2006 Qualification Process Announced

[Gordon]

This isn't the first time CONCACAF has made adjustments to their qualifying system in order to helpout the minnows. There was a time when the US was a minnow who routinely finished behind Canada and Mexico in trying to get out of the North American group. CONCACAF changed this process to try to give the americans a better chance. And it was the right thing to do then, just as it is the right thing to do now.

Minnows also have a role to play in qualifying. In 1970, the US was able to get out of the first round because they were able to beat Bermuda 1-0 while Canada was held to a surprising 0-0 draw. we were out, you went on. Frankly, if you have to use your "A" team to beat an Island nation on their turf, then they don't deserve the term "minnow". Crappy fields, crappy play, too many games all sound to me like red herrings whenthe real complaint is a loss of advantge.

[PumaBear]

I know that for many small nations this will be a jolly experience, but for the countries that supply a very large part of the revenue and resources for the confederation this setup should SUCK big time. It is not because of fear or because we do not feel capable of handling 20 games. The issue is that playing a lot of games in extremely substandard pitches against non professional players is a drag, increases injury risk a lot (remember Blanco's case) and will not contribute anything to Mexico's soccer level growth. On the contrary it is a step backwards. Instead of playing those 4 or 5 extra games against Anguilla, St Kitts and the US Virgin Islands, Mexico should be playing top level nations for preparation. Mexico is NOT by any means responsible for subsidizing both economically and football growth-wise the small minnows of our region.

I really think the popular pressure that is currently going on in Mexico for leaving Concaca and joining South America (even though the possibility seems so remote) will steadily increase with decisions like this. I personally hate it. Maybe it will never happen but hopefully Mexico and Conmebol will get their acts together and merge. He dicho.

[OBartleby]

Originally posted by Gordon
This isn't the first time CONCACAF has made adjustments to their qualifying system in order to helpout the minnows. There was a time when the US was a minnow who routinely finished behind Canada and Mexico in trying to get out of the North American group. CONCACAF changed this process to try to give the americans a better chance. And it was the right thing to do then, just as it is the right thing to do now.

Minnows also have a role to play in qualifying. In 1970, the US was able to get out of the first round because they were able to beat Bermuda 1-0 while Canada was held to a surprising 0-0 draw. we were out, you went on. Frankly, if you have to use your "A" team to beat an Island nation on their turf, then they don't deserve the term "minnow". Crappy fields, crappy play, too many games all sound to me like red herrings whenthe real complaint is a loss of advantge.

Gordon, I understand - and appreciate - your sentiments. But believe me when I say that my primary concern is for the players' health and well-being. I don't think anyone doubts that the 6 clubs who made it to the Hex will trounce any one of the 23 minnows in Pot D, as well as a good many of the semi-emerging minnows in Pot C.

If the field in the minnow nation is not up to FIFA standards, then as someone else suggested, the match should be held in an alternate (neutral) location. As long as this principle is adhered to across the board and every means is pursued to protect the players from injury due to terrible pitch conditions, then I really wouldn't have any major objections to the proposed method.

Sure, it's elitist to say that the US, Mexico and Costa Rica shouldn't have to play the minnows at all, and that we should be allowed a bye into the semi-final round because the Pot A teams have earned this privilege, but that really isn't too far from the reality of it.

[gabe]

this again brings me to the point on how we need Jack Edwards back in the booth for all these extra games! in all the 30-0 games, i wanna hear "mine eyes... o say can you see... etc" 30 times with the voice squeaking! and you know what you do? for entertainment, this is what i suggest ESPN should do that'll save them money on sending more sideline reporters to away games: the sideline reporter should be a ventriloquist dummy of veronica and dave sitting on both laps of jack edwards with him controlling both of them.... and ty keough would be that guy who gets high be4 evry broadcast and told to analyze evry after each play while smoking another joint... then ed o neil replaces rob stone while stone goes on dragnet cop show

[LMvCP]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gordon
This isn't the first time CONCACAF has made adjustments to their qualifying system in order to helpout the minnows. There was a time when the US was a minnow who routinely finished behind Canada and Mexico in trying to get out of the North American group. CONCACAF changed this process to try to give the americans a better chance. And it was the right thing to do then, just as it is the right thing to do now.

