GRAND THEFT. Fifa takes S. America spot

[fatmaradona]

Originally posted by AFCA
Soccerscout get real.

Brazil


Argentina




Uruguay











Rest

Europe's top teams come in at about the same level as Brazil or a bit under (Holland, Germany, France - usually, maybe even Chzech Republic and England). Then there are some European sides about the Argentinian level (probably England, Spain). And then it's all one blur with a lot of European sides about the same level of Uruguay and lower.

You (and others) are acting like no European country ever in the history of football managed to match Brazil and Argentinia. And that's BS. Take away Brazil and what's left of all those World Cups?

is this what Euros really believe? What a shocking post.
I'll take Chile over Yugoslavia, Paraguay over Poland, Ecudaor over Croatia, Argentina over France, and Brazil over a combine EU team.

my .02--Asia has too many allotments (FIFA wants to get into the emerging Chinese market). I think they gave the Aussie theirs because they'd like them to host it some day. Africa need those spots to continue to develop the game there (plus subsarahan soccer is filled with the most exciting teams).
Concacaf- 3.5
Asia 4-
Africa-5.5
Austrialia-1
SA- 4.5
Europe-13.5

["Simply Ken"]

Jay,

Those are friendlies. True.

But I have seen many more Iran matches than you will ever watch, and I have also seen many games from teams from outside of our continent, including South America. I just know more about the subject than you.

What I do know is that no team would come to Tehran and expect much from that game. When Ireland came to Tehran, they BUNCKERED. When Australia came to Tehran, they BUNCKERED. Those were not friendly games. In fact, the last official, non-friendly, match Iran lost at home was in 1973.

I also know that Iran is a team that has learned to travel well, and played many decent sides often getting respectable results. We played Denmark's full squad, preparing for their Euro playoff, in Coppenhaggen and drew the match 0:0 in 1999. We recently (2002) beat Urkaine 1:0 in Kiev. We beat Slovakia 4:3 in Slovakia right before the qualifiers the last World Cup qualifiers. We also drew Japan in our last senior meeting in Japan in 1999, tied the USA in Pasadena in 2000. Even our mostly U21 side recently beat a S.Korea team with 5 World Cup starters in S.Korea, in front of a packed stadium, with Iran winning a record 4th Asian Games gold medal.

Losing to Bahrain was a disgrace. But I saw the game and know that things like that can happen, particularly when one side is nervous and has everything riding on the game while the other side is rolling on the grass for much of it.

As far as Venezuala, they are ranked lower than Iran and had more reason to take the game seriously. Iran, in fact, was fielding a young team in preparation for the mostly U23 Asian Games tournament. Simply put, there is no comparison in class between Iran and Venezuela.

[Luther_Gabriel]

This is how I think the slots should be allotted:

Europe - 15
South America - 5
North America - 3.5
Africa - 4.5
Asia - 3.5
Oceania - 0.5

[Autogolazo]

Bump one of Africa's places over to S. America to give them five and you'll have something more reasonable.

Tunisia and South Africa have done nothing but take up space at the last two World Cups--totally useless, whereas a Chile or Uruguay or Colombia could at least provide some excitement.

[Jay510]

autogolazo, with tunisia you are right, but S. Africa got 2 draws in their first ever world cup in 1998, and this year lost out on the second round to paraguay on goals scored......they tied paraguay and beat slovenia.........and with the emergence of Senegal, and the teams that Cameroon and Nigeria have put up since 1990 and a morocco team that has always been competitive in their cups....i think Africa is a pretty good continent up top......I still left out Egypt as well

so back off a bit

[Jay510]

Originally posted by Luther_Gabriel
This is how I think the slots should be allotted:

Europe - 15
South America - 5
North America - 3.5
Africa - 4.5
Asia - 3.5
Oceania - 0.5

Honestly i dont know the best way to divy up these spots.....Oceania seems to have a claim to 1 spot albeit a small claim.....Africa i dont think has lost any spots with always 5-6 legit teams that can score points in the cup..........Europe, i think 15 is too much if you ask me......i mean, were going to have more slovenia's and portugals and such if UEFA doesnt get their qualifying structure straightened out............N. America, i mean i think 3.5 is fair, and S. America deserves 5, they always get 2-4 teams in the round of 16......i think anymore than 3 for Asia is nuts, but their claim is the most populated continent and in FIFA population counts.

