How are tiebreakers determined

[Woody0]

Right now Italy has 2 points and Sweden/Denmark 4 each.

So Italy will win tomorrow against Bulgaria and have 5 points thereby eliminating the loser of the Sweden/Denmark match.

But if Sweden/Denmark tie they will also each have 5 points and the three top teams will have beaten Bulgaria only, but will have tied each other.

What is the order of priority for determining the two teams that advance?

 

[soccerbob]

Woody- It's a bit confusing but if you go to fcbet.com and click on the Italy- Bulgaria preview, it's very well explained by the person writing a preview of the match.

I would love to see Sweden and Denmark play to a 2-2 draw so they can both screw Italy, which would be exactly what that dirtbag squad deserves.

 

[Woody0]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by soccerbob:
Woody- It's a bit confusing...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Bob, it is well explained there and a bit confusing has to be an understatement

 

[matahari]

Here are the rules:

(a) Greater number of points obtained in the matches between the teams in question.
(b) Goal difference resulting from the matches between the teams in question (if more than two teams finish equal).
(c) Greater number of goals scored in the matches between the teams in question (if more than two teams finish equal).
(d) Goal difference in all the group matches.
(e) Greater number of goals scored in all the group matches.
(f) Coefficient of points from the last two qualifying competitions for the final rounds of the 2002 World Cup and Euro 2004 (points gained and divided by the number of matches played).
(g) Fair Play conduct of the teams (final tournament).
(h) A drawing of lots by the Organising Committee.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I would love to see Sweden and Denmark play to a 2-2 draw so they can both screw Italy, which would be exactly what that dirtbag squad deserves. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No draw will help Denmark should Italy win by more than 2 goal advantage vs Bulgaria.

 

[Duckstabber]

Matahari,

A 2-2 draw means that Italy has no chance to qualify.

 

[matahari]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> (c) Greater number of goals scored in the matches between the teams in question (if more than two teams finish equal). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Duck,

Ok, got it now. That's a hilarious rule btw.

 

[JackDee]

i wouldn't consider it hilarious, that's how we, greece, got through and it's a very sensible clause, you have to favour the better attack, you got to favour the higher scoring, more attacking teams, no point in having one qualify on the basis of pilling one player after the other in their defence and getting results. And ironicaly enough, greece qualified over what's arguably one of the best offences in europe, the spanish one.

bol, duck.

I ve written extensively on this games, some of the scenarios, as well as the qualifying criteria in my thread and other threads. I ll also be betting the highest available odds for Sweden, and Denmark to win. I am not buying the draw scenario, i ve posted this in my thread. Looks like a lot of people will be making a lot of books real happy what with their piling up on the draw. I also believe there's a deliberate plan by bookmakers to lure people to bet the draw. And, mark my words, the draw won't be the end result in this fixture. At 2.2 average price, i have another qualm, here it is: If the game is set up, by both scandinavians, which it isn't but let's suppose it is, either explicitly set up, or under some tacit alliance, if this is the case then shouldn't the odds for the draw be around 1.1-1.5 or off and unavailable to bet, surely they should? If it isn't, shouldnt they be at around 3 something, proper draw odds, like any other game? So, why this 2.2? You can't have the two events together, think about it, would they books let you bet it if they were in the know about a setup? Obviously not, so why do they do let you bet it know, claiming with the 2.2 odds that there's a chance it will be set up. Do bookmakers ever give out odds if there's the slightest chance a game will be set up according to the players expectations? Give me a break. Hence the 2.2, just a bait, don't bite, if there's a draw here it'll be a mere coincidence, as likely as any other draw, and you d be getting ripped off at 2.2. Of course at the same time, it's a line based almost solely on the public's expectations.

bol. Jack.

 

[matahari]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> i wouldn't consider it hilarious, that's how we, greece, got through and it's a very sensible clause, you have to favour the better attack, you got to favour the higher scoring, more attacking teams, no point in having one qualify on the basis of pilling one player after the other in their defence and getting results. And ironicaly enough, greece qualified over what's arguably one of the best offences in europe, the spanish one. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, Jack. Greece got through by the (e) clause, not the (c). If you consider the (c) clause, it completely disregards the better attack favoring.

 

[JackDee]

yeah you are right, what i meant to say is that both clauses have the same rationale in that they favour the more attacking teams.