But its not right doing so at the expense of others. Giving up home field advantage or being forced to send your full team to line the pockets of some one is not the right thing to do. Punishing Mexico to get another team in the WC is not the right thing to do. Punishing a player and waiting for elections to clear the player is not the right thing to do. Exploiting a federation to get another federation money is not the right thing to do. Threatening to sanction a federation for not sending thier full team and not saying a word to the other federation who did the same thing is not the right thing to do.

I dont see the point in helping someone who doesnt want to help themselves. IF the own Jamaican Sports ministry cuts back funding 60%, why should we or anyone else help them out. You have to help yourself first.

Minnows also have a role to play in qualifying.

They do have a role. But use the confederation events to progress. I dont see why we should water down the WC or WCQ anymore than they have to be

In 1970, the US was able to get out of the first round because they were able to beat Bermuda 1-0 while Canada was held to a surprising 0-0 draw. we were out, you went on.

In 1970, Mexico hosted the Cup. Some lucky CONCACAF team was able to participate. In 1986, Mexico hosted the cup. Some lucky CONCACAF team was able to participate (Canada). That was Canada's first and last World Cup appearance. In 1999, when we hosted the COnfederation;s Cup, some lucky CONCACAF team was able to participate. Mexico opened the door to Copa America, and as a result it opened the door to the US, Honduras, and Costa Rica.

Where are your minnows? Ill tell you what their role is... thier role is to let the ones who know how to run and operate the confederation do so. Instead they are a burden. They gang up on the on the bigger fish and as a result, we get no where. Do we expect some leniency and some seniority... damn right we expect it. what have they done? Mexico gave you the 2 most exciting World Cups to date. The US grossed the most money up to that date. You dont bite the hand that feeds you. You are bteer off letting them build some hope going into the second round or even the semifinals... instead of crushing them in the first round.

Frankly, if you have to use your "A" team to beat an Island nation on their turf, then they don't deserve the term "minnow".

I have no problem going to thier turf.

Crappy fields, crappy play, too many games all sound to me like red herrings whenthe real complaint is a loss of advantge.

Crappy fields? One of your players tears his ACL in a pot hole....Mexico-Panama Or how about asking for better playing conditions... then the CONCACAF president ask that they had to provide proof. Then you send them video and photographs of rock pastures and dirt (thats rights DIRT) sprayed with Green paint. And as a result... the President gets mad because that picture happens to be in one of your own stadiums in T&T in your own country. And as a result, the president takes it personal and says that he will allow the game on that field and that considering he is from Trinidad & Tobago, that he will root for T&T and give them all the advantge they can get. He even promoted and marketed the game with commercials promoting violence...

Crappy Play? Mexico spanking T&T 7-1. T&T player gets frustrated and intentionally breaks our best players leg....which eventually cuased his European club to let go of his services.

Too many games? Some of us do have established leagues that come out of own pockets rather than some loan from X party. Some of us do spend money to participate playing in competetive tournaments. I know many minnows like to depend on other leagues and countries to develop thier players...its not costing them much. Hell, if one of thier players gets hurt... its not like they invested alot of dough on him

[Daniel from Montréal]

Originally posted by PumaBear
The issue is that playing a lot of games in extremely substandard pitches...

Yeah all TWO of them...

After that, it's not like Mexico would have avoided the semis.

And I have never seen fans complaining so much about their team actually being put on [gasp] equal footing with its opponents.

[PumaBear]

Sorry Daniel. You don't get it. The issue is that we don't want these teams as our "opponents".

[LMvCP]

Originally posted by Daniel from Montréal
And I have never seen fans complaining so much about their team actually being put on [gasp] equal footing with its opponents.

no need to beat a dead horse... i mean I can see why a fed like the CSA would have no problem putting the burden on others... afterall.. they do it already and thier fans see no problem with it :D...Cough MLS Cough A-League Cough American Universities Cough European lower divisions Cough Bayern Munchen Cough Owen Greaves Cough :D

[Gordon]

Originally posted by rdl674


But its not right doing so at the expense of others. Giving up home field advantage or being forced to send your full team to line the pockets of some one is not the right thing to do. Punishing Mexico to get another team in the WC is not the right thing to do. Punishing a player and waiting for elections to clear the player is not the right thing to do. Exploiting a federation to get another federation money is not the right thing to do. Threatening to sanction a federation for not sending thier full team and not saying a word to the other federation who did the same thing is not the right thing to do.