[Jay510]

i know what you are talkin about.....i consider Iran #3 in Asia, behind Korea and barely behind Japan......

im just saying, all you have to show is that Iran got put in the tougher qualifying group, had a bad game and lost out to Ireland.....sometimes thats the way it goes.......you dont have to show people friendlies to prove Iran's worth in Asia.......anyone who doesnt have them as a legit team that can get points is nuts, cause they beat the USA in 1998 and gave yugo and Germany great games.......my only point is that friendlies mean nothing to me, and last year when it counted they faltered

["Simply Ken"]

I would rank Iran behind S.Korea and Japan, not because I believe it, but merely because that is what the ranking point to right now. Besides, there is no shame in Iran being ranked behind a team that finished 4th in the world. Or one that made it to the round of 16.

But S.Korea and Japan were hosting the World Cup, and I never doubted that as hosts they would advance from their groups. The same way I have no doubt that if ever a World Cup was staged in Iran, we would be going quite far.

In any case, and just to enlighten the discussion, let me point out that recently Iran faced South Korea in the Asian Games. That tournament has become a mostly U-23 event, allowing only 3 over 23 players. S.Korea, however, took the tournament very seriously since they were hosting it. They wanted nothing short of the gold medal so as to not lose face in light of their World Cup performance and given that they were hosts. Thus, they fielded a very experienced side compared to other teams, with 5 World Cup starters in their squad.

Their semifinal game against Iran was tense, with the first half played evenly by both sides. Early in the 2nd half, Iran scored a goal that was ruled wrongly as offside. Shortly thereafter 3 Iranian players were given yellow cards for protests and other unclear infractions. The complexion of that game then changed, with S.Korea begining to totally dominate, although the result remained the same through overtime. Iran -- fielding mostly its U21 players -- finally won on penalties, going on to defeat Japan in the final as well. (Japan fielded a young side being groomed for the Olympics).

As a result of that loss to Iran, BTW, S.Korea sacked their coach. It was the second time a S.Korean coach was fired for seeing his team lose to Iran, with the same thing happening when they were thrashed 6:2 by Iran in the 1996 Asian Cup. To be fair, the Koreans had avenged that loss by beating Iran 2:1 in extra-time (and against the run of play) in the 2000 Asian Cup, under very fortutious circumstances.

But my point is this: the same way I saw Iran dominate Japan in Japan in a senior friendly in 1999, until I really see any of these teams outclass Iran, I will not accept them being really better than my team. They can be ranked higher, but it is foolish to think these ranking will mean much when the game is being played.

[Jay510]

well its certainly debateable which team is better than which in Asia....if you would like i will retract my previous statement about which team is the best...but the problem with Asia is this....whether or not any team is the best means little........after those 3 teams, youve got nothing.....Saudi Arabia had a good team 8 years ago, but if S. Korea and Japan were not host, they would have gotten beaten pretty badly in the cup.....im not sure even iran could have advanced in 2002, though the cup was filled with surprise advancements......Asia has no claim to 4.5 spots.....and ill stand firm on that position

[Sachin]

Perhaps a playoff between Africa and South America would have been a better option. There are arguements for both so it should be settled on the field.

Something like this:

Europe: 14 (+1 host)
S. America: 4.5
Africa: 4.5
Asia: 3.5
CONCACAF: 3.5
Oceania: 1

["Simply Ken"]

I posted the link to an article from the AFC which gave a good glimpse of how football is viewed in the continent. I don't know if you read it.

Basically, the Asian team to follow closely right now is China. Not because they have shown anything, but because they are being spared nothing by the AFC as well as FIFA to see the great potential of that market blossom.

China will be hosting the next Asian Cup, along with the Women's World Cup. They have a decent crop of young players, although it is still amazing that with so much attention, and such a large population, they still haven't found 11 players that can really live up to what one might expect from them.

