Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Alex

Ok this is pissing me off

Recommended Posts

So the I see that the Asians got their act together, had a preliminary draw and have matchups for the bottom feeders in the confederation in June. Then they have the remaining teams seeded and ready for the July draw by fifa. Concacaf - do something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2011 at 8:11 AM, Alex said:

So the I see that the Asians got their act together, had a preliminary draw and have matchups for the bottom feeders in the confederation in June. Then they have the remaining teams seeded and ready for the July draw by fifa. Concacaf - do something.

That's funny. Are you still pissed off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Addona said:

I like this (check the part that's struck out):

https://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2019/7/18/20698673/the-changes-in-world-cup-qualification-mean-gregg-berhalter-needs-to-open-the-player-pool

Even the U.S. fans know what's happening ...

That is funny but have the US ever failed to make the hexagonal? If not then the "rigging" changes did not really accomplish anything.

Which is not to say that CONCACAF are above doing whatever it takes to line their pockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lofty said:

That is funny but have the US ever failed to make the hexagonal? If not then the "rigging" changes did not really accomplish anything.

Which is not to say that CONCACAF are above doing whatever it takes to line their pockets.

They've had some close calls over the years.  However, it's a totally different ball game when you're seeded.  You can make mistakes and get away with it (losing to Guatemala).  They finished behind Mexico and Honduras in the last hex just as we finished behind those same two teams in the semi-final round.  They likely don't make the hex if they had our draw.

Edited by CanadianSoccerFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I feel like they also lost to J, and beat some other minnow at the death in an away fixture, plus I think they squeaked by A&B 3-2 at home ...

Edit: It was A&B they beat at the death in the away fixture that same cycle as they 3-2 match ...

Edit: I just checked and it was 3-1 in the home fixture, not 3-2.

 

Edited by Addona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lofty said:

That is funny but have the US ever failed to make the hexagonal? If not then the "rigging" changes did not really accomplish anything.

Which is not to say that CONCACAF are above doing whatever it takes to line their pockets.

Sure, maybe not. But as soon as they start to look vulnerable they are given this safety net.

This set up is kind of like saying "Things have always worked out this way, so we are going to assume that would never ever change and ensure that it CAN'T ever change."

Amateur teams never win the FA Cup, but you don't see the English FA changing that tournament to put the Amateur teams in a completely separate stream. Have a playoff among the lower tier teams and if you win it all we'll put you in a match for third place while the big boys play for first!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kent said:

Sure, maybe not. But as soon as they start to look vulnerable they are given this safety net.

This set up is kind of like saying "Things have always worked out this way, so we are going to assume that would never ever change and ensure that it CAN'T ever change."

Amateur teams never win the FA Cup, but you don't see the English FA changing that tournament to put the Amateur teams in a completely separate stream. Have a playoff among the lower tier teams and if you win it all we'll put you in a match for third place while the big boys play for first!

It is interesting that you chose the FA Cup as an example because it is heavily tilted towards the teams with a higher ranking (by being in a higher division). In 2018 there were 692 teams who played down to only 20 remaining before they were joined by the 44 teams (more than twice as many) in the top 2 divisions! That is quite a boatload of byes!

The new WCQ format does not guarantee anybody anything. Every team has the same opportunity to lift their ranking into the top 6, or indeed fall out of the top 6. And even after getting there, you still have to finish at least 3rd out of the 6 best teams in order to qualify. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Lofty said:

It is interesting that you chose the FA Cup as an example because it is heavily tilted towards the teams with a higher ranking (by being in a higher division). In 2018 there were 692 teams who played down to only 20 remaining before they were joined by the 44 teams (more than twice as many) in the top 2 divisions! That is quite a boatload of byes!

The new WCQ format does not guarantee anybody anything. Every team has the same opportunity to lift their ranking into the top 6, or indeed fall out of the top 6. And even after getting there, you still have to finish at least 3rd out of the 6 best teams in order to qualify. 

I am aware of the earlier rounds of the FA Cup. The key difference is that it's still the same stream, with the higher ranked teams entering later on. This World Cup Qualifying procedure is two separate, parallel paths. All teams in the FA Cup, no matter how early they are in and how remote their chances are, compete for a chance to win the cup. They have a chance to progress through the rounds. WCQ excludes the majority of teams from any chance of getting a non-intercontinental playoff World Cup spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kent said:

I am aware of the earlier rounds of the FA Cup. The key difference is that it's still the same stream, with the higher ranked teams entering later on. This World Cup Qualifying procedure is two separate, parallel paths. All teams in the FA Cup, no matter how early they are in and how remote their chances are, compete for a chance to win the cup. They have a chance to progress through the rounds. WCQ excludes the majority of teams from any chance of getting a non-intercontinental playoff World Cup spot.

In other words, a higher ranking buys you an advantage. I think that is standard procedure in football and indeed in most or all sports. And that higher ranking must be earned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Lofty said:

 

The new WCQ format does not guarantee anybody anything. Every team has the same opportunity to lift their ranking into the top 6, or indeed fall out of the top 6. And even after getting there, you still have to finish at least 3rd out of the 6 best teams in order to qualify. 

This is a very good point, me personally, I just wished they would have announced top 6 would be based on FIFA rankings MUCH MUCH sooner.

1) Gold Cup would have been even more exciting. 

2) It unintentionally favored teams like Jamaica & El Salvador who travelled the world playing tons of extra games in the last 18 months.

3) It will likely be a different format next cycle as the tourney expands.

Almost makes you wonder based on timeline (announced so late), if Vic thought he could have used Nations League or a different ranking but was forced into using Fifa rankings for top 6 (guess we will never know). 

