NationStates

Nazis in Space wrote:First of all,

Nazis in Space wrote:That's neat.

And immediately amusing.

1st Simulation:

Group C: Portugal, Spain, Costa Rica, Morocco.

I'm a fucking God at group simulation.

Secondly, the actual draw - replace Costa Rica with Iran - is hilarious.

Thirdly, Group F is going to steal all the spotlights. Literally all of those teams are entertaining as fuck.

The only disadvantage is that I want all four to advance. Can't we, say, ban Group A's first and second from advancing in favour of Group F's 3rd and 4th placed?

I think Group F is going to be the most entertaining Group of them all. Holy shit, 2nd place is a Free-for-All.

Nazis in Space wrote:First of all,

Nazis in Space wrote:That's neat.

And immediately amusing.

1st Simulation:

Group C: Portugal, Spain, Costa Rica, Morocco.

I'm a fucking God at group simulation.

Secondly, the actual draw - replace Costa Rica with Iran - is hilarious.

Thirdly, Group F is going to steal all the spotlights. Literally all of those teams are entertaining as fuck.

The only disadvantage is that I want all four to advance. Can't we, say, ban Group A's first and second from advancing in favour of Group F's 3rd and 4th placed?

I wish. Momo is going to be the only reason Egypt goes through, otherwise a walkover for Uruguay.[quote="New New Serrland";p="33003470"]Group A: Russia, Uruguay, Egypt, Saudi Arabia

Group B: Portugal, Spain, Iran, Morocco

Group C: France, Peru, Denmark, Australia

Group D: Argentina, Croatia, Iceland, Nigeria

Group E: Brazil, Switzerland, Costa Rica, Serbia

Group F: Germany, Mexico, Sweden, South Korea

Group G: Belgium, England, Tunisia, Panama

Group H: Poland, Colombia, Senegal, Japan/quote]My picks are in. Wish Nigeria and Croatia could go through too but I think Iceland will surprise again. Senegal the real dark horse though; would like to see them make the QFs.

New New Serrland wrote:Group A: Russia, Uruguay, Egypt, Saudi Arabia

Group B: Portugal, Spain, Iran, Morocco

Group C: France, Peru, Denmark, Australia

Group D: Argentina, Croatia, Iceland, Nigeria

Group E: Brazil, Switzerland, Costa Rica, Serbia

Group F: Germany, Mexico, Sweden, South Korea

Group G: Belgium, England, Tunisia, Panama

Group H: Poland, Colombia, Senegal, Japan

---------

Group F looks brutal. Group H looks like it could be a lot of fun. France, Argentina (hard draw on paper, but I don't think it will be as difficult as it looks), and Brazil must be feeling pretty good.

Lucky draw for England, too.

My picks are:

A: Russia, Uruguay
B: Portugal, Spain
C: France, Denmark
D: Argentina, Nigeria
E: Brazil, Switzerland
F: Germany, Mexico
G: Belgium, England
H: Poland, Colombia

I reserve the right to change my mind just before the tournament.

As for picks...

Group A: Uruguay & Egypt, purely on the basis of sympathy. Which in Egypt's case is less a case of sympathy and more a case of being neutral. But fuck the Russkies and Saudis.

Group B: Portugal & Morocco. Ordinarily, Portugal and Spain are the obvious picks, but... I don't want to rule out upsets. My sympathies lie with Iran, but Morocco tossing out Spain would be fucking hilarious.

Group C: Peru & Denmark. Obviously, France is going to make it, but I'm letting my sympathies run wild here. Also a pity Claudio Pizarro never had the opportunity :<

Group D: Argentina & Iceland. The latter based on... see Group A. Fuck Croatia. And Nigeria ain't gonna amount to shit.

Group E: Brazil & Switzerland. Meh.

Group F: Germany & South Korea. Based on genuine belief, no less. I want Sweden to make it so we get a Sweden vs. Denmark match down the road, I just don't believe they can manage it. I want Mexico to do well because they're fun, but I genuinely believe that South Korea will come out on top.

Group G: Belgium & Tunisia. The rest's chaff.

