Commentary from the Handorian Press Daily
Ask any Audioslavian player how important it is to define your tiebreaker.
If anyone can't remember what happened last year, then maybe it is time to remind you what happened in the group stage of World Cup 87. A really strange situation, labelled by the Audioslavian press as "Tiebreakergate", and caused the Bulls to be eliminated in favour of Poafmersia, who just qualified for the first time in that tournament. Let me take this time to explain what happened.
Group B Pld W D L GF GA GD PtsAfter the second matchday, nobody has qualified. 4th seeds Poafmersia took 3 points against Audioslavia in Matchday 1, but was defeated by 3rd seeds Trolleborg in Matchday 2. Valanora took wins against Trolleborg and Audioslavia, and was firmly in the driver's seat.
1 Valanora 2 2 0 0 5 2 +3 6
2 Trolleborg 2 1 0 1 3 3 0 3
3 Poafmersia 2 1 0 1 4 4 0 3
4 Audioslavia 2 0 0 2 3 6 −3 0
The tiebreakers wrote: Points, Head-to-head points, Head-to-head goal difference, goal difference, and if necessary a coin toss. There was no saying that there would be a retabulation of any of the criteria. Even in the situation where 3 teams are tied, and one team's position has been broken by the tiebreaker. Well at least that was what the host bid stated. Nothing of that sort. And since the Constitution of the World Cup Committee does not specify what tiebreakers should be used for the qualifiers or the main tournament itself, the hosts words will be law.
On Matchday 3, Poafmersia lost to Valanora 0-1, and Audioslavia defeated Trolleborg 6-4. The table read like this:
Group B Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts
1 Valanora 3 3 0 0 6 2 +4 9
2 Poafmersia 3 1 0 2 4 5 −1 3
3 Audioslavia 3 1 0 2 9 10 −1 3
4 Trolleborg 3 1 0 2 7 9 −2 3
If you are wondering, Poafmersia was labelled as having qualified ahead of Audioslavia. Without any coin toss. Nothing. When the hosts was asked, they explained that Poafmersia is ahead of Audioslavia on Head-to-head record. And that caused an absolute outroar in the Audioslavian camp, who were surprised that they were eliminated by a grey area.
To explain how the tiebreakers were interpreted by the hosts, we should look at the head-to-head results between Poafmersia, Audioslavia and Trolleborg. Poafmersia defeated Audioslavia in Matchday 1 4-2. Trolleborg defeated Poafmersia 2-0. Audioslavia defeated Trolleborg 6-4. For Head-to-head points, all 3 teams are level on 3 points. For Head-to-head Goal Difference, all 3 teams are level, with a net 0 goal difference. Then on goal difference, Trolleborg would be behind Poafmersia and Audioslavia, because they lost by 2 against Valanora. The hosts then went back to the first tiebreaker, the head-to-head results, to determine the order between Poafmersia and Audioslavia.
The Audioslavian camp would argue that nothing in the tiebreaker rules indicates that the tiebreakers would go back from the start. With absolutely no precedence for this situation, the hosts deliberated, and decided that their interpretation (which was to restart the use of the tiebreakers, rather than proceed to a coin flip) was correct, and Poafmersia went through to the Round of 16. Though the Red Panjias would note that their qualification was rather controversial, they would eventually silence critics and pull off a win over Brenecia in the Round of 16 to make it to the Quarterfinals.
So why, you may ask, should we bring this up again? Because this time round, it seems that a possibly weird interpretation of the tiebreakers might possibly lead to some additional trouble in the qualifiers. To be honest, even I am not sure whether this interpretation is what the hosts actually meant. During the host bidding discussion, the Poafmersian delegation (again, Poafmersia) tried to clear the air by asking about the specifics of the tiebreaker usage. While the hosts confirmed that there will be no reuse of tiebreakers, something else cropped up.
"On the three way tiebreaker, the determination would still be with A, B, and C down the line, yes."
Based on that particular line, it seemed that even if one of the teams, say A, was found to be ahead of B and C on head-to-head points, when determining whether B or C should be ahead based on head-to-head goal difference, results against A will be in the tabulation. That didn't really sound quite right, but considering that such an interpretation is logical, nothing could really be said. But does it make a difference? 3 matchdays in, and there is a difference we can show you.
Group 7 Pld W D L GF GA GD PtsWe can start with this group. Yes, it is 3 matchdays in, but this would be what happens if tiebreakers exclude teams no longer tied. In this case, in terms of Head-to-head points, Taeshan would have 3 points (from a win over Baker Park), while Baker Park and Juvencus will have 0. Baker Park and Juvencus will be level on head-to-head goal difference since they have not played each other, and Baker Park will be ahead on goal difference. Something similar will happen for Chartistan and Igratia, as Montaña Verde got a win over Chartistan.
