My solution to all FIFA's problems re: Confederation allocations [Archive] - Page 2

View Full Version : My solution to all FIFA's problems re: Confederation allocations

Pages : 1 [2]

sinner78

30 Dec 2002, 05:52 AM

I like that the idea of a merger between the south american group and concacaf group ...
That would really let everybody see if the concacaf clowns deserve their 3.5 places .
I bet they would get blown away in a combined qualifier contest with south america.

Craig the Aussie

30 Dec 2002, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by Jay510
Australians may say they want to qualify through Asia, but not anymore.......theyd never try to legitimize themselves by taking a harder route to the cup, when they have a very easy one.........

Every Australian fan thinks they can win in the World Cup Finals.......Personally, outside of Australia or Oceania, The Aussie nationals are quite bad.

What a lot of rubbish.

True Australian soccer fans (they have their meetings in a phone booth) want to qualify (or not) through a proper league structure - whether its Asia, North America or wherever.

Bandwagoners who know little about the game are happy with the decision.

To probably most of the Australian sporting public soccer (except for their kids Under 12 team) is like ice skating or womens water polo - which are of interest every 4 years during the Olympics and then immediately forgotten.

Mel Brennan

09 Jan 2003, 01:42 AM

I agree with merging confederations, and take it one step further:

11 from UEFA and 7 from Africa, Asia/Oceania, and the Americas respectively.

Does the world REALLY want to see the 12th best European team? And from a fairness/sporting perspective, does anybody have any data on how FAR the 12th best European team has gone in the World Cup?

The most important thing, politically, about merging Confederations is that South America, who has won nearly half the World Cup Finals, could no longer be marginalized due to only having 10 votes in a body of 204. Not that I'm for Brazilians or Argentines running everything; they can't run their own leagues and nations, respectively. But for Europe, Africa and Asia to have so much influence, to be courted so heavily by the power brokers come election time, and for the nations from which the most fruitful players in the world spring to be totally ignored come time to select FIFA leadership, is rather obtuse, and maybe downright stupid.

I pray for this to happen, particualrly as it forces the level of the US game to rise, period. I also do support the regional qualifying process (so as not to create lopsided matches that benefit noone), and I would look forward to one DAMN competitive Copa America.

Plus, maybe merging CONCACAF and CONMEBOL would, by the very nature of the process, inject new blood into the leadership of the Confederations, which have been listing, badly, for some time...

Bauser

09 Jan 2003, 04:41 AM

Originally posted by Universal
I agree with merging confederations, and take it one step further: 11 from UEFA and 7 from Africa, Asia/Oceania, and the Americas respectively. Does the world REALLY want to see the 12th best European team? And from a fairness/sporting perspective, does anybody have any data on how FAR the 12th best European team has gone in the World Cup?

Does the world REALLY want to see the 7th best Asian or African team? I know there is a lot of anti-UEFA people on these boards, but for the sake of quality and for keeping the World Cup the top event in world football, I would rather have the 14th best UEFA team than the 7th best from Asia or Africa.

The most important thing, politically, about merging Confederations is that South America, who has won nearly half the World Cup Finals, could no longer be marginalized due to only having 10 votes in a body of 204. Not that I'm for Brazilians or Argentines running everything; they can't run their own leagues and nations, respectively. But for Europe, Africa and Asia to have so much influence, to be courted so heavily by the power brokers come election time, and for the nations from which the most fruitful players in the world spring to be totally ignored come time to select FIFA leadership, is rather obtuse, and maybe downright stupid.

This I support fully. South America has way too little influence on the political part of the game.

Qdog

09 Jan 2003, 07:00 AM

AFCA

09 Jan 2003, 01:24 PM

Germany
France
Holland
England
Spain
Italy
Romania
Croatia
Portugal
Czech Republic
Yugoslavia
Russia
Ireland
Sweden
Norway
Belgium

I think these are Europe's top teams (maybe Ukraine or Georgia would fit in as well, but not now).

So, who was it again that said we should have 7 African, Asian and American nations to replace 6 teams on this list?

Africa:

Nigeria
South Africa
Ghana
Senegal
Egypt
Tunisia
Marocco

Or any other set of African teams. Good teams, but I reckon 5 out of 7 are a good match for the worst 6 European teams in my list. I'm pretty sure about it.

Americas:

US
Mexico
Costa Rica
Brazil
Argentina
Uruguay
Colombia/Paraguay/Peru/Ecuador

I think only the last slot teams would be a match for the worst 6 of these European teams. The rest are better.

Asia/Oceania:

Japan
South Korea
Iran
Australia maybe

Any of the Asian teams are on the same level or worse (in most cases) than the 6 worst European teams on the list.

Asia 3 spots at most.
Oceania 1 spot (I think the Aussies might surprise people)
Africa 4 spots (5 at most)
Americas 7 spots (or 8)

would leave 17 UEFA spots. Or 15.

Any less than that would compromise the quality of the tournament. Ofcourse this can change in time. But it seems like many people on these boards take the last WC as the only measure. And although the last WC was fun I think it wasn't exactly one of the toughest and quite some big teams didn't bring what they should.

Apart from that, Korea was lucky as hell (although their football was pretty good) and home advantage can work miracles (Japan and Korea).