2014 FIFA World Cup qualifying

I suppose the format can still be used if the amount of spots change

 

I would much prefer the 2006 system. That said, there just isn't enough quality in AFC for an allover group system to be used.

 

You sure they aren't pre-empting that decision with this one!

You might want to note that the dates for the 2014 qualifying schedule have been part of the AFC calendar for a while now. The dates are a bit odd (The 4th round has MD 1,2,3,4,6 + 8 listed) and an initial playoff round in June 2013 (which should probably be the two missing matchdays).

J

 

Pakistan and Bangladesh should be higher as they did get a point against Iraq and Tajikistan.

2014 FIFA World Cup seeding for AFC.

 

lol, against a Z team, if you have forget that they lost the first match 7-0

 

That doesn't really matter - they still got a point. Tanaka sorted the teams based on aggregate score. He should have also taken into account the number of points won.

 

hi everybody, somebody knows where i could find the mongolian soccer jersey please. i'm looking it for a long time...

thanks

 

I'd would like to see two groups of 6, with 5 AFC and 1 OFC team in each group in the final stage. Top two in each directly qualifying, 3 v 3 would be a battle for direct qualification. The matchday schedule would stay exactly the same, except the two September dates are the extra two rounds added by the OFC teams, with the playoffs still in October/November.

If 2 OFC teams is too many, than we can still add the Oceania champion + another AFC team.

 

This would be a good idea IF we get to share the spot with Oceania. Like always the other confeds will be lining up to playoff against OFC.

 

They seem to have changed their mind.

 

probably can't confirm until FIFA's final decision on how many spots AFC will get for Brazil - could be 4 or 4.5 or 5.

Seeds would now be:

1-5 Australia, Korea Republic, Japan, Korea DPR, Bahrain

6 Saudi Arabia having to go into Round 1 with the rest.

 

I'm guessing the bottom 12 of the 46 teams will play a two-legged playoff, then it would be 10 groups of 4 with the winner progressing to the final round (two groups of five).

 

FIFA has also mandated that the FIFA rankings muct be used for determining seeds (even for the WC). AFC was the only confed to not use them last time, maybe FIFA are insisting this time.

Also they may be looking at combining AFC and OFC for WC Qualifications - OFC to enter in the final round the most likely method. I can see 3 groups of 6 teams in the second last round with top 3 qualifying further and adding to OFC qualifier for 10 teams in the final round. Another option would be 6 groups of 4 with top team qualifying and 6 second place teams in playoffs to get in.

 

Guys please help me out here..............are AFC considering previous qualification performance or Fifa rankings for seeding?????........please can anyone clarify my doubt..............if its previous performance then India will blow out in first round itself

 

At first AFC hinted they will use the same qualifying format, but they changed their mind and announced they are still working on it.
India seem doomed anyway - it's not like they are very high in the FIFA ranking.

 

however the format of the world cup qual, i just hope that every team can play a a few more games then just 2. I personally beleive the knockout phase is poor... i mean how can you expect the smaller nations to develop if they only play 2 games and thats against an Iraq or Thailand side. Seems to me that the AFC want the stronger teams a free ride into the 2nd round, to avoid big margin scores,

however if you look at the European qual format, teams like Armenia, Faroe Islands, Kazakhstan always get smashed and are bottom of the group with 1 point and 60 goals conceded.

 

I don't have a problem with it, WCQs don't exist to develop countries.
That's what all the other int'l competitions are for.

 

exactly, anf if Japan vs Cambodia is 20-0 so be it? thats the beauty about the World Cup, becuase every single nation in the world takes part to quality for the most prestigious tournment in the world!

Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and India being one of the better Central Asian nations only got 2-4 games max at last years qualifiers? how can they develop?

AFC have changed Asian cup qualifying format too with all developing nations entering the Challenge cup, so again only min of 3 qual games for most nations, and thats it... atleast for the world cup reduce the 46 or whatever member nations to 40 with a quick knockout run then group 40 teams in 5 groups of 8 or something, to give everyone a chance to develop, and gain experience...

How the hell can Tajikistan being so dominant at Youth level and be able to excel in senior level when they play 2 games in wc and bow out...

 

And they did participate.

WCQs aren't for development.

AFAIK, countries CHOOSE to enter Challenge Cup. I don't think any of them were forced to.
Just look at DPRK or Hong Kong. If AFC was calling the shots, they would probably be swapped.

Maybe they should develop professional players better.

 

if WCQ games are for developing as well as trying to make it to the world cup then what is?

afc is restricting alot of the minnow nations so the bigger nations get spoon fed straight into the last round, so they are always there for major tournements...

thats obvious, changing wcq format to knockout rounds for the first 2 rounds, introducing the Challenge cup and giving seeds and seed teams waived into final rounds is pure obvious..

 

They aren't for developing. Other competitions like Uxx, Challenge Cup, Asia Cup, Federation Cups, Friendlies, etc. are for developing.

Nobody got spoon fed into the last round.

Nobody is forced to play in Challenge Cup.
At the end of the day results are determined on the field. If a country can't make into the 1st group stage what chance do they have of making it into the 2nd group stage, let alone qualifying?
IMO, AFCs system for WCQs is better than UEFAs because it relies on results instead of coca cola bottle cap points. The 3rd round groups are less flaky than UEFAs group stages because there are just 4 teams per group -- half of which go through. Then there's a second group stage in 4th round. This allows for greater variety of matchups which de-emphasizes the impact of seeding or the ability of fluke results having too big of an impact. It also allocates less FIFA match days which have to be devoted to seeing Australia pummel Sister of the Poor; instead we can see 2 countries with a shot at WC face off and decide who is truly better and deserving on the pitch. That is, after all, the point of WCQs.
Compare this to UEFA where the draw is crucial, and tying just 1 game or only scoring 5 goals instead of 10 goals against a minnow can cost you 1st place in a group -- which results in a 1v1 that is also largely dependent on coca cola bottle cap points and luck of the draw.

No thanks. AFC got it right for this past cycle. The only Confed with a better system was CONMEBOL -- but unfortunately AFC can never do that.

 

Playing in highly competitive matches is an invaluable experience to a developing nation. You like to use Australia as an example, so you might like to ask some Aussies about how much better off they are for playing actual competitive matches instead of meaningless friendlies in preparation for tournaments.

A friendly match/tournament with several substitutions which disrupt the continuity of the match are nothing but a sideshow and a team bonding exercise.

The AFC's seeding system may be better, but the actual format of the qualifiers surely isn't.

What good is this seeding system, meanwhile, when a developing nation gets one and only one shot at contributing to their rank? Wouldn't it be fairer if they had a few more matches to be judged on, rather that a single two-leg play-off against opposition deemed to be superior from the offset?

If the WCQ were truly about sending teams that have a shot at the Cup, then I'm sorry but Asia wouldn't be sending a single team let alone 4.5!

Name me one example of where winning a match 10-0 instead of 5-0 has decided a group and you might be on your way to making a barely audible point.

Goal difference is the secondary tie-breaker in Europe. Head-to-head results come first, and before either there is the small matter of points. Teams are rewarded for their consistency, not punished for their reputation.

UEFA's system is much closer to CONMEBOL's than the AFC's is, yet you seem convinced that UEFA's is the worst and CONMEBOL's is the best, despite those similarities.