
Master League
POT ONE
Germany (hosts)
Brazil (holders)
Argentina
England
France
Italy
Mexico
Spain

POT TWO
Australia
Angola
Ghana
Ivory Coast
Togo
Tunisia
Ecuador
Paraguay

POT THREE
Croatia
Czech Republic
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine

POT FOUR
Iran
Japan
Saudi Arabia
South Korea
Costa Rica
Trinidad & Tobago
USA
Special pot: Sebria & Montenegro
 
Last edited:

fd1972uk

---------------------
9 January 2002
Glasgow
Celtic
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Yep, was confused there too. :shock: Does that mean that some group will have 5 teams?

England's group will be as follows, guaranteed:-


England
Tunisia
Poland (they seem to be joined at the hip, not sure if it's allowed tho, so if not the Swiss)
Cost Rica.


FD
 

Cloud1863

Premiership
10 December 2004
Stoke City
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

The pot I would hope for:
England
Angola
Switzerland
Trinidad & Tobago

Our Group Of Death:
England
Australia
Netherlands
South Korea
 

Professor Nutmeg

ML Fanatic
3 July 2002
Master League
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

joostebrood said:
Isn't it better to swap the pots 2 and 3? It doesn't seem logical to me.
That doesn't matter here. What matters are the teams within the pots, if you know what i mean.

Under the seeding system used by Fifa, England came out second to Brazil and Italy narrowly beat the US into eighth.
Fifa's ranking co-efficient meant that performances at the 2002 World Cup, when England reached the quarter-finals, were given twice as much weight as at 1998.
They also took into account a country's world ranking over the last three years.

SEEDINGS TABLE
Brazil 64
England 51
Spain 50
Germany 48
Mexico 47
France 46
Argentina 44
Italy 44

Friday's draw will work in the following way:
The eight seeded teams will be drawn into eight different groups. Germany have already been allocated Group A and Brazil Group F.

Eight unseeded European sides will be drawn into the eight different groups.

The lowest-ranked European side Serbia and Montenegro will be allocated to one of the groups containing either Brazil, Argentina or Mexico to ensure there is no more than two European sides in any group.

A pot of the five African countries, Australia and the two remaining South American sides drawn into eight different groups.

A pot containing the four Asian countries, the USA, Costa Rica and Trinidad drawn into seven different groups.
 

ThomasGOAL

Retired Footballer
15 March 2003
France
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Cloud1863 said:
The pot I would hope for:
England
Angola
Switzerland
Trinidad & Tobago

Our Group Of Death:
England
Australia
Netherlands
South Korea
Cloudl1863 hope :
Switzerland (not easy i think Poland more easy than Switzerland)

Cloudl1863 Group Of Death :
Australia (Ivory Coast better)
 

joostebrood

Premiership
4 March 2002
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

I know it doesn't really matter indeed, it just is weird.

Anyway, a shame we're not in pot 1, but I guess the country that will draw us from group 1 will also regret the fact we're in group 2 (I'm Dutch btw).
 

ezio

League 2
6 August 2003
New Jersey
AS Roma
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

joostebrood said:
Isn't it better to swap the pots 2 and 3? It doesn't seem logical to me.
I think it is because Fifa changed things again and now it is by Geography instead of previous rankings for the rest of the pots.

Ezio
 

gerd

Retired Footballer
8 January 2002
Over the moon
KRC Genk, Spurs
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Joost is right Holland deserve to be in pot 1 (more than Germany).
Well that WC will be another disaster for favourites...that's one thing for sure...i hope for a final between Togo and Angola (which is rather impossible, but there will be surpises...).
 

fd1972uk

---------------------
9 January 2002
Glasgow
Celtic
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Disagree totally, although I was hoping England would be in Pot 2 :mrgreen: it was clear due to their record that they deserved to be there more than Holland, just as the others do, although Germany haven't been in the best of shape, they always seem to do well no matter what anyone says.


