Mod Note: Split from the Russia 2018 thread. On a side, civil note, South Korea is going to field their strongest team since 2002 in 2018.
Odds are Europe is losing a qualification spot to Africa in 2018. It might be time for UEFA to pull out of the Tournament
pretty sure fifa want to welcome the current world champion in the competition agaim which wouldn't happen if the uefa was kicked out not to mention that the european market guarantees good tv deals for fifa {^.^}
Which is stupid. The World Cup field should: 1. Feature the best teams in the world and 2. Give some level of regional representation. Obviously #1 suffers somewhat to satisfy #2, but it shouldn't to a ridiculous degree. Fact is, until a non-UEFA or CONMEBOL team reaches the final I'm not in favor of those confederations giving up spots.
The chances of this happening are pretty much zero. The most that would happen is a playoff spot, but this is again very unlikely.
That's not really saying much as 2002 was biggest officiating scandal that has ever occurred in a WC, so unless South Korea is going to get help from bought paid for referee I'll hold my breath
The extreme for #1 is to just take the top 32 ranked teams and ignore where they come from, which obviously wouldn't work for a lot of reasons. The other extreme would be to go with #2 all the way and divide the places strictly by some combination of number of countries and population in the confederations, which is even worse. So the answer is somewhere in between and that's what we have now. My personal opinion is that this is a "World" Cup and we should move closer to your #2 and take some places away from UEFA and give them to CONCACAF, AFC (Asia) and CAF (Africa). I'd like to see 10 UEFA teams; give one more each of the other confederations (except OFC). I know the #11-13 teams in UEFA are a lot better than the #5 in CONCACAF, the #6 in CAF and the #5 in AFC, but it's not like they're super powerhouses that must be included. and the gap between the Euro teams and the rest of the world is continually narrowing. I think it would be more exciting for a lot more of the world to open it up more. I realize that a lot of people, especially those with ties to Europe don't agree, but that's my opinion. It ain't gonna happen anyway, I doubt UEFA even gives up 1 spot as they have the power in FIFA.
I agree almost completely with your post. Just in terms of global representation, OFC, no matter how low their level might be, they should still get at least one full spot (after all, they do represent a very specific zone of our world. At some past WC's, some of their teams have had decent performance's, so it is not unexpected to see surprises coming from them.
I agree, even though the most likely spot for this half place is the Confederation we currently play in. Another place for it is that the host only receive an extra half spot. For the next world cup this would mean that UEFA get 13.5 incuding Russia.
I agree that in terms of "global representation", OFC should be represented, but the problem is that would pretty much mean New Zealand would get all but an automatic spot in the final every time around. OFC is just so weak, especially after the Kiwis, that giving them a 0.5 spot maybe up against #5 in Asia would be good enough for me for now. The Pacific Island nations are so small and their programs so far behind, I don't see that changing anytime soon either. In the 2013 Confederations Cup (where OFC gets an automatic place), Tahiti was ridiculously bad with an 0-3 record and a -23 GD conceding 24 goals in 3 matches. I bet if their opponents really tried hard it could have been 50. It would be unfair to put such a massively weak team in the WC field. Imagine if in 2022 an OFC team got drawn into the Qatar host group? What a joke that would be.
I think the host nation needs to have an automatic berth. What I don't agree with is that it's a spot with the 7 seeded teams in Pot 1. With Brazil it was OK, with South Africa it wasn't fair and for Qatar (and probably for Russia) it won't be fair. I'd rather see the host put into the Pot where it makes the most sense. For Qatar, treat them like the other AFC teams. The other 3 teams in Qatar's group in '22 will have a huge (and unfair) advantage.
If it is always New Zeland, well good for them if it is. It would be almost as the same as Mexico and the USA, within Concacaf where they get an almost guaranteed a spot in each and every WC, where they not only get 2 spots, but 3 or maybe 4 spots, which minimizes the chances for them of getting eliminated at qualifiers. To be truth it is a very unfair judgement in regards to Tahiti's qualification to that Confed cup, as they did eliminate the same New Zeland team in their respectful qualifiers that in the previous WC ended its participation with 3 draws against 3 formidable opponents. Besides Tahiti's achievement was done by a team of mostly amateur players, and to their disgrace were paired for the Confed cup in a group that featured 3 of the top teams of the world. To be fair with them you could have put any team ranked below 50th, from anywhere around the world, and it could have achieved the same results they did back there. This is not a joke at all. All you need to blame here, is how unfair is the whole Confed cup, where the diference among participating teams is so huge, that these type of results can actually happen and it serves no practical purpose to have them (OFC) to get a spot in this particular tournament, as if it would be to get a full spot for the WC. Playing in the WC, almost every team, at least gets the opportunity to face another team, more up to its own level or slightly over it, so in it, teams from weaker confeds can get a much more fair opportunity to do something . While at the Confed cup, it is almost granted that they will be the team that gets wiped out, the same way as Tahiti did. whom did Tahiti face in the Confed cup ? Spain who at the time were the WC champ and at the same time Euro champion Uruguay, who was the champion in Conmebol Nigeria, who were the champion of CAF In other words, the 3 champions of the 3 best Confeds at that time. An almost 100 % guarantee that they will be kicked their butts very often in every match. Besides they even scored 1 goal (I never even expected them to score any, in that tournament) Their sole qualification to the Confed Cup, was an outstanding achievement, however they did afterwards in it, was an "extra" which doesn't diminish in anything what they previously achieved, by making it to it.
