Will Australia qualify for the World Cup?

[Auxodium]

Look maybe for people in Sydney they don't (that is not Australia by the way) You should see it in PERTH. Where there is a large expat population all soccernuts. yes afl is dominant here but is being challenged by Perth Glory. Everybody talks about them they have been since 1996. Soccer is BIG over here so don't judge the rest of Australia because of what happens in the east.

As for what we REALLY should talk about yes they are 49th in the world that is because of lack of regular friendlies. The only regular matches we play were Confederation Cup tournaments but we screwed it up with a C-team. we have only played 8 games over 2 years and that is shocking. The more we play the better we get. That is why the US-of-A are 10th because they cream the carrabean sides and Canada (sorry) and then they play Mexico and qualify. That also boosts the rankings. But Australia are the strongest in the OFC that is true but it isn't just for Australia. At least Fiji, PNG, Cook Islands and American Samoa have a better chance of competing. They now have a purpose in the qualifiers. the more games we play we will rise the ladder. Really i think Australia and New Zealand should be in the top 20 but sadly they don't play often and Confederation Cups come 2 years so that isn't enough. The OFC has deserved the spot because afterall they are a CONFEDERATION that hasn't been given a spot ever. By the way the old system was not fair at all. Australia won all their games and lost 1. Yes i know that one mattered the most but that was 1 loss compared to Uruguay who lost many to finish 5th to play us.

[skipshady]

Originally posted by Stinkey Turner
Nations do not get automatic qualifiers, Confederations do...Australia is the closest to any nation getting automatic entry.I couldn't have put it any better.
Originally posted by Glorious_Fan
Australia won all their games and lost 1. Yes i know that one mattered the most but that was 1 loss compared to Uruguay who lost many to finish 5th to play us. But if Uruguay lost all those games, then Australia should have beaten them easily, no? Or maybe it means that the best OFC can offer isn't as good as Conmebol's worst qualifier.

Look, suppose you went around beating up 5 year old kids and taking their lunch money. And another guy, let's call him Uruguay, went around fighting adults for money. He won some, he lost some.
Now, suppose you fight Uruguay and Uruguay beats you up. Are you going to say that you deserve Uruguay's lunch money because Uruguay lost a few of his fights while you haven't lost a single fight to a 5 year old?

[Crowdie]

The OFC never asked for a handout and it hasn't been given it. The automatic qualification of one OFC team to the 2006 World Cup is a hand up in an area where other sports dominate. FIFA's role includes promoting soccer in areas where it is still developing. That is what FIFA has done by granting the OFC one automatic qualification berth. If the OFC do not use this to develop soccer in the Pacific Island nations then there is nothing stopping FIFA from taking it away from the OFC. If you are a Samoan child and you see no Samoans playing in the soccer World Cup but you see the Samoan rugby team doing well at the rugby World Cup which sport are you going to play? The big task for the OFC is to make the Nations Cup a serious tournament with more than three countries (Australia, Fiji and New Zealand) really challenging for it. If this happens then the OFC World Cup qualifying tournament will be just as successful.

Crowdie.

[Auxodium]

Originally posted by Crowdie
The OFC never asked for a handout and it hasn't been given it. The automatic qualification of one OFC team to the 2006 World Cup is a hand up in an area where other sports dominate. FIFA's role includes promoting soccer in areas where it is still developing. That is what FIFA has done by granting the OFC one automatic qualification berth. If the OFC do not use this to develop soccer in the Pacific Island nations then there is nothing stopping FIFA from taking it away from the OFC. If you are a Samoan child and you see no Samoans playing in the soccer World Cup but you see the Samoan rugby team doing well at the rugby World Cup which sport are you going to play? The big task for the OFC is to make the Nations Cup a serious tournament with more than three countries (Australia, Fiji and New Zealand) really challenging for it. If this happens then the OFC World Cup qualifying tournament will be just as successful.

Crowdie.