Group H: Poland & Colombia. With Colombia being the only one that I have some vague sympathies for.

I did not do sympathies.

Because, well, no Germany then. Also no Belgium or England

Nazis in Space wrote:First of all,

Nazis in Space wrote:That's neat.

And immediately amusing.

1st Simulation:

Group C: Portugal, Spain, Costa Rica, Morocco.

I'm a fucking God at group simulation.

Secondly, the actual draw - replace Costa Rica with Iran - is hilarious.

Thirdly, Group F is going to steal all the spotlights. Literally all of those teams are entertaining as fuck.

The only disadvantage is that I want all four to advance. Can't we, say, ban Group A's first and second from advancing in favour of Group F's 3rd and 4th placed?

Group A is really some sort of cosmic joke, a waste of time that will produce two teams that will lose 3-0 in their first knockout game.

The Blaatschapen wrote:I did not do sympathies.

Because, well, no Germany then. Also no Belgium or England :p

Bah, I know you love us. You love us so much you even moved here :v

Nazis in Space wrote:

The Blaatschapen wrote:I did not do sympathies.

Because, well, no Germany then. Also no Belgium or England

Bah, I know you love us. You love us so much you even moved here :v

Only because Berlin is the least German major city of Germany.

Also, I can finally have a good party.

Provided you win the finals.

New New Serrland wrote:Group G: Belgium, England, Tunisia, Panama

The Brexit group: Brussels vs. England with the Panama Papers as decoration.

The Blaatschapen wrote:

Nazis in Space wrote:Bah, I know you love us. You love us so much you even moved here :v

Only because Berlin is the least German major city of Germany.

Also, I can finally have a good party.

Provided you win the finals.

With such overwhelming Dutch support the fifth star is basically a done deal.

Wow... group A is awful.

Should be easy enough for England to progress imo. But yeah to me these groups don't seem very well balanced

Nazis in Space wrote:As for picks...

Group A: Uruguay & Egypt, purely on the basis of sympathy. Which in Egypt's case is less a case of sympathy and more a case of being neutral. But fuck the Russkies and Saudis.

Group B: Portugal & Morocco. Ordinarily, Portugal and Spain are the obvious picks, but... I don't want to rule out upsets. My sympathies lie with Iran, but Morocco tossing out Spain would be fucking hilarious.

Group C: Peru & Denmark. Obviously, France is going to make it, but I'm letting my sympathies run wild here. Also a pity Claudio Pizarro never had the opportunity :<

Group D: Argentina & Iceland. The latter based on... see Group A. Fuck Croatia. And Nigeria ain't gonna amount to shit.

Group E: Brazil & Switzerland. Meh.

Group F: Germany & South Korea. Based on genuine belief, no less. I want Sweden to make it so we get a Sweden vs. Denmark match down the road, I just don't believe they can manage it. I want Mexico to do well because they're fun, but I genuinely believe that South Korea will come out on top.

Group G: Belgium & Tunisia. The rest's chaff.

Group H: Poland & Colombia. With Colombia being the only one that I have some vague sympathies for.

A: Uruguay and Egypt, agreed on that one. Good to see the Egyptians back, they're a lot of fun

B: Spain and Iran. Iran are sneaky good, and Portugal are boring as can be (albeit good)

C: France and Denmark. Gutted for Peru. They deserved a better (for them) group than this.

D: Argentina and Croatia. I would love for Iceland to have another great run, but I don't really believe in fairy tales...

E: Brazil and Costa Rica. Flip a coin though, could be Switzerland instead. Hope not.

F: Germany and Mexico. To meet again in the final?

G: England and Belgium, but yawn.

H: Colombia and Senegal. Best wishes to you Poland, you've done a magical thing, but better luck next time.

If we're doing guesses...

A: Uruguay, Egypt
B: Portugal, Spain
C: France, Denmark
D: Argentina, Iceland
E: Brazil, Costa Rica
F: Germany, Mexico
G: England, Belgium
H: Colombia, Poland

As for what I'd like to see in fantasy land...

