Yes, they were. As were Latvia and Lithuania when they took part in the USA '94 qualifiers. They were in our group, seeded behind Spain, ourselves, Denmark, Northern Ireland and Albania.Were Ukraine, Croatia and Slovakia all bottom seeds when they split from the larger Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia?
Croatia started out at 125th in FIFA rankings in 1992 and any team with that comparable level of ranking in 2008 would have been 6th seeded in the WC qual 2010.Originally Posted by Gather round
You are deluding yourself if you think Montenegro are of a similar standard to Malta or Luxembourg.
I reckon they are worse, and no im not joking
When's the last time the likes of Malta or Luxembourg got a score draw home to Bulgaria back to back with a draw at home to Ireland?
When was the last time a team like Montenegro or Ireland won in Switzerland?
I don't agree btw that Montenegro are close to the standard of the bottom seeds.
So you agree with me? The guy above me posted that he thinks that Montenegro are of lower quality than Malta and Luxembourg. Surely a wind-up.
The why the **** are we playing for this cup? would be a good name
nothing since my last post has addressed how this is a bad idea.
B1tching for the sake of it.
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
One of the first things Jack Charlton did was win a "meaningless" tournament in Iceland.
This could turn out to be a useful exercise.
do you not watch football!!!!!!!! ThEy have NO STRIKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
so thats a bit of a handicap playing int football
Lux beat switzerland away
and malta have improved
Er, FIFA rankings did exist then- on their own website they're listed as far back as 1993. My point was that Montenegro were given a bottom seeding partly because the country is so small- I'm fairly sure that if they were, say, 25 million people in the Russian-speaking part of Ukraine forming a new country, they wouldn't be lumped in the pot with San Marino and Andorra. Of course it's hypothetical, but as you say FIFA change their systems all the time.
My broader point is the one made by pundits John Anderson and Kenny Cunningham (I listened to the second half of the MN game on Radio Eireann). If you are going to make the play offs or better, a draw in Podgorica is two points dropped.
Indeed. Although I think we can agree NI (still the 10th smallest country in UEFA) outdid expectations in Euro 2008, for all our lack of players in the Champions' League.
How then do you explain, as per the example I quoted above, there being three bottom seeds (ie with no qualifying points from past tournaments) in one group, and none in another?
I suggested they had better players, a stronger domestic league and by fairly obvious implication deserved a higher ranking than the other two. Where's the delusion?
Montenenegro were given a 6th seed based on their FIFA ranking.
The FIFA ranking was used by FIFA as the basis for their seeding in the draw for the WC2010.
Nothing to do with the absurd idea of a population criteria.
If Croatia were accepted as a member association by FIFA at the same time as FIFA accepted Montenegro. they would also have been 6th seeds in the WC 2010 draw.
On paper an away draw against a 6th seed is not good.My broader point is the one made by pundits John Anderson and Kenny Cunningham (I listened to the second half of the MN game on Radio Eireann). If you are going to make the play offs or better, a draw in Podgorica is two points dropped.
Bulgaria were fortunate to get a draw there whereas our draw was quite comfortable.
At least now, Montenegro are a better team than Georgia.
You are all missing the irony of Gather round dismissing Montenegro as 6th seeds and comparing them to Malta and Luxembourg when I think most sensible people would instead argue that they are in fact probably a better team than his beloved Northern Ireland.
Last edited by youngirish; 23/09/2008 at 12:01 PM.
Don't see any irony, YI, since I stressed repeatedly above that I thought Montenegro were stronger than the other sixth seeds. Go back and read the thread's last couple of pages.
"Most sensible people" (ie, people that agree with Young Irish) might well think that Montenegro would have bettered 20 points in Euro 08. Or that they'll do better this time round, beat Italy etc.. Let's have a look at the league tables in February, that should give us a better idea.
You made a petty little dig on our forum about Montenegor being 6th seeds. This is technically correct but as has been explained there are reasons for this due to the fact them being a new country. New countries are treated differently now than they were when Croatia and Ukraine etc were formed and joined FIFA. That is the fact of the matter.
YOu can come on to our forum all you like and wind people up if you like. Best of luck to you.
In Trap we trust
In fairness Neil, Gather round was responding to a post originally from lopez which could also be interpreted as a wind up.
Lopez guilty or not?
Come on Neil, lighten up. As digs go it was pretty gentle: I was responding to Lopez's preference for a draw with Montenegro rather than winning a competition, however Mickey Mouse you think it is, against three other local countries. I have said repeatedly on the thread that Montenegro are better than the other sixth seeds, but let's not kid ourselves that they're Worldbeaters until this series is over at least.
I think MN would have been treated differently were they a larger country, with likely better results in friendlies before their first qualifying series started. FIFA would have changed the seeding rules. But we'll probably never know, just my opinion. As opposed to your 'fact' that there weren't any World rankings before Euro 1996, for example.
Actually, I came onto this thread in 'your' forum because it's about other teams, including NI. I mean, who were you expecting? Brazil fans?
I've no wish to wind up anyone on here, not even mi buen amigo Senor Lopez. And even if I did, I'm sure after 6,000 odd posts you're more than capable of answering or ignoring
Whilst I have doubts about this tournament, I think it is a good choice that Ireland has been chosen as the initial hosts of the tournament as with the new Lansdowne Rd there is a reasonable chance that these games (the Irish games at least) will be sold out.
However whether the next hosts of the competition will be able to sell out the games is debatable. The recent attendance at the Scotland-NI friendly suggests this will be a hard sell. Added to this is that certain participants do not have a venue suitable for international football. This could be a short-lived football experiment.
My main reservations about the tournament are the oddity of holding it all in one city but over two dates two months apart; and that the fruitier end of our support might misbehave in Dublin, alas.
Two visiting teams are obviously unlikely to sell out Lansdowne, however seriously the teams/ fans take the tournament.
Our lack of a decent stadium remains a problem. Can't really offer much more than watch this space for the moment, sadly. Our new sports boss, Greg Campbell doesn't seem to have done much since getting the job
PS Wales and Scotland at least have the choice of modern stadia to stage any future tournament. If they aren't going to sell out Hampden or Millennium, Swansea or Dundee would do just as well.
Last edited by Gather round; 23/09/2008 at 3:01 PM.
deleted
Last edited by gspain; 23/09/2008 at 3:45 PM.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks