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

[Ben OZ]

I saw posts about re-configuring the Confederations to get a fairer and more representative system of qualification. So I thought it I'd have a stab at working out a way to avoid the inevitable bickering between Confederations whenever it's time to allocate places to Confederations for the next WC. The system I developed is better defined and easier to follow than the current set up so therefore has no chance of ever occurring!

Here it is:

+ Disband AFC and OFC & merge to create A&PFC (Asia & Pacific Football Confederation) comprising of 55 nations.

+ Disband CONMEBOL and CONCACAF & merge to create AFC (Americas Football Confederation) comprising of 45 nations.

+ Retain CAF in current format with its 52 nations.

+ Retain UEFA in current format with its 52 nations.

Confederational Allocation breakdown:

+ A&PFC get 4.5 spots, Group winner with least impressive record plays two-legged playoff series against AFC Group runner-up with least impressive record

+ AFC get 7.5 spots, Group runner-up with least impressive record plays two-legged playoff series against A&PFC Group winner with least impressive record

+ CAF retain 5 spots.

+ UEFA get 14 spots, with Germany as 2006 hosts being given automatic entry.


Confederations Qualification Process :

A&PFC - 55 nations for 4.5 spots

. Top 15 seeded, according to FIFA rankings, receive bye from first round and directly enter final round
. Other 40 nations seeded and placed into 10 Groups of 4 nations for first round. Winners of each group (10 winners) then enter final round.
. 5 Groups of 5 nations compete in final round, with the 4 Group winners with the best record automatically qualifying for WC, 5th Group winner plays 2 match series against 4th best runner-up in AFC.

AFC - 45 nations for 7.5 spots

. Top 16 are seeded, according to FIFA rankings, receive bye from first round and directly enter final round.
. Other 29 seeded and placed into 3 Groups of 7 and 1 of 8 for first round, with top 2 in each Group entering Final round.
. 4 Groups of 6 nations compete in final round, with the Group winners and 3 runners-up with the best record automatically qualifying for WC, 4th Runner-up plays 2 match series against 5th Group winner in A&PFC.

CAF - 52 nations for 5 spots

Following recently released details for CAF Qualifying for 2006 which is:
. Top 16 are seeded, according to FIFA rankings, receive bye from first round and directly enter final round.
. Other 36 nations playoff in 2 match playoffs.
. 18 Playoff winners join 16 seeded nations in 4 Groups of 7 and 1 of 6.
. 5 Group winners proceed to World Cup.

UEFA - 52 nations for 14 spots (Germany secured spot as hosts)

. Similar to current set up yet with 7 Groups (3 Groups of 8, 4 of 7).
. Group winners and runners-up automatically proceed to World Cup.

Who goes to World Cup from where
Taking into account current FIFA rankings

A&PFC:
Group A: South Korea
Group B: Japan
Group C: Iran
Group D: Saudi Arabia
Group E: New Zealand* (enter 2 leg playoff with Ecuador)

AFC:
Group A: Brazil, Ecuador* (enter 2 leg playoff with New Zealand)
Group B: Argentina, Uruguay
Group C: Mexico, Costa Rica
Group D: United States, Paraguay

CAF:
Group A: Cameroon
Group B: Senegal
Group C: Nigeria
Group D: South Africa
Group E: Morocco

UEFA:
Group A: France, Yugoslavia
Group B: Spain, Belgium
Group C: Netherlands, Czech Republic
Group D: England, Ireland
Group E: Turkey, Italy
Group F: Portugal, Denmark

A&PFC vs. AFC:
New Zealand vs. Ecuador -> Ecuador

Hosts:
Germany



This set up as a whole seems reasonable and clearer than the current set up, with less chance of major blow outs in scorelines due to seeding systems occurring in each Confederation bar UEFA.


What do you reckon?

What you like to see FIFA take up in terms of Confederations and their allocations?

[Ben OZ]

In criticism for my Confederational set up and their allocations, I agree that CAF still have it quite easy though will leave it for now. Wouldn't be a bad idea to have CAF with 4.5 spots and UEFA 14.5, playing off against each other for the remaining spot.

The A&PFC seems fairer than the current system, it's based more on merit than the current system. AFC having 4.5 and OFC 1 is too generous considering these confederations are not as strong as others. 4.5 spots for the whole 55 nations in this Asia/Oceania confederation would provide more opportunity for competitive nations to proceed to WC, though it could be argued it even still is quite generous.

The expanded Americas confederation is possibly harsh on the confederation since it's the same number of spots which CONCACAF & CONMEBOL currently receive though I believe it would make for very strong teams coming out of this confederation with no lesser chance of also-rans being amongst the 7 (probably 8) winners from this region.

