Use continental cups as world cup qualifiers?

[vmax71]

What do people think about using continental championsships such as the euro championship, copa america and the gold cup where lets say the top two , or in europe, the top four finishers are automatically given places in the follwing world cup. wouldn't this drastically cut down on the number of matches the players would have to compete in and logically allow them to rest and prevent burnout. Or is it just a money thing and qualifiers mean more money in federation pockets. It seems so logical. that's why I think it will never be considered.

[IncaEnclave]

sounds good...makes to much sense though :)....would be funny to see Canada in the World Cup since they won the Gold Cup a few years ago....also would give credence to the confederation championships since some teams (outside from Europe) don't send their best teams anymore...also would end the debate of combining the Gold Cup and Copa America since the gold cup would be given more attention if automatic World Cup spots were up for grabs

[Crowdie]

Makes huge sense.

Crowdie.

[jhawkinva]

Sounds good for Europe since most of the teams would be quality teams once you reach the final four. But, with CONCACAF you could have teams like Martinique qualifying for the World Cup if they get hot. Also, you would have to eliminate guest teams.

[vmax71]

Originally posted by jhawkinva
Sounds good for Europe since most of the teams would be quality teams once you reach the final four. But, with CONCACAF you could have teams like Martinique qualifying for the World Cup if they get hot. Also, you would have to eliminate guest teams.



That's why for the gold cup only the finalists or just perhaps the champion should get an automatic berth. Let's just say that if there was a world cup next year and the gold cup offered a spot in it to the champion, the interest from everybody would skyrocket - imagine the scene in azteca for the final! It's a win-win for everybody involved, the players- less matches, fans - interest in non world cup tournaments, and the organizers fo the tournaments themselves - lots of money. Don't you think the game against el salvador yesterday would have been played with a "slight" bit more intensity if a world cup berth was the end game?

[worldsoccer-Jeff]

Originally posted by jhawkinva
Sounds good for Europe since most of the teams would be quality teams once you reach the final four. But, with CONCACAF you could have teams like Martinique qualifying for the World Cup if they get hot. Also, you would have to eliminate guest teams.

Martinique is not a full FIFA member and cannot compeat in the World Cup or World Cup Qualifing

[Roehl Sybing]

Fewer tournaments = fewer fixtures = less money for national associations and confederations.

I think having the Gold Cup determine WC qualifying is a great idea. It would certainly make it a lot more important. But it's not in the best interests of the organizations involved.

[jhawkinva]

This would give the U.S. and Mexico a huge advantage. I'm sure the smaller countries would complain about having to play on the road.

I think giving the winner in the Gold Cup a berth would be great , but I wouldn't hand it to anything lower.

[worldsoccer-Jeff]

I say give the winner of the Confeds Cup a spot in the World Cup.

The Confeds Cup is made up of the winners of the Continental cups, right? So this way every team has two ways to make it into the finals and if any confederation complains about their number of teams in the WC Finals, then FIFA could say "Hey, have your champion win the Confeds Cup and you got an extra spot"

Kinda like saying winning the Gold Cup, the OFC Nations Cup, or the Asian Nations Cup are good enough to get you in the World Cup, but you can get into the tornament that can, if you win.


So based on the last result, France would already be in the world cup and UEFA would still have 13 places to play for.

[Crowdie]

Different confederations may suit this idea better. UEFA, for example, continuously complains.... and they compain about the number of games their countries are expected to play as well :-) This idea could work for them or at least it might make them moan less :-) CONCACAF may decide that it doesn't work for them and they will have a separate World Cup qualification tournament. It is simply an idea.

Crowdie.

[Sykotyk]

Reasons to support this idea:

Fewer matches means less burnout by the top players in each country. Also shuts up the clubs with regard to player usage. It would make the continental championships mean something (outside of UEFA). And, remember, if the Gold Cup mattered, Canada wouldn't be winning it.

Reasons to be against it:

The continental titles are played in set countries. Where World Cup qualifying is general home-and-home between all opponents in whatever group you are drawn into.

