Interesting possibility in Group F
Thomas Michanek
Sweden - Argentina : 0-1
Nigeria - England : 2-1
The final standings in Group F becomes:
Argentina 2-1 +1 6 p.
Sweden 3-3 +-0 4 p.
England 3-3 +-0 4 p.
Nigeria 3-4 -1 3 p.
Argentina is through to the 1/8 final.
Sweden and England are tied, and their direct encounter
ended 1-1. The team to join Argentina is decided by
drawing lots... Wake up, FIFA!
/Thomas
WC 2002 on a single sheet: http://w1.184.telia.com/~u18407206/WC02/
Ron
"Thomas Michanek" <thomas....@telia.com> wrote:
> Consider the following results in Group F:
>
> Sweden - Argentina : 0-1
> Nigeria - England : 2-1
>
> The final standings in Group F becomes:
>
> Argentina 2-1 +1 6 p.
> Sweden 3-3 +-0 4 p.
> England 3-3 +-0 4 p.
> Nigeria 3-4 -1 3 p.
>
> Argentina is through to the 1/8 final.
> Sweden and England are tied, and their direct encounter
> ended 1-1. The team to join Argentina is decided by
> drawing lots... Wake up, FIFA!
I'm not sure what you propose.
Obviously, drawing lots is a pretty lame solution. It pleases nobody.
But holding a tiebreak game isn't really practical (and it puts the team
that wins at a huge disadvantage in their next game).
Bill Goddot
Argentina through and England elimated on drawing lots. Even a PK decision
would be better that lots.
JeffC
"Ron" <ronald...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ronaldinho_m-8CB7...@usc.edu...
> > Argentina is through to the 1/8 final.
> > Sweden and England are tied, and their direct encounter
> > ended 1-1. The team to join Argentina is decided by
> > drawing lots... Wake up, FIFA!
>
> I'm not sure what you propose.
>
> Obviously, drawing lots is a pretty lame solution. It pleases nobody.
> But holding a tiebreak game isn't really practical (and it puts the team
> that wins at a huge disadvantage in their next game).
Not compared to the team they just beat :-) Seems to me a penalty kick
shootout would be at least better than a coin toss.
Lee Harris
"JeffC" <jcon...@nc.rr.take.out.com> wrote in message
news:Z8yM8.82034$6v2.3...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
even something like shots on goal, corners, least yellow/red cards would be
better than a coin toss, but a playoff would not be that hard to sort out,
and whatever the problems, both teams would surely prefer it
a golden goal game or penalty shootout
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release Date: 08/02/02
Thomas Michanek
> > ended 1-1. The team to join Argentina is decided by
> > drawing lots... Wake up, FIFA!
>
> I'm not sure what you propose.
>
> Obviously, drawing lots is a pretty lame solution.
If you think about it, I'm sure you can come up with plenty of
other possibilities that would be better than drawing lots.
In Swedish television last night, they compared this solution
with how FIFA spends endless time making up rules for the
exact measurement of ads and logos on the players outfits,
or the exact color of a jersey. Yet the cannot come up with
a tiebreaker that actually has something to do with football!
How about any of the following:
* A penalty kick shootout
* Fair play rating (least amount of red/yellow cards)
* Number of shots on goal in the games played
* Ball possession in the games played
* FIFA ranking ahead of WC
* Best performance in WC qualifying
Before starting to complain and argue against any of the
above, explain how it would be *worse* than drawing lots!
Spam>@ntlworld.com Bungle
> * Fair play rating (least amount of red/yellow cards)
> * Number of shots on goal in the games played
> * Ball possession in the games played
> * FIFA ranking ahead of WC
> * Best performance in WC qualifying
I prefer the Fair play option however you could have a nightmare where say
for example Rivaldo should of been booked for his bit of machiavellian it is
very dependent upon consistent referring.. But at least it would be better
than drawing lots
Serious Tiger
>In article <aawM8.42346$n4.96...@newsc.telia.net>,
> "Thomas Michanek" <thomas....@telia.com> wrote:
>
>> Consider the following results in Group F:
>>
>> Sweden - Argentina : 0-1
>> Nigeria - England : 2-1
>>
>> The final standings in Group F becomes:
>>
>> Argentina 2-1 +1 6 p.
>> Sweden 3-3 +-0 4 p.
>> England 3-3 +-0 4 p.
>> Nigeria 3-4 -1 3 p.
>>
>> Argentina is through to the 1/8 final.
>> Sweden and England are tied, and their direct encounter
>> ended 1-1. The team to join Argentina is decided by
>> drawing lots... Wake up, FIFA!
>
> I'm not sure what you propose.
FFS I've told you all before - sudden death "Mr and Mrs".
When will FIFA WAKE UP and listen to the voice of reason?
ST.
"The English divided his putisima to them mother"
Chris Raistrick
<JnEM8.42371$n4.96...@newsc.telia.net>:
>> > Sweden and England are tied, and their direct encounter
>> > ended 1-1. The team to join Argentina is decided by
>> > drawing lots... Wake up, FIFA!
>>
>> I'm not sure what you propose.
