Is Sepp Blatter a Dope?

How can such a wealthy, global entity such as Fifa ... be run by a guy who, apparently, does something supremely foolish about once a day?

Today's permutation of the Ireland story (and it should have died two weeks ago, except for Sepp Blatter's gaffes) ... is that the Ireland federation's suggestion that it be the 33rd team in the South Africa 2010 draw, as reported by Sepp two days ago, was ...

1) Apparently not serious and certainly never made in writing by Ireland.

2) Clearly not meant for Sepp Blatter to use as comic relief in a public forum. Which is what he did ... mention the 33rd team thing and get laughs.

And that is why the Ireland story has legs ... right up to the day before the 2010 draw takes place.

Here are specifics on the latest "open mouth, extract foot" moment for the exalted ruler of all things soccer:

Did I mention that this comes in the hours before the draw? When we ought to be talking about nothing except the game?

Could Fifa and Sepp have handled this any more ineptly?

Instead of doing the right (if unusual) thing and calling for a replay the day after the bogus France goal, Blatter shrugs and says "sorry, that's the beautiful game for you."

He then excoriates the Fifa-employed-and-assigned referee for not seeing a violation ... on the touch line ... in the 105th minute of a supremely tense match. (Hence the expression, "throwing someone under the bus.")

(Another aside: Hasn't anyone in soccer yet realized how crazy it is for a game involving 22 supremely fit and speedy players, played on an enormous surface, for two-plus hours, to be officiated by one middle-aged guy -- and two linesmen discouraged to do anything except make offsides calls? Aren't we long overdue for a second referee? Even before we get around to video replays?)

Meanwhile, it also is acknowledged that Fifa could take some steps to clean up its innumerable refereeing mistakes (oh, yeah, it turns out the decisive Uruguay goal in the Costa Rica playoffs for a World Cup berth should have been disallowed because of offsides) by adding an official behind the goal (and maybe someday using video replay).

But Sepp and Fifa continue in their staunch opposition to improving the game till after it can give serious study to the idea of an official behind the goal.

(I mean, this ain't splittin' the atom, you know? Stick a guy back there, and he does nothing except watch ... and wait to see if the referee asks for his help. We're pretty sure Fifa can afford to hire guys to do this.)

Meanwhile, Fifa launches an investigation of Thierry Henry, the French player who handled the ball twice before the goal that put France in the World Cup (and eliminated Ireland). Apparently, Henry should have gone directly to the referee and insisted, "That one doesn't count. I handled the ball." Even as the Stade de France is rocking and teammates are celebrating. The fallacy of this confess-your-sins approach being ... that no professional athlete has turned himself in for breaking the rules for, oh, a century now. The expression "that isn't cricket" ... doesn't even apply to cricket anymore. Professional athletes seem to have decided, en masse, about the year 1900, that it should be up to professional arbiters to get things right. But now Thierry Henry is at fault? And he faces a ban of a match of two?

I usually don't like criticizing the heads of major sports organizations. Their jobs are tougher than they appear. A whole world of sniping federations, billions of critical fans ... Generally, muddling through is good enough for me. Fifa can't manage even that.

Sepp just keeps pinning a "kick me" sign to his pants. Which leads me to believe that, yes, the president of Fifa is a dope. Read more!

Draw 'Pot' Losers: France, Concacaf

Finally. All of two days ahead of the Finals Draw, we know which teams are in which pots.

Thanks for all the warning, Fifa.

The winners? Argentina, the Netherlands and Africa.

The losers? France and Concacaf.

First, let's break out the four pots, as identified by Fifa today:

Pot 1 (seeded): Argentina, Brazil, England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, South Africa (host) and Spain.

Pot 2 (Asia, Concacaf, Oceania): Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea; Honduras, Mexico, United States; New Zealand.

Pot 3 (Africa, South America): Algeria, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Nigeria; Chile, Praguay, Uruguay.

Pot 4 (rest of Europe): Denmark, France, Greece, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland.

OK, back to winners and losers.

The winners:

-- The Netherlands, which probably deserved to be seeded but would not have if Fifa had used any one of its recent formulations for determining seeding (the ones that include recent results in World Cup finals). Netherlands didn't even play in the 2006 World Cup, so that would have buried it under the formula used just four years ago.

