WCQ: Third Round - Window 5 (March 24 - 30, 2022)

[RS]

10 minutes ago, narduch said:

The wrench in all of this are the guys on yellow cards.

Anyone of of them gets a yellow in the last qualifier they would miss our World Cup opener.

Assuming qualification is already achieved by then, it wouldn’t be a bad idea for Herdman to sit all those players for the last qualifier (or at least, sit any of the “core” players that are on cards).

Thats also assuming that a yellow-card suspension would carry over to the World Cup itself.

[Ruud]

7 hours ago, TGAA_Star said:

I mean we are practically on the cusp of qualifying for Qatar. It would have been awesome had we qualified last night by clinching our spot if Honduras and Jamaica did their damn jobs and beat the USA and Costa Rica. But no use in crying over spilled milk.

I mean we have 3 more games left 🤷 to go so 🤷 

We have Costa Rica (A), Jamaica (H) and Panama (A)

But I swear can't Canada clinch a spot in Qatar in our next match should we beat Costa Rica? That would give us 28 points which should be enough to qualify I mean shouldn't it?

My guess is herdman treats every game as a warmup and audition for the World Cup !  No full lineup changes etc to the end.  Also we can clinch after Costa Rica depending on outcomes of other matches.  Even a draw Or loss might be enough if Panama lose

[Snowcrash]

8 minutes ago, RS said:

Assuming qualification is already achieved by then, it wouldn’t be a bad idea for Herdman to sit all those players for the last qualifier (or at least, sit any of the “core” players that are on cards).

Thats also assuming that a yellow-card suspension would carry over to the World Cup itself.

Only direct red cards or two yellows in one game carry over to the World Cup.  Individual yellows don't carry over.

Here's the link to FIFA rules manual:

https://editorial.uefa.com/resources/0263-10f46ad3158d-d735f61afd27-1000/fifa_world_cup_2022_preliminary_competition_regulations-covid19_1_.pdf

 

[Allez les Rouges]

4 hours ago, jonovision said:

Looking at the teams in both pots, it seems like the draw will be a much, much more important difference in the quality of the group than which pot we end up in.  Would you rather end up in a group with Tunisia or Morocco? Korea or Russia? I have no opinion, because there's not a lot of difference between these teams.

There is a big difference between drawing Germany or Uruguay as a pot 2 opponent.

Yes, but Pot 3 vs. 4 is what the team has partial control over. There is no control over the luck of the draw.

Another thing to consider is Canada's chances of being in the same group as Qatar: assuming the "no 2 teams from the same confederation in a group" rule applies to the host nation, if Pot 3 has 3 AFC countries (Iran, South Korea, Japan) while Pot 4 has only 1 (Saudi Arabia), as seems likely, Canada has 1 chance out of 5 of drawing Qatar if it's in Pot 3, but only 1 chance out of 6 or 7 (depending on whether they bar the AFC/CONMEBOL qualifier from Qatar's group) if it's in Pot 4.

On the other hand, if South Korea drops to Pot 4 and/or Australia overtakes Japan while staying in a Pot 4 position (neither of which is very likely), then Pot 4 may actually be better than Pot 3 in terms of chances of drawing Qatar.

[Neil R.]

Our chance of drawing Qatar's group is also influenced by the Pot 2 allocation. If the USA or Mexico get Group A, then we can't, regardless of what pot we're in. We might be out of the running for Qatar's group (unfortunately) before they even get to our pot.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Neil R.

[footballfreak]

8 hours ago, Corazon said:

I believe I heard that Atiba was actually suspended for the USA game after receiving his first yellow after a match in the previous round.  If this is the case, you could jot him down as suspension served.

I saw this at the time, but I don’t see how it can be the case. We had other players on yellows from the previous round of qualifying, and none of them served suspensions when they received their first Ocho yellow. Every indication was that the cards reset at the start of the Ocho.

Unless Atiba got a card that isn’t on the match reports, him being suspended seems like nonsense.

Edit: Went back through the qualifiers. Laryea, for instance, got a yellow card in the first Haiti game, and then a yellow against the USA. He played the next game at home to El Salvador.

