Everything I saw leading up to the naming of seeds/pots has put CONCACAF teams with Asia and Oceania. Is there any reason that the three CONCACAF teams are placed in the same pot as the Asia and Oceania teams again, instead of with the Africa teams? Also, what happens if, for example, Ivory Coast is drawn into South Africa's group or Uruguay is drawn into Argentina's group? Do they just throw that out and pick again?

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 9:08 AM. Reason : ]

12/2/2009 8:58:48 AM

The answer to your first question is probably most people consider those to be the two weakest regions and if they were in separate pots, it would make for some pretty easy groups for the seeded teams.

I think the pots exist so there's only a maximum of two teams per region in the same group, whether it be South America, Africa, or Europe.

12/2/2009 9:37:25 AM

so what time does the drawing get announced?

12/2/2009 9:41:46 AM

Coverage starts on ESPN at 12 but I don't think the draw actually happens until like 2


correction to my post earlier, I just read this:

Quote :

"geographical criteria will also be respected, meaning that no two teams from the same confederation will be drawn in the same group (except European teams, where a maximum of two will be in a group). For example, South Africa cannot play the African teams from Pot 3 and Argentina and Brazil cannot be drawn against the three remaining South American teams."

so I guess they'd just put the ball back in and re-draw somebody else

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM. Reason : .]

12/2/2009 9:56:39 AM

they shouldnt give the host nation a #1 seed in the first place...ridiculous


also,
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/706991/ce/uk/?cc=5901&ver=us

why does fifa continually drop the ball? i dont understand what they do over there but they really like to make no sense at all with their decisions. and they really need to drop the henry deal...there is no need to make him a scapegoat. yes it was cheating what he did, but it seems like the officials need to be punished more than henry here. shit sepp blatter needs to be punished more than anyone else for how idiotically he has taken this whole approach

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM. Reason : i hate sepp. he is as big a tool as you can be]

12/2/2009 12:38:50 PM

Isn't the draw on Friday? And are you serious about ESPN coverage?

12/2/2009 12:51:03 PM

Quote :

"they shouldnt give the host nation a #1 seed in the first place...ridiculous"

I dunno, I tend to agree with the decision of a seed for the host. Part of the reason World Cups are awarded in certain places is to help grow the sport (USA, Asia, South Africa) and the excitement surrounding a host country's run in the tournament can go a long way towards accomplishing that. I'd also just feel sad for a full stadium of home fans watching their team get ass blasted a couple of times and with no hope of advancing

^ yeah, 12-3. crazy, right? here's the details

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sports/blogs/Watch-This/ESPN-HAS-2010-WORLD-CUP-DRAW-LIVE-THIS-WEEK-78251477.html

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 1:00 PM. Reason : espn]

12/2/2009 12:54:55 PM

well south africa doesnt stand a chance this tournament anyway...and while i see what you are trying to say, s. korea/japan didnt need any help gettin fans. they had millions already...most any country in the world outside usa wont need the world cup to harbor in any more fans than they already have.



in other sorta related news...the next few WCs are gonna be good on time at least. 2002 wc was awful when the games came on here in america. they wont be too bad in s. africa, prob games between 12-3pm. brazil will be great cause i think they are only ahead of us by 1 or 2 time zones. then it should be in england where im used to games from that time zone. then if fifa is smart, which they arent, it will be in USA after that which ill be working my ass off to go to those games moreso than trying to watch on tv.

12/2/2009 1:05:34 PM

I think they have a way better chance than we did in '94 and look how that turned out.

and I don't mean bringing in new fans for that country, I meant growing awareness of the sport in that part of the world on a global scale - and for one reason, money. Nobody thought there was any kind of a soccer fanbase in the US in 94 now the best teams in the world are touring there to make millions. Same thing for Asia - that part of the world wasn't tapped into by leagues like the Premier League before '02 like it is today. I think FIFA is hoping the same thing will happen in Africa after this.

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 1:22 PM. Reason : .]

12/2/2009 1:21:34 PM

Quote :

"and they really need to drop the henry deal...there is no need to make him a scapegoat."

agreed 100%. The fact that they refuse to make the decision that would have solved the problem and instead want to blame the players is absurd.