1 Taeshan 3 2 0 1 2 2 0 6
2 Commonwealth of Baker Park 3 2 0 1 10 4 +6 6
3 Juvencus 3 2 0 1 3 1 +2 6
4 Eraman 3 1 2 0 8 7 +1 5
Legalese 3 1 2 0 9 8 +1 5
Savigliane 3 1 2 0 6 5 +1 5
7 Montaña Verde 3 1 0 2 5 8 −3 3
8 Chartistan 3 1 0 2 5 6 −1 3
9 Igratia 3 1 0 2 5 9 −4 3
10 Central Antarctic Peninsula 3 0 0 3 0 3 −3 0
Group 7 Pld W D L GF GA GD PtsHowever, if results against teams already out of the tie is included, there will be some movements, as seen above. Baker Park has a -1 goal difference to Juvencus' 0, as they lost by 1 goal against Taeshan. Therefore, Juvencus will be in 2nd while Baker Park will be in 3rd. Replace Baker Park with Chartistan, Juvencus with Igratia, and Taeshan with Montaña Verde, and you will have the exact same situation.
1 Taeshan 3 2 0 1 2 2 0 6
2 Juvencus 3 2 0 1 3 1 +2 6
3 Commonwealth of Baker Park 3 2 0 1 10 4 +6 6
4 Eraman 3 1 2 0 8 7 +1 5
Legalese 3 1 2 0 9 8 +1 5
Savigliane 3 1 2 0 6 5 +1 5
7 Montaña Verde 3 1 0 2 5 8 −3 3
8 Igratia 3 1 0 2 5 9 −4 3
9 Chartistan 3 1 0 2 5 6 −1 3
10 Central Antarctic Peninsula 3 0 0 3 0 3 −3 0
To give an even more extreme situation, Group 18 will present 3 tables, namely "When H2H tiebreakers restart", "when H2H tiebreakers don't restart but ignores teams already tiebroken", and "When H2H tiebreakers don't restart but includes teams already tiebroken".
Group 18 Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts5 teams are level on 4 points. Tolanka, Netop, Sapim, Yuezhou and Equestria. Considering all 5 teams, by head-to-head points, Tolanka has 4, Yuezhou, Netop and Sapim has 1, while Equestria has 0. Tolanka will be ahead, followed by Netop, Sapim and Yuezhou all level, and then Equestria last. If recursion occurs, then head-to-head points between Netop, Sapim and Yuezhou will be considered. Netop and Sapim played each other and drew, while Yuezhou has 0 head-to-head points. Therefore, Netop and Sapim are level, while Yuezhou is behind them.
1 Farfadillis 3 3 0 0 13 6 +7 9
2 New Lusitania 3 2 1 0 11 7 +4 7
3 Le Choix 3 2 0 1 3 2 +1 6
4 Tolanka 3 1 1 1 5 3 +2 4
5 Netop 3 1 1 1 4 5 −1 4
Sapim 3 1 1 1 5 6 −1 4
7 Yuezhou 3 1 1 1 7 6 +1 4
8 Equestria 3 1 1 1 8 8 0 4
9 Arklanda 3 0 0 3 2 8 −6 0
10 Havynwilde 3 0 0 3 4 11 −7 0
Group 18 Pld W D L GF GA GD PtsWhen there is no restart of tiebreakers, Yuezhou will move ahead of Netop and Sapim. That is because, after the 5-way head-to-head points determination, the 3-way head-to-head goal difference between Yuezhou, Netop, and Sapim is all 0, and then Yuezhou would be ahead by Goal Difference (+1 to Netop and Sapim's -1).
1 Farfadillis 3 3 0 0 13 6 +7 9
2 New Lusitania 3 2 1 0 11 7 +4 7
3 Le Choix 3 2 0 1 3 2 +1 6
4 Tolanka 3 1 1 1 5 3 +2 4
5 Yuezhou 3 1 1 1 7 6 +1 4
6 Netop 3 1 1 1 4 5 −1 4
Sapim 3 1 1 1 5 6 −1 4
8 Equestria 3 1 1 1 8 8 0 4
9 Arklanda 3 0 0 3 2 8 −6 0
10 Havynwilde 3 0 0 3 4 11 −7 0
Group 18 Pld W D L GF GA GD PtsNow, if the head-to-head goal difference determination is based on 5-way results, Yuezhou and Sapim will be on 0, but Netop will be on -3, following their 0-3 home loss on Matchday 1 to Tolanka. This means that between Yuezhou, Sapim and Netop, Netop will be behind due to head-to-head goal difference, and then the tiebreak between Yuezhou and Sapim will be done by goal difference.
1 Farfadillis 3 3 0 0 13 6 +7 9
2 New Lusitania 3 2 1 0 11 7 +4 7
3 Le Choix 3 2 0 1 3 2 +1 6
4 Tolanka 3 1 1 1 5 3 +2 4
5 Yuezhou 3 1 1 1 7 6 +1 4
6 Sapim 3 1 1 1 5 6 −1 4
7 Netop 3 1 1 1 4 5 −1 4
8 Equestria 3 1 1 1 8 8 0 4
9 Arklanda 3 0 0 3 2 8 −6 0
10 Havynwilde 3 0 0 3 4 11 −7 0
3 different interpretations, 3 different tables in the case of Group 18. Of course, some of our dear readers may argue that we are doing this too early in the qualifiers, and by the end, these issues will be ironed out. But it is better to address these issues before another repeat of last year occurs.