If you count Peru, you should count Bulgaria and Hungary as well since they were 3rd and 4th in the previous edition.
By the way after the fall of Soviet Union, Russia managed to reach finals twice (losing both finals with small margins at tiebreak) and semis 3 times.
The fall of the Soviet Union was an arbitrary point that I made up. (I included Russia in the powerhouse group)
Either way my point still stands.
Getting back on topic,
I hope this leads to doing away with the challenge/core/whatever status for the VNL.
It's inherently unfair to any country trying to improve their teams, since VNL is such a vital factor for qualification.
I would not call what was happening as diversity but more of positive discrimination and personally I am against positive discrimination. So I like the new system. As a volleyball spectator, that way I will be excited to watch almost all the matches and I will feel fine spending my money on good quality volleyball.
Getting back on topic,
I hope this leads to doing away with the challenge/core/whatever status for the VNL.
It's inherently unfair to any country trying to improve their teams, since VNL is such a vital factor for qualification.
Part of the VNL (different from the World League/Grand Prix) was to ensure participation of countries. "Back in the old days (before 2010s), outside of the traditional countries, 2-3 could just switch out every year due to the cost of participating and some would choose not to play based on their results in the previous year.
With the VNL, they wanted to ensure certain countries participated and said, we need to have challengers, aka promotion-relegation who could drop out. Good enough in world ranking or performance in the VNL and can stay based on play, while each confederation can submit teams to play-into the VNL. I think that it is fair, but also a little unfair. African teams are always at a disadvantage when trying to enter the VNL. Domestic infrastructure just is not there. CSV teams are a little better, but still fighting uphill. NORCECA, Asia and Europe are very similar and hence usually get the last spot in the VNL.
Remember in the past that the world rankings were based on the results in World Champs, Olympics, World League/Grand Prix, World Cup and Continental Championships.
With the new system, every match gives you a result, so if you are winning your confederation results, it will push you higher. If you do well, you should receive some potential attention in World Champs, VNL, Olympics. Maybe you pull off an upset, your points will move higher.
Display MorePart of the VNL (different from the World League/Grand Prix) was to ensure participation of countries. "Back in the old days (before 2010s), outside of the traditional countries, 2-3 could just switch out every year due to the cost of participating and some would choose not to play based on their results in the previous year.
With the VNL, they wanted to ensure certain countries participated and said, we need to have challengers, aka promotion-relegation who could drop out. Good enough in world ranking or performance in the VNL and can stay based on play, while each confederation can submit teams to play-into the VNL. I think that it is fair, but also a little unfair. African teams are always at a disadvantage when trying to enter the VNL. Domestic infrastructure just is not there. CSV teams are a little better, but still fighting uphill. NORCECA, Asia and Europe are very similar and hence usually get the last spot in the VNL.
Remember in the past that the world rankings were based on the results in World Champs, Olympics, World League/Grand Prix, World Cup and Continental Championships.
With the new system, every match gives you a result, so if you are winning your confederation results, it will push you higher. If you do well, you should receive some potential attention in World Champs, VNL, Olympics. Maybe you pull off an upset, your points will move higher.
I think they should have promotion and relegation
I guess I should rephrase to saying teams shouldnt have protection against it just cause they’re country XYZ.
I think everyone should be facing relegation if necessary
LOL now Europeans are calling Russians and Soviets "European"
new format is great. but don't forget who wins gold at olympics. 
Having a month from 2024 VNL to Paris OG is absurd.
Imagine the gamesmanship that could occur to influence the rankings in your favor lol
LOL now Europeans are calling Russians and Soviets "European"
Europeans always call them slav, so european, not asian.
*finally a good system. We don't have to watch weak teams from south and north america cause power houses (brazil-usa) qualifies from world qualifications. European teams will make it more challenging tournament instead of argentina(women) or venezuela(men).
European teams will make it more challenging tournament
*more teams to lose to China, Brazil, USA
LOL now Europeans are calling Russians and Soviets "European"
new format is great. but don't forget who wins gold at olympics.
Yeah I remember it wasn't china for sure😂
Having a month from 2024 VNL to Paris OG is absurd.
Imagine the gamesmanship that could occur to influence the rankings in your favor lol
Why would any team do that? And how? It is practically very hard to make such calculated lost since losing points from each game can vary drastically. In which context you think a team would lose to another team on purpose?
Why would any team do that? And how? It is practically very hard to make such calculated lost since losing points from each game can vary drastically. In which context you think a team would lose to another team on purpose?
I don't think it's that hard. I've fashioned my own spreadsheet for the rankings and I would bet the federations have as well.
You can estimate it. It's not too difficult.
I think it would be 4D chess to lose to opponents who you may match up against better... (there's a reason the OG QFs are drawn randomly now).
You dont think USA would be willing to lose to Germany (to toss them 30-40 ranking points) if it meant they overtook Russia?
Of course the simple answer to solve all of this is to set the pools after the VNL. Even then, being in Pool A may be advantageous for the top teams now.
*more teams to lose to China, Brazil, USA
instead of 25-15 sweeps, we can watch more challenging games. what is wrong with this? with the current system, there is a representation of all continents and better quality.
instead of 25-15 sweeps, we can watch more challenging games. what is wrong with this? with the current system, there is a representation of all continents and better quality.
1. im 95% memeing.
2. There's not a better representation of all continents. There is more Europeans. That is all.
Will it better quality?
(the rise of the USA as the benchmark)
In the Olympic Games since 2008, CEV has won 6 matches against the Big 3 (China, USA, Brazil) That's a winning percent of 19%. Of those six matches, three of them came in Tokyo (Russia/USA, China/Russia, Turkey/China, none of which medaled)
In the World Championships since 2010, CEV has won 15 matches against the Big 3, a winning percent of 29%. Of which (Russia, Serbia, Italy) has 11. The rest have 4 (Germany 1, Netherlands 1, Poland 1, Turkey 1)
That's not even including the wins from the "weak" confederations against Europe
okay im done. please respond with a meme and memes only.
Getting back on topic,
I hope this leads to doing away with the challenge/core/whatever status for the VNL.
It's inherently unfair to any country trying to improve their teams, since VNL is such a vital factor for qualification.
I was thinking the same. Its a must to have a New format for relegation and access in VNL.
if history mattered that much, brazil would have won against the americans 3 times in a row in the finals.
1 country from each continent is enough representation, it's not an equality contest.
Display More1. im 95% memeing.
2. There's not a better representation of all continents. There is more Europeans. That is all.
Will it better quality?
(the rise of the USA as the benchmark)
In the Olympic Games since 2008, CEV has won 6 matches against the Big 3 (China, USA, Brazil) That's a winning percent of 19%. Of those six matches, three of them came in Tokyo (Russia/USA, China/Russia, Turkey/China, none of which medaled)
In the World Championships since 2010, CEV has won 15 matches against the Big 3, a winning percent of 29%. Of which (Russia, Serbia, Italy) has 11. The rest have 4 (Germany 1, Netherlands 1, Poland 1, Turkey 1)
That's not even including the wins from the "weak" confederations against Europe
okay im done. please respond with a meme and memes only.
go off!!!
1 country from each continent is enough representation, it's not an equality contest.
If that is so, then why is there so much complaint about Europeans not being represented?
Those teams (the non Russia, Serbia, Italy ones) aren't beating Brazil, USA, China (like the teams that bring diversity and grow the game outside of the mainstream teams, which is part of the Olympic spirit)
please respond with a meme and memes only
The europeans are probably asleep at this point anyway.
The europeans are probably asleep at this point anyway.
they didnt respond with a meme anyways 