View Full Version : GRAND THEFT. Fifa takes S. America spot
AFCA
17 Dec 2002, 04:18 PM
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?
sinner78
17 Dec 2002, 04:19 PM
all your ramblings mean nothing now...
you can argue all night about who is better but you've had your place taken away..
SoccerScout
17 Dec 2002, 04:20 PM
Its also interesting to look at the distored FIFA rationale.
Australia fails to beat a South American team for the WC spot in 94 and 02 (and in 98 to IRAN) so they say:
"Ok since they cant win it on the field, lets GIVE it to them and penalize the continent that always whips their arses"
Interesting. You would think that intelligent people looking at scores would say "Humm.. SOuth AMericans always eliminate Aussies...maybe we should just give that spot to SA and let Aussie fight with someone else for it".
vico
17 Dec 2002, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by AFCA
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).
Are you comparing Chzech Republic and England to Brazil? :D :D
You are the one who should get real...
SoccerScout
17 Dec 2002, 04:29 PM
Ignore AFCA he is a child + jerk and likes to Troll.
To even mention Chzech Republic in the same breath as Brazil should be grounds for a red card!
pololo
17 Dec 2002, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by Oscar
.2 of those weren't at this year's WC even with that ½ extra spot
.2 of those were kicked out of the tournament in the 1st round
I bet Australia can do just as good in 2006 ;)
It's not the end of the world, it's just a ½ spot
Dude shut up you don't know nothing,you obviously didn't follow soccer for a long time South America has the best players in all times,what does Australia have through the years?
Ive seen great players like Francescoli,Quiroga,Zamorano,Ruben Sosa,Recoba etc that is what i call tradition and talents,and now these countries will not represent the world cup,while Australia gets a free ride with no tradition or good results through the years.
SumRoy
17 Dec 2002, 04:39 PM
Sure New Zealand could take the Aussies out, but the chances are remote.
A 5 team tourney with the fringe teams in each Confederation and Australia would work. That would give the Aussies more than 2 games to screw things up - although their 2 games against New Zealand could end up being just that.
As for the benefits of Aussie participation, more TV money for FIFA from Oceania and more tickets sold at the World Cup thanks to Aussie's travelling support and ex-pats in Europe.
Airwolf
17 Dec 2002, 04:41 PM
C'mon guys. I admit that the FIFA screw a little with the allocations, but come on....
Speaking of percentages and championships won as arguments for spots is BS.
Is this elitist attitude of both UEFA and CONMEBOL fans which I find A LOT MORE irritating than giving five spots to Asia and 1 direct to Oceania.
Let's be real: Aside from Brazil and Argentina, the other CONMEBOL teams have a rough time against the top CONCACAF teams, which IMHO compites with OFC for the confederation with the worst overall level of play.
And if SA and Europe fans are not happy, separate from FIFA, create their own Federation and everybody is happy. You people of the superior race of soccer players don't have to mix with the inferior ones and the "inferior" ones will have more fun. (sarcasm)
I know not all of Europeans and South Americans fans are ellitists. I'm pissed off for the fascists among you, that's all.
nicodemus
17 Dec 2002, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by Heist
When they were a team of college all-stars?
If it was pre 1996 or so that's what the US was.
China is better than a US college team, but Asia barely deserves 4, 3.5 would be more fair and a playoff with Oceania.
Sorry. China beat and tied the USA in 1997.
Oscar
17 Dec 2002, 04:50 PM
Oh, yeah- 40% of a conference's nations appearing in the Finals is more than justified when 30% of that conference's nations have won the World Cup.
I agree, 40% is what CONMEBOL will be sending to 2006 by the way. :D
Dude shut up you don't know nothing,you obviously didn't follow soccer for a long time South America has the best players in all times,what does Australia have through the years?
So you're telling me they can't not qualify like the 2 teams he mentioned, or flop like 2 teams he mentioned? Dude. You're totally over-estimating Australia. :D
pololo
17 Dec 2002, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by Airwolf
C'mon guys. I admit that the FIFA screw a little with the allocations, but come on....
Speaking of percentages and championships won as arguments for spots is BS.
Is this elitist attitude of both UEFA and CONMEBOL fans which I find A LOT MORE irritating than giving five spots to Asia and 1 direct to Oceania.
Let's be real: Aside from Brazil and Argentina, the other CONMEBOL teams have a rough time against the top CONCACAF teams, which IMHO compites with OFC for the confederation with the worst overall level of play.
And if SA and Europe fans are not happy, separate from FIFA, create their own Federation and everybody is happy. You people of the superior race of soccer players don't have to mix with the inferior ones and the "inferior" ones will have more fun. (sarcasm)
I know not all of Europeans and South Americans fans are ellitists. I'm pissed off for the fascists among you, that's all.
What fascists are you talking about Real MAdrid?
Since when did the other South American teams have a rough time against the top CONCACAF?
Stop dreaming and realise that FIFA is doing shi*t job
what have the rest of the world besides Europe and South America did something special in the World Cup?
Africa is still having 5 spots,why?
Rafael Hernandez
17 Dec 2002, 05:04 PM
People forget that Australia just beat their competition in Oceania with a 31-0!!! game and without their top team. Australia just face New Zealand as their top competition. Im sorry but Venezuela is better than New Zealand or at least could beat them. And that is the worst team in Conmebol. So they are taking a spot from a confederation with 9 titles and 8 or 9 competitive sides and giving to a confederation with 1 good team???
Its highway robbery!!
Oscar
17 Dec 2002, 05:11 PM
Let me get my "This Is Officially My Favorite Thread" rubber stamp.
*BANG*
Since when did the other South American teams have a rough time against the top CONCACAF?
Mexico goes to the 2nd round instead of Ecuador
what have the rest of the world besides Europe and South America did something special in the World Cup?
