do you really believe England can win the World cup

[papereyes]

However, I'd dispute the word "failure". In my memory, we've always been ranked somewhere either side of tenth - don't know if there's an easy way to track our moves up and down the ranking system.

[BarryWhiteRFC]

good thread (I mean it)

HNA can be very anti-Irish and that really gets on my tits. Probably a reflection of the UK in general, alas, although I know the feeling can be mutual.

But they are fair game on this thread, because Gus (despite going on to make many fair points, as do the other Irish posters) was provocative and should be able to take jokes about Clinton Morrison etc in return. This is a football banter thread.

ps I'd love England to win the WC. But this team is short of quality forwards (Defoe, Heskey, Crouch, Carlton Cole ffs) and, if Gerrard/Ferdinand are injured or suspended we have not got the strength to replace them at World Cup QF and beyond level.

I agree. I don't think we are quite good enough to put in a good challange. Quarters again I reckon. I'd say were one or two players away though from getting there or there-a-bouts. Maybe not winning it, but being one of the favourites, and pushing to at least the semi's.

As for the ireland bashing, I love to see the Republic do well, a lot of my friends give me a lot of abuse for this, but I don't care. Most of the Irish i've met have always been very pleasent friendly people. If nothing else, I want Ireland to succeed for them, also the Irish RFC (ex) contingent. Obviously i'd always want England to beat them though, should/when they ever meet.

[FiNeRaIn]

good thread (I mean it)

HNA can be very anti-Irish and that really gets on my tits. Probably a reflection of the UK in general, alas, although I know the feeling can be mutual.

But they are fair game on this thread, because Gus (despite going on to make many fair points, as do the other Irish posters) was provocative and should be able to take jokes about Clinton Morrison etc in return. This is a football banter thread.

ps I'd love England to win the WC. But this team is short of quality forwards (Defoe, Heskey, Crouch, Carlton Cole ffs) and, if Gerrard/Ferdinand are injured or suspended we have not got the strength to replace them at World Cup QF and beyond level.

Where's the anti-irishness?

To be honest, I have never known many people that have a dislike for Ireland in my life at all - I have a dislike for celtic and their Irish fans and their constant annoying traits grinds my gears, but this does not reflect at all on normal Irish people who I travelled with, went out with,etc So if that was in any way aimed at me I would like to put that to bed now.

England are a top 10 international side, nothing more and nothing less really. There is a chance they might win the world cup but that goes for another select few teams. We are like the aston villa/everton of world football, not quite at the top but capable of going on a run worthy of winning a competition with 8 games or whatever it is.

We lack the strength in depth compared to everyone else, looks at the striking options of spain/argentina and brazil compared to us for isntance. EmiLOLe heskey, as much as I like him as a personality he wouldn't get anywhere near a B team for most top 10 international teams.

[Seal]

Most likely to win the world cup: Spain, Brazil

Could win the world cup: Italy, Germany, England, Argentina (if they qualify), France

Long shots: Holland, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Portugal (if they qualify)


Therefore, if you buy into that logic, England have a pretty decent side now, one of the best in the world, but are still less than a 7-1 shot to win the thing.

We're pretty good, but it's just a darn hard tournament to win.

[Thaumagurist*]

Most likely to win the world cup: Spain, Brazil

Could win the world cup: Italy, Germany, England, Argentina (if they qualify), France

Long shots: Holland, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Portugal (if they qualify)


Therefore, if you buy into that logic, England have a pretty decent side now, one of the best in the world, but are still less than a 7-1 shot to win the thing.

We're pretty good, but it's just a darn hard tournament to win.

France haven't qualified yet. They could still miss out.

[TBM]

Most likely to win the world cup: Spain, Brazil

Could win the world cup: Italy, Germany, England, Argentina (if they qualify), France

Long shots: Holland, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Portugal (if they qualify)


Therefore, if you buy into that logic, England have a pretty decent side now, one of the best in the world, but are still less than a 7-1 shot to win the thing.