FD
 

Alien_

League 2
31 July 2003
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

gerd said:
Joost is right Holland deserve to be in pot 1 (more than Germany).
Well that WC will be another disaster for favourites...that's one thing for sure...i hope for a final between Togo and Angola (which is rather impossible, but there will be surpises...).
well germany is the host nation so they don't have to deserve it :mrgreen: (and a world cup final in 2002 ain't enough for you ?, i'd say there's only one team that did better :D ), they could be the worst team in the world they'd still be seeded

well anyway it's quite logical that teams that didn't even qualify in 2002 aren't seeded, but of course the 8 seeded will rarely be the 8 best teams
 

pk9

Did you Say BOOTS - Pk
9 January 2004
in the boots thread
Lille, de oranje!
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

wot happened to the oranje, pot 3 ahh welll bring em on anybody that is! apart from brazil in the semi's or quarters
 
G

ghazi

Guest
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

It's frustrating seeing Mexico own a seed when the US has only lost to them once in the last 10 games, but the US kinda screwed itself with its '98 performance and by not accepting an invite to the Copa America.

I can live with the seedings. I actually like the chances of playing v Germany, Italy, France or Spain.

What i DO NOT like is this geographic sanitization occuring in the groupings. What the hell is that all about. Geography is catered to and addressed in the qualification process. After that, the groups should be drawn randomly without regard to geography.

They shouldnt sacrifice the balance of the competition on something as random as a location.

We'll see what happens on Friday.
 

rexrex

Conference
17 June 2005
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

ghazi said:
They shouldnt sacrifice the balance of the competition on something as random as a location.

We'll see what happens on Friday.
I agree there, totally.
 

Professor Nutmeg

ML Fanatic
3 July 2002
Master League
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

joostebrood said:
I know it doesn't really matter indeed, it just is weird.

Anyway, a shame we're not in pot 1, but I guess the country that will draw us from group 1 will also regret the fact we're in group 2 (I'm Dutch btw).
Absolutely, Pot 3 has some tricky teams. Netherlands, Portugal, Czech Republic, Switzerland...
 

JayM

International
17 April 2004
North Yorkshire
Celtic
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

I hate this seeding stuff, just draw the random names out of a hat, would be much better.

This is just designed to ensure teams of a higher standard (in FIFA's opinion) get through to the final whatever it is.
 
G

ghazi

Guest
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

JayM said:
I hate this seeding stuff, just draw the random names out of a hat, would be much better.

This is just designed to ensure teams of a higher standard (in FIFA's opinion) get through to the final whatever it is.
But, really, they haven't done that.

What they HAVE done is essentially favor the European countries by requiring them play TWO teams from weaker pots.

Meanwhile, the US, who's ranked top 10 for years now and missed being a seed by one point, is forced to play TWO European teams and NO Asian teams. . . merely because of its geography.

For a team ranked as high as the US, it seems rather unfair.
 

Rentalkid

Premiership
5 August 2003
Germany
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

JayM said:
I hate this seeding stuff, just draw the random names out of a hat, would be much better.

This is just designed to ensure teams of a higher standard (in FIFA's opinion) get through to the final whatever it is.
Absolutely wrong.
They do this to ensure a successfull and highly attended world cup, from group stage to final.
How would any nation (despite theirs of course) sell out any games in a group consitsting of Angola, Trinidad, South Korea and Iran for example?

It's way better how it is considering even now there are already enough weak pairings in the World cup predestined.
I agree that continental seeding stuff ist just plain stupid. The US and South Korea should be in Pot 3 with the remaining strong European sides, replacing Ukraine and Switzerland, both countries that don't even make it to the Cup regularly.
 

ss4_goku

Premiership
26 May 2004
Hong Kong / Toronto
Man Utd
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

FIFA wants to use this to ensure that every geographical location will be put apart and can play other teams from different continents....would suck totally if all the Asian teams are put into a pot...i mean, what's the point of the WORLD cup then? lolz

But i definitly do agree that if they put the pots in order of seeding, and then after that, ensure that only one from each continent (with UEFA being exception), is in the group.....then that would be more "fair" in terms of standing and geography
 

denirobob

IBERIAN PRIMERA
28 June 2002
Henley, Oxfordshire
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

ghazi said:
It's frustrating seeing Mexico own a seed when the US has only lost to them once in the last 10 games, but the US kinda screwed itself with its '98 performance and by not accepting an invite to the Copa America.

