

Exciting Young Nigerian Striker Oriola Sunday Joins Sydney FC
sydneyfc.comAustralia Cup Ro16 Fixture Updates
The game between North Sunshine Eagles and Heidelberg United has been moved to Hume City's Stadium. It was originally annoucned as taking place at Ironbark Fields. No reason for the change in location was given.
Additionally, APIA Leichhardt vs SU58 has been confirmed for Leichhardt Oval.
2026 Australia Cup Ro16 Draw Thread
The Ro32 is done, and 16 clubs remain:
- APIA Leichhardt
- Brisbane Roar
- Brunswick Juventus
- Fremantle City
- Heidelberg United
- Lions FC
- Macarthur FC
- Melbourne City
- Melbourne Victory
- North Sunshine Eagles
- Preston Lions
- SD Raiders
- South Melbourne
- Sydney FC
- Sydney United 58
- Western Sydney Wanderers
Rules for the draw:
- If it's an A-League side vs an A-League side, the side drawn first will be the home team.
- If it's an NPL side vs an NPL side, the side drawn first will be the home team.
- If it's an A-League side vs an NPL side, the NPL side will always be the home team.
- The Quarter-Finals and Semi-Finals will be drawn at the same time.
#Round of 16 Fixtures:
- Match 1: Brisbane Roar v Sydney FC
- Match 2: Brunswick Juventus v Preston Lions
- Match 3: WS Wanderers v Melbourne Victory
- Match 4: Lions FC v Melbourne City
- Match 5: APIA Leichhardt v Sydney United 58
- Match 6: SD Raiders v Macarthur FC
- Match 7: North Sunshine Eagles v Heidelberg United
- Match 8: South Melbourne v Fremantle City
#Quarter Final Fixtures:
- QF 1: Winner M2 v Winner M8
- QF 2: Winner M4 v Winner M7
- QF 3: Winner M1 v Winner M6
- QF 4: Winner M5 v Winner M3
#Semi-Final Fixtures:
- SF 1: Winner QF3 v Winner QF4
- SF 2: Winner QF1 v Winner QF2
If I've read it correctly, the bracket is as as follows:
Brisbane Roar ˥
Sydney FC ˩ ˥
˥
SD Raiders ˥ ˩
Macarthur FC ˩
APIA Leichhardt ˥
Sydney United 58 ˩ ˥
˩
WS Wanderers ˥ ˩
Melb. Victory ˩
Brunswick Juve ˥
Preston Lions ˩ ˥
˥
South Melb. ˥ ˩
Fremantle City ˩
Lions FC ˥
Melb. City ˩ ˥
˩
North Sunshine ˥ ˩
Heidelberg ˩
Football Australia responds to Infantino's plan to sell off the World Cup to private investors
football360.com.au2026/27 Isuzu UTE A-League season fixtures released: Full Details
aleagues.com.auI crunched the numbers on the 'Best 3rd Placed Sides' combinations in the 2026 World Cup knockout bracket so you don't have to.
With the World Cup expanding to 48 nations, and the best eight of twelve 3rd placed sides from the group stage progressing to the knockouts in this new format, you may have noticed these fixtures listed for the Round of 32:
- 1E vs 3A/B/C/D/F
- 1I vs 3C/D/F/G/H
- 1D vs 3B/E/F/I/J
- 1G vs 3A/E/H/I/J
- 1A vs 3C/E/F/H/I
- 1L vs 3E/H/I/J/K
- 1B vs 3E/F/G/I/J
- 1K vs 3D/E/I/J/L
Eight of the group winners have 5 possible opponents listed for their Round of 32 match.
Twelve groups, but only eight 3rd sides progressing and we don't know which ones until the group stage is done, so there's obviously some uncertainty in the bracket about who exactly will face who. But 5 possible opponents for each of those group winners seems rather unweildy, and hard to figure out.
Which all begs two questions: 1) What specific mechanism determines where the 3rd placed sides end up going? And 2) Are the different possible Ro32 matchups equally likely to occer?
Short answers: 1) 'Annex C', and 2) No, some matches are far more likely than others.
Longer answers:
#1) WHAT IS 'ANNEX C'?
It's basically just a giant table listing out all of the possible cominations of 3rd placed sides, and where those sides go for that combination. So there's a row for if the 8 sides are from groups A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, a row for A,B,C,D,E,F,G,I, a row for A,B,C,D,E,F,G,J, etc.