Instead, Fifa went off rankings ... and Netherlands is a top-five club, so it's seeded.

--Argentina. Forget the rankings. Argentina under Diego Maradona has not been anything like one of the world's top eight clubs. If France is going to be punished for recent form (see below), why not Argentina, as well?

--Africa. By being placed in a pot with the South American countries (the three that aren't Brazil and Argentina), that lifts Africa out of the "loser" pot it shared with Concacaf as recently as 2002. Now the five Africans are guaranteed at least one match with Asia, Concacaf or New Zealand.

And the losers ... some of which we already have referred to:

--France. Is Fifa punishing the French for the Ireland/Thierry Henry hand-ball mess? Certainly seems so. Under the old system of recent World Cup performance, the runners-up in 2006 ought to seeded. If Fifa went with its most current rankings, France is No.7 and ought to be in. But by going back to October's rankings, France is edged out by England.

(Hey, Ireland, we're not letting you in, but we're messing with France. Might even just by accident end up in a group with Brazil, wink-wink, nudge-nudge. Feel better? Didn't think so.)

--Concacaf. The North American teams clearly are considered bottom of the barrel, along with Asia and Oceania -- and the latter two groups clearly deserve it. But Concacaf had two of its three teams ranked in the top 18 in October (United States No. 10, Mexico No. 18) ... yet they are stuck with the weak Asian teams and New Zealand -- which means they can't be in the same group with any of them of those quite-beatable five.

Concacaf teams, then, can look forward to a draw that will include a seeded team, one of the eight unseeded European teams ... and then either an African team (playing on its home continent) or South American team.

That is, a tough draw. The best the North Americans can hope for is getting into South Africa's group. South Africa will be infinitely better, at home, but it still looks more vulnerable than the other seeded teams. Aside from a Diego-led Argentina, maybe.

Seems as if Concacaf should have been thrown a bone and put in the same pot as Africa's five, considering South American already has two teams seeded and one of them (Argentina) is semi-bogus. Let the top two qualifiers out of Concacaf have a chance to play one of the four Asian teams -- none of which are ranked anywhere near the USA and Mexico. (Australia, at 24, is the only Asian team ranked above No. 40, as of October.)

But punking Concacaf is a hoary tradition, in Fifa. All the Yanks and Mexicans and Hondurans can do is go out and get results against at least two good opponents.

Sigh. Read more!

Yes, Ireland Asked to Be No. 33

In this story, we have Ireland confirming it asked to be added to the World Cup finals as the 33rd team.

And then we have Sepp Blatter seeming to say 1) it won't happen but 2) it will be discussed with the executive committee.

Guess there won't be much to discuss.

Blatter didn't exactly improve the situation by suggesting that if Ireland came in ... Costa Rica would have to, as well, since the decisive goal in Uruguay's playoff victory over the Ticos should have been negated by an offsides call.

So, yes, that's one of our reasons for not letting in Ireland: We screwed the pooch so enormously in two matches ... we can't let you both in!

Some questions raised by this story.

I would love to know if Ireland had any sort of plan for a 33-team World Cup. Must have, right? But haven't heard of any, yet.

Maybe a "play in" match against New Zealand? The Kiwis are the weakest side among the 32 that will be in South Africa, by global acclamation. But that wouldn't be quite fair to the Kiwis, who did what they were asked to do ...

How else?

Some variation of the European group qualifying scheme? Maybe three groups of five, three groups of six, the top two from each group go into the knockout phase ... and the final four come from the best of the third-place sides? (With results against bottom teams in the six-team groups thrown out?)

Of course, it would mean for a weird schedule. An extra match for 15 teams, two extra matches for 18 teams ... 75 group-phase matches, instead of 48. So, given the number of matches, perhaps the knockout phase begins with the quarterfinals? Six group winners and the top two runners-up?

Or, seven groups of four, one of five (including Ireland), and only four extra group-stage matches, and ...

That would be the smallest mess, but still.

The only way this could have been fixed was immediately after it happaned. With a replay between Ireland and France within days of the original. When that didn't happen, this all became academic.

And now ... one day from Fifa announcing (in theory) how it will arrange the pots for the Finals Draw, which is coming on Friday. Read more!

Now Ireland Is Being Silly -- According to Sepp

Any semi-serious follower of the game of soccer feels badly for Ireland's national team.

