News: AFC cuts A-League's ACL spots

Discussion in 'Australian A-League' started by X@V!3R, Nov 29, 2012.

  1. X@V!3R

    X@V!3R Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 1999
    Location:
    Land of the Lost
    Anger as AFC cut A-League's ACL spots
    FourFourTwo
    And Qatar gets 4 ?!?!?

    Wow.


  2. artml

    artml Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Kharkiv
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Ukraine
    Welcome to the ACL.

    Even funnier thing is, Thailand gets the same 1+1 spots.
  3. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Country:
    United States
    Well.. If you look at the state of soccer in Australia, is it really that surprising? Australia only has one national league, which only has 10 teams in it, they've folded two teams in the last two years, a number of the other teams are struggling financially, and it doesn't have pro/rel, which is very important to AFC. Given all of that, I think it is more surprising that Australia had as many spots as it had prior to the cut...
  4. 007GS

    007GS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    Country:
    Australia
    Most people have come around and accepted that 1+1 is fair enough. What they don't like is the criteria and Qatar getting 4 spots with a 12 team league. Also the fact that many countries have been completely snubbed. Politics before football.


  5. AKITOD

    AKITOD Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Hobart, Aust
    Club:
    JEF United Ichihara
    Country:
    Japan
    Qatar:
    - league governance (Qatari FA does not run the independent Star League)
    - numbers (2 divisions, 12 & 6 clubs) vs. 9 for Australia (Phoenix don't count).
    - promotion/relegation (they have it)
    - cup (4 cup comps)
    - involvement of another country (no input from other countries)
    - 2011 ACL champions (Al Sadd).
  6. Hachiko

    Hachiko The Akita on Big Soccer

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Location:
    Long Beach, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Country:
    United States
    No surprises with this. Small league, teams coming in and out, an ongoing quest for stability...I think this was a fair decision.
  7. artml

    artml Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Kharkiv
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Ukraine
  8. el-capitano

    el-capitano Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Australia
    Yawns.

    There's no denying that they met the AFC's criteria. But the fact there's four teams out of a 12 team league is a joke. Its meant to be the Champion's League. I'd limit most leagues to 2 teams + a qualifier at most, and get more from the other countries champions like India, etc to make it more interesting.

    I don't think anyone's really having a whinge about the A-League's spots, because I think 1+1 is about right for us, but the number of sports from other smaller leagues whether they meet the criteria or not is the joke.
  9. Roon12

    Roon12 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Ok, Qatar maybe, but UAE?
    How'd they get so much, especially with their performances - Technical Standard category...
  10. artml

    artml Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Kharkiv
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Ukraine
    Adding a team from India or Indonesia or Vietnam won't make it more interesting, but most certainly boring. Confer the previous editions – Arema in 2011, Persipura in 2010, and so on.

    If the gap between teams is too big, it won't be a competition, it will be thrashing. Boring for the strong and painful for the weak. No fun at all.
  11. el-capitano

    el-capitano Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Australia
    I wouldn't give them any more than a qualifying chance. If they can get through qualifying then why not let them have a go. Its no different than the Euro Champions League giving a shot to all the small countries. Refer to 2011/12 edition APOEL. ;)

  12. artml

    artml Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Kharkiv
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Ukraine
    This would be fair, I agree.
    el-capitano repped this.
  13. Sporting Real

    Sporting Real Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Country:
    United States
    The AFC really does need to figure how to let more teams from more countries in. I will admit, I was not surprised by the A League losing a spot, but I still think the 2 teams that qualify should be in, period. Save qualifying for the leagues in developing countries, like Vietnam, India, Thailand and the like.

    The sheer amount of pandering to the Middle Eastern leagues in the AFC is sickening, though. 8 teams from the UAE and Qatar is ludicrous. 2+1 qualifying seems far more fair for them. The only leagues that really should be getting 4 spots are Japan, Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Anyone else currently getting 4 should have a 3+1 set up
  14. Roon12

    Roon12 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    ^^^ Spot on. ;)

    Give up a half spot to get more Asian Champions into play-off spots.
  15. Arsenalkid700

    Arsenalkid700 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Location:
    New York City
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Country:
    United States
    I can give you many reasons for why India should be no where near the AFC Champions League. 1st reason is that the team that would have played in the Champions League dont even have an AFC quality stadium in their STATE.
  16. AKITOD

    AKITOD Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Hobart, Aust
    Club:
    JEF United Ichihara
    Country:
    Japan
    That was the criteria, they met it and got rewarded for it. It wasn't all of a sudden, they laid down the rules a few years ago or something. And remember they have 18 clubs in total.

    Imo I don't think any league should get more than 3+1, and everybody down to Guam champs should get some sort of qualifying place even if in an early round qualifier.

    Well UAE also have a cup competition, 12 team 1st division, pro-rel, independent governance, no outside team involvement.
    Actually it fitted all the criteria I said for Qatar (which you accepted now) EXCEPT for having an ACL champion. And fair enough they have 2+2 based on the criteria. I don't think any league should get more than 3+1, but given the rules UAE got what they deserved.

    You understand that UAE put a crap ton more improvement into their league in the last 3 years than the A-League did purely for this reason.