Never heard of removing an unfair advantage as a punishment before but to each his own.

Originally posted by rdl674

I dont see the point in helping someone who doesnt want to help themselves. IF the own Jamaican Sports ministry cuts back funding 60%, why should we or anyone else help them out. You have to help yourself first.

It will reflect in their play. Their punushment will be a decline in quality from the team that finished ahead of Mexico in 1998.

Originally posted by rdl674

They do have a role. But use the confederation events to progress. I dont see why we should water down the WC or WCQ anymore than they have to be


The Confederation limits the number of CONCACAF teams in the Gold Cup and invites two guests. This is the world cup and if teams like Germany, Italy and Brazil have to play minnows to get there, I don't see why Mexico is too good to play them.

Originally posted by rdl674

In 1970, Mexico hosted the Cup. Some lucky CONCACAF team was able to participate. In 1986, Mexico hosted the cup. Some lucky CONCACAF team was able to participate (Canada). That was Canada's first and last World Cup appearance. In 1999, when we hosted the COnfederation;s Cup, some lucky CONCACAF team was able to participate. Mexico opened the door to Copa America, and as a result it opened the door to the US, Honduras, and Costa Rica.


And in 1974 a crappy Mexican team finishes behind minnows Haiti and T & T, in 1982 Honduras and Minnow El Salvador go through while mighty Mexico manages one win in a group including Canada, Cuba and Haiti as well as the two that went finished ahead of Mexico. And in 1990 a cheating Mexico...well we won't go there, the penalty was too harsh IMHO.

Originally posted by rdl674

Where are your minnows? Ill tell you what their role is... thier role is to let the ones who know how to run and operate the confederation do so. Instead they are a burden. They gang up on the on the bigger fish and as a result, we get no where. Do we expect some leniency and some seniority... damn right we expect it. what have they done? Mexico gave you the 2 most exciting World Cups to date. The US grossed the most money up to that date. You dont bite the hand that feeds you. You are bteer off letting them build some hope going into the second round or even the semifinals... instead of crushing them in the first round.


You know its Mexico right? I mean its not like we are talking about Brazil.

Originally posted by rdl674

Crappy fields? One of your players tears his ACL in a pot hole....Mexico-Panama Or how about asking for better playing conditions... then the CONCACAF president ask that they had to provide proof. Then you send them video and photographs of rock pastures and dirt (thats rights DIRT) sprayed with Green paint. And as a result... the President gets mad because that picture happens to be in one of your own stadiums in T&T in your own country. And as a result, the president takes it personal and says that he will allow the game on that field and that considering he is from Trinidad & Tobago, that he will root for T&T and give them all the advantge they can get. He even promoted and marketed the game with commercials promoting violence...

Crappy Play? Mexico spanking T&T 7-1. T&T player gets frustrated and intentionally breaks our best players leg....which eventually cuased his European club to let go of his services.


A T & T team which finished ahead of Mexico in the semis. The same Mexico which in World Cup 2002, their star player, arguably the best in CONCACAF, gets angry and friustrated about loosing and head butts an opposing player. Crappy play isn't only limited to the "minnows".

Torn ACLs happen no matter the field. Arsenal had two happen last year. And Chelsea hosted a EPL game on a dirt field this year. Note thast T&T was one of the final six, and is a country that finished ahead of Mexico in the semi's. Still think it is all a red herring.

[Daniel from Montréal]

Originally posted by PumaBear
Sorry Daniel. You don't get it. The issue is that we don't want these teams as our "opponents".

I DO get it. You're the ones going on and on about how you should be privileged over all nations in CONCACAF, yet have a federation who lacks the political savy to actually get people on their side. Your players all stuck up in pre-Libertadores competitions? Moving. Really, it is...

You don't CHOOSE your opponents in WCQ. Simple, eh?

[LMvCP]

Originally posted by Gordon
Never heard of removing an unfair advantage as a punishment before but to each his own.

where have you been?

It will reflect in their play. Their punushment will be a decline in quality from the team that finished ahead of Mexico in 1998.

I do recall Mexico finishing first and with 3 games to spare.

