Peter Goldstein is a professor at Juniata College in Pennsylvania in the USA. He has been
World Cup crazy since 1966. He will share his views about the past, present and future of
this event.
Mail Peter
Read earlier columns
|
|
|
The group stage - an analysis (2)
Last column we looked at a number of interesting statistics from the
World Cup group stages since 1958. This week we'll continue the analysis,
and at the end you'll find the answers to last week's trivia questions. Many
thanks to those who wrote to share their numbers with me, and thanks to Paul
Marcuccitti, who pointed out that in 1994, Ireland was placed ahead of Italy
not by lots, but by match result.
Note: at times in this column you may find a discrepancy in the second
decimal place when you add or multiply the numbers. For example, I list
goals per group stage game at 2.61 but total goals per group (= goals/game x
6), as 15.64, not 15.66. That's due to rounding, which is usually to the
second decimal place.
How Many Points?
For World Cup fans, the first and most important question about the
group stage is: who's going to qualify for the second round? If you're a fan
of a particular team, you start the tournament by figuring out what your
team has to do to advance. If you're a fan of one of the traditional powers,
you start by figuring out what your team needs to do to win the group. So
we'll start here by looking at precisely what teams need to do to win, or to
qualify from second place.
A preliminary note. In the previous column, we saw that there's in
fact very little difference between 2-1-0 and 3-1-0; in almost every case, a
team that finished first or second under 2-1-0 would do the same under
3-1-0. For that reason, I have converted the 1994/1998 3-1-0 tables to
2-1-0, and for the most part included them in a single, unified analysis
based on the 2-1-0 system. As it happens, though, in a few spots it's more
useful to keep 3-1-0 and 2-1-0 separate. I'll try to keep things as clear as
possible as we go on -- but unless otherwise stated, point totals are what
they would be under the 2-1-0 system.
Now to the numbers. Through 1990, under 2-1-0, the average points for
a group stage winner was 5.02. If you add in the converted 3-1-0 tables, the
average is 4.91, still very close to 5. In other words, two wins and a draw
is the average score for a group winner. Three wins (6 points) obviously
wins the group, and out of 56 groups, this has happened 14 times. But two
wins and a draw will be enough to win most groups. If you get two wins and a
draw, you only finish second if another team also gets two wins and a draw
and beats you on goal difference. This has happened 4 times in history, most
recently at France 1998, when Yugoslavia finished second to Germany.
Not surprisingly, 5 points is the most frequent score for a group
winner. Out of 56 groups, the winner has had 5 points 24 times, almost half.
As noted, only 4 of those 24 times did the winner need goal difference; in
the other 20, two wins and a draw was enough for first place outright.
In 2-1-0 language, 6 points always wins; 5 points usually wins.
However, there have been a number of instances in which only 4 points (two
wins or one win and two draws) were enough to win. Including the
recalculated tables, this has happened 17 times, more often than the 6-point
winner but still noticeably less than the 5-point winner.
Although 4 points can win, the odds aren't with you. As noted, teams
with 5 points have won 20 out of 24 times, 83.3%. On the other hand, teams
that got 4 points won 17 times, but failed to win 35 times. So 4 points
gives you a 32.7% chance to win, about one in three.
Now we get to a place where at times the 3-1-0 analysis is different.
That's because under 2-1-0, two wins gets you 4 points, and so does a win
and two draws. Under 3-1-0, however, two wins gets you 6, but a win and two
draws gets you 5. This makes a difference when it comes to figuring out
whether you'll need goal difference to win your group. For example, in 1998
Brazil (WWL) won their group over Norway (DDW) 6 points to 5. Under the old
system, they would have needed goal difference, but under 3-1-0, they won
outright.
You'd expect a 4-point winner to need goal difference more often than
a 5-point winner, and the figures bear this out. As noted, the 5-point
winner needed goal difference only 4 out of 24 times, 16.7%. In the 2-1-0
era, the 4-point winner needed goal difference 4 of 11 times, 36.4%. In the
brief 3-1-0 period, the 6-point winners have needed goal difference 2 of 5
times, 40%, and the only 5-point winner so far needed goal difference as
well. So if you get two wins or one win and two draws, there's a good chance
you'll need goal difference, even under the 3-1-0 system.
One more interesting feature of the 4-point winners. As noted, you can
get 4 points one of two ways: two wins (WWL), or one win and two draws
(WDD). Which of these ways would you expect to need goal difference more
often?
My guess was that WDD would need goal difference more often than WWL.
