Daniel Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Repost from the T&T discussion. My real beef was with CONCACAF structuring the semis group (and that entire round; let's even forget about Haiti and Cuba for a sec) *NOTE: upon edit, it's a downright travesty*: Canada ended up being seeded as a 3 (in the pots) - Canada finished as a 3 seed after 2002 WCQ (behind T&T and Mexico, in front of Panama) - St-Vincent finished as a 4 seed (getting completely crushed) - Barbados finished as a 4 seed For 2006, assuming that the seeds get picked up by the preliminary round winners: - Canada keeps its 3 seed - St-Vincent keeps its 4 seed - St-Kitts picks up a 4 seed by defeating Barbados So, Canada's group ended up being seeds (2002 Hex result in parenthesis): 1(1), 2(4), 3, 3 While T&T's group ended up being by some miracle: 1(2), 2(6), 4, 4 The other group, for the record: 1(3), 2(5), 3, 4 I see this (again, having just realised the seeding travesty) and it is clear that either Canada or Guatemala should have switched with one of the island minnows. I can't even fathom how this came to happen. Anyone care to dig up something from 2004 announcing how the semi groups would be created? Because this has just gotten that much more depressing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_World_Cup_2002_%28qualification_CONCACAF%29#Preliminary_Round http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_World_Cup_2006_%28qualification_CONCACAF%29#Preliminary_Round Edit2: Apparently, the non-hex teams were unseeded for the 2006 draw. Which is completely ridiculous when what would be the #4 seed were uncompetitive in 2002, going a combined 1-1-16 6:61 (or 0.22 points per game and an average game score of 0.33-3.39. The last teams were on average 10.33 points from a hex spot. The #3 seeds went a combined 7-3-8 23:27 (1.83 ponts per game and an average game score of 1.28-1.50). The 3rd teams were on average 3.66 points from a hex spot. Guatemala and Costa Rica went to a playoff for a spot in the hex! Having thus done the math, it seems CONCACAF only followed their seeding rational halfway. How f ucking horrible. Edit 3: If we thought we got screwed, look at Cuba and Haiti: they've played 6 games each in 2000 and 2004 *combined*, never making it to the semis, eliminated by Canada, Costa Rica, Jamaica and T&T in the preliminary round. St Vincent has played 20 games over both cycles, Barbados, 14 and St Kitts, 14 as well. Their combined preliminary opponents to make it to semis have been: Nicaragua x2, Barbados and St Kitts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 FIFA ranking for CONCACAF in March 2004 (around the time when the qualifying was made public: 1- 5 Mexico 2- 12 USA 3- 18 Costa Rica 4- 48 Jamaica 5- 50 Honduras 6- 69 Trinidad and Tobago 7- 76 Cuba 8- 81 Guatemala 9- 86 Haiti 10- 91 Canada 11- 100 El Salvador 12- 113 Barbados 13- 125 St. Lucia 14- 127 Panama 15- 130 St. Kitts and Nevis 16- 151 Grenada 17- 154 Surinam 18- 162 Antigua and Barbuda 19- 164 St. Vincent and the Grenadines Group A 2- 12 USA 4- 48 Jamaica 11- 100 El Salvador 14- 127 Panama --------------- AVG 7.8- 71.8 Group B 3- 18 Costa Rica 5- 50 Honduras 8- 81 Guatemala 10- 91 Canada --------------- AVG 6.5- 60.0 Group C 1- 5 Mexico 6- 69 Trinidad and Tobago 15- 130 St. Kitts and Nevis 19- 164 St. Vincent and the Grenadines --------------- AVG 10.3- 92.0 Did not qualify for semis: 7- 76 Cuba 9- 86 Haiti 12- 113 Barbados 13- 125 St. Lucia 16- 151 Grenada 17- 154 Surinam 18- 162 Antigua and Barbuda --------------- AVG 13.1- 123.6 Population isn't everything, but for comparison's sake (with population rank): Group A 3rd United States 297,600,000 98th El Salvador 6,704,932 130th Panama 3,039,150 135th Jamaica 2,731,832 Group B 37th Canada 32,300,000 62th Guatemala 14,655,189 96th Honduras 6,975,204 122th Costa Rica 4,016,173 Group C 11th Mexico 106,202,903 151th Trinidad and Tobago 1,088,644 177th Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 117,534 ...and the kicker: 187th Saint Kitts and Nevis 38,958 Eliminated in preliminary round: 70th Cuba 11,346,670 90th Haiti 8,121,622 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi44 Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Of the top 10 ranked teams in CONCACAF, 4(!) were in Canada's group!. What a crock! And Mexico was basically handed a free pass... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 While were depressing ourselves... lets not forget how we were blatantly screwed by the Ref in edmonton, TWICE!!!! And how Stalteri was given a ridiculously long suspension for throwing the water bottle on the field- he may as well have punched the ref in the face! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 Forget the ref on the field and everything in that regards, which could be up for "interpretation". These numbers are not. I've put a lot of time into this so no threadjacking . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballfreak Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Your hex results in parenthases are wrong. You have the hex results of Costa Rica and USA inverted. Still, very nice rant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Keeper Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Theres has been somthing that doesnt seem right about the whole bracket for WCQ set out by CONCACAF from the first round. But that third semi final group stinks of rigging all the way. Of coarse it just happens to contain T and T. If one looks at the brakets early on, it would seem that it is Haiti and Cuba that have ultimatley been screwed over. Haiti defeated the Turks and Caicos in the first round. The winner of that draw was slated to face Jamaica for a berth in Semis pool 1. While way down the ladder, St. Vincent and the Grenadines where drawn in straight with Niquaragua with the winner advancing directly to semis group 3 (like canadas direct draw with belize). It just seems a bit too