The Irish lost a World Cup finals berth to France on the strength of an extra-time goal scored by William Gallas moments after teammate Thierry Henry twice handled the ball.

Everyone on the planet saw it. Everyone except the referee, that is.

Ireland made several appeals for a replay, for redress, all turned down.

And now Fifa boss Sepp Blatter suggests the Irish are making an even stranger request.

The Irish would like to be the 33rd team at South Africa 2010.

At least, that is what Blatter said today, in South Africa, ahead of the Final Draw scheduled for Friday.

In this story, Blatter said the Irish asked today to join the World Cup as an extra team. How a tournament with 33 might work, Blatter didn't address.

Given the black eye that Fifa got, deservedly, for the way the Ireland match in France ended, and the now-instinctive cynicism I bring to all Fifa pronouncements ... we would be remiss if we failed to note that we have no source out of Ireland's federation confirming they made any such request.

It would not strike me as out of the realm of the possible if Blatter took some throwaway line and pushed it forward as a formal request, just to make Ireland look silly.

At this point in the proceedings, Fifa is as likely to take vows of poverty as add a 33rd team.

And if Ireland actually made that request, in the light of day ... well, yes. Then the Irish are being silly. Read more!

How Will Draw Work? Fifa's Secret

How teams are distributed in the World Cup draw is of utmost importance.

If your country gets into a group with three teams it has trouble matching up with ... well, figure on a short stay in South Africa.

So, you bet, there is great interest in the Finals Draw, which will be held Friday in Cape Town.

But here's the kicker: Fifa still hasn't announced how it will divide up the 32 teams into four pots (groups) of eight. And it won't announce the procedures until Wednesday.

A delay which is almost inconceivable, in the world of 21st century sports. So, we are left to guess.

And here we go.

This is an educated guess.

Pot 1 (top-seeded teams and the host): Argentina, Brazil, England, France, Germany, Italy, South Africa, Spain.

Pot 2 (the rest of Europe): Denmark, Greece, Netherlands, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland.

Pot 3 (Africa and Concacaf): Algeria, Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Honduras, Mexico, Nigeria, United States.

Pot 4 (Asia, Oceania, South America): Australia, Chile, Japan, New Zealand, North Korea, Paraguay, South Korea, Uruguay.

This is actually almost tidy.

Remember: Teams from the same continents are not supposed to be in the same group -- aside from the five groups that will have two European teams

Some possible permutations:

1. Argentina doesn't get seeded, Netherlands does ... and that leaves only seven in Pot 2. Easily solved by sticking Argentina in with the seven Euros. A little weird to separate it from the other three South American teams, but in terms of "what it has done in the past" it makes more sense to put Argentina in with seven Euros than, say, the other orphan team, New Zealand.

2. The five African teams that aren't the host are put in the same pot with the three South Americans who aren't Brazil and Argentina. Which means the final pot would be Concacaf, Asia and New Zealand.

In theory, then, when the draw is made, which teams get pulled from the three non-seeded pots is completely random. But with Fifa, you always worry about how legit it is -- though the organization makes a point of insisting it is random. Well.

The group to be in will be Group A -- the one with South Africa in it. Host countries always always always play better than expected, but South Africa is truly weak. And if that's your seeded team ... well, the three who end up in the SA group will be feeling fairly comfy.

On Wednesday, we find out, presumably, who is seeded ... and which confederations are in which pots ... and then we wait for the names to be drawn. Read more!

Stars, Top Teams Who Won't Be in SA

In the previous post, we noted that Asia is pretty much missing in action from South Africa 2010.

And leading up to the final few qualifying matches, we were keeping close tabs on Lionel Messi of Argentina and Cristiano Ronaldo of Portugal -- the last two Fifa players of the year -- as their teams struggled to join the 32 going to the 2010 World Cup finals.

Those two players have made it. But several well-known players have not. As well as some fairly well-known soccer nations.

For example:

Andrei Shevchenko of the Ukraine. Andrei Arshavin of Russia. Zlatan Ibrahimovic of Sweden.

For each, their World Cup aspirations were dashed late in the process. For those first two, literally on the last day of qualifying. For Ibrahimovic, on the final week of European group play, when Sweden was caught and passed by Portugal for second place -- and lost out on the chance to qualify via Europe's home-and-home second-place playoffs.