Certainly it seems like a less authoritative way to win. But it's the other
way around. In the 2-1-0 era, WWL winners needed goal difference 3 out of 4
times, but WDD winners needed it only 1 out of 7. That's because WWL means
that one other team in the group has a win, and as the other games play out,
that team has a good chance to catch you on points. With the WDD, no one
else has a win, and so the other games are less likely to produce someone
who will equal your total.
In the 3-1-0 era, however, WWL has the advantage over WDD, because it
gives you 6 points instead of 5. In the two cups under 3-1-0, only 2 of the
5 WWL winners needed goal difference, and the one WDD winner needed it. It's
a small sample, but expect this trend to continue.
Now we're back to the unified 2-1-0/3-1-0 analysis. To recap: there
have been 14 winners with 6 points, 24 winners with 5 points, and 17 winners
with 4 points. That makes 55. But the total number of groups is 56 -- what
happened to the other group? Well, that was the infamous Group E at USA
1994, comprised of Mexico, Ireland, Italy, and Norway. For the only time in
history, all four teams wound up with the same number of points. Each
finished with a win, a draw, and a loss, which means the winner, amazingly,
had only 3 points. To top it off, all four teams had the same zero goal
difference! One would like to report that this closest of groups was one of
the most thrilling in history; in fact, it was one of the dullest. Only 8
goals were scored in the 6 games, and the 4-way tie was a fitting emblem of
the overall futility. For the record, Mexico won the group with 3 goals,
Ireland and Italy both advanced with 2 goals (third place teams could
qualify then, remember), and Norway went home with only 1 goal. Yecch.
One more point: that notorious group was actually won with 4 points,
since the system had changed to 3-1-0 by then. But even under 3-1-0, it's
theoretically possible for a team to win with only 3 points. If all the
games are drawn, everyone has 3 points and a zero goal difference. So
whoever manages to score the most goals tops the group. (With any luck, we
won't see it in our lifetime.)
Not everyone advances by winning their group, though. Second place
teams also advance, and, from 1986-1994, third place teams were eligible as
well. Point analysis for the third place teams is pretty iffy, since they
were only eligible for 3 cups, and hopefully will never be so again. So
let's leave that out and concentrate on second place teams. Through 1990,
second-placers managed an average of 3.67 points; if you include the
recalculated tables, it's 3.70, pretty much the same. So if you want to
advance, it's basically a choice between 3 and 4 points, and 3 points were
enough to make it 22 out of 49 times, 44.7%.
If you get 4 points, you're almost a sure bet to qualify -- almost.
Twice in history even 4 points weren't enough. These were groups where the
top three teams took turns beating and/or drawing with each other, and all
three beat the bottom team. So the point standings were 4-4-4-0, and the
third place teams lost out on tiebreakers. The first of these was (who
else?) Scotland in 1974, beaten on goal difference by Yugoslavia and Brazil.
The second was Algeria in 1982, victim of the most notorious fix in World
Cup history. Algeria had already finished its schedule, so going into the
final group game, it was known that if West Germany beat Austria by fewer
than 3 goals, both would qualify. West Germany scored in the 10th minute,
and the two teams simply shut up shop. Despite world outrage, the Algerian
protests were denied. FIFA then changed the system so that last-round group
games would start at the same time (a little too late for Algeria, of
course).
One last note on 4-4-4-0 groups: in the 3-1-0 era we've had the
equivalent 6-6-6-0 groups twice, but both came in 1994, where the third
place teams could qualify and did. Since third-placers will never qualify
again, let's lump these 6-6-6-0 groups with the 4-4-4-0 groups to answer our
final question. Using 2-1-0 numbers, how often will 4 points be enough to
finish first or second? Answer: so far, 48 out of 52 times, or 92.3%. So if
your team can get two wins or one win and two draws, you're almost certainly
in.
Goals
Goals are the lifeblood of the game, and of course the group stage is
no exception. There's an immense amount of data here, with all sorts of
fascinating patterns. Some of the results are predictable, but many others
are unexpected. I know I was more often surprised by the data here than
anywhere else in the analysis.
To start: would you guess that group-stage games are lower- or
higher-scoring than knockout games? Well, knockout games can go to OT, a big
advantage there; teams often play conservatively in the group stage, too,
and maybe less so in knockout games; on the other hand, teams in knockout
games are relatively evenly matched, and routs seem less likely. On balance,
you'd probably guess that group-stage games are lower-scoring.