>>
>> Obviously, drawing lots is a pretty lame solution.
>> But holding a tiebreak game isn't really practical
>
>If you think about it, I'm sure you can come up with plenty of
>other possibilities that would be better than drawing lots.
>In Swedish television last night, they compared this solution
>with how FIFA spends endless time making up rules for the
>exact measurement of ads and logos on the players outfits,
>or the exact color of a jersey. Yet the cannot come up with
>a tiebreaker that actually has something to do with football!
>
>How about any of the following:
>* A penalty kick shootout
How, when one team will be in Miyagi and the other in Osaka?
This requires one of the teams making a dash cross-country. Makes
debates over which fans the kicks are taken in front of pretty tame.
>* Fair play rating (least amount of red/yellow cards)
Which would just compound any bad decisions.
>* Number of shots on goal in the games played
Sky have proven just how unreliable that is. Apparently, tapping the
ball towards the keeper is a shot on target but a goal (eg Beckham's
for Blackburn) is not.
>* Ball possession in the games played
That's a good idea, encourage teams to keep hold of the ball.
>* FIFA ranking ahead of WC
So, if you are ahead in the ranking before, you progress so you go
ahead in the ranking, so next tournament.
>* Best performance in WC qualifying
How does beating Turks and Caicos compare to beating Luxembourg? Is
4th in a single group of 10 teams better than second in a group of 5?
>Before starting to complain and argue against any of the
>above, explain how it would be *worse* than drawing lots!
Oh, that's nice. You get to set the rules.
So:
* A penalty kick shootout
Unfair on the team that needs to change venues.
* Fair play rating (least amount of red/yellow cards)
Makes the cards more debatable. How do you handle cards that get
revoked later? Go back and restart the WC?
* Number of shots on goal in the games played
Impossible to determine with 100% accuracy.
* Ball possession in the games played
Ditto. It would also spoil the game.
* FIFA ranking ahead of WC
How would that be fairer on Senegal Uruguay or Denmark? If it came
down to lots with them vs France, why don't they deserve a 50/50
chance based on their performance?
* Best performance in WC qualifying
To contentious.
--
Cheers,
Chris
Paul C
A Weakest Link competition might be better than the drawing of lots.
Is Anne Robinson available?
--
G.Sibon
<pa...@easynet.co.uk> writes
They could all have a nice game of Buckaroo... but that nasty Mr Collina
won't share... and I'm not going to make him.
--
G.Sibon
You are not asshole, if you are going to speak of something
Jeff Boice
know where things stand when they take the field.
2) Bring both teams to Niigata and do penalty kicks one half-hour
before the scheduled start to see who gets to play.
3) Or you could do a stupid, completely arbitrary rule such as "tie
goes to the nation with the longest period of time since their last
appearance in the knockout round"- this particular case Sweden would
win.
Paul C
Boice) wrote:
> 1) Do the drawing of lots before the games so at least the teams
>know where things stand when they take the field.
>
> 2) Bring both teams to Niigata and do penalty kicks one half-hour
>before the scheduled start to see who gets to play.
>
No need to bring both teams to Niigata. Have FIFA approved
goalkeepers available in every stadium. If a penalty decider is
necessary just instruct each team to report to its nearest stadium.
Simple.
--
Michael Cunningham
news:lLkOqIAb...@nopoints.freeserve.co.uk...
We never seem to settle anything by thumb-wrestling anymore. It's
a lost art, you know.
--
Mike
John Rowland
news:JnEM8.42371$n4.96...@newsc.telia.net...
>
> If you think about it, I'm sure you can come up with plenty of
> other possibilities that would be better than drawing lots.
> In Swedish television last night, they compared this solution
> with how FIFA spends endless time making up rules for the
> exact measurement of ads and logos on the players outfits,
> or the exact color of a jersey. Yet the cannot come up with
> a tiebreaker that actually has something to do with football!
1) The solution needs to be football related.
2) It needs to be quickly playable (30 minutes max), at the end of the
simultaneous 3rd matches.
3) It needs to be playable between two, three or four teams in the same or
different stadia.
4) Each team's ability to win mustn't depend on the talent of whichever team
happens to be in the same stadium at the time.
The teams in different stadia could take single kicks against an open goal
from some distance out, perhaps the centre spot or the penalty
spot at the far end. The big TV screens would keep each team and both crowds
informed about what was happening in the other stadium.
Alternatively, the teams each play keepy-uppy, while the big TV screen in
each stadium shows what is happening in the other stadium. The team which
prevents the ball hitting the ground for the longest time wins. There are
enough qualified officials to time two teams in each stadium simultaneously.
--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 28th Nov.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/7069/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes
Martin Sewell
<jo...@turquoisedays.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>"Thomas Michanek" <thomas....@telia.com> wrote in message
>news:JnEM8.42371$n4.96...@newsc.telia.net...
>>
>> If you think about it, I'm sure you can come up with plenty of
>> other possibilities that would be better than drawing lots.
>> In Swedish television last night, they compared this solution
>> with how FIFA spends endless time making up rules for the
>> exact measurement of ads and logos on the players outfits,
>> or the exact color of a jersey. Yet the cannot come up with
>> a tiebreaker that actually has something to do with football!
