Olympic Games - Brazil 2016 (qualification process)

Well, do you know how will countries be split into the two pools for these Olympic Games ? For instance, how can you assume that already qualified Brazil, Italy and the USA will be in the same pool A ?

Quote from arman

OK we can now guess OG pools. What we have for (almost) sure is this:
Pool A: Brazil, Italy, US
Pool B: Poland, Russia, Argentina

I want to go further and make some predictions. If we assume we will have Iran from Asia with some other team, it will be like this:
Pool A: Brazil, Italy, US, France, Canada/Australia/Japan, IC. Winner
Pool B: Poland, Russia, Argentina, Iran, Cuba, Af. team

If Iran doesn't qualify and Canada qualifies, we will have the question how to distribute two teams with the same ranking (Canada and France) in pools. If Iran and Canada don't qualify, France will be in pool B. Generally pool A will be a death pool.
Cuba position is different according to teams from Asia (or Canada).

Display More

Quote from MikeDomitia

Well, do you know how will countries be split into the two pools for these Olympic Games ? For instance, how can you assume that already qualified Brazil, Italy and the USA will be in the same pool A ?

Because of world ranking, which won't suffer any modifications until May, when the groups should be released.

1- Brazil (Group A)
2- Poland (B)
3- Russia (B)
4- Italy (A)
5- USA (A)
6- Argentina (B)
7- Bulgaria (DNQ)
8- Iran (if qualifies, B)

and so on.

Quote from mariuszj1939

We can expect some minor changes after WL 2016. Unfortunately, I couldn't find info what date of FIVB ranking will be final one for distribution but as I remember correctly first one after WL finals.

WL finals will end 17 July this year, it's impossible for them to make the groups two weeks before the olympics start. They must be released in May or June at the latest, that's why I say the current rankings will be the definitive.

Assuming this grouping, actually Group A looks stronger but it's not a death group. BRA/ITA/USA/FRA will have exciting games, but there are 4 spots to advance to the quarter-finals, and none of CAN/AUS/JPN or IC winner could cause trouble for them, so all these 4 should advance.

Group B is more like a death group. POL and RUS should have no problem to advance, but CUB has potential to challenge ARG and IRI.

Moreover, BRA/ITA/USA/FRA has 50% chance to avoid POL/RUS in the quarter-final, but POL/RUS will by all means face one of BRA/ITA/USA/FRA regardless of their group rankings. So, overall, it favors BRA/ITA/USA/FRA to be in Group A.

Quote

Master tactician that he is, Alekno could hardly be beaten twice in a tournament by the same team (I am sure there must be exceptions, though, but let's not focus on history and circumstances now). powsoff also mentioned that Berezhko and Markin are teammates with Grankin on a club level as well, which surely helps in such cases and I am certain it is one of the reasons for what happened, but how often have the two decided games for Dinamo Moscow? And how often as subs in a final when they were a set (14-25) behind? None, right? Honestly, I've never even seen Markin play like this, not even against the weaker squads in the Russian league. So Alekno definitely played his part. I even saw a Russian team, without its main player, perform a better transition game than the transition masters themselves. And if no coach/team can adopt this system overnight, very few coaches in the world are capable of changing a game's rhythm like Alekno. Kudos. For France were outblocked (OK, stats sheets say France had better serve and slightly better reception numbers), outsmarted, and overall outplayed.

Look, there are many things that Alekno has done correctly. He did bring the right players together, worked well through the defensive drills, studied well the opponent, in the end, introduced the substitutes at the correct time (not after but still during the first set.) But all this rhetorics about Alekno being a "genius" or a "master tactician" sounds more like a kind of cult to me. The big game changer in the final was not the fact that two fresh mega-inspired average players - Markin and Berezhko - were introduced to stage a performance of their lives. The big change was in the attack tempo - courtesy of Grankin who was suddenly able to set shoots and half-shoots into four (the set to the opp got faster too leaving Mikhaylov mostly with a single or moving block.)