12/2/2009 1:24:57 PM

Well he DID deliberately and blatantly handle the ball.

12/2/2009 2:14:46 PM

First off, yes ESPN has covered the draw since the 1994 World Cup. Secondly, when I watched the draw in 1994 I think they made rules up as they went along. The main rules to understand is that multiple teams from the same confederation can be placed in the same group unless they are from UEFA at which point it is a max of 2 teams.

12/2/2009 2:30:43 PM

They've not always had 2 and 1/2 hours of coverage.

And, you're wrong.

12/2/2009 2:37:34 PM

how can they do anything to henry? He did it blatantly but people handball in almost every game. If theyre going to suspend him or take action, then they should suspend every player who has handballed in every league this season. I hate that nothing was called during the game, but it seems like those asshats blatter and platini are just trying to cover their asses for handling this situation so poorly.

12/2/2009 3:24:39 PM

Look, part of the reason that he did it and got away with it is because people like you don't hold the player responsible. I, personally, love that they're trying to preach the fair play aspect of the game. I'm no fan of the FIFA hierarchy, but seriously... start holding the player responsible for his actions. Handballs happen all the time, yes. But it wouldn't happen if people started holding the players responsible for their actions. This particular incident is many orders of magnitude greater than most other incidents that happen. It was on the world stage in an immensely important game. It sets a horrible example for any watching the game. Winning is important, but it's not worth sacrificing your integrity.

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 6:03 PM. Reason : ]

12/2/2009 6:00:57 PM

As angry as i was that Ireland went out of of the Henry bullshit, FIFA making a scapegoat of him now is wrong. They had an opportunity to do the right thing IMMEDIATELY after the game. He came forward, admitted he was wrong, and even said there should be a replay. If they were going to punish him for his actions - an unprecedented action - they should have done it the day after the Ireland game, and scheduled an IMMEDIATE replay. You don't come back to the table weeks later and say "we're going to open an investigation." Oh hell no, motherfucker. What is there to fucking investigate? How late you dumb shits are to the party? How fucking stupid you are about thinking that unchecked and indisputable self-regulation is the way to go? Because what he's done is obviously wrong. You don't come home 4 weeks after your kid has given you his report card with straight Fs and then decide to retroactively give him a spanking for it.


Opening the door to electronic review and other methods is OK in an emergency meeting like this, and though it shouldn't have taken this fucking long, I'm at least glad they're finally coming to their fucking senses about it.


The problem is that FIFA operate with virtual impunity when it comes to the sport - they have made poor decisions year after year, and refuse to adapt. To top that off, any real legal challenges don't hold weight, when they most certainly should. FAs with REAL court cases pending get threatened with being thrown out of the World Cup their national team qualified for - and that's fucking ridiculous. A team could be legitimately cheated out of results in the lower leagues due to corruption, and because of FIFA's ass-backwards system of self policing, the corruption gets off scot-free and clubs lose money hand over fist. Football is a multi-trillion(?) dollar/peso/shekel industry worldwide, and the sort of closed-door inflexible behavior exhibited by FIFA is completely unacceptable in the modern age.

12/2/2009 6:34:41 PM

I agree with everything you said. It's taken way too long to figure out what to do and at this point nothing can really be done. FIFA constantly has its head up its own ass. But I still think the person most responsible for this whole thing is Henry himself and until world football culture as a whole no longer tolerates blatant cheating it's just going to continue to happen.

12/2/2009 6:51:31 PM

It's a slippery slope when you just randomly decide to suspend somebody for a hand ball without pre-existing rules and guidelines (and I honestly don't think there is any way to write a rule about handling that sets a clear precedent for review in future cases; "well it looked like he did it on purpose, so that's a 2 game ban!") Closed door conferences with FIFA panels deciding on what's a suspension and what isn't is not in the best interests of the sport by any means. Crucify him as a fan all you want, that's your right. And his legacy being tarnished for the rest of his life is more punishment than missing a few games of a World Cup, in my opinion. Coaches and players should come out and speak against shit like this. It really shouldn't be up to FIFA to teach players how to play the game with respect. The fans and players should demand it themselves.