Couldn't agree with u more there crowdie. This is to promote the game and to raise awareness in the Pacific and give them a realistic target of competing with the big boys. What can I say I can't fault you on this one Crowdie!

[pololo]

Originally posted by Germanshepherd
What means C-team? Wasn´t it a B-team?

And a loss in a friendly can happen any given time.

Whatever, New Zealand isn`t that bad, they had a draw against Scotland 2 weeks ago.

Wow a draw with Scotland

[Germanshepherd]

Originally posted by pololo
Wow a draw with Scotland

Yes.

The same result like Germany!

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by pololo
Wow a draw with Scotland

The important thing about the Scotland game was that it happened. When Soccer New Zealand asked the European nations for games where was Sweden? They kept quiet. It is easy to criticise the smaller nations but the true sign of the sporting nation is one that helps others. Points to Scotland and the United States.

Crowdie.

[Auxodium]

I agree with you crowdie. The same with the Socceroos. We asked Argentina, Portugal, Spain, USA, Nigeria, Uruguay and South Africa but only 2 have been confirmed which was the England and Ireland Friendlies. SoccerAustralia and SoccerNew Zealand make every effort to arrange matches to play against world class opposition and to practice to be up there in the top class of football. But other FA's refuse to make an effort which is dissapointing. My suggestion of a 4 nation cup in Australia and possibly New Zealand would be great. I remember the Optus World Series where the Socceroos would play 3 teams they invited for a small competition but it fell apart for some reason.

More match experience means better quality. That is what we need.

But Crowdie remember we beat Scotland 2-0 ;)
It was a good game and hats off to them!

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by Glorious_Fan
But Crowdie remember we beat Scotland 2-0 ;)
It was a good game and hats off to them!

At this time the Socceroos would win an ANZAC game (assuming that your first team turns up) and I believe that the All Whites will be up against it in the WC 2006 qualifiers. I certainly haven't written them off but the odds are with you.

The WC 2010 qualifiers are a different story. There are some exceptional youth players in New Zealand and with the Kingz being in the new Aussie league, Soccer New Zealand redesigning the National League here in New Zealand and a growing number of Kiwis playing in foreign tournaments I believe that we will have a good team. I'll ring you after we beat you - your shout for the beer :-)

Crowdie.

PS Good luck against the Irish in Dublin - I think you guys might need it.

[LotharDSM]

Dammit, put your top two teams "after competition" (AUS and NZL for those that ain't watchin') into the AFC mix after they've decided on their top 6 teams. There's 8 teams in a 2x4 playoff (one OFC team in each bracket) and then the AFC/OFC play to allow the top 4 to advance. To allow a playoff post 'dat, why not the #5 and #6 AFC/OFC teams have a playoff against the CONCACAF and CAF finisher that don't make the auto berths?

AUS, if you can't beat the 5th runner up out of SA or 4th place out of AFC, why would you beyatch about not going to the WC with the last 32 spots playing a tourney? You wanna get hammered like the Saudis or Chinese?

Great job on beating England, though, to make a point. You have a lot of individuals playing in Europe, but can it compare to a World Cup spirit when players (like Kewell) aren't willing to put in the effort to make sure their team makes it through to the finals? If they only want the glory games then tough shiznit, everyone else had to make it through qualifiers to...

[JerzyRebel]

What's with his, "Stop posting on our board" talk. Last time I checked, BigSoccer was an American based message board.

As for this crap about the U.S. never having beaten Australia, when is the last time we played? The best recent case for comparison can be made by last year's results against Uruguay. With a World Cup berth on the line Australia lost to Uruguay. The United States beat Uruguay's World Cup squad in the run up to the World Cup. I'm not providing this as evidence that the U.S. would definitely beat Australia, but to point out that any of you kangaroos who swear your team would spank the U.S is drunk.