And you'd be right. But you might be surprised how much lower scoring
they are. Since 1958, group stage games have produced an average of 2.61
goals; for knockout games (including the third-place game), the average is
3.10. Those are rounded figures, so the difference is .49, but the unrounded
total is actually closer to .50. That's half a goal, a gigantic margin. And
the difference has been clear right from the beginning: in 9 of 11 cups,
knockout games have averaged more goals than group stage games. One of the
exceptions was 1974, which doesn't really count, since there were only two
knockout games in that tournament (the Final and third-place game), and the
sample is too small to be representative. The only genuine exception was
1990, in which group stage games averaged 2.28 and knockout games 2.06.
It's probably the low scores in the knockout games that gave Italia 1990 its
reputation as the dreariest ever. In 1986, generally regarded as one of the
better tournaments, the group stage averaged 2.33 goals, barely more than
1990. But the knockout games averaged a reasonable 3.00.
The bad news is that while group stage goals have made a recovery
lately, knockout goals are still clearly on the decline. Here's the table:
# number of group games/number of knockout games
G goals per game in group stage games
K goals per game in knockout games
Note: In 1958, teams tied for second on points had to play off to see who
would advance; these have been counted as knockout games.
# G K
1958 24/11 3.5 3.82
1962 24/8 2.71 3.0
1966 24/8 2.42 3.875
1970 24/8 2.54 4.25
1974 24/2 2.625 2.0
1978 24/2 2.5 3.5
1982 36/4 2.78 4.25
1986 36/16 2.33 3.0
1990 36/16 2.28 2.06
1994 36/16 2.58 3.0
1998 48/16 2.625 2.75
Average 2.61 3.10
You'll see that group stage goals in the last two tournaments are back
up to the level of the 60s and 70s, and in fact are right around the overall
average of 2.61 goals per game. But knockout goals have stayed well down:
the last four cups have been below average. And if you leave out the
aberrant 1974 statistics, France 1998 was second only to Italia 1990. Not a
good sign -- but all the more reason to enjoy the group stage in the future.
From goals overall we move to goals in groups. There are 6 games per
group, and the average number of goals per group is 15.64. A solid 58.9% of
groups score between 12 and 18 goals, meaning between 2 and 3 a game. But
there are extreme cases. The all-time record for goals in a group is an
amazing 31, more than 5 a game, achieved by France, Yugoslavia, Paraguay,
and Scotland back in 1958. The scores of the games: 1-1, 7-3, 3-2, 3-2, 2-1,
3-3. True, scoring was higher in those days, but this group is fully 5 goals
ahead of the pack. It's also the only group ever in which both teams scored
in every game.
What makes this group even more impressive is that the two groups tied
for second (26 goals) each had a genuine minnow, always a potential source
of high scores. The first was Poland, Argentina, Italy, and Haiti in 1974,
with scores of 3-1, 3-2, 1-1, 7-0, 4-1, 2-1. The second was Brazil, Russia,
Scotland, and New Zealand in 1982, with scores of 2-1, 5-2, 4-1, 3-0, 2-2,
4-0. But this last group has a distinction too: it's the only time all 6
games produced at least 3 goals.
Of course, there's another end to the spectrum. The all-time
low-scoring group occurred in 1970, with Italy, Uruguay, Sweden, and Israel.
The scores: 2-0, 1-0, 0-0, 1-1, 1-0, 0-0. That's a massive 6 goals in 6
games. In second place is the famous drawing group of 1990 (see "Draws" in
the previous column), with England, Ireland, Holland, and Egypt. The scores
were 1-1, 1-1, 0-0, 0-0, 1-0, 1-1, for a total of 7.
One more low-scoring group is worth mentioning here, for a couple of
famous goals that weren't. That's the Austria-Brazil-Spain-Sweden group of
1978, tied for third lowest with 8 goals. In their first-round game, Brazil
and Sweden were 1-1 with only seconds to go, and the Brazilians setting up
for a corner kick. The kick was taken, and Zico came out of the pack to head
home the winning goal -- but the referee had actually blown for full time
while the corner kick was in the air. For the record, he was Clive Thomas of
Wales, a name still worth a few choice words in São Paulo. In Brazil's next
game, a Spanish cross found Brazilian keeper Emerson Leão completely out of
position, and Julio Cardeñosa had the ball on his foot with hours of time
and a completely open net. For some reason he hesitated. Then he hesitated
some more. Finally he shot low, soft -- and into the feet of Amaral, who had
managed to get back on the line. The game ended 0-0, and for Spain the miss
made the difference between qualifying and going home. By the way, some
sources list his name as Cardenosa, without the tilde. Either way, don't say
it out loud in Spain. They remember too.