Edit 2: All that is moot anyways, because Atiba didn’t receive ANY cards in this World Cup qualifying cycle before the one against Honduras.

Edited February 3, 2022 by footballfreak

[Joe Keeper]

17 hours ago, Cblake said:

Realistically to get into Pot 3, Canada is going to need to avoid a loss in the final window. Two wins and a draw may just be enough to push them in. Any loss in the final 3 games and it's all but likely Pot 4 for the draw.

 

 

The really interesting thing is that Senegal, Nigeria, and Morocco are not qualifyed yet and all have to face tough home and home direct knock out ties to reach the world cup. CAF can be very unpredictable in those series.  If any or all of them get knocked out at the end of March this could also help us get to pot 3.

 

The ranking points they earned in the African Cup of Nations would obviously not help them if they are eliminated. 

Japan are not through yet but look good to get there math wise. Wales may not make it either but are a good side. 

Edited February 3, 2022 by Joe Keeper

[AvroArrow]

What I would find amusing is if our last game against Panama is meaningless for us, we lose, that allows Panama to leap frog Mexico, and Mexico goes to the Intercontinental playoffs.  Unlikely, but I can dream.

[Unnamed Trialist]

26 minutes ago, footballfreak said:

I saw this at the time, but I don’t see how it can be the case. We had other players on yellows from the previous round of qualifying, and none of them served suspensions when they received their first Ocho yellow. Every indication was that the cards reset at the start of the Ocho.

Unless Atiba got a card that isn’t on the match reports, him being suspended seems like nonsense.

Edit: Went back through the qualifiers. Laryea, for instance, got a yellow card in the first Haiti game, and then a yellow against the USA. He played the next game at home to El Salvador.

Edit 2: All that is moot anyways, because Atiba didn’t receive ANY cards in this World Cup qualifying cycle before the one against Honduras.

I believe it's Herdman who says Atiba got a phantom yellow in Edmonton. 

Of course you'd have to look at official match reports, don't know if Concacaf makes them available. Maybe it was given after the Mexico match for the rumble. 

You're doing great work keeping up the card sheet, we all appreciate it. 

[footballfreak]

11 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I believe it's Herdman who says Atiba got a phantom yellow in Edmonton. 

Of course you'd have to look at official match reports, don't know if Concacaf makes them available. Maybe it was given after the Mexico match for the rumble. 

You're doing great work keeping up the card sheet, we all appreciate it. 

Ah thanks. I hadn’t heard it was from the Mexico game. That makes sense. FIFA used to publish the official match reports, but I don’t know if they’re available anywhere now.

[Corazon]

45 minutes ago, footballfreak said:

I saw this at the time, but I don’t see how it can be the case. We had other players on yellows from the previous round of qualifying, and none of them served suspensions when they received their first Ocho yellow. Every indication was that the cards reset at the start of the Ocho.

Unless Atiba got a card that isn’t on the match reports, him being suspended seems like nonsense.

Edit: Went back through the qualifiers. Laryea, for instance, got a yellow card in the first Haiti game, and then a yellow against the USA. He played the next game at home to El Salvador.

Edit 2: All that is moot anyways, because Atiba didn’t receive ANY cards in this World Cup qualifying cycle before the one against Honduras.

Yes, excellent work on these.  I thoroughly enjoy reading these reports. 

I was entirely basing it on what Herdman and Team Canada said.  Speculation was that it was after the Mexico game in Edmonton.

Edit: I see that you have already responded above. 👍

Edited February 3, 2022 by Corazon

[footballfreak]

6 minutes ago, Corazon said:

Yes, excellent work on these.  I thoroughly enjoy reading these reports. 

I was entirely basing it on what Herdman and Team Canada said.  Speculation was that it was after the Mexico game in Edmonton.

Edit: I see that you have already responded above. 👍

No worries. Happy to do it and it’s good to have people fact checking me. I won’t repost it, but I’ve cleared Atiba. 