A: Uruguay, Egypt
B: Iran, Spain
C: France, Denmark
D: Nigeria, Iceland
E: Brazil, Costa Rica
F: Korea, Mexico
G: Tunisia, Belgium
H: Senegal, Japan

Group A: Uruguay, Russia - C’mon, Russia is not so bad.

Group B: Portugal, Spain - Go Morocco.

Group C: Peru, Australia - France shall not pass!

Group D: Argentina, Iceland - Ice baby in Cup.

Group E: Costa Rica, Brazil - And...

Group F: Germany, Mexico - Fight! Fight! Fight!

Group G: England, Tunisia - No brussels.

Group H: Senegal, Japan - Upset feelings.

Val Halla wrote:Wow... group A is awful.

Russia's group was almost certainly always going to be the weakest group for the simple reason that the hosts are automatically seeded, but the hosts are also the second-lowest-ranked team in the tournament.

And I don't really think the Group A draw was a fix, if only because there's no way on earth that FIFA would have wanted the opening match of their showpiece event to be between the two lowest-ranked teams in the tournament; though I suppose it's Russia's best chance of a win.

Anyway, since everyone else is doing it, I might as well join in...

Group A: Uruguay & Egypt (because this would upset both Moscow and Riyadh; and the Egyptians can at least defend)

Group B: Spain & Portugal (I'd love Morocco to do well, but head over heart here)

Group C: France & Denmark (Australia are struggling, and while my inner romantic wants to see Peru succeed, I just don't see them travelling well)

Group D: Croatia & Nigeria (everyone needs at least one upset group pick; see below for some elaboration)

Group E: Brazil & Serbia (Brazil definitely; Serbia because I think the Russians fans will adopt their Orthodox Slav 'brothers' as the second home team when it's clear Russia are struggling badly)

Group F: Germany & Sweden (Ruthless Aryan northern European efficiency to triumph over romance)

Group G: Belgium & England (though only after England narrowly beat Panama 1-0 with an injury-time winner, and then play through two dispiriting and tedious 0-0 draws with Tunisia and Belgium)

Group H: Poland & Senegal (this assumes Lewandowski avoids injury; and Senegal because I'm generally predicting a poor tournament for South Americans)


Much of the above is predicated on the observation that it's a European tournament, and European teams will therefore likely dominate, as they usually do on their home continent; 1958 notwithstanding. And yes, I am predicting more African than South American teams in the second round; but only into the second round. Brazil - and perhaps Uruguay - will then do what they need to do to avoid total embarrassment for South America.

I have some outside hope for the Nigerians, but realistically know that they'll get caught up in some sort of dispute involving non-payment of match fees a month before the tournament, that half of the team will threaten to walk out, and that the eventual compromise will get everyone to return, but will also satisfy no one, leading to a dispiriting second-round loss to France.

And Argentina will have a horrible tournament; I'd genuinely like them to do well - I travel semi-regularly to Buenos Aires these days - but they're simply not in a good place right now. Now that I've written that, Messi will no doubt single-handedly drag a mediocre Argentinian side to the semi-finals, but realistically this is the worst Argentinian squad in a long time.

The Archregimancy wrote:And I don't really think the Group A draw was a fix, if only because there's no way on earth that FIFA would have wanted the opening match of their showpiece event to be between the two lowest-ranked teams in the tournament; though I suppose it's Russia's best chance of a win.

Not saying it was a fix, because as you say, Russia's group was always going to largely fail at, well, football, but we are talking about the FIFA that wants to expand the cup to 48 teams - because there clearly isn't enough chaff there yet - and about the FIFA that wants said 48-team cup to be played in groups of three, because clearly Gijon 1982 is something we should emulate en masse.

If there'd been a need or the competence needed to get the first match to be an easy one for the host, I don't see why they wouldn't do it. They're planning to maximise the number of such matches in the future, after all.

Nazis in Space wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:And I don't really think the Group A draw was a fix, if only because there's no way on earth that FIFA would have wanted the opening match of their showpiece event to be between the two lowest-ranked teams in the tournament; though I suppose it's Russia's best chance of a win.

