Spain played a decent game and should have scored far more. The game against Chile will be a must wing as I´m quite sure that Switzerland will get something off Honduras. Chile hasn´t looked too bad. Very physically strong and move the ball around well.
Disturbingly (and somewhat amusingly), if both the US-Algeria and England-Slovenia games end in a draw, and England scores two more goals than the United States in their match, England and the US will be tied in all tie-breaking categories and FIFA will flip a coin to determine which team advances. A fucking coin flip. At the World Cup. Guess wrong and go home. And this isn't the only group where this isn't a plausible, if unlikely, scenario. It's never actually happened before, so maybe it needs to for FIFA to realize how absurd it is that they don't have a better tiebreaking system in place. I've got so many questions about it though. Would they televise it? Would the teams be there for it? Who calls the toss? To he honest, I totally hope this happens, if for nothing but the spectacle it would create. As long as it's not in the US's group.
Reminds me of that movie Friday Night Lights where Billy Bob Thornton and those two other coaches showed up for a coin flip in order to get into the playoffs. That was a tense scene if I've ever seen one.
It could happen if Italy and NZ both draw with Slovakia and Paraguay. Sure, it is unlikely that Italy will draw (for a third time) but how great would it be to see them get eliminated by NZ based on the flip of a coin. Conversely, I wouldn't even mind being able to say that NZ were robbed by Italy if they won the toss.
Yeah. Having a representative from the teams present to call it would make the toss too difficult for FIFA to rig.
I was actually supposed to be registered as an English birth and NOT an S.A. one, but Home Affairs said no. So I should actually be English. Anyway... I have NEVER openly supported the S.A. soccer team due to their racist selection policies, which I have posted about before. You might also want to note that they FAILED to qualify for this tournament due to poor results in the African Cup Of Nations tournament, where they haven't progressed beyond the first stage since 2004 - See Here and they didn't even qualify for this tournament in 2010. The only competition that they've won (which you pointed out) was the 1996 African Cup of Nations, when they had some White players in the squad (e.g. Neil Tovey the then Captain, Mark Fish, Eric Tinkler, Mark Williams, etc.) and won due to two goals in the Final by Mark Williams. The only reason S.A. are even playing in this tournament are because they're the hosts. The PSL is not a strong league - PSL teams who qualify for the African Champions League almost always exit in the early stages due to a lack of quality - Kaizer Chiefs, Orlando Pirates and Mamelodi Sundowns, three of the strongest, biggest-spending clubs in the league, are guilty of exiting at early stages in the recent past. Next time, I'd advise you to actually watch one of the PSL matches before you start opening your mouth about how supposedly great the S.A. soccer team is, since many of the players in the current squad play for clubs in the PSL. They didn't win against the U.S.A. because they played badly and Green made a horrendous error, which is why he did not start the second match. England might have a chance if they drop Lampard to the bench and start Joe Cole on the left with Gerrard moving to his favoured central position, but they still have to beat Slovenia, who have been playing quite well up to now. Capello's team did well in qualifying, but somewhere along the line since then they've lost the plot - it comes down to Capello, since he selects the players and tactics and, so far, he hasn't selected winning combinations. I really want England to win, but I'm not sure they'll be able to do it. Brazil have won both of their matches that they've played so far. This Brazil team, under Dunga, is a grafting team, not a craft team. They've still scored 5 goals in 2 matches - a pretty decent return by anyone's standards.The Netherlands, too, have been playing well - they dominated against Denmark once Bendtner got subbed. Italy are perennial slow starters. France have sucked because they have a terrible coach and have, arguably, left many of their creative talents behind (e.g. Vieira, Bemzema, Nasri...). Spain beat Honduras last night so they still have a chance - they actually attacked very well against the Swiss in their first match but the Swiss defence was rock solid. Have you even been watching these games? Portugal must be considered amongst the favourites after their thrashing of North Korea, despite the dire performance again Cote D'Ivoire. None. I refuse to pay FIFA's staggering ticket price, which is 5x as expensive as going to a Super 14 rugby match, with international club sides, and 2x the price of a Springboks Test match. I guess you didn't watch the Confederations Cup last year. NZ played well in that tournament, apart from the 5-0 drubbing by Spain, so they were bound to get a decent result here and there at this tournament, since it's largely the same selection of players (Killen, Fallon, Nelsen, Lochhead, Bertos, Elliott all started then, too).