We should only let the teams into the WC that have won it...even if it was 70 years ago, seeing as the other teams don't deserve to go because they've never done anything 'special' in the WC.
cosmosRIP
17 Dec 2002, 05:42 PM
What a friggin joke!
S.America has been royally screwed, if anything they should have picked up ½ a spot. Asia deserve 2½ and thats it.
What a friggin joke!
"Simply Ken"
17 Dec 2002, 06:03 PM
In coming up with World Cup allocations, I would want to make sure that the very best teams (i.e. those I would give a grade of B+ or better) all have a good shot at all being represented.
The next consideration for me would be to avoid allowing teams that aren't competitive to make the cut. Those teams are the ones I would grade below a B-.
The next consideration is to see as much diversity in the representation as possible, thus preferring teams from lesser represented regions that are internationally competitive to those of similar caliber from regions with greater representation.
IMO, Conembol has plenty of internationally competitive sides (i.e those with B- grade or better). But outside Brazil and Argentina, the rest are not that good for me to want to see ALL of them in the World Cup.
Same with many of the UEFA 2nd and even 3rd sides that might be competitive but add very little overall.
The ideal system for me would promote more playoffs between regions, and reduce the number of guaranteed sides for each confederation.
nicodemus
17 Dec 2002, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by "Simply Ken"
The ideal system for me would promote more playoffs between regions, and reduce the number of guaranteed sides for each confederation.
It would have to be more than just a home and away though. I like the idea, but two games so close isn't a fair picture always.
FunGuy
17 Dec 2002, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by pololo
What fascists are you talking about Real MAdrid?
Since when did the other South American teams have a rough time against the top CONCACAF?
Stop dreaming and realise that FIFA is doing shi*t job
what have the rest of the world besides Europe and South America did something special in the World Cup?
Africa is still having 5 spots,why?
Here is a few from the last 3 yrs, the 200 confedaration cup , canada- brazil 0-0, the Copa America, the concacaf teams kick some south america ass in that tournement, and the 2002 world cup, mexico/ecudor, also 2/3 of our teams advance in that world cup, and 2/5 of the s. american teams did. outside of the big 2 CONMEBOL
is over rated, any of the top 5 teams in concacaf can beat the 8-10 teams in s. america on most days.
"Simply Ken"
17 Dec 2002, 06:35 PM
nicodemus,
Although a home-home playoff does not always give you a fair picture, it is the best compromise IMO given the other factors at issue. At least for the time being.
Besides, it is not, always, possible to get a fair picture in football. Otherwise, we would have seen Holland qualify from UEFA and certainly not Slovenia. And we would have seen Iran represent Asia far more ably than either China or Saudi Arabia.
Alex_1
17 Dec 2002, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by Airwolf
C'mon guys. I admit that the FIFA screw a little with the allocations, but come on....
Speaking of percentages and championships won as arguments for spots is BS.
Is this elitist attitude of both UEFA and CONMEBOL fans which I find A LOT MORE irritating than giving five spots to Asia and 1 direct to Oceania.
Why? Do you believe that Asia deserves five spots and OCeana deserves 1? Oceana's top teams cannot defeat the fringe qualifiers from CONMEBOL. The two home Asian teams were solid in this WC, but two others were the two worst teams in the WC. I see nothing elitist about saying that it is unfair that spots were taken from the top two confederations and given to these two.
Originally posted by Airwolf
Let's be real: Aside from Brazil and Argentina, the other CONMEBOL teams have a rough time against the top CONCACAF teams, which IMHO compites with OFC for the confederation with the worst overall level of play.
I disagree. Have you really followed CONMEBOL closely? Be careful not to fall into the trap of over-analyzing friendlies. And interesting that you did not mention CAF. Uruguay looked mediocre in all friendlies - yet bitch-slapped Australia in Montevideo, and more than kept up in Australia.
Originally posted by Airwolf
And if SA and Europe fans are not happy, separate from FIFA, create their own Federation and everybody is happy. You people of the superior race of soccer players don't have to mix with the inferior ones and the "inferior" ones will have more fun. (sarcasm)
Sarcasm aside, say that this did happn. There would be no FIFA, and the international game would cease to exist - it's well on it's way down the pecking order anyway behind club football and pretty much any club cup on either continent.
One of the reasons this past WC wasn't so great, IMO, is because the strength of the teams was not as high as in 1998 as a whole. Saudi Arabia? China? CAF nations did poor as well. The only teams that really could challenge Brazil, not coincidentally, were the UEFA sides.
It is not a slam against the other countries. The World Cup is jsut that, the World Cup. But the question is, what the hell were they thinking to take the spots away from the top confederations that didn't even do as poorly as CAF or Asia. CAF still has 5 spots. At the least, CONMEBOL shoudl have held onto a half spot, and CAF should have given up at least one spot. I just can't really see it going beyond at the least:
15. UEFA
5 CONMEBOL
4.5 CAF
3.5 CONCACAF
3.5 Asia
0.5 Oceana
Take your pick between Africa, North America and Asia, but OCEANA shouldn't have a meal ticket because their teams are not good enough to challenge the worst of the qualifiers from the stronger sides.
SoccerScout
17 Dec 2002, 06:50 PM
>>is over rated, any of the top 5 teams in concacaf can beat the 8-10 teams in s. america on most days.
>>
Other than Venezuela...no way. The Top 2 Concacaf (US & Mexico) can get pretty even with mid level South Americans (like Chile, Paraguay etc..) but thats about it.
The # 8 and #9 in SA are very interchangable. One year they can be Chile and Bolivia in another it can be Paraguay and Equador and no way in hell can Honduras or Costa Rica beat these teams "Most days" as you say. They would probably lose most days.