the qualifying technique suggested in the times

[Waterhall Wizard]

sorry i never said it was a waste of time and effort.

but i think he would much rather play a competetive match of football with some sort of chance of winning and progressing to the world cup and therefore showing his loyalty to his country on the biggest stage possible. rather than turning up to a match where you know your a loser from the first whistle.

What you are saying is that you would rather an improving team get to the finals instead of being knocked out in the qualifiers by a more deserving team.

If you had your way, in order for the minnow to compete with the big fish in the finals a better team will have been sacrificed.

 

[Easy 10]

Martin Samuel is absolutely SPOT ON with that article.

The crucial point is sorting the wheat from the chaf for this qualifying tournament. The minnows should have to play a pre-qualifiying knock-out tournament, in order to earn the RIGHT to enter a World Cup qualifying group where the "big boys" come in.

The likes of Lichtenstein, Azerbaijan, Scotland, Estonia, Wales etc etc should be playing against each other long before we see them at Old Trafford and the San Siro. With 13 European teams to qualify for the World Cup Finals (plus Germany who already qualify as hosts), the qualifying group stage could comprise of 5 groups of 4 teams - a top seed and 2nd seed, plus whoever else has battled through pre-qualifying. Then the top 2 from each group goes through, and 3 other best 3rd places (with a playoff if necessary).

Less games, tighter groups, more quality. It makes SENSE.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

You don't know you are a loser from the first minute. I remember when the Faroe Islands played their first ever Qualifying match against Austria, the latter boasted they'd win 10-0, they only had to turn up to win, the Faroes were all part timers who couldn't stand up to the rigours of professional football, etc, etc. Result Faroes 1 Austria 0, the latter have never really recovered from the result.

The Champions league have already ruined any chance from clubs from many countries to have a fair crack at giving their own countries pride, international qualifying matches are virtually the last place where these players can try to compete with the best.

I bet if you asked the Azerbaijaini players whether they'd like to beat Malta, Luxembourg and Moldova or play against England they'd all go for the latter because by playing the best the players can improve. For the record I thought they defended reasonably well this evening, they wouldn't have had the oppotunity against Estonia would they?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

I bet if you asked the Azerbaijaini players whether they'd like to beat Malta, Luxembourg and Moldova or play against England they'd all go for the latter because by playing the best the players can improve. For the record I thought they defended reasonably well this evening, they wouldn't have had the oppotunity against Estonia would they?

no i do see that side of the argument. but if ive understood it correctly then they would be playing this standard of teams in a qualifying group.

therefore you would have to ask them 'would you rather be bottom of a group or possibly qualify for thw world cup?'

i would honestly believe that despite it being a lower standard of match like malta etc they would take that opportunity to possibly qualify for the world cup.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Martin Samuel is absolutely SPOT ON with that article.

The crucial point is sorting the wheat from the chaf for this qualifying tournament. The minnows should have to play a pre-qualifiying knock-out tournament, in order to earn the RIGHT to enter a World Cup qualifying group where the "big boys" come in.

The likes of Lichtenstein, Azerbaijan, Estonia, Wales etc etc should be playing against each other long before we see them at Old Trafford and the San Siro. With 13 European teams to qualify for the World Cup Finals (plus Germany who already qualify as hosts), the qualifying group stage could comprise of 5 groups of 4 teams - a top seed and 2nd seed, plus whoever else has battled through pre-qualifying. Then the top 2 from each group goes through, and 3 other best 3rd places (with a playoff if necessary).

Less games, tighter groups, more quality. It makes SENSE.

yes. thats what im trying to say but dont quite hold the same straight talking talents as your good self!

 

[Waterhall Wizard]

The crucial point is sorting the wheat from the chaf for this qualifying tournament. The minnows should have to play a pre-qualifiying knock-out tournament, in order to earn the RIGHT to enter a World Cup qualifying group where the "big boys" come in.

That's a different scenario from that that has been suggested on this thread. What has been said is that they play one another as an official qualifier, and then go straight in to the final. The aim is to protect them from a possible thrashing from a better team, and to guarantee that at least one of them gets to the final.

I have no problem with the minnows playing each other before the main qualifiers in order that they can compete with the big fish. This would probably mean that more teams would have the chance of reaching the qualifiers.

 

[Easy 10]

yes. thats what im trying to say but dont quite hold the same straight talking talents as your good self!

Dunno about that - I talk bollocks

But I do think the way the European qualifying rounds are set up is quite farcicle. You get groups like ours, which are a complete cakewalk, then you get mental groups with the likes of Holland, the Czech Republic and Romania all in together - its daft. Some groups have 6 teams, some have 7 teams...its a mess.

We need this streamlined. 5 groups of 4. Twenty teams competing for 13 places - get rid of the shit before we get to the serious stuff. Its the natural order of things, not unlike the 1st and 2nd rounds of the FA Cup. You have to EARN that right to be rubbing shoulders with the major teams.

How many ridiculous mismatches do we have to see with the likes of San Marino and the Faroe Islands clogging up the calender with pointless fixtures against the proper footballing nations ? If they win through then fair enough, they've earned it. Otherwise - just butt out. You're a waste of time.

 

[fatboy]

Theoretically it is like the FA Cup - the worse ranked teams must win the most games if they are to win.