Edited February 3, 2022 by footballfreak

[Free kick]

i looked at that chart again.   Yes,  indeed most of the Asian sides are in Pot 3 now.    You want to face the Asian sides in the group stage and you want to be in a pot with the strongest sides possible.  Right now Pot 4 with Algeria, Peru, Ecuador, Tunisia and even Saudi Arabia looks stronger than pot 3.   A few Asian sides (Kor, JPN, IRN) are moving up the rankings because they are playing against each other.   i dont see anyone other than Serbia in Pot 3 that should really worry anyone.   The teams in pot 3 others are stagnant sides benefiting from history (having played previously at WC) but are not progressing.   And some like Wales and Nigeria might not even be at the WC.   

In pot 4, there are two SA sides, two very good CAF sides,  and one Asian sides that's topping its group.   There appears to be a number of previously lower ranked teams (like Canada) that are making a run but were from a starting point that was too low to envision getting into pot 3.   They are all stuck in pot 4 right now.  So are we sure we still want pot 3?   

Edited February 4, 2022 by Free kick

[footballfreak]

 

14 minutes ago, Free kick said:

i looked at that chart again.   Yes,  indeed most of the Asian sides are in Pot 3 now.    You want to face the Asian sides in the group stage and you want to be in a pot with the strongest sides possible.  Right now Pot 4 with Algeria, Peru, Ecuador, Tunisia and even Saudi Arabia looks stronger than pot 3.   A few Asian sides (Kor, JPN, IRN) are moving up the rankings because they are playing against each other.   i dont see anyone other than Serbia in Pot 3 that should really worry anyone.   The teams in pot 3 others are stagnant sides benefiting from history (having played previously at WC) but are not progressing.   And some like Wales and Nigeria might not even be at the WC.   

In pot 4, there are two SA sides, two very good CAF sides,  and one Asian sides that's topping its group.   There appears to be a number of previously lower ranked teams (like Canada) that are making a run but were from a starting point that was too low to envision getting into pot 3.   They are all stuck in pot 4 right now.  So are we sure we still want pot 3?   

It’s marginal, but I still think I would prefer us in Pot 3. I watched Peru-Ecuador and frankly I wasn’t impressed with either of them.

One potential advantage of Pot 3 is it lowers our chances of being shoehorned into a group with two UEFA teams. With the way the draw is conducted (usually starting with pot 1), by the point in the draw where Pot 4 is drawn, there are many more restrictions on who can go where.

eg.  “Russia can’t go in Group F because Belgium and Wales are already there. And Peru can’t go in because Uruguay are there. Canada it is.”

Pot 3 avoids some of those conflicts and makes a group of death less likely.

[An Observer]

10 minutes ago, footballfreak said:

 

It’s marginal, but I still think I would prefer us in Pot 3. I watched Peru-Ecuador and frankly I wasn’t impressed with either of them.

One potential advantage of Pot 3 is it lowers our chances of being shoehorned into a group with two UEFA teams. With the way the draw is conducted (usually starting with pot 1), by the point in the draw where Pot 4 is drawn, there are many more restrictions on who can go where.

eg.  “Russia can’t go in Group F because Belgium and Wales are already there. And Peru can’t go in because Uruguay are there. Canada it is.”

Pot 3 avoids some of those conflicts and makes a group of death less likely.

Yeah. My view is that it helps you avoid a Group of Death.  Otherwise I agree that it doesn’t make that much difference 

[footballfreak]

I’ve been putting together a spreadsheet of minutes played since the start of qualifying in March 2021. Not quite ready to share the whole thing yet, but here are some tidbits that stuck out to me:

• Alphonso Davies is only 10th on the team sheet for minutes played in the Ocho. Obviously his absence isn’t new information, but to see it put into numbers just reinforces what a tremendous team we have.
• Cyle Larin is 13th (!) on the same list. His goal output when taken in context is ridiculous. 1.07 goals/90 in the Ocho.
• Alistair Johnston is a machine. In 22 games, he has 21 appearances and 18 starts. He was rested once - against Aruba. He has played a full 33 minutes (~5%) more in the Ocho than his nearest challenger (Laryea).
• 36 players made a roster, 31 played minutes, 29 played qualifying minutes, 25 played minutes in the Ocho. 22 started at least one match in the Ocho.

