Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

The itinerary for the Finals is going to see a few teams having to jet about more than you'd expect. All the groups involve some matches in the cities in the north (Jo'burg, Pretoria, Pietersburg, etc) and some matches on the south coast (Cape Town, Port Elizabeth or Durban).

The team that's drawn into position G2, for example, will start off in Johannesburg, then go to Cape Town, then all the way back up to Nelspruit - and if they finish runners-up in Group G, it'll be back down once again to Cape Town for their second round match. I make that almost 3,000 miles, not to mention the adjustment between playing at sea level on the coast and almost 2km above that in the interior.

Some places in the draw have a distinct advantage in this respect - position B1 play 2 of their group games in Johannesburg and 1 in Pietersburg, and the winner of Group B also plays next in Johannesburg. That looks a better early position in the draw. But with the semis in Cape Town and Durban, and the final back in Johannesburg, everyone's going to have travelled a long way by the time they reach the final.

[Mockswing]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

They did this in USA '94 as well, where some teams were traveling large distances between matches while others either stayed put or didn't travel very far at all. So you had results like Switzerland 4 Romania 1 in Detroit, where the Swiss had also played their 1st match, whereas Romania had to fly 2,000 miles from California where they'd played theirs.

Up to 1990, each group was shared between 2 cities, with the seeded team playing all 3 matches in one city, & the other 3 playing in the other city except when they played the seed. For large countries especially, this makes sense, but FIFA seem to have done away with this.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

This itinerary seems designed to ensure that the likes of Brazil, Italy, Germany and England (not to mention the hosts themselves) all play at least once in Cape Town and either Johannesburg or Pretoria, during the tournament.

Which on the one hand I suppose you could argue is good for the local fans in those cities who might get allocated tickets, but it's a complete nonsense for travelling fans of the actual teams involved, who might reasonably have expected to go to at least all of their own team's group games within a reasonable travel. Cape Town to Jo'burg's like going from Madrid to Manchester.

[Guest]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

They did this in USA '94 as well, where some teams were traveling large distances between matches while others either stayed put or didn't travel very far at all.

A strategy which ensured the final was a disaster.

Italy had to fly the entire width of the continent, whereas Brazil were required to travel a distance of precisely 0 miles, having played Sweden in the Rose Bowl in the semi-final. Most of the Italians were clearly exhausted after an hour, and did very well to hold on for penalties, especially the ageing god Baresi, who was still recovering from a knee operation that had been carried out immediately after the Norway game.

Bulgaria, who had lost to Italy in the semi, were also ludicrously forced to fly all the way to Pasadena for the third place play-off, where they were thrashed 4-0 by the full-of-beans Swedes (who scored all their goals in the first half).

[garcia]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Italy had to fly the entire width of the continent, whereas Brazil were required to travel a distance of precisely 0 miles, having played Sweden in the Rose Bowl in the semi-final. Most of the Italians were clearly exhausted after an hour, and did very well to hold on for penalties, especially the ageing god Baresi

you make it sound as if italy had to fly the width of the continent by flapping their arms. it's only a four hour flight. i bet it took west germany longer to travel from their base in the north to wembley in 1966. there's a three hour time difference between the east and west coasts, but the game kicked off early in the day so that wouldn't have been an issue.

it's a complete nonsense for travelling fans of the actual teams involved, who might reasonably have expected to go to at least all of their own team's group games within a reasonable travel. Cape Town to Jo'burg's like going from Madrid to Manchester.

it's a two hour flight. it doesn't seem like a big deal if you've already come halfway around the world. going to a football tournament is all about travelling around. i've gone to several since 2002. in japan you could be on trains for hours every day, then had to transfer countries. in portugal there was a lot of shuttling between lisbon and porto, which took about five hours on the night train i think. germany has a great transport system but hamburg to berlin is four hours, berlin to munich more like six hours. the train from geneva to vienna takes nearly 12 hours. so a two hour flight which costs about the same as any of those journeys is actually quite convenient.

[Guest]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

garcia wrote:

Italy had to fly the entire width of the continent, whereas Brazil were required to travel a distance of precisely 0 miles, having played Sweden in the Rose Bowl in the semi-final. Most of the Italians were clearly exhausted after an hour

you make it sound as if italy had to fly the width of the continent by flapping their arms. it's only a four hour flight.

It only takes 4 hours to fly from Newark to LA then? Thought it would have been at least 6 or 7 minimum.
But do agree with other general travel points, having been to most of those places.

PS.Does your 'Caps Lock' not work?

[Incandenza]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Newark to LA is about a 5h30m flight, with an extra 2 hours added on for waiting to take off.

Somehow American sports teams can manage flying around the country without succumbing to fatigue.

[San Bernardhinault]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Jo'burg to Cape Town is the kind of thing you do in the morning going to a business meeting. It's not a murderous sort of journey. I know people who drive it for a weekend. If football teams are whingeing about this, then, frankly, any team from the North-East would be unable to play games in London.

Worry more about the slightly unusual climate and the altitude.

[Guest]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

you make it sound as if italy had to fly the width of the continent by flapping their arms. it's only a four hour flight.

Five and a half hours, as has already been pointed out. Just the thing you need after slogging your guts out in an energy-sapping World Cup semi-final.

My point is that it was totally unfair to subject one pair of semi-finalists to it without requiring the other pair to move a single mile. Italy were physically bolloxed in that final. Baggio, the player of the tournament, was so fucked he couldn't take a proper penalty at the end.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Both finalists looked physically bolloxed in that 1994 final, which might have had more to do with playing 120 minutes in Pasadena in 100 degree heat at 12 noon for the benefit of European TV viewers, than what came before.

That won't be a factor next year, with the final scheduled for an evening kick-off in the South African winter, but even so, teams (and fans) are going to be ferried around South Africa like mad if they progress through the whole event.

I think it's a shame that FIFA's gone away from the idea of basing certain teams in certain locales, early on at least, so local fans can see the whole of one particular group.

[Incandenza]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Analogue Bubblebath wrote:

Five and a half hours, as has already been pointed out. Just the thing you need after slogging your guts out in an energy-sapping World Cup semi-final.

With four days between the semifinal and the final. They weren't turning around and playing the next day.

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:

Both finalists looked physically bolloxed in that 1994 final, which might have had more to do with playing 120 minutes in Pasadena in 100 degree heat at 12 noon for the benefit of European TV viewers, than what came before.

This is a more likely explanation, I think.

[Guest]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Brazil weren't tired -- they played at that slow, deliberate speed in every single match in 1994. It was also them, not Italy, who suddenly upped the pace and dominated extra time in the final.

Brazilian players would hardly be keeling over because of a bit of American heat. It's a tropical country, for christ's sake.

[Brandenburger Toro]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Munchkin wrote:

PS.Does your 'Caps Lock' not work?

!

[Incandenza]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

YES TORO, DO NOT USE THE SHIFT KEY, ONLY USE THE CAPS LOCK.

[Guest]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Huh?

What relevance does this have to Garcia's keyboard or typing??

PS.
You need to work on your 'comedy' there.

[Brandenburger Toro]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

YES INCA WHAT RELEVANCE DOES IT?

[Brandenburger Toro]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

HE HAS HAVE EDITED IT NOW THE JOKE DOESN'T WORK HAVE.

[Guest]

Some teams are going to put in a lot of miles

Ho ho.
Try to get out more?