Possible Group in 2010

Group A

The other point to consider is the location of our pool .. some will be much easier for spectators than others.  I would much prefer us not to be drawn to play in Johannesburg ...

Does anyone know if the draw will be televised or anything?

Live on the net I believe ...

Though, if you are in Jo'burg you will be a couple hours drive from 5 of the venues, and about 4-5 hours drive of 3 more
Bullion2009-11-25 10:42:18

Cape Town = Full of the Fanatics.  No thanks.

Perhaps not Cape Town after all ...

Sky sport will televise the draw LIVE at 6am Saturday 5th December. 

They're in Durban HN from what I know.

What would be the worst draw?

For me it would be Germany, Holland and one of the top African sides like Ivory coast.....any of those teams could tear you apart.
Quite a few of the Latin teams and some European teams go into cruise mode when they are 2 goals up....The Germans would try to win 6-0 even if they were 3-0 at half time, they would never let up.

The real issue is how NZ should play these top teams. You don't get any brownie points for being positive and playing 2 strikers and pushing players forward. The world football media thought NZ were being nieve and stupid with their tactics in the Con cup...especially against Spain.
We do not have the skill to trouble top sides like Spain, Germany etc

Iin the Con Cup iraq parked the bus against Spain and only lost 0-1.They played everyone behind the ball all match but they got respect for playing like that...everyone expects the minnows to play top sides with that formation. When its 0-1 late in the game you are still in with a shot from a set piece or what ever. if we play 3-4-3 against a Spain or Germany it would be a cricket score.

The problem is we dont ahve the players to really play around with formations too much. Its all well and good to say play 4-5-1 but we would be far less likely to get a result from any game.
I hope we approach the World Cup positively and try and score goals to win, not try and hold off the onslaught.

There is a difference between being positive and being realistic....

Being belted 0-5 by the likes of a Spain or Germany has serious ramifications in how NZ is percieved both by the NZ public/media but more importantly by FIFA. If we take a couple of hammerings at the WC then it will give much more ammunition by the many who say we do not deserve to be there.

Its about playing smart. every weekend in all the major leagues around the world you see teams from the bottom half of the comp coming up against the top guns....like Burnley, Hull etc playing the Man u's and Chelseas of the world. They know they do not have the skill or the players to beat these top teams regularly. So they pack their defenses, they run and close down all match, they pull lots of players back behind the ball and they try to physically upset the opposition.

They are expected to play like this...both by the media and by the opposition. There is nothing bad or good about this approach. Its about accepting reality. The interesting thing is sometimes this approach works and they get a result.

If NZ adopts this approach and gets a 0-1 against a Spain or Italy i would be stoked. The world media would pat NZ on the back and say well done....even though we played negatively in some peoples eyes. The world of international football is a tough often brutal place....its about results. There is no place for wide eye fantasy.
A mid field of Brown, Elliot and McClinchey is not going to trouble any side at the WC. The reality is we defend like madmen and try and nick a goal from a set piece.

If we lose 1-0 in every group game everyone will say we shouldn't be there. Although I only ever saw the highlights of NZ 3 - 4 Italy I don't think results like that come from sitting back and defending. I think it would do us a bigger favour if we score goals.

If we lose every game 1-0, we will have exceeded everybody's expectations (for those outside NZ). Certainly no-one would say we don't belong at the World Cup.

Scoring goals would obviously help, but we ain't exactly a free scoring side. Our best chance lies in keeping things tight, defend well, and use attacking set-pieces the best way we can (which is coincidently what we did in that friendly against Italy, 3 set-piece goals there).

Poor choice of words on my behalf, 'everyone' should have been, 'everyone who didn't qualify but could have in our place given our easy run to South Africa'. AWs played less qualifying games than anyone else. I don't think we'll go out and thump the likes of Spain or anything, but I'd like to think we'd go with a more positive approach than put everyone behind the ball and hope for a Smeltz breakaway or Bertos free kick.

Anyone read the Sunday News article on how the groups would be done? Absolutely terrible. Very uninformed and you could get far better and more accurate information on these forums on it.

Well, we put out a fairly attacking line-up against Spain in Confed Cup, and only had to thank them for taking the foot off the accelerator and not spanking us by double figures.

Obviously the tactics will depend on who we'll actually be playing, so let's hope for a kind draw next weekend.

Indeed.

yeah we should play smeltz and killen as extra mids and leave fallon by himself up front

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/3107268/South-African-hosts-get-favoured-treatment


this article has a lot of mistakes.

Pots for the final draw announced, as well as seeds.  All the usuals ( Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Italy, Spain, England) + the hosts and the Netherlands but not France - which is a surprise and the result of a change in the seeding mechanism from the last few world cups. Can't imagine anyone will be shedding tears for them....

Who is worse, Chile or Algeria?  I'll take them.

So worst group possible- Spain, France, Ivory Coast.

Yeah, it's a bit of a surpise that France is not seeded - pretty much every scenario I've looked at had them in the top 7. Everything else as expected.

Best case scenario: South Africa, Slovenia/Slovakia, and probably Chile.


PS. Can't get both South Africa and Algeria, we can only have one African team in the group.

We have a one-in-8 chance of playing the opening game vs South Africa! We are in Pot 2 - the team drawn out of Pot 2 to go into Group A will become A2. The opening game is A1 (South Africa) v A2 (from AFC, CONCACAF, or OFC!!). WOuldn't that be something!!

Are you sure about this? I always understood that there's a separate draw to determine the placing in the group (e.g. team from pot 2 gets drawn in group A, and then another draw is made to determine what position they take, A2, A3 or A4).

No i think Seatts is right on this one.  

You may be right - so one chance in 24 (i.e. 1 chance in 8, then 1 chance in 3!)

I can see "Groups of death". 1 with the ranked team plus France and an African team. The second with a ranked team, Portugal and another top African or Asian team. Fingers crossed for SA to be our ranked team.

It's just that I recall from seeing the last draw that there was a separate draw to establish the placings in the group - partly done to ensure that all seeds, for example, don't play all the European teams in the same round, so that each group round has some more variety.

So I've assumed that the same procedure would follow this time around.

Would that make it harder to get tickets to that game or would the "All Whites group games" ticket get you in?

If you have the ticket for All Whites group games, you'll get in.

Imagine playing the opening game, and upsetting the hosts. Unlikely i know, but probably the best chance we would have to pick up points in the comp.  

S.Africa v NZ - would pique the interest of the rugger-buggers  :

Would be absolutely hilarious if we ended up  in a group with Spain/Brazil, Portugal/France and Ivory Coast. and it then got labelled the 'group of death'. Imagine a group with New Zealand in it as the group of death. Not saying I want this to happen but I would certainly see the humour of it.