NIGERIA THE EXPECTED LOSERS OF THE DRAW. BULGARIA, SPAIN,
PARAGUAY LOSE WITH THEM.
ARGENTINA AND BRASIL ESCAPED THREATENING GROUPS OF DEATH.
The draw is made, the World Cup can kick off. It has been a fine draw
(as the FIFA president put it himself "straightforward and to the
point") and many groups appear easy to the fans of the favorite nations.
This impression may deceive but as you can see in the colored table below
the groups seem quite well-balanced with the exception of one. While European
average Austria and Denmark can call themselves now favorites to advance
and concentrate on a surprise in the second round, last World Cup semi-finalists
Bulgaria and Olympic gold medallists Nigeria find themselves back with
each other in another heavy-heavy-heavy-light group. This was no accident,
it was pre-determined as our Quick-Evaluation-Report
on the effect of the seeding on the teams prospects (that was released
by The Shot that passed right through the Net on the day between
the seeding decisions and the draw) was able to demonstrate.
| BRASIL |
ITALY |
FRANCE |
SPAIN |
NETHERLANDS |
GERMANY |
ROMANIA |
ARGENTINA |
| SCOTLAND |
CHILE |
STH-AFRICA |
NIGERIA |
BELGIUM |
USA |
COLUMBIA |
JAPAN |
| MOROCCO |
CAMEROON |
SAUDI-ARABIA |
PARAGUAY |
REP-COREA |
YUGOSLAWIA |
ENGLAND |
JAMAICA |
| NORWAY |
AUSTRIA |
DENMARK |
BULGARIA |
MEXICO |
IRAN |
TUNISIA |
CROATIA |
Now the after-draw-evaluation of The Shot that passed right through
the Net: the prospects for teams in groups A (Brasil), E (Netherlands),
G (Romania,England), to advance to second round, were not affected much
by the particular outcome of the draw. The prospects for the teams in group
B (Italy), C (France), F (Germany), H (Argentina) were boosted by 10% while
the prospects for any team in group D (Spain, Nigeria, Bulgaria) were diminished
by 20%.
The table below demonstrates to you one more time (see evaluation
on the effect of the seeding) the problem caused by the seeding/the
draw organisation. The rows are organised now the way the pots were designed:
| BRASIL |
ITALY |
FRANCE |
SPAIN |
NETHERLANDS |
GERMANY |
ROMANIA |
ARGENTINA |
| MOROCCO |
CAMEROON |
STH-AFRICA |
NIGERIA |
MEXICO |
USA |
TUNISIA |
JAMAICA |
| SCOTLAND |
AUSTRIA |
DENMARK |
BULGARIA |
BELGIUM |
YUGOSLAWIA |
ENGLAND |
CROATIA |
| NORWAY |
CHILE |
SAUDI-ARABIA |
PARAGUAY |
REP-COREA |
IRAN |
COLUMBIA |
JAPAN |
There were three teams that did not become group heads but can be considered
heavy weights. The most logical idea is to distribute them a way that not
more than one of them can be added to any possible group. But this was
not the case. There were 4 possible cases: Nigeria and England into one
group (added of course to the heavyweight that was already topseeded),
Nigaria and Bulgaria into one group (the case that actually happened),
England and Bulgaria into one group, a case that exclusively could happen
to Argentina and Brasil, the non European topseeds and all three of them
into one group, the worst case possible, again exclusively possible for
the Brasil/Argentina groups.
From a different view this strangeness reoccurs: There are 13 lightweights.
Due to FIFA logic it should be obvious, there is at least one lightweight
in each group. By accident this happened in the draw. But it had been possible
a different result to come true: Because of the idea to put the ninth European
team into one of the Brasil/Argentina group, it had been possible, no lightweight
had been drawn into that group. Exactly in that moment when Mexico or Nigeria
had been drawn from the CAF/CONCACAF pot. A probability of 25% that had
not existed for European topseeds.
This information is a component of The
Shot that passed right through the Net. More information on how African
teams were put at a disatvantage until 1990 with mathematical evidence
you can find at http://www.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de/~wille/WOM/BALL/afr_st_e.html
(in Deutsch: http://www.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de/~wille/WOM/BALL/afr_stat.html)