Markin and Berezhko had a good game indeed but definitely not the best one in their careers. I would even take it further and say that for Markin it was "yet another day in the office" as his stats are fairly usual for his games with Dinamo this and last season. Berezhko's performance was very typical for himself... some eight years ago. He was frequently the best scorer for Dinamo at that time. Berezhko has had various problems since then but not without ups. One can easily think e.g. about the final of ChL against Skra back in 2012. This season, due to Biryukov's surgery, both Markin and Berezhko are in the starting line-up. They played a major role in e.g. beating Ural in five sets. Now, let us recall Dinamo's games vs Kazan in late 2015, both of which were lost in five sets. Berezhko and Markin were two main receivers in both and hit quite a bit too. Lastly, you may find this strange, but in certain aspects there are no squads in the Superliga that would be weaker that French NT. Their MBs did grow confident but they didn't get faster... and there is absolutely no chance for Markin to spike vs 182 cm tall blocker in the Superliga. Furthermore, given Markin's/Berezhko's ability to receive the float, the French wouldn't surprise them much from the service line either. Defensive skills were, perhaps, the only advantage and this is where Alekno indeed came up having instructed to play hard. A more fruitful blocking performance was largely due to training and theory and hence can be attributed to the coach too.

I can guarantee you however that this fast setting game was not the fruit of Alekno's mental activity but rather the other way round. He wanted a slower game assuming that the French would easily beat Russia in a fast game; the 209-cm tall Klyuka was supposed to be one of the main weapons of the slow attack. Bringing Berezhko and Markin to the pitch was accompanied with an explanation that "Markin <censored> wants to play and you guys <censored> don't, so I would <censored> rather let him play". In the end, had this been Alekno's master-plan, he would have definitely brought Berezhko and Markin into the starting line-up. There is always a risk that they wouldn't roll into the game otherwise.

Quote

You all said it, both Germany and Poland deserve to be in Rio. Some other good teams across the globe may miss the Games due to the qualifying regulations, but rules are rules. I didn't watch it carefully to say something more technical, the match was more dramatic and emotional, which is what matters more in such moments. I didn't have a favourite and I might let down a few people here by saying this: it would've been strange for a non-volleyball nation like Germany, regardless of how well they played or whether they could reach their WCH2014 form, to take Poland's (or Serbia's, or Bulgaria's) place in Rio, or at the qualifier in Japan. I would take them all but that's not my point. After all, the reigning ECH, Olympic, and World champions were granted another chance and we should accept it.

The Olympics are not about getting "volleyball nations" in there, it is more about the general participation. I don't think that qualifying thanks to just having a public nationwide interest to a particular sport is correct, I would put excellence here first. Somehow I start thinking about all those clubs that "book" the spot in various F4s by having e.g. lots of fans or popular players. The cool thing about volleyball is that small countries/countries with small volleyball communities can nevertheless be successful internationally.

Quote from powsoff

The Olympics are not about getting "volleyball nations" in there, it is more about the general participation. I don't think that qualifying thanks to just having a public nationwide interest to a particular sport is correct, I would put excellence here first. Somehow I start thinking about all those clubs that "book" the spot in various F4s by having e.g. lots of fans or popular players. The cool thing about volleyball is that small countries/countries with small volleyball communities can nevertheless be successful internationally.

And who is getting the big volleyball nations into the OG undeservedly? If the OG are really about general participation, why do we bother and organise all those qualification tournaments? Why don't we send any 2 teams from every continent to the OG so they can simply participate? Would you watch it? Would it really be the most important event of all? No coutry has qualified because of a wide public interest. They have qualified because they have won matches showing skills and determination. As for the F4s, the clubs that organise them have not only popular players and fans but also financial resources, organisations skills and a team of people that enable them to do it. Nobody is able to organise a big sporting event without them. It is time to get real Powsoff.

Quote from powsoff

Look, there are many things that Alekno has done correctly. He did bring the right players together, worked well through the defensive drills, studied well the opponent, in the end, introduced the substitutes at the correct time (not after but still during the first set.) But all this rhetorics about Alekno being a "genius" or a "master tactician" sounds more like a kind of cult to me. The big game changer in the final was not the fact that two fresh mega-inspired average players - Markin and Berezhko - were introduced to stage a performance of their lives. The big change was in the attack tempo - courtesy of Grankin who was suddenly able to set shoots and half-shoots into four (the set to the opp got faster too leaving Mikhaylov mostly with a single or moving block.)