South Africa's news agency did a collection of the guys playing "left out" in 2010, which can be seen here. The story, printed in the Johannesburg Times, also notes how two of the most famous players of the last half-century never did play in a World Cup -- George Best and George Weah, who each played internationally for weak sides (Northern Ireland and Liberia, respectively).

In terms of missing teams, we have Turkey and Croatia, each of which are semifinalists of fairly recent vintage -- Croatia in 1998, Turkey in 2002. Also not coming: Egypt, the reigning African championship.

Russia will be missed by some, along with Arshavin. The Russians currently are ranked No. 13 in the world.

It's inevitable that some good teams and good players won't be at a given World Cup. Tha's why they have qualifying and not direct seeding from rankings.

Actually, when we look at South Africa 2010, the people and sides we would miss most ... are safely in the field.

And here is the rest of it. Read more!

Enormous Void on the World Cup Map

Noticed this the other day. While studying the list of 32 qualifiers for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.

An enormous swath of territory, extending from eastern Europe across nearly the breadth of Asia has ... zero ... teams in the World Cup.

From the eastern borders of Slovakia and Serbia and Greece ... to the border of North Korea, the continent of Asia is shut out of South Africa 2010.

And Fifa can't be happy about that, if we assume that it believes every region on the planet would like to have at least one or two countries from their neighborhood in the finals. To root for ... to root against ... just someone to bring the event a bit closer to home.

Didn't work out this time. Not for the 90 percent of the contiguous bulk of this population-dense area.

How did this happen?

--In part, it is bad luck.

Russia, Ukraine and Bahrain were on the edge of qualification. Each was in a home-and-home playoff for one of the 32 berths, playoffs in which each was the favorite. Each stumbled in the second half of the playoff.

--In part it reflects bad planning on the part of FIFA.

Soccer's organizing body allowed Australia to shift from the Oceania qualifying group into the Asia qualifying group. The Australians took a look at Asian soccer and decided -- quite accurately -- that their chances of getting to South Africa via one of the four guaranteed Asia berths were much better than winning Oceania (which essentially means beating New Zealand) and getting the region's half-berth -- and surviving a home-and-home roulette with Asia's No. 5 finisher.

That doesn't mean Fifa should have allowed the Aussies to move. Anyone paying attention (and apparently it doesn't include Fifa) knew that Australia represented a strong threat to qualify out of Asia, and that Oceania without Australia is a one-country "region" named New Zealand.

Australia rolled right through Asian qualifying, not losing in eight matches (6-0-2) of final group play, and poof! there went one of Asia's four berths -- to a country usually considered a continent of its own and not part of Asia.

--Some of it is the sheer weakness and/or incompetence of soccer federations in the massively populated Asian mainland.

China plays lots of soccer, has hundreds of millions of fans ... but its federation is corrupt and incompetent. India also has a horrible federation and doesn't play much soccer. Pakistan is a soccer nonentity and doesn't seem to mind. Ditto, Bangladesh. Indonesia is hardly better. None of those five countries reached even the final 10 in "Asian" qualifying.

Iran usually is competent, but it fell two points short of qualifying outright, one point short of the fifth-place playoffs. Saudi Arabia lost to Bahrain in the fifth-place home-and-home, and then Bahrain lost to New Zealand. There goes the Arabian Peninsula.

And that leaves Asia represented by Japan, the two Koreas ... and Australia. Three countries on the edge of the continent, and one on another continent entirely. And it leaves seven time zones, from central Europe to Korea, with no World Cup teams.

So, from Turkey and the Middle East, from Poland, Romania ... through all the "stans", across Mother Russia and its breakaway children, through China and Mongolia, across Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand, and down into Indochina and Indonesia and over to the Philippines ... a chunk of territory that probably holds something like two-thirds of the world population ... it's World Cup armageddon.

For soccer fans there, the 2010 World Cup will be about watching teams from the rest of the world. (Unless they feel kinship with the Koreas or Japan.)

Meanwhile, Europe has 13 teams, Africa has six, South America has five, North American has three and even little Oceania has one.

We can be fairly certain Fifa would prefer that an Iran and a Russia and China and maybe an Arabian Peninsula team were in the World Cup. None of them are.

It leaves a yawning void on the World Cup map. Maybe it won't happen again anytime soon. Fifa has to be hoping so. Read more!