The Confederation limits the number of CONCACAF teams in the Gold Cup and invites two guests. This is the world cup and if teams like Germany, Italy and Brazil have to play minnows to get there, I don't see why Mexico is too good to play them.

The Gold Cup may be a 12-16 team tournament, but there is a qualifying process. Central America uses the Copa UNCAF. THe Carribean uses a similar tournament to qualify to the Gold Cup. Now, if they want to use a North American type qualifier where Canada, Mexico, and the US knock each other out.... so be it. But CONCACAF is not that stupid.

Brazil may have to play Venezuela, but having a 30+ or 40+ team confederation is different than having a 10 team confederation. We cant have thier type of qualifying format. It would take for ever. Europe has thier own which still has its flaws...And to ensure that a powerhouse team doesnt get left out, they have a second round between the second best team of each group. And still, teams like Holland are left out.

And whther we like it or not, every federation does have to take into consideration UEFA. CONMEBOL wants to host its Copa America alongside Euro Cup so that South American national team players can participate in thier confederational Cup.

And Spain and germany and Italy do have to play the Lichensteins and the Luxumburgs, but in a 8-10 game round robein tournament with other teams.

And in 1974 a crappy Mexican team finishes behind minnows Haiti and T & T, in 1982 Honduras and Minnow El Salvador go through while mighty Mexico manages one win in a group including Canada, Cuba and Haiti as well as the two that went finished ahead of Mexico. And in 1990 a cheating Mexico...well we won't go there, the penalty was too harsh IMHO.

:rolleyes: what have they done and what have we done. getting spanked 11-1 in World Cup play..Mexico has paid thier dues and have taken thier fair share of ass whooping in the past... but developed on thier own 2 feet without putting the burden on others. Thats the difference. Its like Warner and CONCACAF not supporting the FMF when they wanted to participate in the Copa America. After we paid the dough and started to do well (2 time runner up and 2 time 3rd place), Warner and CONCACAF wants to take our ticket and give it to CONCACAF. They even want to take out ticket to the Copa Libertadores... events that we paid for.

You know its Mexico right? I mean its not like we are talking about Brazil.

And not too many teams are up there with Brazil. But like it or not buddy, Mexico is a team to look out for at the world level.

A T & T team which finished ahead of Mexico in the semis.

Mexico also qualified first. Thanks

The same Mexico which in World Cup 2002, their star player, arguably the best in CONCACAF, gets angry and friustrated about loosing and head butts an opposing player. Crappy play isn't only limited to the "minnows".

head butts... the intention to hurt was not there.

Torn ACLs happen no matter the field. Arsenal had two happen last year. And Chelsea hosted a EPL game on a dirt field this year. Note thast T&T was one of the final six, and is a country that finished ahead of Mexico in the semi's. Still think it is all a red herring.

Jesus!!!!! You can tear your ACL on a threadmill, but CMON.... rock pastures and sprayed dirt fields... Just think of Real Madrid paying 50 million for a player from the Carrieban and having him infured because of a pothole . Mr Apologist.

[LMvCP]

Originally posted by Daniel from Montréal

I DO get it.

NO, you dont get it. Get yourself a league and stop depending on FMF's money and American leagues and Universities to develop your players... and then maybe you will get it. Help yourself first. dont expect it.

You're the ones going on and on about how you should be privileged over all nations in CONCACAF,

Mr. grateful, we give you WC 86, and this is the thanks we get. The CSA doesnt even pay a fraction of what we pay to CONCACAF.

yet have a federation who lacks the political savy to actually get people on their side.

Well, when you get a bunch of freeloaders who have a vote... they will out vote us

And thats stupidity on our part. Not only do we offer our services and billfolds to build up the Central American leagues, we now have to take care of the tiny islands.

Your players all stuck up in pre-Libertadores competitions? Moving. Really, it is...

Do you even have a league yet?

start talking when you get a league. Our teams have done very weel for themselves in Copa Libertaodres....

You don't CHOOSE your opponents in WCQ. Simple, eh?

We cant. The free loaders can

[Daniel from Montréal]

Good job, rdl!

You've managed to ignore ALL the points I bring up and slam the CSA and Canadian soccer instead. Is that to say that your arguments wouldn't stand if I was "Daniel" and no specified location?