Also, I think it's being blown a bit out of proportion. Basketball players flop to earn fouls, baseball players will argue until they're thrown out that they were safe on a call at home even when they know they didn't touch the plate, wide receivers trap the ball on the ground but act like they caught it, etc. I'm not saying it's acceptable but come on, cheating is a part of sports, not just soccer.

12/2/2009 7:06:55 PM

i think its more that this is world cup news and the whole world sees it...im sure fifa doesnt/didnt want another hand of god 23 years after the first one....but its their own damn fault, 23 years is a long time to fix problems like that.

12/2/2009 7:12:44 PM

Quote :

"They've not always had 2 and 1/2 hours of coverage. And, you're wrong."

They had a show about that long in 1994 and it was at least an hour in 2006. Also if the "And, you're wrong" was a sesponse to the second cooment I've mine, I made a typo. I meant, you can't have more than 1 team from the same confederation unless it it UEFA at which point the max is 2.

12/2/2009 8:38:34 PM

haha how are people like me responsible for henry getting away with that handball? Henry was definitely in the wrong, he knows it, but the ref and fifa are the ones who messed up. You can't have an investigation into a handball, it would take like 5 seconds to realize what happened, just by watching the replay. You cannot just condemn one player for a handball, no matter what the consequences, without punishing everyone for handballs. After the "henry investigation", they should open up a "maradona investigation" and suspend Maradona for his handball because, frankly, it has been bothering me for about 20 years.

12/2/2009 9:03:57 PM

Quote :

"It's a slippery slope when you just randomly decide to suspend somebody for a hand ball without pre-existing rules and guidelines (and I honestly don't think there is any way to write a rule about handling that sets a clear precedent for review in future cases; "well it looked like he did it on purpose, so that's a 2 game ban!")"

I agree with your first part. I do not agree with the second.

I'm an Ireland fan. In no way do I think Henry should receive any punishment for his actions, nor should the game be replayed. I believe this because there is no precedent or law of the game to support this and that's the problem. I'm not nearly as pissed at a single incident of intentional cheating as I am the overall threat that intentional cheating poses to the the sanctity of the game.

I think the Henry ball cupping incident is a reason to take a step back and look at the rules and for a possible solution, as is Eduardo's douche-flop and Ngog's cunt-dive. "He looks like he did it on purpose, so that's a 2 game ban!" is fine with me if it will put a stop to this nonsense. If they don't want to go retroactive then put a damn replay assistant ref on the sidelines. You can't just continue to ignore a recurring problem and expect it to disappear.

12/2/2009 9:12:03 PM

BREAKING NEWS!!!1!1!1!

In response to recent incidents of cheating, FIFA has come out with a strong advertising campaign against such acts.

FIFA

Cheating is gay!

[Edited on December 2, 2009 at 9:48 PM. Reason : .]

12/2/2009 9:47:52 PM

AHAHA

12/2/2009 9:53:25 PM

lol. i was always knew eduardo and ngog were gay with each other

12/2/2009 10:03:40 PM

Quote :

"I think the Henry ball cupping incident is a reason to take a step back and look at the rules and for a possible solution, as is Eduardo's douche-flop and Ngog's cunt-dive. "He looks like he did it on purpose, so that's a 2 game ban!" is fine with me if it will put a stop to this nonsense."

Seriously though, how could you determine varying degrees of hand balls and which ones require a ban or no ban?

12/2/2009 10:09:40 PM

There are only two "degrees" as far as I'm concerned, intentional and non-intentional. If there is enough proof of intent, then whatever penalty could be imposed. Obviously though that only works as a deterrent and even if Henry was banned for life, it doesn't change the fact that France moves on. Honestly, they need to fix the refereeing problem.

12/2/2009 10:19:57 PM

My team is still undefeated

12/2/2009 10:35:57 PM

^^
Intentionally handling the ball is how the law is currently written. An unintentional hand ball is not a foul, period.

12/3/2009 6:09:32 AM

this is hilarious to me for some reason

12/3/2009 9:08:14 AM

Those suits look like they're loaners from a pair of 12 year old girls.