>
>1) The solution needs to be football related.
Where's the fun in that? Why not underwater crochet, or something
similar?
>[...]
Martin
Platypuss
Corners won?
--
Pete Langdale
At the moment, the net is mostly made up of educated
individuals. What will happen when anyone can login?
J.C. Herz 1994
kevin....@nottingham.ac.uk
a) What kind of drawing tools are used - crayon, pencil, chalks, indian ink?
b) Is there a pre-chosen designated artist from each team, if so who's ours?
c) Is there a time limit on when the drawing has to be completed?
d) Is a single drawing sufficient or is the artist entitled to submit a
small portfolio and the best entered from a selection?
e) What 'lot' is actually drawn - a parking lot? used car lot? these are
clearly American terms and may provide an unfair advantage to the USA if
they take part. Anyway it seems a weird choice of subject to me, better a
still life or some interpretive piece surely.
Joe Horowitz
<kevin....@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:kevin.bailey-1...@wpdpm16.nottingham.ac.uk...
> So, when these 'lots' are drawn -
> a) What kind of drawing tools are used - crayon, pencil, chalks, indian
ink?
Non-toxic crayons are usually preferred, on grounds of safety and economics.
> b) Is there a pre-chosen designated artist from each team, if so who's
ours?
Beckham, obviously. It's a captain's responsibility to do a lovely drawing
of mummy and daddy for his country. This bodes well for England, as Beckham
still writes his Christmas thank-you letters in crayon, so he will be more
familiar with the medium than, say, Vieri, who will undoubtedly try to use
tracing-paper to gain an unfair advantage.
> c) Is there a time limit on when the drawing has to be completed?
Ideally before the start of the second-round matches.
> d) Is a single drawing sufficient or is the artist entitled to submit a
> small portfolio and the best entered from a selection?
I think it's best of five, and then sudden death after that.
> e) What 'lot' is actually drawn - a parking lot? used car lot? these are
> clearly American terms and may provide an unfair advantage to the USA if
> they take part.
> Anyway it seems a weird choice of subject to me, better a
> still life or some interpretive piece surely.
The word "lot" is perfectly acceptable in the English language. Players can
draw whatever they want, be it still-life, portrait, landscape or even
something a little more abstract and conceptual, just so long as they draw a
lot of it. Hence the expression, "draw lots".
Joe
Paul C
Yes I can see the attractions of drawing lots as a means of separating
teams. So, when they've drawn lots do they send for Brian Sewell or
Sister Wendy to judge them?
"Hmm. Yes, Team A have made good use of chiaroscuro. The harmony of
tones is especially delightful. The brushwork picks up the larger
diagonals of the work and the thrust of unaccented angular elements in
the surroundings. I'll give it 8 out 10"
Just one question. What happens if it's a ..erm ..draw?
--
Joe Horowitz
"Paul C" <pa...@easynet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3d04f385...@news.CIS.DFN.DE...
> Yes I can see the attractions of drawing lots as a means of separating
> teams. So, when they've drawn lots do they send for Brian Sewell or
> Sister Wendy to judge them?
Tony Hart, obviously. He is the best artist ever because he can draw
anything.
> "Hmm. Yes, Team A have made good use of chiaroscuro. The harmony of
> tones is especially delightful. The brushwork picks up the larger
> diagonals of the work and the thrust of unaccented angular elements in
> the surroundings. I'll give it 8 out 10"
>
> Just one question. What happens if it's a ..erm ..draw?
They never draw, but when they do, they draw lots.
Joe
--
"That was not a damned little party of futbol.. .that was REAL LIFE."
Tom Jobes
Lots of what?
Tomcat
Joe Horowitz
"Tom Jobes" <jo...@aquaterra.com> wrote in message
news:3D05306B...@aquaterra.com...
> >
> > They never draw, but when they do, they draw lots.
>
> Lots of what?
Lots of drawing.
Ffs, have you not been paying any attention?
kevin....@nottingham.ac.uk
<jh007c31...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Thanks for that, it's all so much clearer now. Could be worse, could be a
lottery. Imagine Dale Winton let loose on an unsuspecting football
audience
(shudders).
davro5
ingredients of : not relying on debateable stats ,
not forcing one team to switch venues
not passing judgement on the knobbliness or Non-
knobbliness of knees.
BRIBERY
Yes , its tried and tested
Who can honestly say that if their team has to draw lots against Japan
or South Korea , that they've got a hope in hell.
Well its either that or going on the team with the most outrageous haircuts
!
I can imagine Mick McCarthy putting on a hairdresser in the closing stages !
It'd be great , the Chinese could have gone for bee-hives and it
would have given them much needed height in the box.
The Belgians already have hairdressers in the squad by the looks of them.
I've even seen the goalkeeper getting manicures on the bench.
And the Poles ?
No haircut is outrageous enough to save the Poles
( A bouffant with "Die Pope Die in anal agony" shaved into it perhaps :)
Something for the weekend ? You won't be around that long.
davros
--