We're pretty good, but it's just a darn hard tournament to win.

France haven't qualified yet. They could still miss out.

I doubt it Spacey - The Faroe Islands have won 1 game in 8 years..........

[Thaumagurist*]

Serbia are FOUR points ahead of France. They'd need Serbia to drop some points to have a chance of qualifying automatically, otherwise it'll be the lottery of the play-offs....

[papereyes]

Most likely to win the world cup: Spain, Brazil

Could win the world cup: Italy, Germany, England, Argentina (if they qualify), France

Long shots: Holland, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Portugal (if they qualify)


Therefore, if you buy into that logic, England have a pretty decent side now, one of the best in the world, but are still less than a 7-1 shot to win the thing.

We're pretty good, but it's just a darn hard tournament to win.

France haven't qualified yet. They could still miss out.

... and they could still go on and win it.

CHRIST YOU'RE A TEDIOUS WORM

[Gus the teenage cow]

I hope Fifa don't seed the play-off draw and just have it as an open draw, no doubt if germany go down in moscow and with france almost certainties for play-offs the pressure from the big football associations will be on


oh and by the by uefa is being absolutely screwed in terms of qualifying places, i have no problem with africa getting 5 slots + south africa = 6

but asia with 4 possibly 5???? no way, asia should get a maximum of three places


concacaf with 3 possibly 4????? - concacaf should get just 2 places


south america with 4 (possibly 5) is ok

oceania 1 (possibly 2) - should get 1 place and that place should be only after a play-off against 5 th south american

this would leave 16 places for europe, much better than the current 13


qualification is a joke at the moment, teams liek mexico, usa and australia are almost guaranteed qualification...but if you put those teams in uefa groups they'd absolutely struggle to qualify

for gods sake honduras and new caledonia are in the running coz of the way the qualification slots are distributed while the likes of portugal, sweden, romania, czech republic, bulgaria, the ukraine and many others face elimination in europe - fair? i don't think so

[Thaumagurist*]

He had put the "If they qualify" qualifier next to Argentina and Portugal, I was thinking why not France too?

[papereyes]

I hope Fifa don't seed the play-off draw and just have it as an open draw, no doubt if germany go down in moscow and with france almost certainties for play-offs the pressure from the big football associations will be on


oh and by the by uefa is being absolutely screwed in terms of qualifying places, i have no problem with africa getting 5 slots + south africa = 6

but asia with 4 possibly 5???? no way, asia should get a maximum of three places


concacaf with 3 possibly 4????? - concacaf should get just 2 places


south america with 4 (possibly 5) is ok

oceania 1 (possibly 2) - should get 1 place and that place should be only after a play-off against 5 th south american

this would leave 16 places for europe, much better than the current 13


qualification is a joke at the moment, teams liek mexico, usa and australia are almost guaranteed qualification...but if you put those teams in uefa groups they'd absolutely struggle to qualify

for gods sake honduras and new caledonia are in the running coz of the way the qualification slots are distributed while the likes of portugal, sweden, romania, czech republic, bulgaria, the ukraine and many others face elimination in europe - fair? i don't think so

I actually agree, to some extent.

Think you're under-estimating conacaf and perhaps over-estimating africa.

I also think the ranking needs sorting as it over-rates Africa, Asia and the other regions at the expense of middling European teams.

I'd also probably just put Oceania into Asia, maybe as a separate stream but SERIOUSLY, other than New Zealand (and, previously, Australia), are any of those islands ever going to compete.

[papereyes]

He had put the "If they qualify" qualifier next to Argentina and Portugal, I was thinking why not France too?

We get it. You don't like France.

There's no need to keep banging on about it.

Seriously.

