[jmeissen0]

Jack Warner has said that the federation will have 3.5 or 4 slots. This was reported in the Edmonton Sun, a Canadian paper, this morning.

http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonSports/e...1-07-0087.html

[desertfox2]

Interesting. I still think though that the CONCACAF should only get 3 1/2 spots, not 4. I think we should give teams like Honduras, Jamaica, and by this article Canada at least a chance to qualify in some sort of playoff series. However, 4 is too many right now. If CONCACAF has another good showing in Germany in 2006, then yeah, they should get 4 spots. I just feel one good World Cup for a region is not good enough to get a whole spot, especially considering the major dropoff of talent from the 3 big guns that went to Japan and South Korea and the rest of the region.

[Canadian_Supporter]

Originally posted by desertfox2
Interesting. I still think though that the CONCACAF should only get 3 1/2 spots, not 4.

I agree, I think CONCACAF (at this point) should only get 3 1/2 spots. Four is just too many at this point.

[thurd]

good news

[IASocFan]

Originally posted by thurd
good news

I'm not sure this is news. It's conjecture and politicking. It won't be good news until FIFA announces where the slots will be allocated. The only news is that Warner is lobbying. That's his job.

[Qdog]

He did say "Officially we still have three spots. But we're told we for sure will have three and a half and I'm fighting to the death to make it a full fourth. Three and a half is the worst-case scenario.''

It sounds like 3.5 is the most likely senario, and I for one would be happly with that. But I think he is right in askig for 4. If the AFC can say with a straight face they deserve 5 we can surely push for 4. Personally I would like to see a playoff between our 4th and an AFC team.

[Captain Canuck]

Originally posted by Qdog
He did say "Officially we still have three spots. But we're told we for sure will have three and a half and I'm fighting to the death to make it a full fourth. Three and a half is the worst-case scenario.''

It sounds like 3.5 is the most likely senario, and I for one would be happly with that. But I think he is right in askig for 4. If the AFC can say with a straight face they deserve 5 we can surely push for 4. Personally I would like to see a playoff between our 4th and an AFC team.

Agreed. Asian doesn't deserve more spots than Concacaf by any criteria - if they have 4, so should we.

Also, I'm not sure I agree about the poster who indicated a "great drop-off" in Concacaf after the 3 who qualified for 2002. If there is a great drop off it occurs after the top 8 teams in the region, but even then its probably more accurate to say a general slope than a sheer drop.

[Ismitje]

Originally posted by Captain Canuck


Agreed. Asian doesn't deserve more spots than Concacaf by any criteria - if they have 4, so should we.

While I agree Asia doesn't deserve more spots than Concacaf, ther are criteria that indicate otherwise. Such as:

AFC = 44 member federations, with two from small (in terms of population) countries.

TFC = 41 member federations, with 23 from small countries/non-countries (such as the US Virgin Islands).

AFC's potential for market expansion is massive, TFC pretty limited.

AFC had a team reach the semis. TFC did, too - in 1930. (however little one thinks ROK deserved to get to the semis, it is a discussion point, believe me).

3.5 seems fair to me. Who the .5 playoff is against is anyone's guess, though a regional playoff makes sense (CONMEBOL 4.5 + Concacaf 3.5 = playoff).

4 is a reach. With Asia pushing for 5 and Oceania wanting a full berth, who do you take spots away from (I know we all have "seems fair" scenarios - but would they work in the FIFA poitical world? That's the key)? One is up for grabs due to the champion not getting an automatic berth, but that doesn't point to a lessening of CONMEBOL's crew.

[Captain Canuck]

Originally posted by Ismitje


While I agree Asia doesn't deserve more spots than Concacaf, ther are criteria that indicate otherwise. Such as:

AFC = 44 member federations, with two from small (in terms of population) countries.

TFC = 41 member federations, with 23 from small countries/non-countries (such as the US Virgin Islands).

AFC's potential for market expansion is massive, TFC pretty limited.

I understand what you are getting at, but really, if that was the criteria on which spots are to be provided (population, # of nations in the federation) Asia would have twice as many as South America & just as many as Europe.

And any claim that 5 spots are warranted to Asia because 1 host nation got to the Semi's must be countered with fact that the only 2 proper Asian qualifier's finished dead last (#31 & #32) in the World Cup, & were the two teams which got hammered the most. That indicates there isn't the depth yet to warrant as many as 5 spots.

I probably went over the top when I said "no criteria" - maybe I should have said "weak criteria".

[Justin O]

Originally posted by Captain Canuck
I understand what you are getting at, but really, if that was the criteria on which spots are to be provided (population, # of nations in the federation) Asia would have twice as many as South America & just as many as Europe.

It's not the criteria but it is a factor. And as long as it's the World Cup, population and number of federations should at least pay a limited role. I think 4 for Asia and 3.5 for CONCACAF is acceptable.