I follow what you're saying, but...the US (#16) and Mexico (#15) are normally in the top 20 or at worst slide into the 20's when they're in a down cycle. NZ is currently the highest ranked team in OFC at #118. I know the FIFA rankings can be screwy, but there's no comparison between CONCACAF and OFC in terms of quality. I didn't mean to get into a Confederations Cup discussion. Just saying that for the WC I think it's a bad idea to have a hugely non-competitive team like Tahiti in it. A GD of -23 over 3 games is ridiculously bad, no matter who you're playing. I really don't care about the Confederations Cup, just talking about the WC. I still stick by my original personal preference/opinion, that UEFA gets 10 spots, OFC gets .5, and others get one more added. Also, I think the host country getting an auto berth in the finals is good enough, no need for them to always be in the seeded pot. Just my opinion.
You are just saying that they are uncompetitive due to a heavy loss. Well, past WC had Netherlands beat 5-1 vs. Spain, Germany 7-1 vs. Brazil Will you say now that both Spain and Brazil are "hugely non-competitive" teams due to those results ? ........, I don't think so. any team can get a beating once in a while, specially if you face top teams, and as in the case of Tahiti, if you face 3 of the best teams in the world (2 of which, Spain and Uruguay, at the time were among the top 4 teams of the world), it is very likely that you will get 3 sucesive beatings (El Salvador from Concacaf even took 10 goals in the WC in only one match against a non top team once (vs. Hungary in 1982), and after it Concacaf didn't lose spots at all). The thing that has helped, both Mexico and USA, the same as other teams, it is their continued presence in the WC which helps among other things to raise local enthusiasm over the game, helps to gain huge amount of points which helps them raise their world rankings and also helps local players to raise their overall playing level by regularly playing against top players from elsewhere. Back in time, playing against USA and/or Mexico (or any Concacaf team, for the case being), was almost as kicking the ball and cellebrating a scored goal, and despite this issue, they still got their direct ticket to the WC. Why shouldn't other teams from other places get the same or equal benefit ?, specially considering that the argument being spoken of, is to have the whole world to get represented in the WC. OFC deserves at least, one full spot in the WC. No my friend, in this point we don't share the same point of view.
I think there's a big difference between a single bad game where a team gets blown out and a while tournament. But maybe you're right and maybe the gap isn't that big. As you pointed out, NZ did play a credible WC in 2010. So I'm open minded about it...I could be persuaded for wanting to include OFC with a full spot. And as Tahiti proved, it doesn't always have to be NZ. I'm for inclusion, not against it.
@Rickdog, you know I was just thinking about a parallel in American sports with the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. All the top teams go, and the top conferences like the ACC, Big-10, Pac-12 get their 5 or 6 teams in, and the small minor conferences like the Patriot League get their one team. Nobody credible can claim that the Patriot League champion is even close to as good as the #6 team in one of the major power conferences, but still their champ gets to go. And the excitement that results from that bid to the big tournament is amazing. It can electrify the fan base for that team, even though they know they aren't going to win the tournament or even make the Sweet 16. And when those small teams do pull an upset or even play really well against a major power team, it's great to see, it's big news and everybody loves it. It's good for the sport and good entertainment. I think there's a parallel here with allowing more teams from the lesser confederations to go. Create more excitement in the rest of the world. I know it might not be "fair" because better teams will stay home and lower ranked teams will go, but I'm ok with that. I'm sure many will disagree, but I think it's good for a "World" Cup. So I'm cool with it...give OFC their 1.0 place!
WHen you go back to when the lesser confederations were given direct spots for 1970 we only had 16 teams and there was no way these teams were amongst the top 16. It was access to to the World Cup, and later on with more teams, that allowed North America Africa and Asia to develop teams to the point that they were reasonably competetive. I think OFC deserves that opportunity as well. It may be some time (maybe not in my lifetime) before there is a case for more than one OFC team but as a full confederation I think they should be represented by a team.
There have in the past been UEFA teams that have missed the WC finals that had a chance of winning the whole thing. England missed in '94 with a solid team and the Netherlands missed in '02 with a very good team. You're talking about making it even tougher to qualify in Europe, in order to allow (this year) Panama, Burkina Faso and Jordan take the place of Portugal, Greece and France. Sorry, I just don't agree. France had a legit shot this year, something Panama or Jordan couldn't claim. Not to mention it would make CONCACAF qualifying ridiculously easy (and to some extent CAF as well). You may as well just give the CONCACAF "big 3" (Mexico, the US and Costa Rica) tickets to Russia right now.
world cup is world cup, so there should be a little bit of everyone taking part. but taking away current spots from south america and europe is criminal! apart from cheating koreans no other team outside these two confederations made a world cup semis for ages. that answers everything!!!
This debate about Oceania is farcical. Having been involved in Oceania watching my NT Australia play for years before we moved to Asia in 2006 there is no way in the world this confederation deserves a full spot. Quite frankly the interest and the abilities do not warrant it. What would be better for countries in this region to be swallowed up in Asia and seeing the Oceania sides play in regional qualifiers initially and then letting the best couple play in full round robin with Asia for WCQ and maybe even throwing a spot or two Oceania's way for the Asian Cup. What hinders this region is the lack of competition they can get playing one another. Give them competition and they will get better. Give them a clear path to the WC not having to rely on the lottery of a 2 legged play off against an opponent who has had a tougher preparation is a farce
40 teams for 2018 1- host 13 uefa 13 africa-asia (7 africa-6 asia) 13 america-oceania (6 concacaf-6 conmebol-1 oceania)
I'd actually be very happy with Russia winning the World Cup. Much rather see them win than a Brazil, Argentina, Germany or Spain.