2020 Olympic Games - qualification

    Quote from Padar

    Your argument is a joke. If NED is not going to make it, then that’s because they are not good enough. Are we supposed to base on last OGs as to which team should qualify? Then 12 teams should remain the same forever!

    So by your logic Argentina is good enough but NED isn’t even though NED will almost certainly beat Arg every time they play each other? That’s not a fair assessment because one has a much easier path than the other, it’s not about who is good enough. If the continental qualifications were first then the intercontinental qualifications second, and NED didn’t qualify it would be fair to say they weren’t good enough, but in the current system you can’t conclude such a thing.

    Frankly, I don't think the continental qualification tournaments are even needed. Just make the continental championships count as qualifiers. Make them important again. Right now, they're a bit of a joke. So, the continental champions qualify automatically, the World champion qualifies directly as well, and then the rest come through the World Qualifying Tournament. Easy.

    Quote from Ksenia

    I do agree with that, + USA's women's team dropped like a wall even though they won gold medals of VNL (commercial tournament) too. They barely won over Bulgaria (3-2). We dont even know USA's women team would be able to defeat Korea:/ cuz Bulgaria was the weakest team of VNL.

    Lol! When was the last time Korea won against USA?

    Quote from JoanaBG

    Frankly, I don't think the continental qualification tournaments are even needed. Just make the continental championships count as qualifiers. Make them important again. Right now, they're a bit of a joke. So, the continental champions qualify automatically, the World champion qualifies directly as well, and then the rest come through the World Qualifying Tournament. Easy.

    But FIVB needs money. Lesser tournaments = lesser money from sponsors.


    Your idea makes sense the most.

    Quote from Mapuan

    Lol! When was the last time Korea won against USA?

    His post was based on the results of the last VNL, that's why I have shared my opinion. Russian NT didn't send their "A team" to VNL this year. We have ECH, WC this year, it will be better to judge the failure of the teams about those competitions, instead of VNL.


    My main point was that Korean NT is not the weak opponent. Korean NT defeated Brazilian NT (3-0) in 2012 OGs, defeated Italian NT (3-1) in 2012 OGs, defeated Netherlands (3-0) in 2016 (WOGQ), + friendly game (1-2) against Serbian NT + Kim (72%). They right now have a strong head coach, we dont even know their capability against strong NTs.

    I didn't talk over past performance of Korean NT. We will have OGs next year, Korean NT will probably be "hidden" dangerous NT to me because of having the strong head coach. I didn't write USA would lose the match against Korean NT, but they also played 5 sets against Bulgaria (the weakest team of the last VNL), we don't know they would defeat if they played against Korean NT at the IOGQ.


    VNL is called "commercial tournament" here by our commentators and legend coach "Karpol".

    Quote from pope

    All the people supporting Africa and Argentina in the OG are all the people that will be complaining when their favorite team is put in the same group with China-Serbia-Italy while Japan gets Argentina-Africa in their group.

    Yes I wanted to write this before, guess which 2 teams will join the group with Japan ? :dance6::whistle:

    Hey guys,

    did you notice that FIVB rankings has a BIG, BIG mistake?


    PERU took part in Word Cup 2015. Ended up in place 11, therefore should have been awarded 5 points in the ranking, so instead of a total of 27 points, they are supposed to have an accumulated of 32 points.


    Mistakenly , those 5 points are not accounted for. See for yourself below :white:


    http://www.fivb.org/en/volleyball/VB_Ranking_W_2018-10.asp


    this could have changed significantly the groups of World qualification tournament.


    Poland would not have even taken part in these tournaments. :whistle:


    FIVB needs to explains this mistake :hit:

    Calm down. Go back to basic mathematics and then come back. PER - 10+3+9=22 and they have 27... Miracle. These 5 points are included but there is only place in the table.

    Quote from brahmin

    Having tracked the FIVB ranking system back to 2004, FIVB does not do a good job of tracking past data. I will state the following.

    Final positions in a tournament matter to the FIVB. If your team is not winning, it does not get points. In the big tournaments you get 100 for winning, while 5th place gets you like 50 points. So when Brazil wins two FIVB tournaments and you finish 5th twice, you are 100 points behind Brazil.

    My ranking system may catch some differences, such as ARG women being 11th in FIVB, while I have them as 21st. My points system is based on individual matches, not the end of tournament result. However in my ranking if you play in more matches (final round) you get more points if you win. Argentina does not win many international matches and therefore does not get rewarded as much. Germany is my 11th place team, 178 points ahead of Argentina. FIVB has them 38 points behind in 15th.