And HOW are the "freeloaders" choosing their opponents exactly? The whole point is that anyone can play anyone, to a certain extent. Teams that have performed well in past WCQ (such as US, CR, Mexico and other Hex finishers) have a (deserved) advantage.

This is the best and fairest qualifying system for CONCACAF (it's still called that, right? Not the Mexican Confederation Who Lets Other Countries Tag Along Because It's So Great?). If Mexico doesn't like it, well, quite simply, "ain't nothin' they can do" (short of pulling out).

This type of attitude is why Mexico can't get things their way in CONCACAF: they play the bratty kid.

[LMvCP]

Originally posted by Daniel from Montréal
Good job, rdl!

You've managed to ignore ALL the points I bring up and slam the CSA and Canadian soccer instead. Is that to say that your arguments wouldn't stand if I was "Daniel" and no specified location?

And what point is that? That each federation should be on equal footing? In an utopian confederation maybe... but when other feds dish out more, even when they didnt have money to dish (like in the past 60s & 70s), Mexico still tried to on thier own.

Other than the name, the examples you have given, and prevoius post, does indicate a little


And HOW are the "freeloaders" choosing their opponents exactly? The whole point is that anyone can play anyone, to a certain extent. Teams that have performed well in past WCQ (such as US, CR, Mexico and other Hex finishers) have a (deserved) advantage.

The FMF is under constant criticism from the Warner administration that we dont do enough for the others. They want us to play them on a more regular basis and build for them. We dont want to play them on a more regular basis. How can we get to Brazil's stature if we have to worry about Haiti? South America got rid of Suriname? whooo thats a load off South America's back. Is there a rendeveau point that I need to know about? When is enough? At one point are we in the clear from "our" duty to build the rest of CONCACAF without getting criticized for wanting to progress? When the MLS starts participating in the Copa Libertadores? When Haiti has there own Aztec Stadium? When T&T pay multi million dollar salaries? WHen Nicaraguan have thier own US bases Network to promote thier league and news? When the US gets another WC? When Canada gets a WC?

This is the best and fairest qualifying system for CONCACAF (it's still called that, right? Not the Mexican Confederation Who Lets Other Countries Tag Along Because It's So Great?). If Mexico doesn't like it, well, quite simply, "ain't nothin' they can do" (short of pulling out).

Sure its the best and fairest qualifying for you.

This type of attitude is why Mexico can't get things their way in CONCACAF: they play the bratty kid.

Bratty kid? I thought in order to be a brat, you had to be given everything? No one gave us anything. We had to work and pay our way. We dont tag along other federations and see what they get so we can try to steal from them.

I dont expect you to understand, considering you are on the recieving side.

[Daniel from Montréal]

Ok, then, since you seem to have all the answers, what would a (more) fair an equitable solution be, without being convulated like previous editions (how many prelim games were there in 2000 before the semis and in how many sub-series and sub-groups? ugh)?

P.S.: And as for being on the "receiving" end (i after e except before c btw), Canada doesn't really improve its situation from 2000, having an added 2 games. We participate in the Gold Cup (which Interforever oversees, money-wise) and don't participate in any CONCACAF club competitions (mainly because the CSA is pretty incompetent, but that's another can of worms), so I fail to see how Canada's one of the aforementionned "freeloaders".

PPS: No one forces you to play CONCACAF nations in friendlies. And sending your best clubs into confederation tournaments is seen as, oh, I don't know... normal!?

[TopDogg]

Originally posted by rdl674
[B]I dont expect you to understand, considering you are on the recieving side.
What the hell are we (Canada) receiving from Mexico? Luis Hernandez laughing at Carlo Corazzin when he gets kicked in the nuts?

Why bother asking questions if you don't intend to let anyone who oppses your views answer them?

[El CHarro_NEgro....]

Originally posted by Daniel from Montréal

........
PPS: No one forces you to play CONCACAF nations in friendlies. And sending your best clubs into confederation tournaments is seen as, oh, I don't know... normal!?

If Mexico, on an official WCQ, ask the host playing field to meet the official conditions, isn't Normal to our Confederation to support us? After all, its our right, isn't it?

Isn't having a rotate Confederation Cup also Normal? If Dominican Republic can host a Pan-American games why not a small tournament like the Gold Cup?

If USA and Mexico send alternative squads to the Gold Cup, and Mexico is the only punished by that, is Normal? Isn't the team's coach the only one who can decide which players to call any way?