Now let's look at team goals. How many goals does it take to win a
group? The average number of goals by a group winner is 5.91, just under 2 a
game. To finish second, and thereby qualify, it's a lot lower: only 4.48,
right about 1.5 a game. How good a defense do you need? Group winners have
allowed only 1.96 goals per group, less than 2 goals in 3 games.
Second-place finishers have allowed an average of 2.73, so you can allow
almost a goal a game and still manage to qualify.
Note that the gap between first and second place is almost twice as
large in goals scored than in goals allowed, 1.43 to .77. That's because
there's no upper limit to the number of goals you can score. You can exceed
the average by as many as you can get in the net. But soccer is a low
scoring game, and you can't do better than zero goals allowed. No matter how
much better the defense of the first-place team is, second-place teams are
still going to get their fair share of shutouts.
This leads us to the question: is offense or defense more important in
the group stage? At first glance the stats seem to be relatively even. The
team that has scored the most goals, or tied for the most, has finished
first in the group 41 of 56 times, 73.2%. The team that has allowed the
fewest goals, or tied for the fewest, has finished first in the group 40 of
56 times, 71.4%. Apparently not much to choose there. But the trend seems
definitely to favor the defenses. In the first 6 cups, the highest-scoring
teams won 79.2% of the time, but in the last 5, only 68.75%. Conversely, in
the first 6 cups, the stingiest teams won 62.5% of the time, but in the last
5, 78.1%. This seems to confirm what we know already: in the modern game,
solid defensive teams tend to succeed more than showy attackers.
Incidentally, Czechoslovakia 1958 and West Germany 1982 managed the
remarkable feat of leading their groups in both goals scored and fewest
goals allowed, and still not finishing first.
There are some other oddball results buried in this data. Three times
the team that scored the most goals in the group outright didn't even
qualify. In 1982, Hungary started out with the all-time World Cup rout, 10:1
over El Salvador, but lost 1:4 to Argentina and drew 1:1 with Belgium, and
finished out of the money. In 1994, Russia, to all intents and purposes
eliminated before the final game, ran up a 6:1 score on Cameroon, with Oleg
Salenko scoring a record 5, but all it got them was third place. Then in
1998 Spain pulled the same final-round 6:1 on Bulgaria, and wound up in the
same third place. (By the way, in 1986, Belgium scored the most goals in
their group and finished third behind Mexico and Paraguay, but that was one
of the years when third place teams could qualify. Also, Czechoslovakia and
Hungary in 1958 scored the most goals in their groups, and would have
finished second under current rules, but had to go to playoffs, and both
lost.)
So, you ask, has a team allowed the fewest goals in their group
outright and failed to qualify? Yes indeed, and for that we go back to the
Group of Futility in 1994 (see above). In that 4-way tie between Mexico,
Ireland, Italy, and Norway, the Scandinavians finished dead last despite
allowing only 1 goal, fewest in the group. (Again, Czechoslovakia 1958 only
went out because of the playoff rule.) Cameroon 1982 gets a special mention
here: they allowed only 1 goal, tied for lowest not only in their group but
in the entire tournament. But they scored only 1 as well, and finished third
behind Italy on goals scored.
Let's go now to some outstanding individual team performances. The
record for goals scored in the group stage is 12, held jointly by the
luckless Hungarians of 1982 and Poland 1974. We've covered the Poland group
briefly already, as it was one of the all-time high-scoring groups, with 26
goals overall. Poland ran up 7 against a very weak opponent (Haiti), but
their other rivals were no slouch at all: Argentina and Italy. To show you
how hard it is to score 12 goals in a group, only one other team has even
scored 11, and that was France back in the high-scoring days of 1958 and
Just Fontaine. Yugoslavia got 9 in one game once (vs. Zaire, 1974) and still
wound up with only 10.
So to the other extreme: what's the fewest goals ever scored by a
group winner? Well, you really don't want to know. No, I'm serious; it's too
ugly for words...Are you sure? Are you absolutely sure? OK, you asked for
it. The fewest goals scored by a group winner is 1. Just 1. One. How is this
possible? Well, if you get a 1-0 win and two 0-0 draws, you have 4 points,
and if the other teams take turns beating or tying each other, 4 points can
be enough to win your group. World Cup fans know that only one team is
capable of perpetrating this sort of outrage -- that's right, Italy. It
happened in the all-time low-scoring group of 1970 (see above), with
Uruguay, Sweden, and Israel. The scores and final standings:
Uruguay 2, Israel 0
Italy 1, Sweden 0
Italy 0, Uruguay 0
Sweden 1, Israel 1
Sweden 1, Uruguay 0
Italy 0, Israel 0
W D L GF - GA Pts
Italy 1 2 0 1 - 0 4
Uruguay 1 1 1 2 - 1 3
Sweden 1 1 1 2 - 2 3
Israel 0 2 1 1 - 3 2
You wouldn't have believed it was possible. How remarkable is Italy's feat?
