🔵🟡Scotland v Poland 🔴⚪

[Pie Of The Month]

2 minutes ago, ArabFC said:

Literally tells you right there, eight teams, not four.

 

Literally no need to be a c**t for a minor mistake at half 6 in the morning mate.

[The Master]

2 hours ago, Pie Of The Month said:

There we go, if we want to be pot 1 we would need to win our group. 

 

 

A complete fudge of a system because England decided to be shite in the previous Nations League. 

When the new NL format was announced, it was pretty obvious the intention was for the full interim ranking to be used for World Cup qualifying.

But now instead of the remaining pot 1 spaces going to the third-placed League A teams, they’ve given them to the highest ranked teams in the FIFA rankings not in the quarter finals. Then to make it look less obvious what they’ve done, screw over more teams by using the FIFA ranking further down as well.

[Jaggy McJagface]

4 hours ago, Pie Of The Month said:

There we go, if we want to be pot 1 we would need to finish top 2 in our group. 

 

 

There is absolutely zero chance they use this convoluted format rather than just the NL rankings if England hadn’t made an arse if it and dropped down to league B.

 

They are clearly protecting the bigger teams with the big stars and are shit scared of a scenario where England and France end up in the same qualifying group and one of them not making it.

 

This is the absolute worst scenario for us as if we get a shoeing in this NL group then we will likely be in pot 3 for the World Cup qualifiers now, whereas before we’d have been pot 2 (or even pot 1 if we’d managed to finish above Poland). We’ve been absolutely shafted by this.

Edited September 4 by Jaggy McJagface
Typo

[Dunning1874]

Pretty much rules out Pot 2 for us then - definitely Pot 1 if we finish in the top two and almost certainly Pot 3 if we don't.

[The Master]

The more you dig into it, the worse it gets.

It's entirely possible that if a team finishes 2nd in their NL group, they will end up in a lower WC qualifying pot than if they'd finished 3rd or even 4th.

That's what the "draw pot adjustments" are - if too many teams from the same pot (based on FIFA rankings) qualify for the play-offs, they'll move down the lowest ranked team in the play-offs, and move up the highest-ranked team not in the play-offs.

So if I've picked this up right, it would mean (e.g.) if too many pot 3 teams qualify for the play-offs, they'll move the lowest-ranked pot 3 team in the play-offs to pot 4, and move the highest-ranked pot 4 team not in the play-offs to pot 3. 

 

[Jaggy McJagface]

8 minutes ago, The Master said:

The more you dig into it, the worse it gets.

It's entirely possible that if a team finishes 2nd in their NL group, they will end up in a lower WC qualifying pot than if they'd finished 3rd or even 4th.

That's what the "draw pot adjustments" are - if too many teams from the same pot (based on FIFA rankings) qualify for the play-offs, they'll move down the lowest ranked team in the play-offs, and move up the highest-ranked team not in the play-offs.

So if I've picked this up right, it would mean (e.g.) if too many pot 3 teams qualify for the play-offs, they'll move the lowest-ranked pot 3 team in the play-offs to pot 4, and move the highest-ranked pot 4 team not in the play-offs to pot 3. 

 

I’m struggling to get my head round this

[The Master]

7 minutes ago, Jaggy McJagface said:

I’m struggling to get my head round this

The answer is "England must be in pot 1". That's the only logical explanation for such a convoluted and potentially unfair system.

You can guarantee that if it were fixed like this to ensure Italy, France or Germany were in pot 1, the English media would be all over it and screaming about how unfair it all is. 

[Dunning1874]

5 minutes ago, Jaggy McJagface said:

I’m struggling to get my head round this

Teams taking part in Nations League playoffs need to be in four team groups rather than five in order to fit all their qualifiers in after their playoffs, so if too many teams from one pot are in playoffs to accommodate them all in four team groups, they need to be swapped for someone in a different pot who isn't in a playoff and so can be in a five team group.

It could actually work in our favour as well as it's possible we might sit in Pot 3 on World Rankings having finished bottom of our Nations League group, but a team sitting in a Pot 2 position in the rankings have finished 3rd in League A or 2nd in League B groups and so have a promotion/relegation playoff, and we could then get put in Pot 2 in their place as a team without a playoff.