This isn't a new concept. Euro 2024, being a 24 team tournament with the best 4 of 6 third placed sides progressing, had a similar table. Same for the 24 team World Cups in the 90s. The scale of the table is a little different, though. With 4 of 6 progressing, those tournaments had 15 possible combinations of third placed sides, which was fairly easy to keep track of.
But this tournament has 8 of 12 progressing, which has a few more cominbations... 495 to be precise. Yes, 495. Wikipedia conveniently has all of the possible cominations listed out for us..
No fan could be reasonably expected to remember and keep track of all of them. But thankfully, something I quickly noticed glancing at the giant World Cup 2026 Annex C table is that some pairings are FAR more likely than others. Conversely, some pairings only have a fraction of a percentage change of happening. Knowing which pairings are likely, and which can effectively be ignored, makes things a little easier to follow.
Which brings us to question 2 and the point of this post:
#2) WHICH ROUND OF 32 MATCHES ARE MOST LIKELY?
I went through the 495 possibilities (or rather excel did), and summed up the number of occurrences of each pairing to work out what the most likely Ro32 matches are.
From the perspective of the 8 group winners that have been paired against 3rd placed sides, their most likely opponents are:
| . | 3A | 3B | 3C | 3D | 3E | 3F | 3G | 3H | 3I | 3J | 3K | 3L |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1A vs | 19.6% | 36.8% | 0.6% | 39.2% | 3.8% | |||||||
| 1B vs | 5.3% | 1.0% | 52.5% | 2.8% | 38.4% | |||||||
| 1D vs | 66.5% | 7.9% | 2.2% | 10.5% | 12.9% | |||||||
| 1E vs | 3.2% | 0.2% | 46.7% | 42.8% | 7.1% | |||||||
| 1G vs | 63.4% | 1.2% | 17.2% | 8.3% | 9.9% | |||||||
| 1I vs | 0.4% | 20.0% | 55.8% | 14.1% | 9.7% | |||||||
| 1K vs | 3.8% | 9.7% | 18.4% | 1.4% | 66.7% | |||||||
| 1L vs | 5.9% | 0.6% | 22.8% | 4.0% | 66.7% |
Or, from the perspective of the third placed sides IF they progress:
| . | 1A | 1B | 1D | 1E | 1G | 1I | 1K | 1L |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3A vs | 4.8% | 95.2% | ||||||
| 3B vs | 99.7% | 0.3% | ||||||
| 3C vs | 29.4% | 70.0% | 0.6% | |||||
| 3D vs | 64.2% | 30% | 5.8% | |||||
| 3E vs | 55.2% | 7.9% | 11.8% | 1.8% | 14.5% | 8.8% | ||
| 3F vs | 0.9% | 1.5% | 3.3% | 10.6% | 83.6% | |||
| 3G vs | 78.8% | 21.2% | ||||||
| 3H vs | 58.8% | 25.8% | 14.5% | 0.9% | ||||
| 3I vs | 5.8% | 4.2% | 15.8% | 12.4% | 27.6% | 34.2% | ||
| 3J vs | 57.6% | 19.4% | 14.8% | 2.1% | 6.1% | |||
| 3K vs | 100% | |||||||
| 3L vs | 100% |
Keep in mind that this second table is for each 3rd placed side IF they progress, which is only two thirds of the time. So 3K for example WILL face 1L IF they progress (so it's 100% for them in the second table), but them progressing only has a 2/3 likelihood of happening (so that fixture is given 66.7% for 1L in the first table).
To summarise the main probabilities in more human terms:
- 1A: Most likely a coin toss between 3E and 3H, maybe 3C.
- 1B: Probably 3G, or maybe 3J.
- 1D: Almost certainly 3B if they progress, otherwise a coin toss between 3I and 3J.
- 1E: Coin toss between 3C and 3D.
- 1G: Almost certainly 3A if they progress, otherwise probably 3H.
- 1I: Probably 3F. Failing that, most likely 3D, 3G, or 3H (in that order).
- 1K: 3L if they progress. If not, probably 3I or maybe 3E.
- 1L: 3K if they progress. If not, probably 3I.
And the 3rd placed sides, IF they progress the most likely opponents are:
- 3A: They'll almost certainly face 1G.
- 3B: 1D in literally all but one scenario in which 3B progresses.
- 3C: Probably 1E, but maybe 1A.
- 3D: If 3F doesn't progress then probably 3I. Otherwise, almost certainly 1E.
- 3E: If both 3K and 3L fail to progress then 1K. Otherwise, probably 1A.
- 3F: Probably 1I, but an outside chance of facing 1E.
