Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol, England are actually good - not world class as the English seem to think ..... but they have plenty of players that can unlock the USA's defences. They are a level above the US.
Last time around they drew 1:1 and England wasn't a level above in that game for sure. Oh, and US won the group ahead of England, right?
There is a US v England planned friendly, contingent on the two teams not being drawn into the same group for WC 2014.
I am Scottish I am not an England fan but it is plain to see to me that they are a level above. One match is is one match, Celtic beat Barca does that mean they are on par with them? Of course not.
That one looks good to me! To be honest, I haven't really come across that many simulated groups of death yet, even though people say it's bound to happen for the next WC.
In your similation, I would say the following teams go through:
Group A
1. Brazil
2. Russia
3. Bosnia and Herzegovina
4. Iran
Group B
1. England
2. USA
3. Ecuador
4. Switzerland
Group C
1. Italy
2. Uruguay
3. Costa Rica
4. Algeria
Group D
1. Netherlands
2. Colombia
3. Ghana
4. Australia
Group E
1. Germany
2. Portugal
3. Cameroon
4. South Korea
Group F
1. Belgium
2. Chile
3. Japan
4. Greece
Group G
1. Argentina
2. Cote d'Ivoire
3. Croatia
4. Honduras
Group H
1. Spain
2. France
3. Nigeria
4. Mexico
Group A. the battle for 2nd is obviously between bosnia and russia to be honest I think it's way too early to tell which one will go through with brazil easily winning the group.
Group B is a wide open group all the teams in it can beat each other but ATM I'm leaning towards
1.England
2.Ecuador
3.USA(sorry usa you just haven't convinced me yet)
4. The swiss.
In Group C I find the battle at the top most interesting. ATM I would say Uruguay is better than Italy but with an ageing squad I think italy could catch them by the time the WC starts. still I'll give them the edge given that they have home continent advantage.
1. Uruguay
2. Italy
3. Costa Rica
4. Algeria
In group D I find it like group C with 2 teams clearly above the rest. Colombia and the dutch should advance easily enough but who comes out on top will be interesting. I say colombia will thanks to home continent advantage and the fact that their golden generation is now starting to shine.
1. Colombia
2. NED
3. Ghana
4. AUS
Group E This is a group that germany should win and if portugal refind their form then they should also claim 2nd without any problems.
1.Germany
2.Portugal
3.Korea
4.Cameroon
Group F This group is the group of dark horses Belgium and Chile. These 2 teams should advance easily enough but it's really which teams wins the group that will be interesting to see. But, to be honest I see Chile winning this group handedly.
1.Chile
2.Belgium
3.Greece
4.Japan
Group G This group is Argentina's to lose with no solid contender to challenge them, anything less than 9 pts will be a disappointment. the battle for 2nd is also pretty much sealed with nither croatia or honduras likely to cause problems for the ivorians.
1.Argentina
2.CIV
3.Croatia
4.HON
Group H this groups fate is already pretty much decided with footballing heavyweights Spain and france in there all mexico and nigeria have to fight for is 3rd place.ATM spain is without a doubt the better side however there star is beginning to fade as their squad ages as potentially a new golden generation arrives in france. I'm predicting the shock of the round
1.France
2.Spain
3.Nigeria
4.Mexico
These simulations are silly for me, let's wait until the groups are drawn in December, after all not all qualified teams are defined yet. Also, with the new rule of group leaders based on the stupid FIFA ranking, it's almost certain there will be at least one but most likely 2-3 very competitive groups. Call it death group or not, but thing is, any group with more than 2 obvious favorite for the round of 16 can fit the bill.
I am Scottish I am not an England fan but it is plain to see to me that they are a level above. One match is is one match, Celtic beat Barca does that mean they are on par with them? Of course not.
I was thinking about this over the weekend while watching two separate games...the Sunderland game and then Sporting KC. I was thinking how Altidore gets so many opportunities in WC Qualifying and friendlies, but not in the PL. I think that Klinsmann understands better how to utilize Altidore's strengths. Altidore isn't great when he is the lone forward. He needs quality service at his best.I was then watching Sporting KC and thinking Zusi isn't an incredible player, but his skills create opportunities for others frequently, and for some reason him and Altidore make a good pair. Add in Dempsey's work rate, Donovan's inteligence, and Bradley's game control and the US are a collection of pretty good players that come together to make a really good team. Their big weakness is in the back line, they are pretty inexperienced back there. Anyway, not the most talent, but they work better together than many other teams.
future world cup will be won by indonesia or fiji islands (????????)
I know the stupidity coming from FIFA is incredible. I'd rather them expand the World cup to 40 and give africa and asia a spot along with the rest of the confederations than put up with this crap.
I know the stupidity coming from FIFA is incredible. I'd rather them expand the World cup to 40 and give africa and asia a spot along with the rest of the confederations than put up with this crap.
They are both political ideas that makes no sense and are neither practical nor reliable.
I know the stupidity coming from FIFA is incredible. I'd rather them expand the World cup to 40 and give africa and asia a spot along with the rest of the confederations than put up with this crap.
I already showed an article in my post above discussing the interests behind the 40-team WC idea. It's a bad one for the sport, it just a political move. The current first round with 32 teams is already seen as too long. Increasing the number of teams would also have major implications on infrastructure preparation that are likely unrealistic for some future hosts. Besides, 32 slots already allows plenty of "touring" teams that has little or no chances to play competitively in the first round. Increasing the number of teams would likely cause a considerable drop on the overall quality of the games. Finally, every ranking system you look at with or without taking into consideration the factor "tradition" and/or "history" show that Asia and Africa already have too many slots.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
..... but they have plenty of players that can unlock the USA's defences. They are a level above the US.