If China achieve a fraction of success in men's football that they have experienced in some other athletic fields, then the AFC's expectation that they can become one of the top 20 teams in the world by the next World Cup might turn true.

In the meantime, as the AFC stated in that same article, "More than anybody else, Iran have the ability to challenge the traditional powers of the world. They are physically well endowed and have a lovely football style and culture."

[Rafael Hernandez]

Originally posted by deejay
Well, The last time that a CONMEBOL country has left the tourney without points was 1950.


I seen this repeated somewhere else too. Its not true.
Chile went 0-3 in Spain 1982 and didn't get any points.

[Jay510]

its tough for certain countries to continue to compete every single turn of the cup. In Europe and South America its not, but in many Asian, N. American and African nations (and Oceania i guess). Some nations, get a good squad together over 4 years and then they are too old the next......In china they have so many resources id be surprised if they didnt get good soon. But you never know when Iran will get some injuries and not do well......depth is key in a fickle sport like soccer......

["Simply Ken"]

Originally posted by Jay510
its tough for certain countries to continue to compete every single turn of the cup. In Europe and South America its not, but in many Asian, N. American and African nations (and Oceania i guess). Some nations, get a good squad together over 4 years and then they are too old the next......In china they have so many resources id be surprised if they didnt get good soon. But you never know when Iran will get some injuries and not do well......depth is key in a fickle sport like soccer......

True. But two things mitigate against the risk you mention as it relates to Iran. First, we have a large population, and second, football is a widely popular sport in the country. Nonetheless, given the crop available to us in the 1998-2002 cycle, I have to say we blew a good chance to shine by our inopportune failures. The crop next in line fortunately is not bad, as shown in our recent Asian Games gold medal. Hopefully they will fulfill the promise many held for the last squad.

As for China, they are bound to find enough players to field a strong team sooner or later. The only question is whether it will be sooner, or later? :-)

S.Korea and Japan, meanwhile, will continue to wreap the enormous windfall from their World Cup hosting and success. Both those nations will solidify themselves as decent sides internationally, although neither can ever blossom to the heights that I believe a side like Iran could blossom to one day. The football culture that exists in Iran is simply lacking elsewhere in Asia, with Iran in that regard being more similar to the S.American countries than the Asian ones.

[Jay510]

id be surprised if either Japan or Korea got as far as they got in the next 30 years........Especially Korea....

Japan had Russia and Belgium, good teams but not anything special

Korea, played very well in the group, but in round 2 and the quarters got the calls........they were no better really than a round of 16 squad to me both are way overrated.........If i had to pick an asian team to make it to round 2 in the next few cups it would be Iran to me.....i think they are going to be consistently decent

[Rafael Hernandez]

Is Iran going to still be good? In 98 they had some good players in Germany but now I think that all their best players went to the Qatar league or UAE league, I forget which. That is basically a retirement league.


Also about the guy who said Chile had a better WC record, he is insane! Yes Chile went 3rd in 62. But guess what? That is also the year they last won a game in the WC! Even last time when they went thru the first round, they had a worst record than Spain. Spain has qualified year after year and is normally a candidate to do important things, while Chile has been a dissapointment and just recently broke with that streak. Also by your argument, Cuba is a better WC team than Scotland and Wales is better than Colombia.

["Simply Ken"]

Originally posted by Rafael Hernandez
Is Iran going to still be good? In 98 they had some good players in Germany but now I think that all their best players went to the Qatar league or UAE league, I forget which. That is basically a retirement league.

It is too early to say with confidence how Iran will do, although I believe enough of the ingredients exist for Iran to make it to Germany in 2006 -- and do well. Besides, I'm somewhat supestitious, and given Germany's role as a springboard for Iranian football, I have a sense that Germany 2006 will be good for Iran:-)

As for player transfers, many of our players have chosen the easy route to money by going to the UAE. Personally, I don't mind the older crop going there as it provides them with a nice retirement. But I am still hoping players like Karimi take up the European offers and move to somewhere they can be challenged. And where they can improve.