    Russia’s women’s team dropped like a stone this year in my ranking to 10th as they kept losing in the VNL. I felt that South Korea would give them a scare if they were playing for the final match, and I was right, but they came from behind. However, if you look to next year it still is not looking good for them with my system. They had a bad year this year so far, but a good Euro champ could help them.


    This is going to be a big asks...but you seem to be the only one here to offer an alternative to the flawed fivb ranking. Following the serpentine system and six pools of 4 teams, I'd be really interested to see what the international qualification would look like under your point system.



    Quote from pope

    All the people supporting Africa and Argentina in the OG are all the people that will be complaining when their favorite team is put in the same group with China-Serbia-Italy while Japan gets Argentina-Africa in their group.


    It shakes how it shakes. I'm not one to complain about stuff like that so strike me out from your broad " All the people..." comment.


    The thing I like the most about my favorite team is how they face a challenge. How they believe they're always in it. That they could always win it no matter what. Their "It's not about the cards you're dealt it's how you play the hand" approach is inspiring to me. If my favorite team believes that they can win against anyone in any pool then fuck it I believe they can. That's the kind of fan I am. If they landed in the murderers row pool then so be it. Because I know they're not just going to pout their way out of it. They're going to do everything they can to emerge out on top. So at the end of the day it's doesn't really matter what pool they're in, I have full faith in my favorite team.

    Quote from serdar

    4 teams is such a small number when you will jeopardize the level of the whole tournament by including other weak teams instead.

    Noone asks fivb to change qualification for only turkey, it is for the sake of having a high level in a tournament that's supposed to be higher level of each sport.


    Many people (including me) start watching volleyball thanks to Olympic games. Watching a weak team to be humiliated against CHN won't attract more followers to this sport.

    One and only weak team is African participant for me(and maybe the host, but that is the other story and in that i agree that host have not automaticly qual to the game) and for me that don't joepardize level of the tournament. In quaterfinal that is usually very good and unpredictible matches, on the other hand having 2 strong team does not ensure an even and good match. Example is Serbia-Russia at qf Rio2016. Serbia was played great but Russia is played very bad for me. I still think that one team is not a reason for jeopardize level of the tournament.

    Quote from Bogdan123

    One and only weak team is African participant for me(and maybe the host, but that is the other story and in that i agree that host have not automaticly qual to the game) and for me that don't joepardize level of the tournament. In quaterfinal that is usually very good and unpredictible matches, on the other hand having 2 strong team does not ensure an even and good match. Example is Serbia-Russia at qf Rio2016. Serbia was played great but Russia is played very bad for me. I still think that one team is not a reason for jeopardize level of the tournament.

    Not only African team but also second south american will be there too. This year the host is Japan so it is not a big problem since they are a decent team but it becomes a problem when England or France is the host, which means at least 3 teams will be very weak (quarter of whole participants)

    I think I like the new system where each continent has their own competitions and send one team, meaning 6 teams. Rest of the spots are decided in world qualifications where European teams probably will most likely get all 6 spots as they deserved it for so long.


    The current system makes sense neither economically nor socially as previous post explained it. Worst of all, these low quality matches make the sport less watchable.


    Maybe Brazilian users are worried to see Brazil losing to a European team in quarters? :D I am sure majority of federations love the current system where they pass 3-4 teams easily and get some nice points which helps them to climb in world ranking. Harder the competition means risking their chance of losing a nice spot not only in OGs but also in world ranking.

    Quote from Meatballs

    I think I like the new system where each continent has their own competitions and send one team, meaning 6 teams. Rest of the spots are decided in world qualifications where European teams probably will most likely get all 6 spots as they deserved it for so long.


    The current system makes sense neither economically nor socially as previous post explained it. Worst of all, these low quality matches make the sport less watchable.


    Maybe Brazilian users are worried to see Brazil losing to a European team in quarters? :D I am sure majority of federations love the current system where they pass 3-4 teams easily and get some nice points which helps them to climb in world ranking. Harder the competition means risking their chance of losing a nice spot not only in OGs but also in world ranking.

    I honestly doubt that Europe would get all six remaining spots, 3-4 of them probably, but there are a few Asian countries, and even Dominican Republic(They took Brazil to 5 sets) can pose threats to some of the European teams

    Quote from Meatballs

    Maybe Brazilian users are worried to see Brazil losing to a European team in quarters? :D

    if they get there. .....


    To be honest the only team Brazil won't have to worry about if the one coming from Africa. They will need Tandara/Gabi/Natalia at their best against every team, and this is what we saw during Pan Am games as they lost for Argentina and Colombia without them.


    That explains why they want Africa teams there so bad.