Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Yes, but I would like you to list who you think the best teams are. As far as I can see they have all been seperated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Yes, but I would like you to list who you think the best teams are. As far as I can see they have all been seperated. 28612[/snapback] Why did you make a post inferring you wanted a definition of best teams when you wanted a list of best teams then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 All of the groups are even and therefore fair, unless you say otherwise. You do know all of the groups bar group 1 have 2 qualifers from WC2002 don't you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Yes, but I would like you to list who you think the best teams are. As far as I can see they have all been seperated. 28612[/snapback] Why did you make a post inferring you wanted a definition of best teams when you wanted a list of best teams then? 28615[/snapback] ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Because I wanted the defininition first then you could provide me with a list proving you definition. Neither are forthcoming I notice as the qualifying system is completely fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Because I wanted the defininition first then you could provide me with a list proving you definition. Neither are forthcoming I notice as the qualifying system is completely fair. 28635[/snapback] I'll skip the 'best teams' definition if that's ok. But some groups are less competitive than others, therefore less even, therefore less fair, using your definition of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 (edited) So basically you are going to say they aren't fair without backing it up? Glad we got that sorted then. Edited September 5, 2005 by Sima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 So basically you are going to say they aren't fair without backing it up? Glad we got that sorted then. 28646[/snapback] No, nice of you put words in my mouth though. Are you saying all the groups are equally even in terms of strength? It's just that's what you were using to define fairness, not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I'll just take the words you put in my mouth and give them back tbh. Yes, the groups are even, even = fair. See, not hard is it. 15 teams qualifed from Europe for WC2002, excluding Germany (hosts) that leaves 14 which are split up into 7 groups of 2 and drawn into Groups 2-8 Not quite sure what happened to Group 1 but both Holland and Czech Republic are in the top 5 in the world so presumably their seedings were defined by that. If you have a fairer way, I'd be glad to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I'll just take the words you put in my mouth and give them back tbh. Yes, the groups are even, even = fair. See, not hard is it. 15 teams qualifed from Europe for WC2002, excluding Germany (hosts) that leaves 14 which are split up into 7 groups of 2 and drawn into Groups 2-8 Not quite sure what happened to Group 1 but both Holland and Czech Republic are in the top 5 in the world so presumably their seedings were defined by that. If you have a fairer way, I'd be glad to hear it. 28654[/snapback] So, as you point out, one group has two teams in the top 5 in the world, but the groups are even. OK, glad we got THAT one straight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 2 teams that did NOT qualify for the World Cup Jesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 2 teams that did NOT qualify for the World Cup Jesus. 28661[/snapback] But surely having two teams in the top 5 in the FIFA world rankings would suggest that group is stronger than some of the other groups and therefore not EVEN? Also, maybe they didn't qualify for the last World Cup because they were in a strong group the last time. I'm only hypothesizing, but that would be unfair. Only using your criteria for defining fairness of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 They weren't in the top 5 at the time of the draw tbh. They are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chip2388 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Author Share Posted September 5, 2005 They weren't in the top 5 at the time of the draw tbh. They are now. 28669[/snapback] Even so they must have both been close to the top 10. Some groups such as 7 and 8 contain pretty weak teams, despite even the likes of Spain struggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 World Cup qualifying groups are practically bound by geographic restrictions, not all regions have attained the same level therefore the groups cannot be evenly balanced. Not fair, but neccessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 why are you surprised ?? I'd have thought the club would have been aware of this before he signed.. Anyway, we can either choose to sign internationals or not, is how I see it personally like..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 My sentiments exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charvski 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 i think the club would of knew about it when they signed him, and why would you want to stop anyone playing for their country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakermaker 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 FIFA dont allow clauses to be put into contracts that would prevent a player playing for his country. as for our position relating to solano,he's 30 or 31,peru have no chance of qualifying for the world cup and he's fallen out with the manager,i guess fat fred/souness would think its a fair chance nobby'll not be off to south america every other weekend..........unless he's found yet another new girlfriend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charvski 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 i just think the media have just asked him the question because of what happened in the past with bobby robson and that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 Exactly. He hasn't even confirmed he is definitely doing it. Shit stirring by the media until something more concrete comes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now