Not saying it was a fix, because as you say, Russia's group was always going to largely fail at, well, football, but we are talking about the FIFA that wants to expand the cup to 48 teams - because there clearly isn't enough chaff there yet - and about the FIFA that wants said 48-team cup to be played in groups of three, because clearly Gijon 1982 is something we should emulate en masse.

I'm old enough to remember the 1982 World Cup - and nor is it the first World Cup I remember.

But it was my first conscious introduction to A) why FIFA shouldn't be trusted to organise anything and B) why it's absolutely necessary to hold the final matches in four-team groups simultaneously; forcing anyone to sit through that W. Germany - Austria match is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.

But if the latter infamous match is what you're referring to by 'Gijon 1982', it was the final match in a group of four (Austria, Algeria, Chile, W. Germany) - not a match in a group of three - taking place the day after Algeria's 3-2 victory over Chile; which is why both W. Germany and Austria knew which result would suit. None of the second round matches in groups of three took place in Gijon; the latter were all in Barcelona and Madrid.

And those 1982 groups of three did give us this.

The Archregimancy wrote:

Nazis in Space wrote:Not saying it was a fix, because as you say, Russia's group was always going to largely fail at, well, football, but we are talking about the FIFA that wants to expand the cup to 48 teams - because there clearly isn't enough chaff there yet - and about the FIFA that wants said 48-team cup to be played in groups of three, because clearly Gijon 1982 is something we should emulate en masse.

I'm old enough to remember the 1982 World Cup - and nor is it the first World Cup I remember.

But it was my first conscious introduction to A) why FIFA shouldn't be trusted to organise anything and B) why it's absolutely necessary to hold the final matches in four-team groups simultaneously; forcing anyone to sit through that W. Germany - Austria match is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.

But if the latter infamous match is what you're referring to by 'Gijon 1982', it was the final match in a group of four (Austria, Algeria, Chile, W. Germany) - not a match in a group of three - taking place the day after Algeria's 3-2 victory over Chile; which is why both W. Germany and Austria knew which result would suit. None of the second round matches in groups of three took place in Gijon; the latter were all in Barcelona and Madrid.

And those 1982 groups of three did give us this.

I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable, much like the expansion of the world cup to 48 teams inevitably results in more teams in the general range of the Group A teams appearing.

Hence, FIFA is seemingly supportive, not wary of constellations such as Russia : Saudi Arabia.

Nazis in Space wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
I'm old enough to remember the 1982 World Cup - and nor is it the first World Cup I remember.

But it was my first conscious introduction to A) why FIFA shouldn't be trusted to organise anything and B) why it's absolutely necessary to hold the final matches in four-team groups simultaneously; forcing anyone to sit through that W. Germany - Austria match is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.

But if the latter infamous match is what you're referring to by 'Gijon 1982', it was the final match in a group of four (Austria, Algeria, Chile, W. Germany) - not a match in a group of three - taking place the day after Algeria's 3-2 victory over Chile; which is why both W. Germany and Austria knew which result would suit. None of the second round matches in groups of three took place in Gijon; the latter were all in Barcelona and Madrid.

And those 1982 groups of three did give us this.

I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable, much like the expansion of the world cup to 48 teams inevitably results in more teams in the general range of the Group A teams appearing.

Hence, FIFA is seemingly supportive, not wary of constellations such as Russia : Saudi Arabia.

Everything to get China into the cup.

The Blaatschapen wrote:

Nazis in Space wrote:I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable, much like the expansion of the world cup to 48 teams inevitably results in more teams in the general range of the Group A teams appearing.

Hence, FIFA is seemingly supportive, not wary of constellations such as Russia : Saudi Arabia.

Everything to get China into the cup.

Still not a 211 team tournament.

The Blaatschapen wrote:

Nazis in Space wrote:I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable, much like the expansion of the world cup to 48 teams inevitably results in more teams in the general range of the Group A teams appearing.

Hence, FIFA is seemingly supportive, not wary of constellations such as Russia : Saudi Arabia.

Everything to get China into the cup.