 

[keaton]

One, the writer got his facts wrong. England weren't putting eight past Turkey in 1993 we were very poorly and luckily beating them 1-0 (dennis wise's handball)
Two, if yesterday was such a mismatch then surely the Azeri players did really well to only lose by to two goals which will give them confidence and shows the progression they've made. They also drew with Wales who were beating Italy not that long ago.
Thirdly, i'm pretty sure that when the score was 0-0 last night, the Azeri forward went very very close to scoring. England would then have to take apart a very pumped 11 man defensive wall.
If that had been the case i don't think we would be talking about games being too easy

 

[Easy 10]

It was only a combination of bad luck and bad finishing that kept the score down to 2-0 last night. We hit the woodwork twice and spurned a number of good chances, but are you seriously trying to say that the game last night was in any way competative ? I've not got the OPTA stats to hand, but I'm sure if you took a glance at those, you would see the extent of Englands complete and utter domination of the game. It really was just a matter of time before we scored.

It IS a complete waste of time having these minnows in the groups. OK, occasionally you might have a freak result occur, a fluke or whatever. Its football, it happens (I remember the 2-2 with Macedonia at St Marys). But I don't think that makes any kind of case for having these groups stuffed to the rafters with makeweights who are no more than cannon fodder for goal difference.

Armenia, Andorra, Albania, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Estonia, Latvia, Cyrus, Faroe Islands, Moldova, Scotland, Belarus, Wales, Azerbaijan, San Marino, Malta, Iceland....these teams should (of course) have a shot at qualifying for the World Cup, but they should be playing off against each other FIRST before being lumped in with the proper footballing nations.

 

[fatboy]

The same Latvia that qualified for Euro 2004, drawing with Germany and playing well in the group of death against Czech Rep and Holland?

 

[Easy 10]

Yup. Thats the one.
The fact that some of the smaller nations have carved out the odd good result here and there shouldn't mean they automatically have a right of passage to overly-bloated World Cup qualifying groups. If Latvia are capable of getting a result against the Czech Republic, then they should be capable of knocking out Andorra and making the proper qualifying group.

What are the FIFA World Rankings supposed to be used for, for christs sake.

 

[lincs seagull]

what does either side gain from mis matches like this the big team dont try there players at full stretch and the smaller teams can not judge there advancement or learn anything apart from stick everyone behind the ball and hold on. the occasional big time match is good but being beaten heavly 90% of the time is not good.

And the article also points out it is detremental to the big sides no real competition and a lack of motivation. And when the compertition in the final starts they are found wanting. They dont learn how to play against a strong defence or a passing side or a team with play makers the teams in englands group offer none of this Poland are the only side in the group which will give us a test at the moment.

I would love to be drawn in groups with italy spain france etc to really show where we are and where we need to be.

we need to do this to help evryone these matches are now very boring now that we have so many new and weak international sides

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

I agree that the minnows play a qualifying tournament themselves then they enter the draw with the 'better' nations.

That way if they win their group(s) they still get the chance to play the Hollands, Englands, France of this world.

This will improve confidence. How many managers say that winning breeds confidence. Yes the Faroes beat Austria 1-0. Great that was a long time ago. Every now and then you will get a surprise result and its great! But since then what?

But if they beat 3 or 4 or whatever on their way to the main qualifiers, you'd probably see a much better team as a result of having won a few matches.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

I would love to be drawn in groups with italy spain france etc to really show where we are and where we need to be.

I doubt very much you'd be saying that if we failed to qualify for the finals. I remember when we did draw Italy in a qualifying group and failed to qualify because we didn't put enough goals past Finland and Luxembourg.

What is the point in playing the good teams in qualifying when you want to meet them in the Finals?

 

[Kukev31]

The qualifying technique suggested is a very good idea. Every other federation does it (apart from south america but they only have 10 teams). So why dont UEFA, less but more competitive games for the big clubs and a greater chance of winning for the smaller teams.

 

[Simster]

That is a VERY good point.

I also feel sorry for Azerbijan as we "Humiliated" them 2-0 tonight

I simply think that proves the writer's point. Just because we didn't put ten past them, doesn't mean we didn't win easily. We had 65% of possession which is an extraordinarily high percentage. On another day, we'd have been six up at half time.

Football is a low scoring game, so teams that are incapable of competing are simply demeaning the use of goal difference as a way of differentiating teams. And unlike a domestic league structure, the lesser nations haven't earnt the right to be playing in the same competition as the bigger fish.

For example, if England finish level on top with Poland but Poland finish ahead of us because of goal difference, despite the fact that England's record against the third and fourth placed teams imight be better, is that necessarily fair?

 

[Easy 10]

I would love to be drawn in groups with italy spain france etc to really show where we are and where we need to be.

I agree with your post, but I don't think anyone is calling for groups to be made up of several top-ranking European teams. They just need to be seeded (as they are now), but with less crap teams being included. A top seed and 2nd seed would suffice, with two other teams who have successfully pre-qualified making up a group of 4. So instead of rubbish groups like:

Portugal
Slovakia
Russia
Latvia
Estonia
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg

You could cut that down to 4 teams - the top seed (eg Portugal), 2nd seed (eg Russia) plus any other two from the rest, who have pre-qualified for the group. Dunno what the World Rankings are at the moment, but that should be the barometer to ascertain who is a top/second seed.

Simple innit ?

 

[fatboy]

How does a team stop being a "minnow" and qualify for this group of so called good teams? Or is it a closed shop?

 

[Easy 10]

By consistently winning games against its fellow minnows, qualifying for groups, picking up results against the big boys here and there and gradually working its way up the FIFA world rankings.

Can't see anything unfair with that. The best of the minnows will earn the right for their "big games" against the major nations. It also provides more of an incentive for them to improve as footballing nations, rather than just being handed glamour games on a plate all the time, accepting their thrashing, and waiting for the next World Cup / Euro group to roll round for their next stuffing.