To be sure, we still have a few players in Europe. Mahdavikia has returned from injury, and was recently hailed by Kicker as the most effective player in all of the Bundesliga, with more assists per game on average (this year and through his career) than anyone else, surpassing Ze Reborto and many others. His return from injury has also changed Hamburg's fortunes BTW, making them come back to the upper half of the Bundesliga.

Vahid Hashemian is also playing regularly for VFL Bochum in the Bundesliga, and has scored 4 goals so far this season. He alternates between starting and coming in as a substitute, with most of his goals scored as a substitute player in fact.

Rahman Rezaie finished a great season in the Serie A last year with Perugia, where he didn't miss a single minute for his club after he joined them -- and earned good ratings in every game. This year his rating have fluctuated more, although he still starts and has added scoring to his repertoire as a defender.

There are several other Iranians in European leagues, but they are mostly with lesser clubs such as Charleroi -- a struggling club in the Belgium first division which has 3 Iranians on its roster. Many of the rest of our players, however, have moved either back home -- or more often, to the UAE.

[Ben OZ]

Originally posted by Jay510
just a request......can anbody residing in Oceania actually say that that confederation deserves a full spot

Australia
New Zealand
Solomon Islands
Fiji
Tahiti
Papua New Guinea
Cook Islands
A. Samoa
New Caledonia
Vanuatu

i mean come on, look at this..............Based On this I cant wait to see the response if Australia or New Zealand manage to not qualify for the cup.........I mean Australia only beat fiji 2-0 in the deciding game last time...........if they manage to fall flat on their asses, i will be laughin it up

Most Australian soccer fans prefer if Oceania hadn't been given direct qualification and would prefer to go through Asia. The reason is the lack of competitive matches, that's what has cost us in our last 3 WC campaigns and Oceania gaining direct qualification does not help this.

Blatter promised Oceania a spot after the allocation of '02 spots after Oceania winners had to play the 5th best South Americans, and for better or worse kept his promise.

Australia, at our peak are competitive and would hold our own against all but the very best. Problem is we rarely have our 1st side together and when we do, they are only in camp for a couple of days then disappear.

We'll see just how good Australia are at the moment when we play England at Upton Park next month.

IMO, Australia are at a similar level to the US, who went quite well at Korea/Japan.

[sinner78]

Originally posted by pololo
You problably don't watch SOuth American football i mean there are more than just Brazil and Argentina,there are lots of talents in Uruguay,Bolivia,Peru,Colombia etc.
I mean Michael Owen and Beckham are super talents in EUrope but in SOuth America there are filled with better talents than these overrated stars.
If you don't believe me watch some South American cups or leagues.

*laughing my arse off*

Uruguay??? knocked out in the first round ..
argentina??? knocked out in the first round...
Peru ???
Colombia???
Bolivia???



Those countries are nothing in world terms...
The argies got sent packing from the world cup by owen and beckham..
stick to watching swedish football you turnip...

[AFCA]

Originally posted by DELBUCEO
Uruguay reached semifinals in 1970 WC and won 14 SA cups, last one in 1995. What's you idea of 'up to date'? Yesterday? An hour ago?
BTW, the overrated fame and the glory of Dutch football was achieved 20 y ago too. You guys won nothing then, and you still haven't won nothing since then. You are nothing but a pathetic product of marketing and merchandising.

What have SA prizes got to do with it?

We were eliminated by Brazil (eventual champions)in the quarter finals 94 with a near 3-2 loss. In 98 we were eliminated in the semifinals by Brazil after a 1-1, being robbed of a penalty when v Hooydonk was pulled to the ground in the Brazilian penalty box. That day we were better than Brazil. Simple.We lost in penalties, but I can't remember a single penalty shoot out Holland ever won.

Holland can match Brazil for footballing talent and wit any time. If you had half a brain you would know.m Too bad they ************ed up against Ireland otherwise we might have had another Brazil-Holland match up.

In 96 and 99 friendlies we drew Brazil 2-2 (but what do we need friendlies for right?)

Anyway.... a product of marketing and merchandising? Could you tell me how to market a national team? By playing well pherhaps. And that's probably the reason why both Brazil and Holland are quite popular teams around the world. But when it comes to national teams there's no such thing as marketing my friend. Merchandise hardly matters...