Markin and Berezhko had a good game indeed but definitely not the best one in their careers. I would even take it further and say that for Markin it was "yet another day in the office" as his stats are fairly usual for his games with Dinamo this and last season. Berezhko's performance was very typical for himself... some eight years ago. He was frequently the best scorer for Dinamo at that time. Berezhko has had various problems since then but not without ups. One can easily think e.g. about the final of ChL against Skra back in 2012. This season, due to Biryukov's surgery, both Markin and Berezhko are in the starting line-up. They played a major role in e.g. beating Ural in five sets. Now, let us recall Dinamo's games vs Kazan in late 2015, both of which were lost in five sets. Berezhko and Markin were two main receivers in both and hit quite a bit too. Lastly, you may find this strange, but in certain aspects there are no squads in the Superliga that would be weaker that French NT. Their MBs did grow confident but they didn't get faster... and there is absolutely no chance for Markin to spike vs 182 cm tall blocker in the Superliga. Furthermore, given Markin's/Berezhko's ability to receive the float, the French wouldn't surprise them much from the service line either. Defensive skills were, perhaps, the only advantage and this is where Alekno indeed came up having instructed to play hard. A more fruitful blocking performance was largely due to training and theory and hence can be attributed to the coach too.

I can guarantee you however that this fast setting game was not the fruit of Alekno's mental activity but rather the other way round. He wanted a slower game assuming that the French would easily beat Russia in a fast game; the 209-cm tall Klyuka was supposed to be one of the main weapons of the slow attack. Bringing Berezhko and Markin to the pitch was accompanied with an explanation that "Markin wants to play and you guys don't, so I would rather let him play". In the end, had this been Alekno's master-plan, he would have definitely brought Berezhko and Markin into the starting line-up. There is always a risk that they wouldn't roll into the game otherwise.

What I surely should've included in my post was the tremendous contribution by Grankin, which I never denied. Yes, maybe I went a bit too far, but I still think Alekno is the first person Russians should be thankful to when discussing the actions in Berlin. Grankin, in my opinion, comes second. I believe there are a few coaches out there who deserve credit for their incredible decisions/game plans (although sometimes there is luck involved) and, consequently, their success due to these decisions. Even if it sounds like a cult, I surely didn't mean it to be, for we are all just volleyball admirers and appreciate those people/moments. It certainly isn't the first time for Alekno, though Which, you should bear with me, makes him a great coach, doesn't it? But I don't idolize people, especially not sports people, I assure you.

Yes, to me as well, Grankin was the final's MVP. And I fully agree Alekno's idea to start with Tetyukhin-Klyuka didn't work and the match could've have easily gotten to that scenario from the group stage. Alekno also make mistakes, no one denies that. I think there was, however, no way for Grankin to play fast with either Tetyukhin or Klyuka. These are not the balls they convert/expect/are good at. Had Grankin been given freedom and played faster in the first set, the score would've surely been the same, if not worse. And as we both agreed, the appearance of his two teammates on court gave him the freedom he needed. Whether Alekno deliberately invited Grankin's teammates for the qualifiers in Berlin or whether it was simply due to injuries/bad form of other players, we (perhaps) don't know for sure and this is why we agree 100% that Alekno got lucky to have them (Berezhko and Markin) both there and for the whole thing to have worked miraculously.

On a side note, I was really impressed by Grankin in that final, but I missed the first set (due to wrong calculations regarding the start time), so Alekno's explanation after the match about the setting, his tactics, and the attackers' preferences emphasized Grankin's importance and pretty much explained to me what had happened.

Now, I am sure you can dig out some matches when both Berezhko and Markin were valuable for Dinamo. It's just a personal opinion (and preference) that I don't find Markin super valuable in general (maybe I didn't watch all his games in the past 3-4 years, but in those I did he was mostly OK). And even if there are extremely strong teams in the Russian league (maybe you are even right that some of them would dominate over the French team individually), we just can't compare a domestic league match to an Olympic qualifier. Besides, the French national team plays volleyball that is almost completely opposite in style to Russia, which makes any comparison almost irrelevant. Last, yes, I remember very well the five-setter matches of Dinamo against Zenit at the end of 2015. And I remember that Dinamo lost all of them. Which, to me, doesn't undermine Berezhko and Markin's presence and qualities, but says a lot about the role of the head coach, too.

Quote

The Olympics are not about getting "volleyball nations" in there, it is more about the general participation. I don't think that qualifying thanks to just having a public nationwide interest to a particular sport is correct, I would put excellence here first. Somehow I start thinking about all those clubs that "book" the spot in various F4s by having e.g. lots of fans or popular players. The cool thing about volleyball is that small countries/countries with small volleyball communities can nevertheless be successful internationally.

This is an interesting issue. I fully agree with you that Olympics is the place to invite the best (allegedly) teams of each continent, but it doesn't mean all best teams of each continent. For the latter we have World Championships. This is actually the reason why I enjoy WCHs much, much more. Olympics are usually more fun to watch during the knock-out stage, but they are highly regarded by all sports people. True, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Germany missed their chances, there is no one to blame but themselves, they won't get invited just because they are "volleyball nations", it is the formula for Europe and we must accept it. Could you, however, tell me what is the excellence in a qualifier between Mexico, Chile, Tunisia, and Algeria? And who defines this "excellence"? Let's forget who develops volleyball and who doesn't. One of the building principles of the Olympic movement is equality. And how do European teams receive equal chances to qualify in comparison to other continents?