- 3G: Most likely 1B, but an outside chance of 1I
- 3H: If 3A doesn't progress then 3H most likely takes the spot against 1G. Otherwise probably 1A, with an outside chance of 1I.
- 3I: If 3K doesn't progress then IL, otherwise if 3L doesn't progress then 1K, otherwise a coin toss between 1D or 1G.
- 3J: If 3B doesn't progress, 3J is the most likely option to face 1D. Otherwise, probably 1B or maybe 1G.
- 3K: 1L in all scenarios in which they progress.
- 3L: 1K in all scenarios in which they progress.
Most likley Round of 32 pairings:
- 1E vs 3C/D
- 1I vs 3F/D/G
- 1D vs 3B/I/J
- 1G vs 3A/H/J
- 1A vs 3E/H/C
- 1L vs 3K/I
- 1B vs 3G/J
- 1K vs 3L/I
AUCKLAND
This one is based largely on a design by u/RealTimitri from a few years ago. There's two main changes in my version:
- I've reversed the direction. They had the circuit going clockwise, but the lack of any meaningful runoff at the ANZAC Avenue/Beach Road intersection (turn 9 in their design, turn 4 in mine) after the downhill run from Constitution Hill seemed quite dangerous to me. Running the circuit in an anticlockwise orientation resolves this issue. Going down Grafton Road rather than up it (between turns 6 and 7 in my design, 5 and 6 in theirs) would also provide for an interesting challenge, with drivers needing to brake hard after the downhill for the turn onto Stanley Street.
- I've got the circuit turning off of Quay Street for a series of corners in the southern corner of Bledisloe Wharf. This serves the dual purpose of adding some variety to an otherwise fast circuit, and breaking up the near 2km long Quay Street Strait.
SYDNEY
This is an iteration on an earlier design that I posted here a few months ago. This one has all of the same constraints/considerations - minimising the number of trees that would need to be removed, avoiding heritage listed buildings and structures such as the sandstone park gates, minimising traffic impact, etc.
That said, I've reworked large parts of the Centennial Park portion (turns 17-7 on this version, 13 to 2 on the old one) of the circuit compared to my original design, including reversing the direction of the start/finish straight and introducing a crossover. Reasoning for the changes:
I relised that turn 1 in the old version wouldn't work (at least not without major landscaping) due to the way the gradient of the hill suddenly changes next to Grand Drive. I played around with a few different ways of reworking it - such a switchback-esque path (magenta) but that had runoff issues, or a series of hairpins (blue) but that didn't look good, or moving the start/finish straight to the south side of the Parade Grounds to allow for a smoother approach (red) but that would make the already-short start/finish straight far too short.
The red option was the least bad, but even then it would still require either major landscaping work or a ramp/overpass over Grand Drive.
At that point I figured if an overpass over Grand Drive would likely be needed anyway, I might as well make it a crossover in the layout. That way we get the best of both worlds - the 500m start/finish straight from the original design is retained (but with the direction reversed), then by routing it around the Pine Grove we get the smooth approach to the overpass from the red option.
The last sector now goes left at turn 19 (15 in the old one) to accommodate this, and heads up Grand Drive and under the overpass, rather than the right turn down Dickens Drive from the original, which has the added bonus of requiring less of the park to be closed off for the circuit.
The other major change is to the Lang Road chicane (16/17 in this layout, 12/13 in the old one). There were two issues I was unable to resolve in the original version of the layout - I couldn't figure out a neat way around the Robertson Road Gates, and I couldn't think of a good way to maintain residential access for those living within the bounds of the circuit. The solution I eventually cooked up is a tunnel. The chicane has been brought forward to allow for the tunnel entrance, with the exit being inside the park bounds near Busbys Pond. This avoids the gates entirely by going under them, while also allowing for residential access via Cook Road (and Grand Drive via the Randwick Gates).
VANCOUVER
This one's basically a merger of the 1990-97 and 98-04 Indycar layouts. Main changes from those layouts are as follows:
- I've added some corners near the Plaza of Nations, as I thought the fast turn 2 almost directly into the hard-braking turn 3 would be interesting.
- Reworked the series of corners at the northern part of the circuit near Rogers Arena.
- The turn 8-11 area of the 98-04 circuit is now apartments, so I've got it going slightly further south (onto 1st Avenue), and not as far west (going up Ontario Street/East Park, rather than Salt Street).
- After Expo Boulevard, I've got the circuit going further east, down Main Street to Terminal Avenue instead of Quebec Street - importantly keeping the on and off ramps for the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts from Main Street within the bounds of the circuit. This is to provide a route for residential access (including for those living next to East Park in the southern part of the circuit).