[SoccerScout]

Overall not a bad idea but of course many involved wouldnt want to do it. Australia WANTS nothing other than what they got now, a free pass. A merge of North and SOuth America would be bad for the US and all North and Central Countries. It would be tougher for the US to qualify even with the 7.5 spots, especially considering the US is almost always playing away even at home.

[El_Maestro]

I agree with SoccerScout, the merge of Conmebol & Concacaf would be bad for the latter and too beneficial for Southamericans, eventhough I am one and I would like to have more teams in the WC.

If Southamericans are in a good day, they could get away with 6 or 7 of those 7.5 spots. I mean, sorry Concacaf, these are not those silly Copa Americas where Conmebol countries send their second tier squads, this is the real deal, this is for the big one. Let me tell you, SA's qualys can be brutal.

Believe me, it's better for you to keep things the way they are. And if it did happen, I suggest you start booking European referees, but not Italians or Spanish, better go with Germans or British.

Bring also your own water, try to get accomodations in your embassys, rent bulletproof buses and try FIFA to have Bogota, Quito and La Paz banned. Some helmets wouldn't hurt either.

[Nobby]

Merging confederations is not the solution. Take the hypothetical western hemisphere confederation for example. It would be subdivided into groups either randomly or by region. If it is by random selection, there would be some sever travel situations and some extremely lopsided match ups say between a small carribean island and Brazil. Randomization could also generate some lopsided groups. It wouldn't be fair or efficient so how about using the CONCACAF method of having regional tournaments. If it is subdivided by region then we're right back where we started because ten South American nations make a well defined region, the original CONMEBOL. A final group phase could be played between the top 6 CONMEBOL'ers and the top 6 CONCACAF'ers to determine the best 7.5 overall but sending the top 3.5 to 4 of each to the final is much more efficient at the expense of losing a little fairness.

[Heist]

Originally posted by Nobby
Merging confederations is not the solution. Take the hypothetical western hemisphere confederation for example. It would be subdivided into groups either randomly or by region. If it is by random selection, there would be some sever travel situations and some extremely lopsided match ups say between a small carribean island and Brazil. Randomization could also generate some lopsided groups. It wouldn't be fair or efficient so how about using the CONCACAF method of having regional tournaments. If it is subdivided by region then we're right back where we started because ten South American nations make a well defined region, the original CONMEBOL. A final group phase could be played between the top 6 CONMEBOL'ers and the top 6 CONCACAF'ers to determine the best 7.5 overall but sending the top 3.5 to 4 of each to the final is much more efficient at the expense of losing a little fairness.

I agree, travel situations would make this too much of an issue. And there would be some lopsided games, Haiti playing Brazil? El Salvador against Argentina...
How about CONCACAF and CONMEBOL go just as they had planned, but only the top two from CONCACAF and top two from CONMEBOL make it automatically.
The next 4 from each confederation get drawn into 2 groups of 4. The winners each go, and the runners up of those groups play for the final spot. The one who loses has to play whoever CONCACAF #4 would have been playing. That might put CONCACAF back at 3 some years, but it gives them the chance to send 4, but they'd all really have to earn it. It'd raise the bar for Central American countries I think and make the whole americas better.

[Ben OZ]

Originally posted by SoccerScout
Australia WANTS nothing other than what they got now, a free pass.

I'd agree that Oceania wants nothing other than what they've got now but not necessarily Australia. The majority of soccer media commentators and fans in Australia are somewhat embarrassed by the decision and query whether it will do us any good come 2006, if we make it.

Most Australians would like us to qualify through Asia since Oceania direct qualification doesn't give us what we really need, match prepapration against competitive nations. What cost us in the past against Iran and Uruguay, and to a lesser degree Argentina, was coming up against a competitive nation (equal or better than us) after only playing nations we had a distinct advantage over beforehand. Our fear now, as a result of FIFA's ruling, is not whether we'll make the Cup Finals but if we do make it, will we be ready, no Australian wants us to get there and just be easybeats.

On the proposal, I forgot to think about travel and that would be a big issue. I like the ideas Nobby and Heist proposed, they sound quite good.

[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.

[Ben OZ]

Any Australian who thinks we can win the WC is a goose. I'd be more than happy if we could progress past the first round if we make the Cup, I think we were at our peak in '98 and have dropped off somewhat since hopefully we can pick up form again. Bummer we didn't make the '98 Cup, oh well.

[SportBoy321]

I love the idea of having only 4 confederations. As far as an Americas Confed goes most of the teams going to the WC from it would be from South America I say so what to that. You'd have lopsided scores sure so what what do you think you have in Europe when teams play Malta,Luxembourg ,Moldova,Andorra,Faeroe Islands,etc.

[sammydog]

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.........


I think you are quite wrong here. Most australian supporters realise that going through asia would be benificial on many fronts.

1. We would get to play quality opposition on a frequent basis. Something we have never had and a reason for past failures in the playoffs.