[TGAA_Star]

12 hours ago, Neil R. said:

Our chance of drawing Qatar's group is also influenced by the Pot 2 allocation. If the USA or Mexico get Group A, then we can't, regardless of what pot we're in. We might be out of the running for Qatar's group (unfortunately) before they even get to our pot.

That's true which is why Canada in our first World Cup back, we could end up very much in a Group of Death 

[apbsmith]

21 hours ago, narduch said:

To make Pot 3 we probably need as many upsets as possible in the remaining qualifiers.

Teams like North Macedonia doing the unthinkable would be much more beneficial than anything we do on our own

Agree, going to be watching all these qualifiers very closely. 

The quality in pot 3 is much stronger then pot 4. You also need to factor in 1-2 possible upsets in the qualifiers, so of those current 32 teams some will change. I'd much rather have a chance to win the Fifa lotto and a chance to play a pot 4 AFCON/Asian team, especially if one sneaks in.

[apbsmith]

19 hours ago, CanadaFan123 said:

The pot 1 and 2 teams that we would want would be Qatar and Switzerland perhaps. 

I'd much rather avoid the team that knocked France out of Euros and auto qualified for WC over Italy. Swiss are very well organized, disciplined and lethal. 

Few other teams in pot 2 I'd prefer, but to each there own. I'll save my opinion for the draw.

Still mind blown we are having these discussions!

[Unnamed Trialist]

Just now, apbsmith said:

I'd much rather avoid the team that knocked France out of Euros and auto qualified for WC over Italy. Swiss are very well organized, disciplined and lethal. 

Few other teams in pot 2 I'd prefer, but to each there own. I'll save my opinion for the draw.

Still mind blown we are having these discussions!

I'd still take Switzerland, thinking they have players who are Liam Millar's teammates, you are not going to be in awe. But I see your point: the key is not to underestimate anyone. 

What happened when Spain won the World Cup, do folks remember? We lost the first match of the group stage to Switzerland, I remember exactly where I watched it, in the big cafeteria that looks down onto the pool used in the 1992 Olympics, for totally odd circumstances. Fact is, Spain won a World Cup, and most would say deservedly, but without playing great matches or dominating in any game, except maybe the 2-0 over Honduras. But it started with a loss to the Swiss.

[Sal333]

10 hours ago, An Observer said:

Yeah. My view is that it helps you avoid a Group of Death.  Otherwise I agree that it doesn’t make that much difference 

Actually, if Canada's performance this past year isn't a fluke whichever group we fall in will become the Group of death. And it doesn't matter if we're in Pot 3 or Pot 4. The only way to avoid it is to be in Pot 2 and we all know that ain't gonna happen. Not this WC.

Allow me to explain. In these qualifications we tied and beat both the USA and Mexico. For me that tells me Canada is on par with those two teams regardless of what the dopey FIFA rankings say. Both the USA and Mexico are in Pot 2. So whatever group Canada is placed into will have one Pot 1 team, two Pot 2 teams and either a Pot 3 team (if we don't advance) or a Pot 4 team (if we do advance)

Edited February 4, 2022 by Sal333

[TGAA_Star]

Canada imagine we end up in a group with the world champions France...it would be like 1986 all over again because we had them in our group then and 36 years later to get paired with the French, I would love that match up personally if I'm being honest.

[Unnamed Trialist]

49 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

Actually, if Canada's performance this past year isn't a fluke whichever group we fall in will become the Group of death. And it doesn't matter if we're in Pot 3 or Pot 4. The only way to avoid it is to be in Pot 2 and we all know that ain't gonna happen. Not this WC.