Well, no other team has ever qualified for the second round with only 1
goal, not in second place, not even in third.
But let's cut the Italians some slack. At France 1998 they scored 7
group stage goals, their all-time high. (Thank you, Christian Vieri.) Of
course, it would be uncharitable to point out that 13 different nations have
scored more than 7 goals in a group stage. And even more uncharitable to
list them: Poland, Hungary, France, Yugoslavia, Brazil, Germany, Denmark,
Russia, Paraguay, Portugal, Spain, Czechoslovakia, and the ultimate
humiliation, Scotland. In addition, Peru, Holland, Argentina, and Mexico
have also scored 7.
But if you look closely at those names, you'll find one very signal
omission. It's England. What's the reputation of England at the World Cup?
Underachievers, mostly. They always come in with high hopes and usually exit
earlier than they expect. But a look at the stats shows you the reputation
they really deserve -- Italy's. In 24 group stage games, England has scored
only 30 goals, a pathetic 1.25 per game. That's a very tiny bit more than
Italy, who has 37 goals in 30 games, an average of 1.23. But on defense
England makes Italy look like Brazil. In 24 games, they've allowed only 13
goals, an average of 0.54. The Italians have let in 21 in 30, for 0.70 per
game. Add it all up and you find that Italy's group games have featured 1.93
goals per game, but England's only 1.79. Yet Italy has the bad rap, and
England doesn't. Of course, Italy does it deliberately, whereas England...
At the other end of the scale, we find Brazil, the team that scores a
lot and gives up a lot. Except they don't. In 33 group games, they've scored
57 goals, an average of 1.73 a game. That's OK, but Germany puts them to
shame, averaging 2.06 per game, about a third of a goal more. That means
Germany outscores Brazil in the group stages by about a goal per tournament.
Well, what about Brazil's notoriously bad defense? Check the numbers: in 33
group games, they've given up only 18 goals, for a fantastic 0.55 per game.
That's clearly better than Italy, and only a fraction behind England.
Brazil's group games have averaged 2.27 goals, well under the 2.61 average,
and light years behind Germany's 2.88, and even Argentina's 2.70. So what
gives? Is the glorious attacking Brazil just a myth?
No - they just don't show up until the knockout games. In 22 knockout
games, Brazil has scored 52 goals, for an excellent 2.36 average; that's
actually more goals than both they AND their opponents average in group
stage games. They've also given up 25 goals, a hefty 1.14/game, more than
twice as many as in the group stage. Total goals in their knockout games
thus average 3.50, as compared to 2.27 in group games. That's an increase of
1.23 goals, well more than twice the average increase of .50. (Compare
Germany, whose knockout games average 3.32 and group games average 2.88.)
The conclusion is clear: Brazil plays it close to the vest in the group
stage, only letting out the stops in the knockouts. In fact -- and to me
this is the most surprising stat of all -- Brazil has never led the
tournament in group stage goals, not once, while they've led or tied in
fewest goals allowed no less than 5 times. That's a shocker. (It's also the
answer to one of the trivia questions from last week.)
There is a Brazil of the group stages, but it's not Brazil, it's
Hungary. In 6 group stages, the Hungarians have scored 2.11 goals/game and
allowed 1.83 goals/game, for a whopping total of 3.94, almost 4 goals per
game. Among teams that have played in at least 5 group stages, the 2.11
scored per game is tied for first with France, and the 1.83 allowed per game
is second only to Bulgaria. The total of 3.94 is the highest by fully half a
goal per game. Just call them the Magnanimous Magyars.
We'll close with one slightly amazing stat. We just noted that France
is tied with Hungary for most goals scored per group game. Through 1982,
they were neck-and-neck with the Hungarians in goals allowed as well. So
what's the stat? Well, here are the scores of France's first 12 group stage
games, with France's goals first: 7-3, 2-3, 2-1, 1-1, 1-2, 0-2, 1-2, 1-2,
3-1, 1-3, 4-1, 1-1. Incredibly, only once was either team held scoreless.