Also, I love hearing all the bragging about how Australia is just swimming in European league-caliber players. All that talent and a joke of a confederation and you STILL couldn't qualify for the World Cup. After you're done beating the Tonga's and Papua New Guineas of the world by 20 goals let's see what you do in 2006 in Germany, especially since you'll likely be a C-rated team in the draw.

[um_chili]

Originally posted by Crowdie
The OFC never asked for a handout and it hasn't been given it. The automatic qualification of one OFC team to the 2006 World Cup is a hand up in an area where other sports dominate. FIFA's role includes promoting soccer in areas where it is still developing. That is what FIFA has done by granting the OFC one automatic qualification berth. If the OFC do not use this to develop soccer in the Pacific Island nations then there is nothing stopping FIFA from taking it away from the OFC. If you are a Samoan child and you see no Samoans playing in the soccer World Cup but you see the Samoan rugby team doing well at the rugby World Cup which sport are you going to play? The big task for the OFC is to make the Nations Cup a serious tournament with more than three countries (Australia, Fiji and New Zealand) really challenging for it. If this happens then the OFC World Cup qualifying tournament will be just as successful.

Crowdie.

A typically cogent point by Crowdie makes what is the best (really, only) possible defense of OFC's playoff spot. But I would assert that the difference between the current system and the one LotharDSM and I have both proposed on this thread is negligible. In fact, if you put the two ANZAC teams in with AFC you might get more buzz b/c they'd play more games against better competition. It would also help out the Samoas and Fijis because it would increase their chances of making progress in WC qualifying (perhaps they could upset an ANZAC team and get to play a number of games against different, higher quality opponents).

But "not a handout"? Unconvincing. The highest ranked teams in OFC are #49 and 51. Every other team is uncompetitive. Giving a direct spot to OFC would be like giving a direct spot to the winner of Jamaica v. Trinidad & Tobago (#s 48 and 52), or to the winner of Finland v. Zimbabwe (#s 45 and 55). Perhaps any of those teams will qualify, but to guarantee that one of them will is far too generous. Stick 'em in with AFC. Make them earn it.

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by um_chili
But "not a handout"? Unconvincing. The highest ranked teams in OFC are #49 and 51. Every other team is uncompetitive. Giving a direct spot to OFC would be like giving a direct spot to the winner of Jamaica v. Trinidad & Tobago (#s 48 and 52), or to the winner of Finland v. Zimbabwe (#s 45 and 55). Perhaps any of those teams will qualify, but to guarantee that one of them will is far too generous. Stick 'em in with AFC. Make them earn it.

We'll swap you. OFC gives up its automatic qualification place in exchange for regular home and away games for the OFC teams against the full strength sides of the best European, South American and African sides. These games will be a regular occurance and all the OFC teams will have access to these games.

Crowdie.

[desertfox2]

Oh btw, AFC will never let the OFC top 2 teams play in their qualifying system, so you all can drop that. I don't understand why noone brings up the point that you can have Australia play in that 6 team group at the end of qualifying (like I mentioned earlier in this thread). That would be the best option.

[Auxodium]

Originally posted by JerzyRebel
What's with his, "Stop posting on our board" talk. Last time I checked, BigSoccer was an American based message board.

As for this crap about the U.S. never having beaten Australia, when is the last time we played? The best recent case for comparison can be made by last year's results against Uruguay. With a World Cup berth on the line Australia lost to Uruguay. The United States beat Uruguay's World Cup squad in the run up to the World Cup. I'm not providing this as evidence that the U.S. would definitely beat Australia, but to point out that any of you kangaroos who swear your team would spank the U.S is drunk.

Also, I love hearing all the bragging about how Australia is just swimming in European league-caliber players. All that talent and a joke of a confederation and you STILL couldn't qualify for the World Cup. After you're done beating the Tonga's and Papua New Guineas of the world by 20 goals let's see what you do in 2006 in Germany, especially since you'll likely be a C-rated team in the draw.

