Human Afazeli now destroys CQ

[inarsenewetrust]

There is no group of death based on performance after the fact. Group of death is to forecast the closeness of a group before games are played. What you are describing is a difficult group, not a group of death. Very few, if any, put Morocco on par with Portugal. At the time of the drawing the group had two clear favorites. Therefore it was not a group of death.

so based on performance, was this the most difficult group of the 2018 world Cup?

[KC McElroy]

we are not talking about group of death on paper anymore,(even though many people put morocco on par with portugal before the group started). We are talking about, if based on performance, this was the group of death, or the most difficult, however you want to put it. Now could you comment on that? Instead of repeating the same two damn sentences in every post...

There is no group of death based on performance after the fact. Group of death is to forecast the closeness of a group before games are played. What you are describing is a difficult group, not a group of death. Very few, if any, put Morocco on par with Portugal. At the time of the drawing the group had two clear favorites. Therefore it was not a group of death.

[inarsenewetrust]

The group had two clear favorites. Therefore it was not a group of death.

we are not talking about group of death on paper anymore,(even though many people put morocco on par with portugal before the group started). We are talking about, if based on performance, this was the group of death, or the most difficult, however you want to put it. Now could you comment on that? Instead of repeating the same two damn sentences in every post...

[KC McElroy]

No, I think you are selling Morocco short, who a number of people were putting almost at par with Spain and Portugal, and I was among them.
If the other team was Tunisia, or Egypt then yes there were two clear favourites. Morocco were a very, very good team, much better as a unit than any other African team, and unfortunately many will never know how good they are. Their FIFA ranking is still suffering from older results but I expect them to improve considerably over the next year or two and we may only consider the extent of their quality using a retrospectoscope in 5-10 years.
In the end they actually played better than both Spain and Portugal (and Iran) but didn't get the results, with poor refereeing having a huge role in both Spain and Portugal games.

The previews you had read must have been different than the ones most people read as all others indicated the group had two clear favorites. Therefore it was not a group of death.

[DR Strangemoosh]

So there weren't two clear favorites in the group?

No, I think you are selling Morocco short, who a number of people were putting almost at par with Spain and Portugal, and I was among them.

If the other team was Tunisia, or Egypt then yes there were two clear favourites. Morocco were a very, very good team, much better as a unit than any other African team, and unfortunately many will never know how good they are. Their FIFA ranking is still suffering from older results but I expect them to improve considerably over the next year or two and we may only consider the extent of their quality using a retrospectoscope in 5-10 years.

In the end they actually played better than both Spain and Portugal (and Iran) but didn't get the results, with poor refereeing having a huge role in both Spain and Portugal games.

[KC McElroy]

Based on how close every game was, it ended up becoming a group of death even though it was not one on paper. Especially if luck/refereeing decisions had been on Morocco's side against Spain or Portugal.

The group had two clear favorites. Therefore it was not a group of death.

[Saam]

No one is arguing whether the group was difficult or not. We are discussing whether it was a group of death. And as it had two clear favorites it wasn't a group of death.

Based on how close every game was, it ended up becoming a group of death even though it was not one on paper. Especially if luck/refereeing decisions had been on Morocco's side against Spain or Portugal.

[KC McElroy]

read the last sentence. It not being a group of death in the traditional sense, doesnt change from the fact that it was the MOST COMPETITIVE WORLD CUP GROUP. and not just for "lower seeded teams". No team in the group won a match by a margin of greater than a goal. Portugal tied Iran and Spain tied Morocco, the two "lower seeded teams", and one can argue that both morocco and iran even deserved to win those matches. The group was extremely difficult for the favorites as well, as reflected in the points totals and scorelines. Therefore, based on performance, it was the hardest group in the WC (FOR ALL TEAMS INVOLVED), which in many peoples definitions, makes it the group of death.

No one is arguing whether the group was difficult or not. We are discussing whether it was a group of death. And as it had two clear favorites it wasn't a group of death.

[inarsenewetrust]

Thank you. It's precisely what I have been saying and why this wasn't a group of death. You simply confuse group of death with difficult group for lower seeded teams.

read the last sentence. It not being a group of death in the traditional sense, doesnt change from the fact that it was the MOST COMPETITIVE WORLD CUP GROUP. and not just for "lower seeded teams". No team in the group won a match by a margin of greater than a goal. Portugal tied Iran and Spain tied Morocco, the two "lower seeded teams", and one can argue that both morocco and iran even deserved to win those matches. The group was extremely difficult for the favorites as well, as reflected in the points totals and scorelines. Therefore, based on performance, it was the hardest group in the WC (FOR ALL TEAMS INVOLVED), which in many peoples definitions, makes it the group of death.

[KC McElroy]

Disagree. Many in the big podcasts (football weekly, totally football, bbc, times) were hyping Morocco, not just as a "potential upset" but as a team which was likely to beat either Spain or Portugal ... based on many factors which include their qualifying performance in the hardest african qualifying group, their coach, style of playing etc...

Again, there is a marked disparity between North American tipping and European punditry with how a team like Morocco was seen.

So I would say the group had three strong teams (morocco, spain, portugal) and one potential dark horse (Iran).

So there weren't two clear favorites in the group?

[KC McElroy]

KC you can repeating the same thing over and over again it doesnt make your argument any better or more insightful. With the current seeding system, it is impossible to have a group of death, because any two teams from pot 3 and 4 are inferior to portugal/spain. But based on performance, our group was the group death as all matches were so close and no team was clearly better in performance than any other team. This was the only WC group like this in Russia. Therefore, for this WC, our group can be considered if not a group of death, the most difficult and competitive group to advance from.

Thank you. It's precisely what I have been saying and why this wasn't a group of death. You simply confuse group of death with difficult group for lower seeded teams.

[DR Strangemoosh]

The group had two clear favorites.

Disagree. Many in the big podcasts (football weekly, totally football, bbc, times) were hyping Morocco, not just as a "potential upset" but as a team which was likely to beat either Spain or Portugal ... based on many factors which include their qualifying performance in the hardest african qualifying group, their coach, style of playing etc...

Again, there is a marked disparity between North American tipping and European punditry with how a team like Morocco was seen.

So I would say the group had three strong teams (morocco, spain, portugal) and one potential dark horse (Iran).

[inarsenewetrust]

The group had two clear favorites. A group of death does not have clear favorites.

KC you can repeating the same thing over and over again it doesnt make your argument any better or more insightful. With the current seeding system, it is impossible to have a group of death, because any two teams from pot 3 and 4 are inferior to portugal/spain. But based on performance, our group was the group death as all matches were so close and no team was clearly better in performance than any other team. This was the only WC group like this in Russia. Therefore, for this WC, our group can be considered if not a group of death, the most difficult and competitive group to advance from.

[tooleh khers]

It never was a group of death. Most people simply confuse group of death with a difficult group for the lower seeded teams. Our group had two clear favorites.

I agree. This was the weakest "group of death" ever.

[KC McElroy]

yes but given the closeness of each match (either tie or decided by one goal), AND given the fact it was still this close even with two clear favorites, makes it the group of death.

The group had two clear favorites. A group of death does not have clear favorites.