And somehow France didn't manage to shut out an opponent until their 13th
group stage game. So who was unlucky 13? Canada. There's a good joke
somewhere there; I'll leave it to you.
Trivia Answers (questions from last week's column)
1) Name the only team to have failed to get a point in consecutive World Cup
appearances four years apart.
Answer: Switzerland 1962-66. Both El Salvador and the USA have come up empty
twice as well, but not in back-to-back cups.
2) Name the only team to come from two goals down to win a group stage game.
Answer: Peru 1970. They trailed Bulgaria 0:2 in the second half, but reeled
off three straight goals to win.
3) Name the only European team to finish a group stage without scoring a
goal.
Answer: Greece 1994. The other teams that have gone goalless are El Salvador
1970, Australia 1974, Zaire 1974, and Canada 1986.
4) Name the only team to allow zero goals in the group stage and be
eliminated their next game.
Answer: Mexico 1970. Playing at home, they drew 0:0 with Russia, then beat
El Salvador 4:0 and Belgium 1:0. But they were squashed by Italy 1:4 in the
quarterfinals.
5) A two-parter:
a) How many times has Brazil led the tournament in goals scored in the
group stage?
Answer: Zero.
b) How many times has Brazil led the tournament in fewest goals allowed
in the group stage?
Answer: Five. (See above for a full treatment of Brazil and group stage
goals.)
6) Name the only team to have won their group with a negative goal
difference.
Answer: Cameroon 1990. The Indomitable Lions defeated Argentina 1:0 and
Romania 2:1, thus clinching a spot in the next round. So they laid down 0:4
against Russia in the final game.
7) Name the only team to have finished their group stage with a win against
the first-place team and a loss against the last-place team.
Answer: Switzerland 1994. After a 1:1 draw with the USA, they beat Romania
4:1, which in effect clinched a spot in the second round. They then lost 0:2
to Colombia, who had lost their first two games, and Romania snatched the
group with a win over the USA.
8) Name the only two last-place teams to have defeated the first-place teams
in their group.
Answer: Russia 1990 and Norway 1994. Russia lost their first two games, then
beat Cameroon, who had clinched the group already (see question 6). Norway
was part of the famous 4-way-tie Group of Futility, discussed earlier in
this column; they beat Mexico in their opener 1:0, but still finished last.
9) Name the only four last-place teams to have drawn with the first-place
teams in their group.
Answer: Colombia 1962 with Russia, Israel 1970 with Italy, Honduras 1982
with Northern Ireland, and Tunisia 1998 with Romania. The Colombia game
deserves special mention. They were the biggest outsiders in the tournament,
but in one of the most famous comebacks in World Cup history, they came from
3 goals down in the second half to gain a 4:4 draw with the Russians. It was
their only point of the tournament. [By the way, if you thought this
question said only two teams had done it, you're not hallucinating -- I
caught the mistake a day after it first appeared.]
10) A two-parter, True or False:
a) No team has ever finished first in their group one year and last in
their group four years later.
Answer: False. Peru (1978-82), Russia (1986-90), and Cameroon (1990-94) have
all done it.
b) No team has ever finished last in their group one year and first in
their group four years later.
Answer: True. Sweden (1990-94) and Norway (1994-98) have come the closest,
finishing last, then second. Thanks to Patricio Sabido, who wrote to point
out the remarkable fact that none of the four group winners in 1974 (East
Germany, Yugoslavia, Poland, and Holland) had even qualified for the finals
four years previously.
|
[HOME]
BACKGROUND
Info on how
the World Cup was founded and about the trophy as well. |
THE
WORLD CUPS
Detailed info
on every match in every tournament. |
COLUMNISTS
Interesting columns about the past, present and future of the World Cup. |
THE
NATIONS
Every nation
with appearances in the World Cup. Detailed info on every country. |
LEGENDS
Player profiles
of many of the most influential players in history. |
A-Z STORIES
An A-Z collection
of strange and different stories in World Cup history. |
STATISTICS
A big collection
of various statistics and records. |
MASCOTS
Every mascot
since it was introduced in 1966. |
QUIZ
Test your
knowledge about the WC. Three different levels. No prizes, just for fun. |
TOP
10 RANKINGS
Rankings of
lots of stuff. For instance Best Goals, Best Players and Best Matches. |
LINKS
Our collection
of links to other soccer sites with World Cup connection. |
LINK
TO
Some banners
and buttons for you to link to us if you want. |
ABOUT
US
A little information
on who keeps this site available. |
|