Mexico vs. Uruguay is very tough to call. 2-1 to Uruguay, at least one of those goals to Forlan. S.A. have their best chance to beat France, but I still think the French will win that one. 2-1 to France, at least. Korea Republic to take the win over Nigeria. They just have too much quality for the Nigerians. 3-1 to Korea Rep.. The fourth match is obvious. Argentina will win that one, it's just a question of by how many goals. 3-0 at least to Argentina. As for the matches on the 23rd... Slovenia vs. England - VERY close to call. I'm praying 1-0 to England. England HAVE TO WIN to progress, so I'm hoping they'll be hungrier for it than the Slovenians. Slovenia will play for the draw unless England scores first. U.S.A. vs. Algeria - Donovan and Dempsey to run rings around Algeria. 2-0 to U.S.A. Ghana vs. Germany - Ghana haven't looked fantastic this tournament and I think the Germans will be very hungry after their last match against Serbia. 3-1 to Germany. Australia vs. Serbia - Serbians should have this one. 3-1 to Serbia. Serbia to progress to last 16 ahead of Ghana on goal difference... Germany should still place 1st in the group.
Is there anything actually stopping Mexico and Uruguay from just kicking the ball back and forth for 90 minutes to allow them both to qualify? I'm sure both teams will try to win, but it would be so satisfying if they turned the match into a 90 minute training session for the purpose of fucking over the French.
First place in this group means playing Greece, Nigeria or South Korea in the round of 16, instead of a rested Argentina.
Even if there was a winner in the Uruguay/Mexico match, France is so far behind in goal differential that they would have to beat South Africa 4-0 or 5-0, assuming Uruguay/Mexico is a one goal game. France is not making it out of the group, they haven't even scored a goal yet, they aren't going to win 3-0 or anything in the last game.
HOLY.SHIT! If you haven't been watching, France are completely fucked. Bafana lead 2-0 at half time and Gourcouff got a red for elbowing Sibaya in the face. The vuvuzelas are sounding everywhere here! This is like 1995 when S.A. won the Rugby World Cup! Uruguay currently 1-0 up through Suarez.
South Africa will need 2 more goals though or for Mexico to concede more if I understand it right. Man it would seriously suck for South Africa if they didn´t go through after all this and if they do I can´t imagine what all the people there will feel like.
South Africa came out fired up but couldn't sustain it for 90 minutes. As much of a trainwreck as this France team is, they still have a lot more talent than the Bafana. Mexico is about to fall ass-backwards into the round of 16 for doing absolutely nothing (draw w/ SA, beat an imploding France team, loss to a mediocre Uruguay). Disgraceful....I'd like to say they'll get smoked by Argentina but a Maradona-coached team is a time bomb waiting to happen and the Mexies always play Argentina tough.
Well, now that France has scored it's all over for SAF. It's a shame, but only for emotional reasons. The hosts are out, so enthousiasm recedes and it's always nice to see little countries give the bigger ones a beating. On the other hand; SAF just aren't good enough. Yes, they're beating France, which is a great result either way. But this France team is a fucking disgrace. A team with such good players shouldn't neccesarily become World Champions, but their performance has been beyond ridiculous. SAF profited from the discord in that team to finish in a respectable way. Which is nice for them. Edit: I just saw a good analysis on tv after the game: SAF could've progressed if they just showed more guts, were more tactical astute and if their coach wasn't such a huge bleeding pussy. France played with only ten men, but SAF still played with five men at the back to cover one striker. They should've shown more initiative and adopt another tactic. But they held on to their old system, no matter what happened. And Parreira.....Jesus Christ. Beating France is nice and all, but if you need two more goals to progress, you don't start substituting strikers for strikers. You take out defenders or midfielders and pour men forward. Oh well, this is still the coach that made Brazil mind-numbingly boring in 2006 and managed to lose to France. Who were coached by Domenech!
S.A. played really well for the first 45 minutes, as Aribidi said, but half-time killed it for them. Domenech is a gigantic asshole, but he still rallied his troops and got them to play better and snuck a goal in the second half. S.A., however, do not deserve to qualify for playing 45 minutes of good football - Uruguay have simply done better and made more of their chances, as did Mexico. I'd love for Gordon Igesund to coach S.A., but he's turned down the job twice before. I'm sure Parreira will be shown the door for failing to qualify for the 2nd Round.
The altitude excuse is pretty valid. Most of the big teams play lower, their bodies are adapted to lower altitudes. Not to mention the ball reacts differently. I wouldn't say that England would've "won" with better altitude preparation, but it is a valid excuse in my opinion. Also, Capello sucks.
I realize that in sports sometimes they throw all other factors aside from success out the window when making these decisions, but isn't firing him for not qualifying a little harsh? He had by far the least talented team in the group, and still missed the cut by a mere goal differential. Since I'm no expert in soccer, does failure at a major event usually mean the ax has to fall?