strange that only one of Jamaica and Haiti could be drawn into the semis, and that Cuba got a high quality opponent too in Costa Rica, and that none of them could be drawn into Group 3!!! One would think that it should have been Haiti in that direct entry draw against either Niquragua or St. Vincent, while the other of the former two should have been drawn against the Reggae Boys (having to play the Turks and Caicos first of coarse) for entry into group 1. Also, this way, Haiti (probable winners of a tie against Niquaragua or St. Vincent realisticly) would have been drawn into group three. This way group 3 would have been (realisticly) Mexico (1st seed), Trinidad(2nd), Haiti(3rd), and St. Kitts and Nevis (4th) (whom ligitimatley defeated Barbados). Either this, or place one of Guatamala, Costa Rica, Canada and Honduras in the direct tie with either Niqurague or St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Or, perhaps most simply (and fairly) draw Haiti against Cuba in that direct match up for entry into group 3. Then simply take Niquaragua and St. Vincent, split them into the 2 premiminary ties that Cuba and Haiti had to play in (The Caymans and Turks/Caicos respectivly). This atleast would have given Hait and Cuba a chance, and parred group three alot more evenly!! Any way you slice the equation for the brackets and the seeding, it is apparent that Concacaf, weather they did rigg things or not, needs a FAR more fair qualifying system right from the earliest rounds. http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/t/group/ncc.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Joe Keeper If one looks at the brakets early on, it would seem that it is Haiti and Cuba that have ultimatley been screwed over. If the top 12 sides advance -actual or ranked- our group would be approximately as tough as the one we ultimately got. We should be able to take 7 points at home at 2 away no matter who the opposition might be. T&T did what they had to, we didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Agreed. Excellent rant though. Proud of you Daniel. Nice research. Forgotten how soft that Group C was. Gawd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by footballfreak Your hex results in parenthases are wrong. You have the hex results of Costa Rica and USA inverted. Still, very nice rant. I edited to show these were the 2002 results, on which 2006 placement was based. As for YNWA's post: the top 12 *should* make it into the semis if the draw wasn't so inconducive to it. In this case, of the 3 teams that were not top-12, Group C had the two lowest ones (15-19). The average CONCACAF ranking of the two unseeded teams in each semi group was: A: (11+14)/2 = 12.5 B: (8+10)/2 = 9 C: (15+19)/2 = 17 Those are some more telling numbers considering that the big dropoff is usually around ranks 12-13. From 1 to 11-12 (Panama being the March 2004 exception, but their ranking has since climbed), you usally have some pretty even games where anyone can get points off of anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Bertuzzi44 Of the top 10 ranked teams in CONCACAF, 4(!) were in Canada's group!. What a crock! And Mexico was basically handed a free pass... It worked well for Mexico, but much better for T&T. They knew Mexico would get #1 while giving the other two teams almost no opportunity to get any points in head to head matches. Then it was simply a matter of T&T being the best out of those three teams in action not involving Mexico to make the hex, which was not difficult. Pretty smart -- keeping Mexico happy by tossing him the bone of super easy qualification to the hex while T&T ensures they get to the next round. When the biggest federation in the region is happy with the group, it's hard for any opposition to develop. Of course, my thoughts only apply if someone from T&T is pulling all the strings in CONCACAF and we know that is simply not possible, right? Jaso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Of course we got screwed. But as much as I agree with you Daniel, even if we were placed in a group with Mexico, T&T, St.Kitts, and us ... I'm afraid WE'D STILL BE SCREWED... by the ref, the scheduling, and our inability to deal with BS like we did. We need a team that can beat T&T, Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica, Cuba, Bahrain, and anyone else. We also need an association that can lobby successfully against horrendous and incompetant CONCACAF referrees and officials. If the Uzbecs and Bahrainians can get a match replayed, I couldn't understand why we couldn't in those games against Honduras. Rant over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 You can't have a match replayed over a judgment call. I prefer our chances in such a group (considering how weak T&T was to start), which is slightly easier than our 2000 group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Man Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Daniel You can't have a match replayed over a judgment call. I prefer our chances in such a group (considering how weak T&T was to start), which is slightly easier than our 2000 group. MLS Toronto ICE Strikers will make whatever group we're in a breeze. At the end of the day, all this is gossip. Had we won when we should have won, we'd be heading to germany. But we didn't. Time to simply suck it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 So to summarize, T&T got a break. Fair enough. But let's say we relied on FIFA rankings and used a Canadian seed system (1 vs 12, 2 vs. 11, etc) to produce the following groups: Mexico T&T Guatemala St. Vincent USA Honduras Canada St. Kitts Costa Rica Jamaica El Salvador Panama I figure our group would be no easier because we would still need to take four points from Honduras. Something we could not do. BTW, based on the Hex, T&T gets out of the semis anyway. If we can't consisently beat Honduras, Guatemala, Jamaica, and T&T at home, we won't