The qualifying has already started in some places, so I thought we should get this thread started, even though we're all focused on the WWC right now. What we know so far: Teams (12): Host (1): Brazil CONCACAF (2); tbd in beginning of 2016 CONMEBOL (1): Colombia CAF (2); tbd later in 2015 UEFA (3); decided by top 3 teams from the 2015 WWC so to be decided soon! If England finishes in the top 3 UEFA teams, their spot will be passed down to the 4th team as Great Britain will not enter a football team. AFC (2); tbd in 2016 OFC (1); tbd in October when winner of Pacific Games has a play-off versus NZ Stadiums (7): Itaquera Arena (São Paulo) Maracanã Stadium (Rio de Janeiro) Olympic Stadium (Rio de Janeiro) Fonte Nova Arena (Salvador) Amazônia Arena (Manaus) Mané Garrincha Stadium (Brasília) Mineirão (Belo Horizonte). Tickets are already open to Brazilian residents for the matches in São Paulo.
I still can't believe the Manaus stadium exists, much less that they're using it AGAIN after all the complaints it got last summer...
Predictions (as noted above, Brazil as host and Colombia are already qualified): Host (1): Brazil CONCACAF (2): USA, Canada CONMEBOL (1): Colombia CAF (2): Nigeria, Cameroon UEFA (3): Germany, France, Netherlands AFC (2): Japan, Australia OFC (1): New Zealand Group Draw Predictions: Group A Brazil (Host) France Nigeria New Zealand Group B Germany Canada Australia Cameroon Group C USA Japan Netherlands Colombia
The World Cup is also the qualifier for UEFA. Because of this, the top 3 advance to the Olympics. At this point I'd say it's going to be France, Germany & Sweden. For AFC, I see Japan & North Korea advancing. Hosts(1): Brazil UEFA(3): Germany, Sweden, France CONCACAF(2): USA, Canada CONMEBOL(1): Colombia CAF(2): Nigeria, Cameroon AFC(2): Japan, North Korea OFC(1): New Zealand DRAW Group A Brazil Sweden Cameroon Japan Group B Germany Canada Colombia New Zealand Group C USA France Nigeria North Korea
Australia is now the 2nd best team in AFC, behind Japan. They will beat North Korea, if they get to play them for an Olympic berth. Germany and Sweden can't both get there now. They play in the round of 16, and the loser is out. There will be at least 3 UEFA teams in the Quarterfinal. If one of them is England, then the best UEFA team that lost in the Round of 16 would be in, instead of England. Netherlands had 4 points in their group (Switzerland and Sweden only had 3 points in their group). Germany did have 9 points, so even if they lost to Sweden, and chaos happened to the other UEFA teams, maybe. But essentially, the loser of Germany vs. Sweden is out, especially if it's Sweden that loses.
So you are 100% sure that two or more of Netherlands, France, Switzerland and Norway will win? That seem a bit odd to be, while I am fairly certain that France will give Norway and Switzerland just around 50% and think Netherlands seem fairly likely to lose that France is to win. So I would say that it is about 25% chance that the loser will be involved in a play of for a spot.
you might of forgetting, that let's say France & Germany go to the quarters, then another Euro team(and final OG spot) will go to the winner of the Norway vs England 16th round game what's the 'word' over in Sweden? If Pia looses to Germany, is her job in danger? and are they all ready talkin about a new successor? perhaps Tony Gustarsson?(though me might just be waiting to see if Ellis bows out early as well, lol)
Can't use the Norway-England game a reference since England basically doesn't count as a UEFA team for the Olympics. Right now, there's only one R16 game guaranteed to produce a UEFA Olympic qualifier, and that's GER-SWE. France, the Netherlands, Norway*, and Switzerland are all in games against non-UEFA-Olympic opponents. So, in theory, if at least three of those four teams lose, then the loser of GER-SWE would have that Olympic shot.
Yeah, just another example of politics getting in the way of football... Since FIFA treats England, Scotland, Wales, and N. Ireland separately but the IOC only has Great Britain, the four home nations never try to play as Team GB - they don't want to enter a combined team due to fears of FIFA ceasing to recognize them separately, but none of the try to enter their team in place of Team GB either because the others could raise a stink of being usurped. Getting a Team GB for the two football tournaments at the London games was apparently a nightmare and they don't want to do it again. England and UEFA have gone or record saying that if England is one of the top three in the WWC, the Olympic spot will be passed down. There's a similar problem in Rugby, too, though in that case I think the English team will just serve as Team GB if they qualify.
Considering Japan are huge favorites, then the play-offs would consist of Netherlands, Norway, Sweden & Switzerland.
Yes, and since they as far as I know only did it with two teams earlier how they did it then (play-off format) don't say anything of how it will be done now.
It's been confirmed to be a round robin format. To take place from February 29 to March 9, 2016 in a cite TBD. Anyone else think this should be held in a neutral country?? I'm sure who ever ends up hosting it will have an advantage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_UEFA_Women's_Olympic_Qualifying_Tournament
29 February to 9 March 2016? that would make it hard to run in Sweden and even harder to do in Norway. And isn't that the Algarve & Cyprus Cup dates? Norway and Sweden being involved in Algarve and Netherland in the Cyprus this may make 2016 a very odd year for both those Cups.
That would be a nice solution, but I have some doubt that that Netherlands would buy into that being one of the teams behind Cyprus Cup. Still threatening with a a tournament in Northern Scandinavia in February\March (on turf of course) could be enough to convince anyone sensible that a group in Algarve would be preferable.
step further...have it outdoors in Svalbard near the polar bears and have the Norwegian players wear signs, in polar bear language, reminding the polar bears they too are Norwegian and shelter, care and protect them and therefore are not on the "menu". Note: this could backfire, of course, if the polar bears have a land or other dispute with Oslo . Did I mention I hope Norway qualifies?