12/3/2009 9:45:20 AM

that's how suits are supposed to fit.

12/3/2009 10:13:02 AM

bored and was reading stuff on the world cup draw. im not sure if someone already posted this gem or not, but here you go:

Quote :

"Pot 1 will be comprised of the eight seeded teams, which at this point are likely to be host South Africa, Brazil, Spain, Argentina, England, Germany, Italy and the French national volleyball team."

12/3/2009 10:25:52 AM

I think it's because Beckham looks so classy and Rooney looks like some schmuck off the street. Rooney is never supposed to look that happy goddammit!

But back to the problem. I've been trying to think of a good cheating analogy for other sports and I hadn't been able to think of one until now. Doctoring the ball in baseball. Yes, it is against the rules. And there are in-game rules to deal with it. The pitcher is automatically ejected... If a pitcher gets away with it during the game but is later caught on camera doing it, he doesn't get suspended for the game and the game doesn't get replayed. But he would get an "x" game ban. It's basically the same thing. The intent to cheat is obviously there.

In this day and age with multiple camera angles all over the field, judging intent on dives and handballs is pretty clear cut. It's not hard to determine whether someone did it intentionally or not after viewing it several times from several different angles. Also, intent is much, much different depending on where something happens on the field. If a player handballs in the middle of the field purposefully to stop an attack he immediately knows he did something stupid and worthy of being booked because it will 99.99% most likely be spotted by both the referee and an assistant because he'll be one of maybe 3 players in that spot on the field and the view is unobstructed. But if a player handballs near the goal (on offense or defense) he KNOWS that there is a decent chance that there will be players obscuring the referees vision because anyone who's played for even a moderate amount of time is aware of the blind spots on the field. Same thing with a dive. A player KNOWS that he has a decent chance of getting away with it just because he knows it's hard on the referee to be positioned perfectly to make the call. That's what makes the intent worthy of discipline in this situation. The player is DELIBERATELY attempting to deceive the referee in this situation because he KNOWS he can get away with it. If there was even the threat of being suspended retroactively, it would solve this problem in a heartbeat.



As far as interpretation of the handball rule is concerned, yes, the law states that there has to be intent to play the ball with your hand. But anyone who knows two shits about soccer knows that this is not how the rule is put into play. Age and skill level is a huge determining factor in what is a handball and what is not. A professional player who is attempting to block a cross into the box might have his head turned completely the other way but leave his arm stuck out for balance in a completely natural motion and the ball could hit his hand and he would be penalized. Was he intending to play the ball with his hand even though he had no idea where the ball really was and was performing a natural motion? Of course not. Is it still considered a handball because it's blatantly obvious to everyone in the stadium that it hit his hand? Yes. A player who is 11 years old in a rec league could probably get away with that though. The way the rule is written is a far cry from the way it's used in practice, so don't try to hide behind the literal definition of the rule.

12/3/2009 10:50:50 AM

Quote :

"A professional player who is attempting to block a cross into the box might have his head turned completely the other way but leave his arm stuck out for balance in a completely natural motion and the ball could hit his hand and he would be penalized. Was he intending to play the ball with his hand even though he had no idea where the ball really was and was performing a natural motion? Of course not. Is it still considered a handball because it's blatantly obvious to everyone in the stadium that it hit his hand? Yes."

I'm just going to have to disagree with you then and say that if a penalty was awarded in your scenario, then it's the wrong decision (although I'm not really sure what natural position puts somebody's arm completely out for balance). Penalties are not given for hand balls when "the ball hits a player's hand." The rule of thumb has always been, in fact, the exact opposite of that. A hand ball is when the player hits the ball and not the other way around. So in your scenario, if the other team takes a shot or crosses the ball, and then he puts his arm out in a "natural motion," then yes, of course it's a penalty. But not simply because the ball hit his hand.

We can argue what's a "natural movement" all day long but you can't honestly believe that every time a ball hits a player's hand in the box and the referee sees it, a penalty will be called.

