Can you name the qualified teams from the 2006 World Cup?

created by Matt

Enter a team in the box below
Correctly named teams will show up below
Answers do not have to be guessed in order
Order and points are based on 1st round finishing position
Also try: World Cup 2010 Geography

You have 5 minutes to guess after you click the button below.

Popular trivia games today

'J' Girl Names By Decade

4676

Geography Bunker

3336

Element Typing Challenge

2875

Word Ladder 02/12/2012

2509

Missing Word 02/12/2012

1985

Rock-Paper-Scissors Minefield

1600

Rhymes with 'Late'

1367

NBA Closest Team

950

And more...

Ready? Click to Start

05:00

Show Missed Answers

Group A
9
6
3
0

Group B
7
5
3
1

Group C
7
7
3
0

Group D
9
4
2
1

Group E
7
6
3
1

Group F
9
4
2
1

Group G
7
5
4
0

Group H
9
6
1
1

Javascript is not currently enabled on your browser.
If you do have Javascript enabled:
This site uses javascript to make the magic happen.
Please turn on javascript and reload this page, or use a more current browser (like Firefox)

World Cup: 2006 Quiz

Rating:	Report a mistake
Published: July 29th, 2009
Category: Sports
Plays: 142,103

Tags: Soccer Quizzes, World Quizzes, cup, point, 2006, qualified, 2006 World, World Cup, team

Loading friend results....

	Journey2688:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:16 GMT	20 points
	Good Quiz! maybe make one for 2002 as well?

Comment below threshold: show it

	mungar:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:19 GMT	16 points
	@emh: Because the UK as a whole doesn't want to be embarrassed worldwide by their soccer team, so they let England shoulder the embarrassment.

	sprclrs_anonymus:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:20 GMT	13 points
	i love this quiz

	Journey2688:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:23 GMT	17 points
	@emh: England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland all have teams, but only England qualified.

Comment below threshold: show it

	NoVan:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:27 GMT	28 points
	Damn! I forgot Serbia and Montenegro was one country back then. That's what I get for doing the Countries of the World quiz twenty-odd times.

	Wales:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:29 GMT	21 points
	Please do this for every world cup!

Comment below threshold: show it

	brianc:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:48 GMT	13 points
	@moviedynamic: world cup is every 4 years, 2006 was the most recent and I'm disappointed that I typed in Serbia, and didn't realize it was not a country by itself then :(

Comment below threshold: show it

	rsdwv5:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 04:57 GMT	23 points
	I was there!! Best time of my life!

	stl100:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 05:13 GMT	18 points
	@emh: Well association football was codified in England, and England and Scotland were the first two "national" football teams, in 1870. There wasn't a football association outside the UK until 1889. So I guess the main reason was that they needed someone to play against...

Comment below threshold: show it

	Niques:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 05:32 GMT	2 points
	Oh, Africa. I knew there was a continent I missed. Can't believe I forgot Ghana!

	Haunter:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 05:34 GMT	7 points
	And despite getting a goal taken away and having two men sent off against the dirty Italians, the USA was the only country to take a point off them the entire tournament.

	fatbeard:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 05:36 GMT	3 points
	to a certain extent it was just naming countries, but one at least has to have some knowledge of what countries are good at football. Very fun, I hope for 2002 next (or 2010 in the not too distant future)

Comment below threshold: show it

	ulashima:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 06:10 GMT	4 points
	There might be a massive World Cup test with all the cups and countries involved. The downside is when someone types Brazil (or any regularly qualifying strong team for that matter) s/he'd be covering many many answers at once.

	sevorak:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 06:19 GMT	38 points
	The only sporcle quiz where England is right and United Kingdom is wrong.

Comment below threshold: show it

	Lauro:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 09:27 GMT	2 points
	@Haunter: This ranking has not much to do with how good a team is. Ranking for World Cups is depends on the performance at the WCs before. And u have to beat all teams nevertheless. But you´re right, US should have won against the dirty Italians...

Comment below threshold: show it

Zalx:

Jul 29th, 2009 at 10:24 GMT

4 points

@Brian - Togo was the first answer I got after England. I pulled them in our office sweepstake last year and spent the few days they were in the tournament supporting them - even though they were the bottom ranked team there.

	foyherald:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 10:27 GMT	6 points
	@Lauro and @ Haunter the groups are made up from teams from different confederations. It was unlucky that the US were drawn in a hard group but remember those other teams also qualified and had a high world ranking due to their record in qualifying matches and previous tournaments.

	dav_uz:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 10:32 GMT	1 point
	Brilliant quiz! Got em all woo! When they do a 2010 one in a couple of months my tip is don't forget the North Koreans who have already qualified - they also qualified in 1966 - reaching the quarter finals.

Comment below threshold: show it

	davidr:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 10:55 GMT	7 points
	@Haunter: Oh, quit whining. When you're the fourth best team in the world, you should be able to beat any other team. Not every game, of course, but if you're worthy of that ranking, it shouldn't be a surprise when you beat anyone else. Yes, it's unfortunate to end up in a hard group but a high ranking doesn't confer the right to weak opposition. You don't hear Usain Bolt complaining that, as the best 100m runner in the world, he shouldn't have to race against other world-class sprinters...

	lostnone:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:01 GMT	8 points
	@foyherald - the groups arent all made up of teams from different confederations - quite a few of the groups contain 2 european teams. @Haunter - the draw was seeded based on previous tournament performance and not just world ranking. You could also argue that the USAs world ranking was inflated due to the number of qualifying games they play against obviously inferior opponents, and that if they really were the 4th best team in the world they would have easily gotten out of their group

	Rhys:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:05 GMT	8 points
	FFS, you think only one more, type as many decent national sides from obscure nations, but then realise you forgot to type the name of the eventual winner. :(

	banutzu:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:14 GMT	2 points
	can we have more world cup squads like the french winning team from 1998 that was featured a few weeks ago. england's squad from 1990 would be a great challenge for example....

	Boomslang:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:17 GMT	2 points
	Brilliant quiz, maybe you could do a World Cup 2006 stadium one too?

	Distiller:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:23 GMT	2 points
	32/32. Roll on South Africa.

	Fitzgib:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:30 GMT	1 point
	Would be good if it accepted "Holland" as well as "Netherlands"

	foyherald:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:46 GMT	1 point
	@lostnone all but 1 group had 2 european qualifiers as 14 qualified plus Germany as hosts (32/15 = 2 per group apart from 1)the other group teams come from a mixture of confederations so that apart from europe no 2 teams from the same confederation are drawn in the same group. Although Argentina v Brazil would make an interesting group game!

	darth_shrimper:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 11:52 GMT	14 points
	@Haunter - if the USA really were fourth bestin the world that group would have been easy. The sole reason qualify every time is because you only have to beat Grenada reserves and Nicaragua Ladies in the preliminary phases

	BuggritHall:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 12:08 GMT	2 points
	Its Holland in football and not Netherlands!!!!

Comment below threshold: show it

	The_Snakes:	Jul 29th, 2009 at 12:18 GMT	15 points
	The USA national team would do better if the merged the North & South American confederations into one. There's only so much better you can get when your only competitive game is against Mexico - playing the likes of Brazil & Argentina in competitive games regularly would be a much better test.