Edited by apbsmith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, apbsmith said:

This is a very good point, me personally, I just wished they would have announced top 6 would be based on FIFA rankings MUCH MUCH sooner.

1) Gold Cup would have been even more exciting. 

2) It unintentionally favored teams like Jamaica & El Salvador who travelled the world playing tons of extra games in the last 18 months.

3) It will likely be a different format next cycle as the tourney expands.

Almost makes you wonder based on timeline (announced so late), if Vic thought he could have used Nations League or a different ranking but was forced into using Fifa rankings for top 6 (guess we will never know). 

Last night during one of the Voyageurs Cup games (I think it was the Vancouver vs Cavalry game) I'm pretty sure I heard Gareth Wheeler say that nations thought the CONCACAF ranking was going to be used, and then at the last minute it was changed to FIFA (no doubt FIFA forced that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kent said:

Last night during one of the Voyageurs Cup games (I think it was the Vancouver vs Cavalry game) I'm pretty sure I heard Gareth Wheeler say that nations thought the CONCACAF ranking was going to be used, and then at the last minute it was changed to FIFA (no doubt FIFA forced that).

The FIFA rankings are seriously flawed. While I have no problem with the new WCQ system theoretically, this practical reality is very damaging to the integrity.

The saving grace is that I still think it will result in the 4 best teams advancing but using the CONCACAF rankings would have made it much more likely for the best 6 teams to be in the hexagonal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2019 at 12:55 AM, Lofty said:

The new WCQ format does not guarantee anybody anything. Every team has the same opportunity to lift their ranking into the top 6, or indeed fall out of the top 6. And even after getting there, you still have to finish at least 3rd out of the 6 best teams in order to qualify. 

Not according to WeGlobalFootball a long-standing website that makes soccer ranking systems its business. According to them the new FIFA system does NOT let countries move their ranking up (or down) very quickly. See the "Teams Do Not Move" section in this lengthy and scathing review of the new system.

http://www.weglobalfootball.com/2018/06/12/fifas-new-elo-rankings/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, CanSuffer said:

Not according to WeGlobalFootball a long-standing website that makes soccer ranking systems its business. According to them the new FIFA system does NOT let countries move their ranking up (or down) very quickly. See the "Teams Do Not Move" section in this lengthy and scathing review of the new system.

http://www.weglobalfootball.com/2018/06/12/fifas-new-elo-rankings/

 

Yes, I actually posted that link a few weeks ago. See my post immediately above yours for my thoughts on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Lofty said:

Yes, I actually posted that link a few weeks ago. See my post immediately above yours for my thoughts on that.

Ok, it was you. I wanted to thank the person who posted that. It's very informative and useful info on the subject. So thanks. It's great when a forum/post is actually useful.

Agreed the rankings are seriously flawed and are damaging to FIFA/CONCACAF 's (already shallow) integrity.  I've been a supporter of Vic Montagliani in CONCACAF up til now. I applaud his efforts to give more meaningful games to the minnows in the Caribbean. But it doesn't excuse this laughable system.

Edited by CanSuffer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CanSuffer said:

Agreed the rankings are seriously flawed and are damaging to FIFA/CONCACAF 's (already shallow) integrity.  I've been a supporter of Vic Montagliani in CONCACAF up til now. I applaud his efforts to give more meaningful games to the minnows in the Caribbean. But it doesn't excuse this laughable system.

For me Montagliani has had good points and bad points as CONCACAF president.

Positives:
Nations League
CONCACAF League
Club Index
Nations Index
Qualifying for the Gold Cup improvements (it wasn't based on sub-region, no automatic spot for Canada, seemed to open the door for having every nation being required to qualify in the future)
Ever so slightly expanded hosting duties for the Gold Cup

Negatives:
Lack of Nations League B and C championships
Changing CCL (and making CL) from having a group stage to being a cup competition
Not using the Club Index to actually determine spots in CCL and CL (just for seeding). Ex: Caribbean get's a spot in CCL, all the spots at this point are baked in to the format rather than variables determined by the index.
This WCQ format.
The bizarre events around the Ottawa Fury fiasco. Saying "I don't see any exceptional circumstances" and then saying "I don't know why Ottawa are acting weird, they are allowed in USL".
The Gold Cup is still the USA Cup.

For me the positives outweigh the negatives, but I'm a bit baffled by some of these negative things I've listed. They get the general idea on a lot of this, but then just can't take it across the finish line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kent said:

For me Montagliani has had good points and bad points as CONCACAF president.

Positives:
Nations League
CONCACAF League
Club Index
Nations Index
Qualifying for the Gold Cup improvements (it wasn't based on sub-region, no automatic spot for Canada, seemed to open the door for having every nation being required to qualify in the future)
Ever so slightly expanded hosting duties for the Gold Cup

Negatives:
Lack of Nations League B and C championships
Changing CCL (and making CL) from having a group stage to being a cup competition
Not using the Club Index to actually determine spots in CCL and CL (just for seeding). Ex: Caribbean get's a spot in CCL, all the spots at this point are baked in to the format rather than variables determined by the index.
This WCQ format.
The bizarre events around the Ottawa Fury fiasco. Saying "I don't see any exceptional circumstances" and then saying "I don't know why Ottawa are acting weird, they are allowed in USL".
The Gold Cup is still the USA Cup.

For me the positives outweigh the negatives, but I'm a bit baffled by some of these negative things I've listed. They get the general idea on a lot of this, but then just can't take it across the finish line.

I know it's nowhere near the most important thing when you look at the big picture, but for some reason the bolded part has really pissed me off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, El Diego said:

I know it's nowhere near the most important thing when you look at the big picture, but for some reason the bolded part has really pissed me off

I'm a lot less pissed off about that now than I was originally, but it's still stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...