Allow me to explain. In these qualifications we tied and beat both the USA and Mexico. For me that tells me Canada is on par with those two teams regardless of what the dopey FIFA rankings say. Both the USA and Mexico are in Pot 2. So whatever group Canada is placed into will have one Pot 1 team, two Pot 2 teams and either a Pot 3 team (if we do advance) or a Pot 4 team (if we do not advance)

Just the fact we have attacking threats means the rival holds back and is a bit more cautious. The latest example was how having Tajon on the field basically occupied Serginho Dest for an entire match. So we took out the attacking component of a back most say is better attacking than defending (though Dest was quite good). 

So I think you are right: no one will want to have to plan for us, since we are mostly a countering team when up against bigger rivals. We can have spells of possession, but often renounce it.  If we can keep our defensive shape, then the rival will be cautious about pushing more forwards so as to not be exposed at the back. So you'd figure that a Denmark or a Switzerland would sit back a bit and not go nuts, just to avoid being hit by the Davies, David and Larin on the pitch. 

I think against far superior teams with better skill and pace, and more capacity to dictate, we'll have a tougher time. Though you look at the Italian CBs, ageing, or the Spanish, inexperienced, or the English, a bit heavy-footed, and you might want to take your chances.

[TGAA_Star]

42 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Just the fact we have attacking threats means the rival holds back and is a bit more cautious. The latest example was how having Tajon on the field basically occupied Serginho Dest for an entire match. So we took out the attacking component of a back most say is better attacking than defending (though Dest was quite good). 

So I think you are right: no one will want to have to plan for us, since we are mostly a countering team when up against bigger rivals. We can have spells of possession, but often renounce it.  If we can keep our defensive shape, then the rival will be cautious about pushing more forwards so as to not be exposed at the back. So you'd figure that a Denmark or a Switzerland would sit back a bit and not go nuts, just to avoid being hit by the Davies, David and Larin on the pitch. 

I think against far superior teams with better skill and pace, and more capacity to dictate, we'll have a tougher time. Though you look at the Italian CBs, ageing, or the Spanish, inexperienced, or the English, a bit heavy-footed, and you might want to take your chances.

You also have to worry about those things too when you face South American or African teams because of skill and pace

[Sal333]

42 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Just the fact we have attacking threats means the rival holds back and is a bit more cautious. The latest example was how having Tajon on the field basically occupied Serginho Dest for an entire match. So we took out the attacking component of a back most say is better attacking than defending (though Dest was quite good). 

So I think you are right: no one will want to have to plan for us, since we are mostly a countering team when up against bigger rivals. We can have spells of possession, but often renounce it.  If we can keep our defensive shape, then the rival will be cautious about pushing more forwards so as to not be exposed at the back. So you'd figure that a Denmark or a Switzerland would sit back a bit and not go nuts, just to avoid being hit by the Davies, David and Larin on the pitch. 

I think against far superior teams with better skill and pace, and more capacity to dictate, we'll have a tougher time. Though you look at the Italian CBs, ageing, or the Spanish, inexperienced, or the English, a bit heavy-footed, and you might want to take your chances.

The beauty of this team is that it is at the beginning of its developmental curve. At the beginning in a number of ways.

1) If you remove Atiba, Vitoria and Borjan we'll have one of the youngest teams at the WC. Between now and November many of those young players will grow. Develop their experience and skills

2) Many  NT players are either going to move or have just moved to higher divisions. More opportunities to grow.

3) Also, I think there's still more room to grow as a unit and I'm referring to both the players and the staff. I can see the coaching staff create different formations and tactics that will surprise our opponents. Also, the players will develop more cohesion among themselves. I heard many pundits talk about the number of games that Canada had to play in 2021 and they referred to it as a liability. I was of the opposite opinion. It helped these boys to gel and grow into a team. If management can line up as many friendly games as possible from May till November it can only help.

4) And finally,As of today we still don't know the peak of this team. Maybe we achieved it in this round. Or Maybe this team still has a couple of more levels. I'm of the opinion these players have a couple of more gears. I'm convinced of it especially after this window where we played without Davies and partially without Eustaquio. Knowing that your team doesn't necessarily need two of it's five best players is a tidbit of self knowledge that will help the coaching staff to implement a variety of strategies. Strategies that will surprise many teams. Even the top tier teams.