Yes, I am also against the same countries being granted rights to host certain tournaments. It is more common in club volleyball, as it seems. But even on national teams level it still remains unclear how Berlin always gets European Olympic qualifiers, how Japan always gets practically everything, etc. Do we really want small countries/clubs to be granted international acceptance immediately? Or to be invited to tournaments more easily when they clearly have a long way to go before finding their way there?

Finally back from Berlin, what a tournament it was.

First of all, congratulations to Poland for surviving a match point. Other teams would have crumbled, however Poland should increasingly get worried about its aura of invincibility being tarnished. Nobody is afraid of meeting Poland anymore, and they are squandering too many set points in crucial parts of the competitions (France SF). Anyway Antiga has plenty of time to fix what is wrong before the Games.

Germany... heartbreaking. No other words needed, they did everything they could. I think they lost the match in the second set of their 3rd place final, being 21-19 (if I recall right) and throwing it away 22-25. And why couldn't they simply play that ball on their match point, instead of throwing it away on serve... Tille and Grozer were mediocre when it really mattered. Poland looked really beatable.

France was brought back from dreamland, without the amazing defence they are truly nothing special. To me it's always the same team playing beyond the limits, crashing and burning spectacularly when things start to get nasty.

Russia

Quote from vabo

Germany... heartbreaking. No other words needed, they did everything they could. I think they lost the match in the second set of their 3rd place final, being 21-19 (if I recall right) and throwing it away 22-25. And why couldn't they simply play that ball on their match point, instead of throwing it away on serve... Tille and Grozer were mediocre when it really mattered. Poland looked really beatable.

Grozer was obviously out of shape in this tournament. Given the importance of this tournament, he could have flown back from Korea at least a couple of days earlier.

FIVB finally published a news that may end the discusion on world qualifiers. Still Im not sure we can trust this because formerly there was some mistakes in FIVB news.
here is the link , and the text:
"In each gender, the top three ranked teams plus the best ranked Asian team (outside of the top three teams) will qualify for the Olympics."
It is opposite to the news from Japan federation and norceca. I dont know which one we should accept.

Obviously the fivb version is the most reliable. I guess Canada is pretty much eliminated from Rio under such conditions.

France, Poland, Japan and one between Iran and Australia as the second Asian team should make it through.

On a slightly related matter, Gazzetta dello sport reported that some European federations are backing Dominican Republic on the new qualification system for Tokyo 2020.

1 spot for the host
1 spot for the World champion
5 spots for the continental champions
4 spots to the winners of 4 world tournaments, where the top 16 ranked teams compete

1 ticket missing...1 spot World cup maybe?

http://dal15al25.gazzetta.it/2…piche-2020/#comment-38841

I would hate the World Cup disappearing entirely, but it is true that it's the biggest problem for the assignment of tickets to the Olympics. 2 spots are a farce, 3 are too many and 1 would make the tournament a pointless as soon as a team loses a single match. And the World cup disrupts immensely the European championship as we have seen this year. Slovenia would have not beaten Poland and Italy in normal circumstances.


Personally I would keep 3 world tournaments and assign 1 ticket to the winner of the world league, but a change of calendar would be required, as the Final Six it's too close to the Games as it is.

Quote from arman

FIVB finally published a news that may end the discusion on world qualifiers. Still Im not sure we can trust this because formerly there was some mistakes in FIVB news.
here is the link , and the text:
"In each gender, the top three ranked teams plus the best ranked Asian team (outside of the top three teams) will qualify for the Olympics."
It is opposite to the news from Japan federation and norceca. I dont know which one we should accept.

This is what Wikipedia says, probably based on information by FIVB, I think it pretty much sums up the whole process: "The first group (World qualification) is combined with the Asian Olympic qualification tournament. The top three ranked teams will secure the vacancies in the 2016 Olympic Games. The best ranked of non-qualified Asian team will qualify as Asian Olympic qualification tournament winners." There are two scenarios. First, the best Asian team finishes outside the top 3, then the top 3 + the best Asian team go to Brazil. Second, the best Asian team finishes among the top 3. Then, as far as I understand, the top 4 go to Rio.