[TBM]

Most likely to win the world cup: Spain, Brazil

Could win the world cup: Italy, Germany, England, Argentina (if they qualify), France

Long shots: Holland, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Portugal (if they qualify)


Therefore, if you buy into that logic, England have a pretty decent side now, one of the best in the world, but are still less than a 7-1 shot to win the thing.

We're pretty good, but it's just a darn hard tournament to win.

France haven't qualified yet. They could still miss out.

I doubt it Spacey - The Faroe Islands have won 1 game in 8 years..........

True....but even the competition in the playoffs isn't great

[papereyes]

Its not bad.

Genuinely impressed with the standings of the Former Yugoslav countries

Serbia lead their group from France
Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia-H are all second placed

Of the other countries, you have Macedonia (population about 2 million) a win from making things even more uncomfortable for the Scotch and Montenegro in their first ever qualification.

[Thaumagurist*]

He had put the "If they qualify" qualifier next to Argentina and Portugal, I was thinking why not France too?

We get it. You don't like France.

There's no need to keep banging on about it.

Seriously.

My dislike of France has nothing to do with it. I was being pedantic about his list.

[prostak]

Gus - It's a WORLD cup. In honesty, 16 teams is about enough to make an enjoyable European Championships, why would you want to over-saturate the WC in favour of the European teams? Look at the teams that qualified for 2006 - Poland, Ukraine and Czech Republic among others could all have stayed home without damaging the overall quality of football (Indeed, Ukraine not going would have spared us that godawful 2nd round match of theirs against the Swiss). I'd much rather see a redressing of the imbalance in qualification places, giving more spots to Africa and Asia - though there's a decent argument that the latter federation should be split into east and west, particularly since Australia's defection.

As for the question posed by the thread - no. Like always, they'll go out, probably in the quarter-finals, to the second good team they face. Then the Germans/Italians/Brazilians will win.

[papereyes]

Of the 32 best teams according to the FIFA rankings,

3 are African - Cote d'Ivoire, Cameroon, Egypt (5, plus hosts)
2 are North American - Mexico, USA (3 plus playoff)
5 are South American - Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile (4 + playoff)
1 is Asian - Australia (4 plus playoff)
0 are from Oceania (Playoff)
21 are from UEFA (13)

Where's the imbalance again?

[1960]

And don't get me started on seeding for the finals. We have already won our group and might even get 10 wins out of 10. BUT we didn't qualify for the 2008 Euros and went out of the 2006 World Cup in the QF. So Germany, France and Argentina, even if they all qualify through play-offs, will no doubt be seeded above us.

The old old story with England seeding. While not wanting to give any credit to Scotland, they suffer from the same problem in qualifiers. Do badly, so get stuck with harder teams so do badly, so...etc.

[prostak]

Where's the imbalance again?

Geographically. If you read what I said, I didn't mention quality of the teams involved. I couldn't care less if some 'better' (according to the notoriously suspect FIFA rankings, which I've only encountered when used by people trying to back up fatuous arguments like this) European teams miss out at the expense of Egypt, Iraq etc. I'd find it much more interesting to have a genuine spread of nations from across the world.

Incidentally, do you really think FIFA have appropriated qualification spots according to ranking? Have a think about the 2006 FIFA-Adidas-Budweiser-Avaya-Coca-Cola-Continental-Deutsche Telekom-Emirates-Fujifilm-Gillette-Hyundai-MasterCard-McDonald's-Philips-Toshiba-Yahoo World Cup in Germany. Laboured point maybe, but do you see what I'm driving at?

[prostak]

And don't get me started on seeding for the finals. We have already won our group and might even get 10 wins out of 10. BUT we didn't qualify for the 2008 Euros and went out of the 2006 World Cup in the QF. So Germany, France and Argentina, even if they all qualify through play-offs, will no doubt be seeded above us.

The old old story with England seeding.

Though this is hilarious. What difference does seeding really make, if you're strong enough to win the thing? Plus, Germany, France and Argentina would all seem to be nations with better footballing history than England...