Using Nate Silver’s ESPN rankings to forecast the probability of any team advancing. It places the USA and Portugal at about even at about 40% (Portugal slightly ahead).
Portugal are well ahead of the USA in terms of quality, but if they have one Achilles’s heal it’s the reliance on Ronaldo. Portugal may have a better squad than USA even sans Ronaldo, but he’s such a talismanic figure for them if he has a bad day (which does happen, if not very often) or is suspended/injured it’s a massive blow psychologically and it forces them to find another way to play which they won’t be as comfortable with. The flipside to that though is if Ronaldo is on song (which is hardly unlikely), I don’t think the USA really has anyone who can counter or contain him.
For me Portugal slip-up is probably the USA’s best hopes for making the 2nd round, but even in that scenario it’s just as likely to be Ghana who get into the 2nd round.
edited to add: of course Germany are the clear favourites in this group.
As for England we’re in a tough group, but we’ve got a fair chance. Obviously Italy and Uruguay are high quality teams, but there’s no significant overall quality advantage and despite England being very disappointing at times recently, we’re still capable of taking the game to either of those teams. My feeling is that Uruguay are slightly more likely to slip-up in the first round than England or Italy.
Bear in mind that Portugal, even with Ronaldo barely got by Luxembourg and Israel. Portugal are really quite ordinary if Ronaldo is contained or is off his game.
Silver’s projections are interesting. I feel sorry for the poor old Aussies with a 2.7% chance of advancing.
I don’t think there is sufficient sample size to be able to draw any great statistical conclusions. The teams facing each other in World Cups rarely play against each other, and especially not in games that actually matter.
You can have all sorts of fun drawing conclusions from historical results, but I’m not sure that they have any validity. For example, you might observe that the great majority of World Cups have been won by either the host nation or by a previous champion. Which is true, but there have only been 19 World Cups. It’s the sort of factoid that sounds good but means little.
I would hardly say they barely got by Luxembourg. The scoreline in Luxembourg may not have been impressive, but the game was pretty much over a few minutes into the 2nd half. If Ronaldo has a poor game it does give the USA a decent opening to get a result, but I don’t think the USA has the defensive players to contain Ronaldo if he plays well.
Yep, the whole way international soccer works makes it difficult to use statistical performance to make predictions. It’s not the be all and end all, but the best indicator is always the quality of players an international team has.
I don’t the feeling of doom surrounding the group. Italy can be slow starters and they are not in a real flush of form. They are always quality but not always outstanding.
Uruguay have quality but can be erratic. If Suarez has an off day or is injured (perhaps by being beaten up in a bar for being a C*NT…could happen!) then they are greatly diminished.
Costa Rica should be beaten comfortably (though nothing is certain)
I don’t expect too much from England though. We just aren’t technically good enough to go the distance. Counter-attacking at speed may get us into the quarter-finals but if we try to out-play the better teams and break them down in the final third…no hope. We are a bit of a one-trick pony and we only seem able to pull that trick off about 75% of the time.
Who will England put in goal? That has been a real issue the past several tournaments.
It will be Joe Hart or Fraser Forster. Hart has had a tough time of it recently and is currently in and out of the Manchester City side, though I thought he did alright last night against Bayern. My view is that, from what I have seen, Forster is probably the better shot stopper - but an on form Hart is pretty good at coming off his line to deal with balls over the top, allowing his defenders to play a slightly higher line, and is probably the better keeper overall. He has, though, had a fairly dreadful first few months of this season.
A lot might depend on the type of game Hodgson wants to play. If he wants to counter attack, he might go with Forster and sit his defenders deeper, in the hope that England can spring forward at pace when a move breaks down deep in England’s half.