Sykotyk

[Roehl Sybing]

Originally posted by Sykotyk
Reasons to be against it:

The continental titles are played in set countries. Where World Cup qualifying is general home-and-home between all opponents in whatever group you are drawn into.
Home-and-home only matters if you're playing a large number of fixtures, which is 10 in the final phase in CONCACAF. You spend anywhere between two weeks and two months licking your wounds from the last crushing away loss, that's when playing in front of a home crowd counts. If it's a real tournament, like the Gold Cup or Euro, you have fewer games in a much shorter amount of time. Now endurance becomes a factor. That's when you find the true team.

[Chesco United]

Last I heard, in 2006, the African Cup of Nations will double as World Cup qualifying. Guess the World Cup draw will be a little later.

[prk166]

Originally posted by vmax71
What do people think about using continental championsships such as the euro championship, copa america and the gold cup where lets say the top two , or in europe, the top four finishers are automatically given places in the follwing world cup. wouldn't this drastically cut down on the number of matches the players would have to compete in and logically allow them to rest and prevent burnout. Or is it just a money thing and qualifiers mean more money in federation pockets. It seems so logical. that's why I think it will never be considered.

Overall, I think this would be a good thing to do. I don't think it would necessarily mean less money in some pockets since the format of many would have to be expanded. I'd like to see it for CONCACAF for sure with so teams like Jamaice, the US, Canada, and others having their best players overseas.

[beachesl]

Been arguing this for years, but most people seem against the idea. Looked hopeful last year when FIFA initially gave CAF a green light to use their January 2005 African Nations Cup as a WC qualifiers, but then FIFA did a turnaround trash , as usual.

It is the only answer to escalating fixture congestion and international/club problem. It is as clear as day.

It would also make screwed up joke "tournaments" like Gold Cup actually worthwhile....with real groups and only members of Concanaf (the current CONCANAF WCQ proposal means 20 to 22 games to qualify!). Teams like Canada would actually have a chance to field a full strength team for once (their Euro clubs got them by the short and curlies).

[Oscar]

Different confederations may suit this idea better. UEFA, for example, continuously complains

I'd say it would suit the lesser confederations better, seeing as they need to give importance to their continental championship to generate interest. Something which isn't the case for the European Championship.

So.....

Use continental cups as world cup qualifiers?

No

[beachesl]

Originally posted by Chesco United
Last I heard, in 2006, the African Cup of Nations will double as World Cup qualifying. Guess the World Cup draw will be a little later.

Not quite true. Last year FIFA gave an initial green light to CAF for the January, 2006, African Nations Cup in Egypt, but then changed their mind. They have approved that the qualifiers for the 2006 ANC (starting this November, before the 2004 ANC in Tunisa!, which was only reasonable way to go given fixture congestion), will serve as the initial rounds of the qualifiers for the 2006 WC as well
(top 2 of each final group for 2006 ANC will go on to be in one of 5 Groups of 4, along with 5 qualifiers in Kor/****** +ANC host Egypt, only sane way to go, given what FIFA will allow).

[Prenn]

Nah, couldn't see it working in Europe. Some teams would end playing meaningful competition just once every 4 years. There's also the problem that the hosts automatically qualify and that 16 into 14 doesn't go.

[TOTC]

This premise is asinine. This is only done in field hockey (and you know where that sport relates vs. soccer!).

You MUST have home national team matches that mean something for WC qualifying. That encourages and grows the sport in each and every country.

Take CONCACAF. It has six of the most amazing "home field advantage" stadia in the world: Azteca, Saprissa, The Office, Mazatenango, San Pedro Sula, and (when it is 28 degrees) Columbus Crew Stadium.

All that goes out the window if the CONCACAF Gold Cup yields three WC bids.

The lack of home matches for WC and Olympic qualifying is exactly what is wrong with field hockey. And certain other sports!

[argentine soccer fan]

Two reasons to say no:

1) It would be a huge unfair advantage in favor of the countries that hosts the continental cups.

2) The fans of all the countries that don't host the continental cups will not have a chance to see their own national teams at home.

Next idea?