From: car@public.BTR.COM (Carlos Rimola-Sarti  car@btr.com)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.soccer
Subject: Re: FIFA propoesed changes to (OCEANIA) Southern America
Date: 27 Aug 92 06:02:20 GMT
Organization: Connective Strategies, Inc. (CSI).  Mountain View, California

In article <1992Aug26.155532.17881@fuw.edu.pl> michals@fuw.edu.pl (Michal Szleper) writes:
-In article <7826@public.BTR.COM> Carlos Rimola-Sarti writes:
->                                            BTW, in that article I 
->incorrectly stated that Uruguay last won the Copa America in 1985 when
->it really was in 1987 and came in 2nd place in 1989.
-
-Sorry, but I don't really give a damn about Copa America. Maybe
-Uruguay, Colombia, Peru, Chile and Paraguay are superpowers in
-Copa America, but somehow they repeatedly fail to confirm this
-in world competitions - and only these I refered to.

Michals, I am going to try to make this brief because we are begining to
go around in circles.

It was my feeling that you did not "give a damn" about the Copa America 
and other world competitions that act as indicators of a team/country's
status and potential.  This is exactly the point that me and others have 
tried to make.  

If a country like Uruguay defeats Argentina and Brasil in this competition 
I think it proves that the level of play in that country is, AT LEAST, at
a competitive level with those other two countries.  Specially, when those
two countries field almost the same teams they successfully fielded one year 
before in world cup competition.

I have to wonder, if you don't think that the Copa America is "world
competition", does the same logic apply to the European Cup?  Which, BTW,
is an excellent example of how looking at a narrow set of results can
surprise you.  Denmark only qualified for the 1986 world cup [and I
might say did beautifully until the game against Spain].  However, if
you look at 1982, 1986 and 1990 as the only indicators you would have
probably bet that Denmark had a zero chance of wining the European Cup.
Yet, if you had looked at how well they had recently done in club competition
with teams like Brondby and B1903 and you had looked at how well some
of their internationals like the Laudrups and Molby were doing,  you,
AT LEAST, would not have ruled out their potential.  I will re-emphasize
that we need to look at the BIG picture.

-
->Let me give you a little tidbit here, why go back all the way to 1982.
->That's tooo far away by your standards, no?  So, if we look at only
->1986 and 1990, where does Poland fall?  Well, in 1986, according to
->my sources it finishes #14 right behind Paraguay and just two places
->above the Uruguay.  1990?  Not much to talk about!
-
-I considered the last 3 World Cups in order to have some reasonable
-amount of statistics, but in the meantime to make sure that we're
-not talking of prehistory. Should it be 2 or 3 or 4 it's just a matter
-of taste.
-
-You're right about Poland. We've had 10 bad years. But what did
-you want to prove with that?

Well, I quite explicitly stated that it proved nothing.  The point is
that you can look at as narrow a set of statistics to suit your taste/point/
allegiance/etc..

-
->However, if as you wish, we only look at these last 3 cups then we
->will see that in 1982 the two other South-American teams, Peru and
->Chile did poorly but in 1986 Paraguay finished #13 ahead of the following
->European teams in the general standings:
-> (----------------------- much deleted --------------------------------)
->             (...)Personally, I don't think this proves anything.
-
-That's right! At least you can judge yourself objectively.
-Is #13 such a big success? Frankly I see no difference in finishing
-#13 or #16 or whatever. And has any of your favorite teams advanced
-to the top 4?  Or even 8?  You see, some European teams have.
-

They "damn" better have when they have more than half the teams in
the competition!  Simple laws of probability would dictate so.  However,
finishing #13, ahead of many of the European countries certainly
proves that your team is capable of competing and deserves the spot.

->Incidentally, my personal opinion is that South-America's 3 spots with
->the chance to fight a 4th is fair.  Europe's 13 I think is a bit high
->and I suspect that as Africa and other continents continue to improve
->it will be Europe who will have to give up additional spots.  Either
->that, or we will have to go to a cross-continent set of ellimination
->games.  I think that would be fair and should please all of those who
->are confident in their teams.
-
-Well, so in the end of all we do agree. I like very much the idea
-of cross-continental eliminations. Not because I'm confident in
-any team in particular, but simply because this would be the most
-fair system, giving equal chances to all teams, regardless
-geography.
-

Yes, if you agree that SA deserves at least 3 spots plus the opportunity
to play for an additional one.  However, as I previously stated this was
not my point of contention.  On that one, I gather we still disagree on.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
-My opinions are my opinions. Quite predictable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Michal~ Szleper                          "All you need is love, love,
-(michals@fuw.edu.pl)                      Love is all you need..."


+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Carlos Rimola-Sarti                   |         email: rimola@csisdn.com  |
| Connective Strategies Inc.            |                      car@btr.com  |
| ISDN PRI Connectivity Group           |         phone:      415-903-2585  |
+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| "Al compas del cha-cha-cha, del cha-cha-cha del tren..."                  |
+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.sport.soccer