Quote :

"It's not hard to determine whether someone did it intentionally or not after viewing it several times from several different angles. Also, intent is much, much different depending on where something happens on the field."

So if you use your hand to stop the ball intentionally on a cross into your box? Is that worse than what Henry did? What kind of rules are you going to come up with? x amount of games for where it happens? x amount of games for how secretly you're doing it? x amount of games on if you're French?

[Edited on December 3, 2009 at 11:14 AM. Reason : .]

12/3/2009 11:06:24 AM

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. The ball didn't hit his hand in this instance, but I've seen it called in professional games and I know you have too. The player is using his arms for balance, much like normal human beings do, or maybe protecting his face.

Quote :

"So if you use your hand to stop the ball intentionally on a cross into your box? Is that worse than what Henry did? What kind of rules are you going to come up with? x amount of games for where it happens? x amount of games for how secretly you're doing it? x amount of games on if you're French?"

Why are you being purposefully obtuse? You know what he did was much worse than this scenario. Are you seriously just pulling stupid questions out of your ass at this point? It's much easier to call a handball in open play than it is near the goal. Everyone knows that and players use it to gain an unfair advantage over the referee. It's fucking black and white on replays almost 100% of the time. Part of the beauty of being complex, intelligent beings is that we can analyze different situations based on the individual event. Why do you need a goddamn outline for every single situation that could possibly happen? The simple fact that something like this COULD be punished should be enough of a deterrent to stop 90% of these things from happening.

[Edited on December 3, 2009 at 11:26 AM. Reason : pic fail]

12/3/2009 11:23:58 AM

Because it's so easy to overreact to a situation like this and say, "BAN HIM!!!" without realizing the consequences.

Yeah, I'm being kind of an asshole because I'm tired of people talking about how he's the worst person in the world and I think FIFA are a bunch of fuck heads for the way they're treating him now. But I'm honestly asking how you would put any retroactive banning in place. There has to be guidelines or you're just going to have a bunch of panels of FIFA jerks deciding who they want to ban and who they don't - it just doesn't seem fair to me because I can't see an acceptable way to determine severity of hand balls. It sucks for Ireland and everything but let's move on. I mean, how many hand ball injustices have we had in soccer for the last 30 years? 2... 3? It's not like it's taking over the game where players are just slapping around at balls like volleyball.

12/3/2009 11:33:48 AM

^exactly

^^ It would be basically impossible to write a rule or policy that could be equally applied to every situation and leaving it up to a human's discretion is a bad idea. Like you said, humans are complex and capable of analyzing it from many different angles, but you didn't mention the biases (even if subconscious) that will always come into human judgment as well.

It is much easier to address dives retroactively IMO because there is no judgment call. If contact occurred and he fell, no dive. If no contact occurred and he fell, it's a dive.

12/3/2009 11:40:58 AM

Well it's even easier to underreact to a situation like this, and that's exactly what has happened. To be honest, in no way do I think there should be a replay of this game. Under almost no circumstances do I think a game should ever be replayed actually, barring a referee being bribed or something extremely serious like that. But if FIFA had set a precedent with this incident that said that if we catch you cheating with intent to destroy the integrity of the match, you will be punished, I think that would go a long way in clearing up problems like this. Handballs aren't the main issue here. It mostly pertains to diving, but in certain instances like this (or Maradona, or the recent Messi handball goal, or the Germany vs. USA WC02 handball) it is applicable. Am I going to sit here and write an airtight, perfectly constructed outline of how I feel FIFA should put this idea into effect? No. I don't care that much at all. So you can go ahead and rip my vague, general idea to shreds. I don't have all the specifics ironed out, but I feel as though my basic idea of retroactive punishments is a good one and would prevent almost all of these situations from occurring.

Quote :

"It would be basically impossible to write a rule or policy that could be equally applied to every situation and leaving it up to a human's discretion is a bad idea. Like you said, humans are complex and capable of analyzing it from many different angles, but you didn't mention the biases (even if subconscious) that will always come into human judgment as well."

Fine... here's the rule. If we catch you cheating to destroy the integrity of the match it's a 2-game ban. No exceptions. Is that good enough for you?