2. We would actually get to watch the team play some decent games. Something we get once every four years.

3. Should we make the world cup we would be much more prepared. Ouir only hope at the moment is that we get some good friendlies. It is rumoured that we will play Argentina, Uraguay, Switzerland and spian this year as well as the england game in february so this is a good start should we make it, but they are only friendlies.

[Elninho]

Originally posted by SportBoy321
I love the idea of having only 4 confederations. As far as an Americas Confed goes most of the teams going to the WC from it would be from South America I say so what to that. You'd have lopsided scores sure so what what do you think you have in Europe when teams play Malta,Luxembourg ,Moldova,Andorra,Faeroe Islands,etc.

There's a difference. Europe doesn't have nearly as many "microstate" teams. In UEFA, only Malta, Luxembourg, Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Cyprus, Moldova, and the Faeroe Islands really count as microstate teams. In CONCACAF, there are 25 Caribbean nations, most of which play at the microstate level. (Basically, all except Jamaica, T&T, Cuba, and Haiti are no-hopers against any decent opposition.) And within Central America, there are Nicaragua and Belize, neither of which is any better than the small islands. UEFA has 8 microstates from a membership of 52. A combined Americas confederation would have at least 23 microstates from a membership of 45. This would mean a whole lot more matches with lopsided scores. At least in the status quo CONCACAF lets the minnows knock each other out before the regional powers get involved.

Will Brazil vs. Montserrat hold your attention? I don't think I'd even bother watching the USA play Anguilla or St. Lucia or the Cayman Islands.

[astar24]

The only problem I have with this system is the # of spots/confederation. Europe already has too many as it is, reduce CAF to 4.5 are u crazy?
CAF should have at least 7 spots.

[DoyleG]

Originally posted by astar24
The only problem I have with this system is the # of spots/confederation. Europe already has too many as it is, reduce CAF to 4.5 are u crazy?
CAF should have at least 7 spots.

With the exception on CONMEBOL and UEFA, the allocations are much more even with each other.

It may be worth it for the AFC and OFC to merge. The problem is that the Asians don't want to have a repeat of what happened in 1981.

[lanman]

Originally posted by astar24
Europe already has too many as it is...

How do you work this out?

According to FIFA, 18 of the top 32 teams are from Europe. ELO rankings also has 18, Kessler's rankings has 16.
In terms of all time records at the World Cup, 20 of the top 32 are from Europe.

The number of teams from Europe in the second round (as a percentage of the total teams) is always equal or higher than that in the first round. No other confederation can claim that.

The ideal situation would be to have a global qualification, but that is never going to happen. It is logistically impossible to start with, but even if it wasn't it would never happen as you would end up with about 25 of the 32 teams coming from Europe and CONMEBOL.

[art]

Originally posted by astar24

CAF should have at least 7 spots.

Now THAT's over the top. Let CAF earn their 5 first, which they've yet to do.

...unless you're joking, in which case, congrats, I took your bait.

[Heist]

Originally posted by lanman
The number of teams from Europe in the second round (as a percentage of the total teams) is always equal or higher than that in the first round. No other confederation can claim that.

The ideal situation would be to have a global qualification, but that is never going to happen. It is logistically impossible to start with, but even if it wasn't it would never happen as you would end up with about 25 of the 32 teams coming from Europe and CONMEBOL.

CONCACAF had 2 of 3 teams through. And Costa Rica almost made it... at least they played respectably.

I disagree. If it is higher than 20 or 21 i'd be surprised.
To be fair AND encourage the sport in the places where it needs to be encouraged this should be the breakdown.
5 from CONMEBOL and 15 or 16 from UEFA. Add 3 from CONCACAF, 4 or 5 from Africa, and 3-5 from Asia and Oceania.

And to whoever said CAF deserves 7. What continent are you watching?

[USA4Life]

The US and Mexico hold their own against South American teams after Brazil and Argentina.

[FunGuy]

not just the US and Mexico, a quater (10 teams) of concacaf can handle South america ( excluding Brazil and Argentina)

[Heist]

Originally posted by FunGuy
not just the US and Mexico, a quater (10 teams) of concacaf can handle South america ( excluding Brazil and Argentina)

I'm a big supporter of CONCACAF, but please tell me how this is true.

I can think of:
USA
Mexico
Costa Rica

Borderline holding their own against Colombia, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Ecuador:

Honduras, Jamaica, T & T, Canada (and they'd all have to be at the TOP of their game).

Borderline having a chance against Peru but no chance against the above teams:
El Salvador, Guatemala

That's still only 9...

if the top 9 in CONCACAF and the top 9 in CONMEBOL played a round-robin qualifying you'd probably have 3 US teams in the top 8 or 9, with most CONCACAF on the very bottom.