[Jaggy McJagface]

6 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

Teams taking part in Nations League playoffs need to be in four team groups rather than five in order to fit all their qualifiers in after their playoffs, so if too many teams from one pot are in playoffs to accommodate them all in four team groups, they need to be swapped for someone in a different pot who isn't in a playoff and so can be in a five team group.

It could actually work in our favour as well as it's possible we might sit in Pot 3 on World Rankings having finished bottom of our Nations League group, but a team sitting in a Pot 2 position in the rankings have finished 3rd in League A or 2nd in League B groups and so have a promotion/relegation playoff, and we could then get put in Pot 2 in their place as a team without a playoff.

Even if that were to work in our favour that is an absolutely ridiculous system and unfair on the team that should have been pot 2 in that scenario.

 

Couldn’t be clearer that it’s been put in place to ensure the big teams all get there.

 

The solution to this is either;

1.) Don’t expand the NL in such fashion that these fixture clashes become likely.

2.) If you *are* set on revamping the NL, do qualifying pots based on them to avoid this nonsense.

 

The fact that this dogs dinner of a format is what they plumped for tells you all you need to know. There is no other reason why they wouldn’t just use the NL rankings other than the most commercially lucrative team have made an arse of their last nations league campaign.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, The Master said:

A complete fudge of a system because England decided to be shite in the previous Nations League. 

When the new NL format was announced, it was pretty obvious the intention was for the full interim ranking to be used for World Cup qualifying.

 

1 hour ago, Jaggy McJagface said:

There is absolutely zero chance they use this convoluted format rather than just the NL rankings if England hadn’t made an arse if it and dropped down to league B.

They are clearly protecting the bigger teams with the big stars and are shit scared of a scenario where England and France end up in the same qualifying group and one of them not making it.

The last World Cup qualifiers weren't seeded by Nations League positions either, it was reported that UEFA wanted to use them but FIFA insisted on their rankings being used. The fact that the Nations League placings are being used at all now makes it more likely that bigger teams end up unseeded compared to the previous system.

[forameus]

Craig makes a decent point actually.  It sounds like a shite system (and probably is to be honest) but it's probably prone to shift more than the old World Rankings system.  The top nations would have to completely tank to miss out on the old system, and it's more possible now.  Granted, this really harshes my buzz of imagining England horsing another Nations League campaign, have their fans talk about how it doesn't really matter, than get papped out of World Cup qualifying.  That's less likely to happen than before, but here's hoping.

The format itself (and I haven't read it, only going by what's said here) seems far more convoluted than it really needs to be. Maybe just having straight Nations League rankings isn't the perfect solution, but it's clear and simple and gives every nation something clear to go for.  Any system where it kind of matters but doesn't, and it can pay to finish in a lower position but who really knows...that's a bit shit.

[Jaggy McJagface]

8 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

The last World Cup qualifiers weren't seeded by Nations League positions either, it was reported that UEFA wanted to use them but FIFA insisted on their rankings being used. The fact that the Nations League placings are being used at all now makes it more likely that bigger teams end up unseeded compared to the previous system.

They weren’t, but FIFA added some stipulations to the draw proceedings this time around to leave using the NL as the preliminary seeding format an option for UEFA. It was pretty clear that just using the nations league was not only allowed, but was the obvious solution to the scheduling conflicts this time around.
 

I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue with your second point. They are only using the nations league for the teams finishing in the top 2 in each league A group - a total of 8 teams out of 50 odd in Europe. As it stands, none of the big teams have any real jeopardy of falling out of pot 1 unless all of France, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands contrived to finish bottom of their groups, which is incredibly unlikely. Even then, all but one of them would still make pot 1 in that scenario. So no, it is not actually realistically more likely that the big teams will miss out using the new system.

 

If they’d used the ACTUAL nations league rankings instead of this half arsed version, there would be some actual jeopardy involved for those teams, but as it stands there is very little chance of them dropping down a pot.