If Mexico get invited to Copa America, and we open the doors to other Concacaf's teams like USA, Costa Rica, Honduras and even Canada, isn't Normal for our Confederation to support us instead of trying with any resource to stop us?

If we pay millions of dollars to participate on Copa Libertadores, and by performing well on it,
we open the option, first to get Concacaf's teams invited to the Merconorte Cup, and then, the option to build a Super Intercontinental Club's competition with the best teams of the Continent (Including MLS, Central American, Caribbean and any future Canadian national league teams) with the winner playing the UEFA cup champion. Isn't normal to our own Confederation to heavily support that option instead of screwing all? But not stopping there, but also trying to stop Mexico's participation on Copa Libertadores?

Isn't protection the Confederation's players Normal? Like saying: anyone wh B]intentionally[/B] breaks other player's leg get more than just 3 games
sanction?

In what way does CONCACAF is supporting Mexico? Isn't normal to our own confederation to support the grow of each nation?

[OBartleby]

I have been reading these posts with interest. They seem to typify the friction between the “haves” and “have-nots” we find in CONCACAF. I do, however, tend to side with rdl674 in the respect that each of the established nations should not have to bear the financial burdens of the minnow nations when it comes to travel, lodging and all that. I’m not sure I see exactly how each of the established nations would be paying for the development of the minnows, as some have directly and indirectly claimed. Maybe rdl674 can shed some light on how exactly FMF would be paying for the development of the minnows.

And while it is undoubtedly true that Mexico has pulled itself up by its own proverbial bootstraps, it is equally true that their success was helped along by hosting two World Cups. The US Soccer Federation experienced a similar bulging of the coffers when we hosted WC ’94.

Daniel, the Canadian who is posting a more extreme opposition to rdl674, seems to be showing his socialist colors – or maybe because he has grown up in a socialist nation he doesn’t realize the degree to which the “fairness” and “equity” principles of socialism have affected his worldview, including how soccer should be treated. Eh?

I do think that our region’s playing ground should be level and fair, at least in principle, but I don’t think that this should happen at the expense of other nations. When this happens, it’s not fairness at all but rather an economic version of the USA’s Affirmative Action, and in the states we have another word for that program which the auto-censor will convert to asterisks. ‘Nuff said.

[cmonaco]

Originally posted by rdl674
How can we get to Brazil's stature if we have to worry about Haiti? South America got rid of Suriname? whooo thats a load off South America's back. Is there a rendeveau point that I need to know about? When is enough? At one point are we in the clear from "our" duty to build the rest of CONCACAF without getting criticized for wanting to progress? When the MLS starts participating in the Copa Libertadores? When Haiti has there own Aztec Stadium? When T&T pay multi million dollar salaries? WHen Nicaraguan have thier own US bases Network to promote thier league and news? When the US gets another WC? When Canada gets a WC?

You should be more worried about getting up to the stature of, say, the USA before you are worried about competing with Brazil. Small steps. ;)

Seriously, though. Do you really think this qualification system is indicative of a CONCACAF conspiracy to hold Mexico back? Mexico has no duty to CONCACAF other than the duty every other member nation has to their confederation: to compete fairly against the rest of the confederation in all serious competitions. Mexico's progress is in no way inversely related to building the rest of CONCACAF. Your problem is you at CONMEBOL as a model, and CONMEBOL is a very unusual confederation, as it has very few teams who are all very competetive. No other confederation on the globe is like this. In every other confedeation, you have the big-time nations competing against the minnows, and they don't complain, they just go out and win.

Prove that Mexico, Costa Rica, and the USA are heads and shoulders above every other team in the region over the next few years, and maybe next time the powers that be will decide they will get byes for the first round... Or else forfeit the away matches to island nations and see if you can still win your first round group.

[OBartleby]

Originally posted by cmonaco
You should be more worried about getting up to the stature of, say, the USA before you are worried about competing with Brazil. Small steps. ;)
Let's not forget Costa Rica.... [cough]Azteca[cough, cough]

Prove that Mexico, Costa Rica, and the USA are heads and shoulders above every other team in the region over the next few years, and maybe next time the powers that be will decide they will get byes for the first round...
Perhaps a slew of 20-0 score lines will take care of that. As it should.