I can live with the seedings. I actually like the chances of playing v Germany, Italy, France or Spain.

What i DO NOT like is this geographic sanitization occuring in the groupings. What the hell is that all about. Geography is catered to and addressed in the qualification process. After that, the groups should be drawn randomly without regard to geography.

They shouldnt sacrifice the balance of the competition on something as random as a location.

We'll see what happens on Friday.
Hello mate

long time no speak!

The geographical thing was in place in 2002 and as far as i can recall previous tournaments before that, although I agree with what youre saying.

The weird thing in 2002 was that essentially the World Cup was two seperate 16 team tournaments with the final the only time the two sets of 16 sides mixed (due to two nation hosting) - I think it's diffrent this time although would need to check on fifa's site. They also scrapped the rule about teams who qualifiyed in same group being kept apart, and unless that's been changed back, then England could get Poland for instance which i dont really agree with.

db

ps - is that you and your bro in your avatar mate ?
 

fd1972uk

---------------------
9 January 2002
Glasgow
Celtic
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

No, that's his pimp. :mrgreen:

I do kinda agree, but as someone already said if a whole group of 1 continent or at least the majority came out together it would be pretty naff.

Although I ain't overly clued up in the African teams, the tournament doesn't seem to have me thinking it's as glamorous with the like of Cameroon, S.Africa and Nigeria, even Senegal not being there and also the likes of Columbia and Uruguay not being there too. Obviously it's good to see some new names and no doubt they deserve to be there, but just have a feeling about the actual qualities of these teams.


FD
 

gerd

Retired Footballer
8 January 2002
Over the moon
KRC Genk, Spurs
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Rentalkid said:
Absolutely wrong.
How would any nation (despite theirs of course) sell out any games in a group consitsting of Angola, Trinidad, South Korea and Iran for example?
If i could be garanteed a group with those teams i would buy tickets for all the matches...
The remarks in this thread are very conservative...
In 2O years countries like India, China, South Africa and The Unites States may well be the top nations...why wouldn't countries like Angola and Togo not increase the level of football???
I'm old enough to remember the first time Cameroun played a WC finals (1982 in Spain) who would have thought then that they would become a team that is sorely missed in 2006...
The first super power in football was Uruguay: were are they now...
I'm delighted that there are loads of new countries and i would welcome first round groups consisting of Brazil, Engand, Italy and Portugal (for example)...
Every sports need new stars and new heroes, but football and football fans don't get this and in the end it will mean the end of football...look how boring the "big" competitions are...
 

Professor Nutmeg

ML Fanatic
3 July 2002
Master League
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Every country in the finals earned the right to be there. If some bigger names didn't make it, it's their own fault. I like to see a bit of change myself.
I too remember watching the '82 World cup gerd :)
 

fd1972uk

---------------------
9 January 2002
Glasgow
Celtic
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Yep he does, although I still have my doubts for the upcoming tournie.

Remember '82 myself, old Davie Narey annoying the Brazilians. :mrgreen: Boniek, Rossi, Armstrong, Robson.


FD
 

denirobob

IBERIAN PRIMERA
28 June 2002
Henley, Oxfordshire
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

Jeez you fellas make me feel young! 86 was my first WC - Negrete, Josimar, The Moroccan chap who burst the ball, Aztec Gold, humungous goalnets etc... great days {|=

Anybody here used to buy or still got the official Fifa vids of each competition ? Hero the 86 one with Michael Caine doing the voiceovers is without doubt the finest piece of celulloid never to win an oscar!!

http://zemeken.free.fr/images/Mexico86_zemeken.jpg


db
 

Cloud1863

Premiership
10 December 2004
Stoke City
Re: World Cup 2006 Seeding

ThomasGOAL said:
Cloudl1863 hope :
Switzerland (not easy i think Poland more easy than Switzerland)

Cloudl1863 Group Of Death :
Australia (Ivory Coast better)
We walked over Switzerland at Euro 2004 and Poland took points from us in the qualifiers tho I dont think there is much in the two sides. Ivory Coast are a decent side but for some reason with all the British based players in Austrailia i feels a bit more of a tougher game.
 
Top Bottom