 

 

[craigkillie]

The actual Nations League rankings obviously make it the most likely that the bigger teams drop down in pots (although in practice this hasn't happened much when they've used it in UEFA qualifiers, there hasn't been a big nation in Pot 3 or below yet), but that was never part of the discussion for World Cup seeding as far as I'm aware. All of the chat on here was entirely about it just being FIFA rankings based.

However, if you are comparing this system to a pure rankings based system, which is what was used for the last World Cup qualifying, and what the discussions on this forum up until now had been anticipating as being used for the upcoming World Cup, then it is clearly more likely under this current system that "smaller" nations, end up as top seeds. Under this system, 8 of the 12 places are based on shorter-term performance compared to longer-term ones, and that is generally likely to favour smaller teams, since these tend to be more likely to put together short runs of brilliant performances which can't be sustained long-term.

Just to use ourselves as an example, under the pure rankings based system, there was basically no chance of us being in Pot 1. Under this system, we could easily sneak in by maybe taking something like 8/9 points from this Nations League group - ie it wouldn't even require us to go out and smash everyone. If we end up in Pot 1, then by definition that's one less space available for a "bigger" team.

Edited September 4 by craigkillie

[Richey Edwards]

Game is being broadcast on the television. 

Unfortunately I have a jam-tasting event tomorrow so will be unable to watch it.

[The Master]

The point is, it's not a case of this system or the rankings, and no other option.

Using the full Nations League rankings provides all the benefits you describe ("smaller" teams displacing "bigger" teams from pot 1). There's no need for the chosen format to make that happen. 

The format they've chosen is because England* could not be in pot 1 using only the NL rankings. And in choosing this format, they've created the possibility of teams being penalised for success. 

 

*I'm sure they'd also have done it if France, Germany, Italy etc. had found themselves in League B or below. It's just England happen to be the only "top" nation who find themselves in that position. 

[Jaggy McJagface]

5 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

The actual Nations League rankings obviously make it the most likely that the bigger teams drop down in pots (although in practice this hasn't happened much when they've used it in UEFA qualifiers, there hasn't been a big nation in Pot 3 or below yet).

However, if you are comparing this system to a pure rankings based system, which is what was used for the last World Cup qualifying, and what the discussions on this forum up until now had been anticipating as being used for the upcoming World Cup, then it is clearly more likely under this current system that "smaller" nations, end up as top seeds. Under this system, 8 of the 12 places are based on shorter-term performance compared to longer-term ones, and that is generally likely to favour smaller teams, since these tend to be more likely to put together short runs of brilliant performances which can't be sustained long-term.

Just to use ourselves as an example, under the pure rankings based system, there was basically no chance of us being in Pot 1. Under this system, we could easily sneak in by maybe taking something like 8/9 points from this Nations League group - ie it wouldn't even require us to go out and smash everyone. If we end up in Pot 1, then by definition that's one less space available for a "bigger" team.

I thought it had been widely assumed that the NL rankings proper were likely to be used because scheduling conflicts due to the revamped nations league made using the FIFA rankings impractical/verging on impossible? I’m sure I saw Scotland’s coefficient and the WeGlobal page on Twitter having threads on this out months ago.

 

It’s the fact they’ve decided to use this weird hybrid model (which still makes for a no less convoluted draw with teams moving up and down pots depending on if they reach a playoff) at the last minute which stinks of a fix. It’s clearly been set up in this manner not because it makes most sense, but because it ensures England - the most commercially lucrative nation - don’t get papped into pot 2.

 

With regards to your last point, yes it does make it easier for us in particular to get lucky and reach pot 1 compared to the 2022 WC format. However, we’ve got to bear in mind that there are going to be 12 qualifying groups this time around rather than the 10 we had last time, so it would be easier for tier 2 nations to snatch a pot 1 berth via the rankings anyways. Austria are currently ranked 12 in Europe, with Ukraine, Sweden and Turkey not far off them.

[craigkillie]

9 minutes ago, The Master said:

The point is, it's not a case of this system or the rankings, and no other option.

Using the full Nations League rankings provides all the benefits you describe ("smaller" teams displacing "bigger" teams from pot 1). There's no need for the chosen format to make that happen. 

