[Heist]

How is it possible that Asia deserves 4 or 5 spots?

South Korea and Japan definitely are worthy.

China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, North Korea fighting for 2.5 spots. They'd probably go to Saudi Arabia and China, two of the whipping boys of the most recent tournament.
I'm stretching at this point

If the home and away series wasn't the way qualification worked i'd tell the Israeli federation to get itself into Asia qualifying instead of UEFA. They can certainly hang with the 7 nations above and they could even finish behind one of them and get a secured spot in Germany.
Politically I just don't think it would work though.

[Nobby]

Asia has a large population. The AFC has 43 active members. At home, their best teams compete well against Europeans and South Americans. There is a huge potential for the growth of the sport in Asia, China in particular. Its possible that Asia deserves 4.5 spots.

[biosoccer]

The title to this thread should read : 4.5 for aweful soccer.

["Simply Ken"]

Some so-called remedies seem worst than the problem!!

I agree that 4.5 spots for Asia is generous. But 2.5 for Asia would be ludicrous. There is no guarantee that in a confederation that large, with so many sides of enough ability to pull upsets, which teams would end up qualifying from Asia with only 2.5 spots. It would all depend on how the draw was made, and even then, luck would have to be on the side of the favorites.

The allocation for the AFC in my opinion should have been 3.5 -- the same as in 1998. Even better would have been 4.5 or even 5 for a combined AFC/OFC group.

Nonetheless, also I see merit in giving Asia 4.5 based on the fact that FIFA would have an incentive in promoting the sport in what is potentially a huge market. Such considerations are appropriate in allocating World Cup berths, although due attention should be given in making sure the competition is not watered down too much.

[biosoccer]

Asia gets 4.5 because of one thing and only one: MONEY.

[Heist]

Originally posted by "Simply Ken"
Some so-called remedies seem worst than the problem!!

I agree that 4.5 spots for Asia is generous. But 2.5 for Asia would be ludicrous. There is no guarantee that in a confederation that large, with so many sides of enough ability to pull upsets, which teams would end up qualifying from Asia with only 2.5 spots. It would all depend on how the draw was made, and even then, luck would have to be on the side of the favorites.

The allocation for the AFC in my opinion should have been 3.5 -- the same as in 1998. Even better would have been 4.5 or even 5 for a combined AFC/OFC group.

Nonetheless, also I see merit in giving Asia 4.5 based on the fact that FIFA would have an incentive in promoting the sport in what is potentially a huge market. Such considerations are appropriate in allocating World Cup berths, although due attention should be given in making sure the competition is not watered down too much.

My remedy isn't 2.5, although if was based on competitiveness of the countries involved you could argue it. I disagree about the draw in that case. If they seeded South Korea, and Japan in the two groups, maybe with China and Iran also seperated three of the top 4 teams. They should have the Concacaf version or many rounds for the small teams, rather than the UEFA version, and I think they already do.

I also agree with your final comment, although they don't seem to lean too far to promotion and far from competition in the case of Asia and Africa. Take a half from one of those guys and give it to South America.

Actually a better system would have many more half-berths, but that would just turn it into a pre WC with teams from all over the world playing each other for a chance to go to the Finals. That would make for excitement for sure, and incent more teams to improve themselves. More countries would have a real shot, but they would have to prove themselves against teams other than Bahrain or Fiji or San Marino to make it to the Finals. What do people think about some system like that?

["Simply Ken"]

Heist,

I believe in intercontinental qualifying. I have a proposal that I would like to see one day come to frution.

The proposal would allow regional preliminary qualifiers to get rid of real minnows. The final rounds however would be mixed, with different countries in each region hosting these "mini-World Cups" that would serve to select the final 32.

That way countries and regions with less experience will gain the necessary experience, as well as attention, by playing (and occasionally hosting) meaningful international games.

In my system, each region would be given a FEW guaranteed spots. The rest would be decided in accordance with results on the field.

[pololo]

Originally posted by Nobby
Asia has a large population. The AFC has 43 active members. At home, their best teams compete well against Europeans and South Americans. There is a huge potential for the growth of the sport in Asia, China in particular. Its possible that Asia deserves 4.5 spots.

Japan and Korea didn't meet any South American side.

[Heist]

Originally posted by "Simply Ken"
Heist,

I believe in intercontinental qualifying. I have a proposal that I would like to see one day come to frution.

The proposal would allow regional preliminary qualifiers to get rid of real minnows. The final rounds however would be mixed, with different countries in each region hosting these "mini-World Cups" that would serve to select the final 32.

That way countries and regions with less experience will gain the necessary experience, as well as attention, by playing (and occasionally hosting) meaningful international games.

In my system, each region would be given a FEW guaranteed spots. The rest would be decided in accordance with results on the field.

This sounds intruiging, but i'm a little confused.
The CONCACAF region would get 8 spots or something?
CONMEBOL would get 7 or something, UEFA would get 30.

And from those lets say 64 teams they go to mini-cups all around the world.

Would countries like the US and Mexico, clearly the top 2 in their region have to even play in preliminary qualifiers? If so, this would decrease the excitement in qualifying I think.

What i'd propose is something I mentioned in another board. Or maybe something more extreme.

The 32 or so countries who just missed automatic bids from their confederation, would play in a mini-cup resulting in the last 8 teams to enter the cup Finals.

So, only 23 bids (plus the host) would be guaranteed for each Finals.

This is a *little* like what UEFA does, 9 group winners and the top second place goes in. The next 8 second place qualifiers have a playoff to see who goes. In this proposed case the 32 would play a whole tourney instead of a home and away. The problem is, I don't see how FIFA fits this in the calendar. Maybe if this group was smaller, 16 teams playing for 4 or 6 spots. That'd be exciting.

[Nobby]

Originally posted by pololo
Japan and Korea didn't meet any South American side.

It is true that during the 2002 World Cup, neither played a South American team. I meant competitions in general such as friendlies and other competitions like the Confederations Cup and World Cup Qualifiers.

The best remedy for South America's loss of allocations is to win matches. If all four CONMEBOL teams advance out of the group phase in 2006 then there would be rock solid evidence that they deserve more spots. Until then I'll go out on a limb and say a team that finishes fifth in the CONMEBOL round robin qualifiers is not going to win the World Cup. The same cannot be said of UEFA, CAF and AFC teams because qualifications are organized into groups using random selection. The higher membership of these confederations requires them to do it this way.