    Technical standard isn't the be-all of ACL criteria, because they prefer professionalism and quality leagues because they realise that in the long run that will be what grows better football in the future.
  17. Roon12

    Roon12 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    I now accept Qatar? Where did I post that I previously didn't.

    Secondly, if technical standard is not preferred, why does the AFC give that particular category such a high weighting - 200 (out of 1000)?
  18. AKITOD

    AKITOD Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Hobart, Aust
    Club:
    JEF United Ichihara
    Country:
    Japan
    Exactly, you can get incredibly far without thinking about playing ability. In UEFA, it's almost completely determined based on previous UCL performances per league with their coefficient thing.

    AFC it's only 20%, that's a small percentage (even if it's a big category). Cause they're rewarding creation of the environment that promotes better leagues. 20% is bugger all.
  19. Roon12

    Roon12 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    So, again: where did I state that about Qatar?

    If you say 20% for Technical Standard is a small percentage, why does AFC rate this important category 200% to 400% higher than the bugger all AFC weights some of the minor categories you say are so important?

    Do you understand the difference between big & small? ;)
  20. AKITOD

    AKITOD Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Hobart, Aust
    Club:
    JEF United Ichihara
    Country:
    Japan
    With Qatar I had assumed you were the same person who complained earlier and were coming around, with the way you went "Okay, maybe Qatar" after my points were made. Regardless the point is you agree Qatar met the criteria.

    Oh boy. 20% out of 100% is small. It's not about relative to other categories, it's about the fact that in UEFA it's 100% out of 100%. Do you understand my point here?

    All the other 80% are all divided up into categories and shit like that. But it boils down to 2 things:
    On field and off field. It's just that you can't really dice up on-field into little criteria like "Goal-kick taking - 2pts, Dribbling 5pts etc etc" or something like that. Whereas it would be irresponsible to lump all off-field into one category.
    AFC are letting countries know that off-field aspects are 4x more important than on-field. Whereas UEFA go 100% onfield pretty much. The reason for difference is cause AFC isn't at a level where the highest level is considered world class (whereas whatever happens to be best in UEFA can be assumed to be the world standard fairly safely).

    It's funny, you're arguing with me but you are the one who brought up the point that UAE get a lot of spots despite pretty crap onfield results. That example of yours backs it up, as well as the criteria and eventual allocation.
  21. Roon12

    Roon12 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    ^^^ No, you're arguing with me. ;)

    Here, we're discussing the various categories AFC use to allocate ACL spots. I made a point of the fact that AFC give a big weighting to Technical Standard compared to the small weightings given to most of the other categories. How does UEFA's weighting for a particular category change the fact that AFC gives Technical Standard a weighting of up to 400% bigger than than some of those less important categories that you're arguing about?

    And no, I don't agree that Qatar met all the categories. From their league attendances, perhaps Qatar should not have passed that criterion, maybe even copped a 30-point penalty into the mix. How did they do it, given the sparse 'crowds' at Stars League matches?
  22. artml

    artml Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Kharkiv
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Ukraine
    You may wish to adjust the crowds to country population. Qatar is a tiny nation with less than 2M residents.
  23. Roon12

    Roon12 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    I may wish, but that, along with Qatar's population size, is also irrelevant.

    AFC set and published the criteria for attendances and allowed for no adjustments relative to populations.
  24. AKITOD

    AKITOD Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Hobart, Aust
    Club:
    JEF United Ichihara
    Country:
    Japan
    You seem to have written the same thing as before without responding to what I said other than picking UEFA despite the fact it's there for comparison purpose between confederations.....so I'll refer you back to my previous post once more and let me know when you say something about the on-field vs off-field.

    Your issue was with UAE (and now Qatar too it seems) getting more places. To quote at the start with UAE
    "How'd they get so much, especially with their performances - Technical Standard category..."
    With examples reflected in the final allocation, one of which you brought up, brings me back to the start of this when I said:
    "Technical standard isn't the be-all of ACL criteria, because they prefer professionalism and quality leagues because they realise that in the long run that will be what grows better football in the future."
    So in answer to your question "How'd they get so much", even with a poorer technical standard. They still had 80% of the game left to play for with a pass-mark of 60%. That's where they got the points, and that's how it works. The fact they did is proof to my statement that technical standard isn't the be-all of this process.

    You're not giving an alternative, or proof that I'm wrong. So if you accept my answer to your question there is no more for you to say, and if you don't understand my answer to your question then there's no other way I can put it for you. All you bring up is that technical standard is worth 20% therefore using that to try reject my comment. But I'm backing mine up with 80% for off-field as well as the actual allocation and the actual turn-out of events.
  25. almango

    almango Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Location:
    Bulli, Australia
    Club:
    Sydney FC
    Country:
    Australia
    I think the AFC is correct to promote proffessionalism, but I wonder at some of the things they have stipulated are needed for proffessionalism to exist. It's not necessary to have a Cup Competition, or promotion/relegation to be proffessional. I also don't see the need for a League to be independant of the national body. I actually believe that having the national body with a big part to play in the running of a League as a good thing. I would also question the AFC's decision to put Central Coast in the main draw. Brisbane Roar are the Australian Champions.

Share This Page