[Edited on December 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM. Reason : ]

12/3/2009 11:45:01 AM

Well, I totally agree about diving. But I'm for bans in that case because of ^^. It's pretty straight forward.

And that's sort of my point about hand balls. It's obvious that FIFA either a) can't come up with straight forward guidelines to ban hand balls like Henry's or b) come up with a bullshit review policy that will never be implemented 100% fairly or accuracy. So, what's the point of going through all that shit when this isn't a widespread epidemic of a problem in soccer?

12/3/2009 11:52:20 AM

Because doing nothing opens up the possibility of it happening again in the future. If they stamp it out now then it will never become a problem.

12/3/2009 11:54:47 AM

I think everyone's blowing this thing out of proportion. Yeah it was a pretty blatant handball, but sometimes the ref misses a call, and if Ireland wants to blame their loss on a bad call, then I guess they're just trying to hide the fact that in the 90 minutes (or 180 minutes if this was a two game playoff, I don't even know) they were given to beat France, they were unable to do so.

As far as diving is concerned, that crap is lame and should be stamped out with whatever iron fist they can come up with.

12/3/2009 7:27:40 PM

well in that debate you could argue that in the time before the goal, france were not beating ireland either...in fact, ireland was playing well enough that they couldve beaten france...no team in the world was coming back from that heinous miss by the ref....and then when the player tells you he handballed it, i just dont know what the ref is thinking.

12/3/2009 7:45:03 PM

^true, but claiming that you lost solely because of one bad call is a little erroneous. i realize that a bad call that costs you a goal is a pretty big deal, but still at the end of the day it comes down to you got unlucky and the other team got lucky.

12/3/2009 7:52:23 PM

Handballs are going to happen. There is so much unconscious muscle memory for that action that I don't think you can ever prove a handball had malicious intent. It is against the rules of the game, and failing to control your arms properly should be penalized by the referee like any other infraction. Diving, however, is an action for which there is no excuse. If you are retroactively show to blatantly dive - I'm talking over the top Cristiano Ronaldo style, untouched, unprovoked, on film - I say lifetime ban.

[Edited on December 3, 2009 at 8:00 PM. Reason : ]

12/3/2009 7:59:18 PM

to be fair to ronaldo, he didnt flat out dive from no contact if i remember correctly. he definitely embellished in the box at the slightest of touches. but i dont recall him ever pulling an ngog...i wanna say rooney has had worse dives than ronaldo actually.

harsh doesnt even begin to describe lifetime ban

[Edited on December 3, 2009 at 9:11 PM. Reason : f]

12/3/2009 9:10:33 PM

Quote :

"Intentionally handling the ball is how the law is currently written. An unintentional hand ball is not a foul, period."

That was my point. Perhaps I didn't phrase my response properly. It's either an intentional handball or unintentional, which means not even [technically] a handball. I guess I just propose that any intentional attempt at cheating should be an automatic red card offense which, in many competitions, would ban you from the next game.

The second problem is the officiating. The crux of the issue in this case is that the handball was not called in the first place. In order to discourage cheating, they need to either A) reform refereeing by adding video replay/more referees/whatever fucking works B) allow for retroactive punishment for cheating via video evidence.

I believe diving is a much bigger problem for the sport; however, any intentional deception could apply.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unrelated (since I don't think there is a general soccer thread ?):

I may be playing indoor for Winter II on a buddy's coed team and was wondering what you people wear on your feet. Obviously indoor shoes are an obvious option, but I was wondering if any of you wear turf shoes since I think FieldTurf is used at a lot of these places. Any thoughts?

[Edited on December 3, 2009 at 11:14 PM. Reason : .]

12/3/2009 11:14:03 PM

^I heard the place near campus that used to be called soccer dome only allows indoor shoes.

[Edited on December 4, 2009 at 12:43 AM. Reason : .]

12/4/2009 12:43:13 AM

i think you can wear turf shoes as well at soccer dome, but i could be wrong. I wore indoors when i played there, it wasn't too bad.

12/4/2009 1:01:06 AM

^^, ^^^ i wear turf shoes when i play at both places.

12/4/2009 7:33:36 AM