qualify for another Hex -much less the final 32. Doesn't matter how much we cry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 You don't see how it is easier when one of the teams is definitely weaker, which affects the entire group dynamic? Had your proposed group been our group and we had the same results vs Honduras, it would come down to our respective confrontations with the States. Also, since one team is markedly weaker, we'd probably see the States end up qualified early and sending a B team near the end. Now I fully agree that we played crap in a few key games and had (once again) trouble finding the net, but it is a federation's job to not skew the qualification process by not seeding some teams while seeding others, especially with the wide gap in our confed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Keeper Posted November 20, 2005 Share Posted November 20, 2005 I admit that Canada caused alot of their own problems by not scoring, especially at home to Guatamala. However, I think this thread is addressing the larger problems of the qualifying story and how such decisions affect all the countries in our zone. The focal point is obviously that sketchy group three draw, wether or not there was movment in favour of Mexico and Trinidad or not. After seeing the Garabage on display by the refferee, archundia, at that home match in Edmonton agianst Honduras (as well as most other refereeing displays) and then this "seeding," mess, I have come to question the goverance of Concacaf. A more organized, competeative and balanced process for WCQ would benifit the whole regions development. This would include us, with proper pressure being exurted on us on the home front for player develoment, preperation and results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timotas Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 Interesting thread Daniel. I totally agree that the groups weren't structured well and that Group 3 was extremely unfair. I was, like everyone else, extremely dissapointed with the results in the semis. Looking at our group... it was tough. But I still believe there was no reason why we shouldn't have made it to the hex. Guatemala, Costa Rica, and Honduras are all strong CONCACAF teams... but unfortunately those are the teams we're going to have the beat to make it anywhere. I just still have this view in my mind that we're the 4th best team in CONCACAF, after USA, Mexico, and Costa Rica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Joe Keeper I admit that Canada caused alot of their own problems by not scoring, especially at home to Guatamala. We can say the same in 2002 WCQ. We should've gotten a win at home against T&T knowing we would be on the road from that point on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Geez, we get a bye through an early round to avoid any embarrassment or hassle of a trip, we play the next round with both games at home, then we screw up the home qualifiers, especially the first, completely unprepared for it. I personally could not give a damn about T n T and Warner and who gets the breaks. We also happen to qualify automatically for the Gold Cup lately, I should think we don't deserve that either. It would be better for us to be treated badly, forced to qualify for GC, not be given byes, have to play more as a team, and maybe learn through it to do our job instead of worrying about everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Yank Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Yes, Canada was on the **** end of a couple very bad decisions. I would like to point out that in the history of concacaf world cup qualifying, no team has lost 2 home games and still made it to the hex. Had Canada done the business at home this thread wouldn't exist. In 2000 the US had some similar bad calls made against them, yet still qualified. If you don't win at home you won't advance, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Canada actually didn't win a single game at home in the semi-final round. We had a better road record, with one win, one draw (which should have been a win) and a 1 goal loss. We definitely screwed up with our preparation & selection for that first match at home though & got screwed out of a victory in Edmonton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 29, 2005 Author Share Posted November 29, 2005 And by the third game we had to go all out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted November 30, 2005 Share Posted November 30, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Daniel And by the third game we had to go all out. Well, I don't know about that. Sure we had to play for the win, but we needed to do that in every game. Remember, going into the 3rd game against the Ticos we were ahead of them in the standings, as they lost their first two, including a 5-2 thrashing at home in the first match, after two draws against Cuba in the round before - 4 crappy results in a row, but they still made it, partly because they didn't have their subsequent game-winning goals disallowed. Canada of course is held to a higher standard by Concacaf - we have to be perfect in order to advance, the other teams don't. [] The game where we went all out was the 5th game, the home match against Costa Rica, one that we had to win, which wouldn't have been the case had the two previous wins stood. That was why, after Onstad's blunder allowing the Ticos back into the match in the 2nd half, we went all out with 5 strikers and got burned on two goals on the counter (one was a free kick, but it resulted from a foul off a counter). Really, another campaign where just about everything that could possibly go wrong did. I'm really sick of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 30, 2005 Author Share Posted November 30, 2005 Sorry, "3rd game" meant "3rd home game", which was the CRC in Vancouver . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.