The format they've chosen is because England* could not be in pot 1 using only the NL rankings. And in choosing this format, they've created the possibility of teams being penalised for success. 

 

*I'm sure they'd also have done it if France, Germany, Italy etc. had found themselves in League B or below. It's just England happen to be the only "top" nation who find themselves in that position. 

The full Nations League rankings weren't used the last time either, unless something has changed since the last World Cup, FIFA insist on using their rankings as the predominant system for seeding the draw. The fact UEFA have even been given the flexibility to include any Nations League elements for the seeding of the groups is the somewhat surprising part to me.

Every other confederation (except South America where it's obviously just one big group) used FIFA ranking. This includes CONCACAF, who have their own Nations League.

[craigkillie]

13 minutes ago, Jaggy McJagface said:

I thought it had been widely assumed that the NL rankings proper were likely to be used because scheduling conflicts due to the revamped nations league made using the FIFA rankings impractical/verging on impossible? I’m sure I saw Scotland’s coefficient and the WeGlobal page on Twitter having threads on this out months ago.

 

It’s the fact they’ve decided to use this weird hybrid model (which still makes for a no less convoluted draw with teams moving up and down pots depending on if they reach a playoff) at the last minute which stinks of a fix. It’s clearly been set up in this manner not because it makes most sense, but because it ensures England - the most commercially lucrative nation - don’t get papped into pot 2.

 

With regards to your last point, yes it does make it easier for us in particular to get lucky and reach pot 1 compared to the 2022 WC format. However, we’ve got to bear in mind that there are going to be 12 qualifying groups this time around rather than the 10 we had last time, so it would be easier for tier 2 nations to snatch a pot 1 berth via the rankings anyways. Austria are currently ranked 12 in Europe, with Ukraine, Sweden and Turkey not far off them.

It certainly hadn't been widely assumed on here, where there was discussion of pots based on FIFA rankings. There has certainly never been any belief on this forum that we were guaranteed Pot 2 by being in League A of the Nations League.

This is FIFA's competition, and the fact that UEFA have stretched themselves with another competition format isn't FIFA's problem. World Rankings have always been used for World Cup qualifying, including for 2022 World Cup despite the Nations League rankings also existing at that point.

This is not really "at the last minute" given that the draw isn't for another 3 months. England got relegated to League B almost exactly 2 years ago, this isn't something that has just popped up over the horizon.

[Jaggy McJagface]

13 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

It certainly hadn't been widely assumed on here, where there was discussion of pots based on FIFA rankings. There has certainly never been any belief on this forum that we were guaranteed Pot 2 by being in League A of the Nations League.

This is FIFA's competition, and the fact that UEFA have stretched themselves with another competition format isn't FIFA's problem. World Rankings have always been used for World Cup qualifying, including for 2022 World Cup despite the Nations League rankings also existing at that point.

This is not really "at the last minute" given that the draw isn't for another 3 months. England got relegated to League B almost exactly 2 years ago, this isn't something that has just popped up over the horizon.

I distinctly remember reading threads about this while I was still in Germany from more than one account on Twitter. The fact most people here (or anywhere) were more interested in talking about the performances on the pitch than the intricacies of a convoluted future qualifying draw isn’t exactly surprising.

 

The rankings have always been used to determine WC pots… until now. The fact is FIFA have allowed confederations to use other means of determining their preliminary qualifying pots. The fact FIFA added these stipulations tipped a lot of people who had noted the problems with the new NL format off that they were in all likelihood just going to use the nations league rankings to determine the pots.

 

Simply using the NL pots is not only allowed, it makes the most sense by far and would avoid overcomplicating the draw by adding nonsense playoff permutations.

 

The point people are making today is that we are only getting this dogs dinner of a format because one of the elite nations has put themselves in a position where they either might not qualify or knock out one of the other elite nations in qualifying, and that stinks.

Edited September 4 by Jaggy McJagface
Typo

[Claudia Gentile]

38 minutes ago, Richey Edwards said:

Game is being broadcast on the television. 

Unfortunately I have a jam-tasting event tomorrow so will be unable to watch it.

You taste jam through your eyes?