Quote from vabo

Obviously the fivb version is the most reliable. I guess Canada is pretty much eliminated from Rio under such conditions.

France, Poland, Japan and one between Iran and Australia as the second Asian team should make it through.

On a slightly related matter, Gazzetta dello sport reported that some European federations are backing Dominican Republic on the new qualification system for Tokyo 2020.

1 spot for the host
1 spot for the World champion
5 spots for the continental champions
4 spots to the winners of 4 world tournaments, where the top 16 ranked teams compete

1 ticket missing...1 spot World cup maybe?

http://dal15al25.gazzetta.it/2…piche-2020/#comment-38841

I would hate the World Cup disappearing entirely, but it is true that it's the biggest problem for the assignment of tickets to the Olympics. 2 spots are a farce, 3 are too many and 1 would make the tournament a pointless as soon as a team loses a single match. And the World cup disrupts immensely the European championship as we have seen this year. Slovenia would have not beaten Poland and Italy in normal circumstances.

Personally I would keep 3 world tournaments and assign 1 ticket to the winner of the world league, but a change of calendar would be required, as the Final Six it's too close to the Games as it is.

Display More

It is a very logical distribution, I would love that. But please, let's not give more credit to the funny and entirely commercial World League. We know how they change formulas every now and then, we know how unclear it is to invite a team there and how vague it is to even make divisions. The latest absurdity will be the 2016 format which will rank teams on unequal terms (opponents).

Quote from YavorD

This is what Wikipedia says, probably based on information by FIVB, I think it pretty much sums up the whole process: "The first group (World qualification) is combined with the Asian Olympic qualification tournament. The top three ranked teams will secure the vacancies in the 2016 Olympic Games. The best ranked of non-qualified Asian team will qualify as Asian Olympic qualification tournament winners." There are two scenarios. First, the best Asian team finishes outside the top 3, then the top 3 + the best Asian team go to Brazil. Second, the best Asian team finishes among the top 3. Then, as far as I understand, the top 4 go to Rio.

From my understanding of the sentence "The best ranked of non-qualified Asian team will qualify as Asian Olympic qualification tournament winners", if any Asian team finishes among the top 3, the best ranked remaining Asian team (ranking 4-8) will get the Asian berth.

This happened in the women's qualification of Beijing Olympics in 2008. Japan was in top 3 of world qualification, Dominican Republic was the 4th, and Kazakhstan ranked 5th. The last spot was granted to Kazakhstan, leaving Dominican Republic to protest for a while.

Quote from andrea

From my understanding of the sentence "The best ranked of non-qualified Asian team will qualify as Asian Olympic qualification tournament winners", if any Asian team finishes among the top 3, the best ranked remaining Asian team (ranking 4-8) will get the Asian berth.

This happened in the women's qualification of Beijing Olympics in 2008. Japan was in top 3 of world qualification, Dominican Republic was the 4th, and Kazakhstan ranked 5th. The last spot was granted to Kazakhstan, leaving Dominican Republic to protest for a while.

I agree with my friend andrea. If non Asians want to qualify, they must be among top 3. But if some Asians enter top 3, there will be other Asians from non-top3 part.

Quote from andrea

Grozer was obviously out of shape in this tournament. Given the importance of this tournament, he could have flown back from Korea at least a couple of days earlier.

Two days would have not changed anything. Had Alekno brought a better team to the World Cup, so Rus would have qualified, the domestic season would have been unaffected and nobody would have been gone to Korea. Then yes, Grozer would have scored more. You know whom to blame now

Quote from arman

FIVB finally published a news that may end the discusion on world qualifiers. Still Im not sure we can trust this because formerly there was some mistakes in FIVB news.
here is the link , and the text:
"In each gender, the top three ranked teams plus the best ranked Asian team (outside of the top three teams) will qualify for the Olympics."
It is opposite to the news from Japan federation and norceca. I dont know which one we should accept.

Oh no! even FIVB doesn't know what is it doing, they've changed the bold text in this news and now it is like this:

"In each gender, the top three ranked teams plus the best ranked Asian team will qualify for the Olympics. If an Asian team is ranked among the top three, then the next ranked team will be qualified."

I hope this would be the final statement.

Quote from arman

Oh no! even FIVB doesn't know what is it doing, they've changed the bold text in this news and now it is like this:

"In each gender, the top three ranked teams plus the best ranked Asian team will qualify for the Olympics. If an Asian team is ranked among the top three, then the next ranked team will be qualified."

I hope this would be the final statement.

If it is true, then it will be exactly as I had described it