On the current qualifying format - acknowledging the format may change for 2026 - China still wouldn't have qualified.

AFC will have 8 teams in 2026, which would consist of (on current format) the top four teams in each final group; China finished 5th in Group A.

Uzbekistan and the UAE would have qualified, though.

Nazis in Space wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
I'm old enough to remember the 1982 World Cup - and nor is it the first World Cup I remember.

But it was my first conscious introduction to A) why FIFA shouldn't be trusted to organise anything and B) why it's absolutely necessary to hold the final matches in four-team groups simultaneously; forcing anyone to sit through that W. Germany - Austria match is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.

But if the latter infamous match is what you're referring to by 'Gijon 1982', it was the final match in a group of four (Austria, Algeria, Chile, W. Germany) - not a match in a group of three - taking place the day after Algeria's 3-2 victory over Chile; which is why both W. Germany and Austria knew which result would suit. None of the second round matches in groups of three took place in Gijon; the latter were all in Barcelona and Madrid.

And those 1982 groups of three did give us this.

I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable.

Perhaps not. The Gijon match played out the way it did because both W. Germany and Austria qualified with a draw; the format allowed the top two teams in a group to go through.

In a tournament with 16 groups of 3, only the group winners would go through; so there can be no scenario where a draw would send both teams into the second round, and the second match for the teams will - hypothetically - always have one team that wants to win by as many goals as possible, because if one team won its first match, and the second team lost its first match, then a victory for the second team can still propel the second team above the first team in the table. There will always be something to play for.

The real problem will be tiebreakers; it's likely that arcane tiebreakers will be necessary far more frequently.

We both agree that the proposed format for 2026 is idiotic, mind. Perhaps not quite as idiotic as 1938 (where every match was a knockout match - so the Dutch East Indies travelled a very long way for the privilege of losing 6-0 to Hungary in their only match), but still fairly idiotic.

Nazis in Space wrote:I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable.

I stand corrected - you're entirely right.

I've just doublechecked the format for 2026, and the top two teams go through from the groups of three.

This is even more idiotic than I thought.

Dear God, save us from FIFA.

The Archregimancy wrote:

Nazis in Space wrote:I'm aware that it was played in groups of four. The point is that the proposed - correction, approved for 2026 - WC expansion with its groups of three would make the reoccurance of such constellations inevitable.

Perhaps not. The Gijon match played out the way it did because both W. Germany and Austria qualified with a draw; the format allowed the top two teams in a group to go through.

In a tournament with 16 groups of 3, only the group winners would go through; so there can be no scenario where a draw would send both teams into the second round, and the second match for the teams will - hypothetically - always have one team that wants to win by as many goals as possible, because if one team won its first match, and the second team lost its first match, then a victory for the second team can still propel the second team above the first team in the table. There will always be something to play for.

The real problem will be tiebreakers; it's likely that arcane tiebreakers will be necessary far more frequently.

We both agree that the proposed format for 2026 is idiotic, mind. Perhaps not quite as idiotic as 1938 (where every match was a knockout match - so the Dutch East Indies travelled a very long way for the privilege of losing 6-0 to Hungary in their only match), but still fairly idiotic.

Your mistake is in assuming that FIFA would do the sensible thing and only let the group winner qualify.

This is not the case. The top two get through, only the last one is eliminated.

And then I was ninja'd by seconds.

Wait, no, I wasn't, that's eight minutes. How the fuck did I miss...

... eh, whatever. We're in agreement, anyway.

The Archregimancy wrote:

The Blaatschapen wrote:
Everything to get China into the cup.

On the current qualifying format - acknowledging the format may change for 2026 - China still wouldn't have qualified.

AFC will have 8 teams in 2026, which would consist of (on current format) the top four teams in each final group; China finished 5th in Group A.

Uzbekistan and the UAE would have qualified, though.

I have little doubt in my mind that, given the sheer amount of money being poured into development relative to the rest of Asia, China will qualify by 2026, and 2022 is even a possibility.

The rise of China may be the death knell - or at least will definitely make things harder - for the likes of the Saudis, unless they adapt a Qatari Handball type solution.