We beat the USA in 99 and we have never been beaten by the way so that isn't "crap" Also we did beat Uruguay but lost away so it was the goals that decided Australia qualifying. We have never been beaten by them (USA) so write to US Soccer to arrange a friendly :P And not in LA coz that is where the last game was played (we drew 0-0)

[Auxodium]

Originally posted by desertfox2
Oh btw, AFC will never let the OFC top 2 teams play in their qualifying system, so you all can drop that. I don't understand why noone brings up the point that you can have Australia play in that 6 team group at the end of qualifying (like I mentioned earlier in this thread). That would be the best option.

Yes that would be a workable solution but remember why Australia and New Zealand are not in the AFC. The other AFC members constantly refused our entry so we made our own to incorporate the Pacific who were also refused. It is always mentioned that we should try to join the AFC but they keep rejecting it.

[JerzyRebel]

Originally posted by Glorious_Fan
We beat the USA in 99 and we have never been beaten by the way so that isn't "crap" Also we did beat Uruguay but lost away so it was the goals that decided Australia qualifying. We have never been beaten by them (USA) so write to US Soccer to arrange a friendly :P And not in LA coz that is where the last game was played (we drew 0-0)

Way to post some false information there "Glorious" Fan. Australia and the U.S. have only played two national team matches EVER. Aussies won 1-0 in 1992 and there was a scoreless draw in 1998. We didn't play in 1999. The U.S. played and beat New Zealand 2-1 in 1999 in case that is what you had in mind, or were you thinking of the time you beat American Samoa?

Oh, you Kangaroos are so right, you OWN us. Give me freakin break. Can't wait to see you guys in the World Cup in 2006 in real matches against teams slightly better than Tonga and Papua-New Guinea.

[lollies]

I can't wait to see a strengthened Papua New Guinean or Tongan side causing an upset and beating the US team in the future due to the improved competion in the OFC and access to more quality games, all coming from the decision to give the OFC direct qualification.
( lol It might happen, you never know)

The original topic of this thread was will Australia qualify for the 2006 world cup? not whether the OFC deserved direct qualification ( a lot of Aussies and Kiwi's didn't agree with this anyway, but we’ll take it) which has been done to death. What's done is done.

If Australia has their best side for the qualifiers then we should qualify but the Kiwi's will be giving it their all and you can never discount them. I’m just looking forward to it.

[Auxodium]

Originally posted by JerzyRebel
Way to post some false information there "Glorious" Fan. Australia and the U.S. have only played two national team matches EVER. Aussies won 1-0 in 1992 and there was a scoreless draw in 1998. We didn't play in 1999. The U.S. played and beat New Zealand 2-1 in 1999 in case that is what you had in mind, or were you thinking of the time you beat American Samoa?

Oh, you Kangaroos are so right, you OWN us. Give me freakin break. Can't wait to see you guys in the World Cup in 2006 in real matches against teams slightly better than Tonga and Papua-New Guinea.

Ok so i said 99 not 98 but the USA have not beaten the Socceroos. I have my almanac and that is what it says. I misquoted the last game we played. Sheesh!

I didn't mention New Zealand so where did that come from? You tell me coz i never typed that in my post! By the way we have played more than 2 but they were not sanctioned by FIFA for some reason.

Can we cool down a bit peoples? Rest this debate. That is for the rivalries section

[JerzyRebel]

Originally posted by Glorious_Fan
We beat the USA in 99

Sorry Glorious, but you didn't just have the year wrong, you had the result wrong as well. If you're going to make arguments for your team being better try to keep the factual errors down, otherwise some people might start thinking you're lying to make your argument sound better.

To brag about never having lost to us when we've played once in the past 13 years is bit week. That was the reason for my hostile post.

And to clarify, I never said Australia sucks. You guys obviously have some serious talent. I just think people crossed the line when they start claiming Australia is better when the U.S is the one qualifying for the World Cup out of a much tougher region every year.

I'm willing to bet that this friendly will happen before the next World Cup.