AUSTRALIA GROUP WC Q

Vaguely · Post by **Vaguely** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:12 pm

Googes wrote:What is wrong with the A League players we have got?
Thompson
Milligan
Alosi
Moore
Covic
Bolton
Bridge
vukovic
Rudan
Brosque
Ahmad Elrich
Costanzo
Dodd
Sarkies
Agostino
Burns
Djite

That is just some who can play with many more others and you can include the players in europe who is only playing reserves. E.G. Troisi, Leijer and etc.

Putting all them together can make a good side and for the future of including the olyroos.

Yeh, but with the quality of the asian sides we can afford to drop points overseas when we play against these teams. We have to put out our best squad. I mean the squad mentioned is good but I dont think it is good to play against the likes of China and Iraq, perhaps against Qatar but then again we learnt our lesson at the Asian cup underestimating Asian teams

Googes · Post by **Googes** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:25 pm

A league players will play only 3 games at most I believe with the dates. Australia needs to be playing friendlys hot asian countries to climatetise.
True it looks scary but needto believe in the olyroos.

Australia still should go through
Australia beat china 2-0 in china early in the year and should beat Iraq in Australia.

Predictions over the 6 games Australia win win 4 draw 1 lose 1
The lost will be against Iraq in the away game.

Hawkesy · Post by **Hawkesy** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:38 pm

BodÃ¸ Glimt wrote:I know some of the smaller nations would pull out in this case, but it eliminate the argument of who should get how many berths etc. Not a fan of seeding either.

Without seeding, you could have germany, italy, brazil, argentina, france and England all in a group going for one place. :?

The only way it could be done is with seeding and only allowing the top 128 ranked teams to play in open qualifying. Then have second tier competition such as in cricket and rugby.

Missing Post Count · Post by **Missing Post Count** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:38 pm

Hawkesy wrote:
BodÃ¸ Glimt wrote:I know some of the smaller nations would pull out in this case, but it eliminate the argument of who should get how many berths etc. Not a fan of seeding either.
Without seeding, you could have germany, italy, brazil, argentina, france and England all in a group going for one place. :?

The only way it could be done is with seeding and only allowing the top 128 ranked teams to play in open qualifying. Then have second tier competition such as in cricket and rugby.

Luck of the draw

Hawkesy · Post by **Hawkesy** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:43 pm

BodÃ¸ Glimt wrote:
Hawkesy wrote:
BodÃ¸ Glimt wrote:I know some of the smaller nations would pull out in this case, but it eliminate the argument of who should get how many berths etc. Not a fan of seeding either.
Without seeding, you could have germany, italy, brazil, argentina, france and England all in a group going for one place. :?

The only way it could be done is with seeding and only allowing the top 128 ranked teams to play in open qualifying. Then have second tier competition such as in cricket and rugby.
Luck of the draw

Ok the luck of the draw would mean it PROBABLY wouldn't happen but if you want the best teams then surely you seed.

pires7 · Post by **pires7** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:03 am

Redistribution of the places would be a good start.
North American Qualification is a joke. The US + Mexico get a walkup start to every World Cup

Missing Post Count · Post by **Missing Post Count** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:25 am

It's more or less a sure thing that Mexico will qualify