Keep in mind that there are, I believe, only 10 nations in the Conmebol region. That means half would qualify. I think that Conmebol and Africa should each get 4.5 spots with a playoff between the 5th place team in each region. This would never happen because Africa is Batter's pet project and he would never take even .5 of a spot from them.
While I am against FIFA's decision, this is a good argument in their favor. It clearly will probably help the game along in a place like Australia if they have a place in the WC.
The problem here isn't whether or not Oceania gets a spot or not. Why have a separate federation if they aren't given at least one automatic spot? The real crime is in Asia and Africa. The worst teams at the WC were from these 2 federations. Tunisa? China? Saudi Arabia? Come on. There is no reason these federations should be given 9.5 spots at the WC. Thats almost a full third of the field. 3.5 for Concacaf is about right, IMO. We don't deserve a straight 4. While Europhiles will also cry foul, it should be remembered that several of the teams which qualified this time around were quite mediocre.
In 1998, CONCACAF, and more specifically the United States sent the worst team in the competition. You can't judge by one cup.
I think it is fair and reasonable that CONCACAF gets 3.5 slots. The Confederation earned something with its strong showing at this World Cup and it's nice to see we're being rewarded. I live in and support a CONCACAF country and, myopic as it may be, I don't care what hapens elsewhere. Further, I think it would be emabrassing if the US came in 4th in CONCACAF and had to go to the playoff but if they have to do that, so be it. And, if after playing the playoff with the 5th place Asian team, if the US can't be in the top 3 in CONCACAF and beat the 5th place team from Asia, then they really don't deserve to go the World Cup.
You're right, you can judge from just one cup. So why does Asia get an additional 0.5 slot because of their performance in the last WC? Over the last decade Concacaf has done more the prove they deserve the extra half slot than Asia has. Asia still needs to live up to having the 4th slot they recieved as a result of having 2 host nations. Giving them another half slot at the expense of SA and Europe is laughable. Africa also has done little to show they deserve 5 full slots. They make some noise, score some goals, but are there really 5 quality teams in africa every WC cycle?
It's called the World Cup, so I don't have any problem with Europe losing a spot to bring a little diversity to the event. I do think COMEBOL's 60 year record of achievement warrants better treatment and that Oceana should be a part of Asia. But it's not bad overall.
CONCACAF and AFC are the two worst federations (besides Oceania.) We should all be grateful for what we have. I wouldn't say CONCACAF has proved itself over the past decade. Mexico has traditionally done well, but the USA and I'm assuming you mean Costa Rica haven't been all that hot. The USA got decimated in 90 & 98 and advanced in 94 (host country has never failed to advance) and we had a good run this time. I would say neither federation has "proved" itself in the grander scheme.
Everyone here keeps saying that Asia gained a 1/2 spot which in actuality they didn't. They had the half spot for this past World Cup. If memory serves me correctly they lobbied and lobbied and threatened to boycott the tournament (except for Korea and Japan) if they didn't at least get another full slot (meaning 5 slots). UEFA compromised with them and decided to randomly choose one of its 2nd place group finishers (Ireland) to play against the 3rd place team from the AFC qualifying tournament (Iran). Secondly I think its tragic that OFC is getting a full qualifying spot. They should join back up with the AFC and combine the 1/2 bid they had already with the AFC's 1/2 bid. Or if they still want to remain their own confederation, join in with the AFC for World Cup Qualifying. Someone mentioned that this is marketing to the rest of the world, but how is it marketing when the team taking the OFC's spot will 9/10 times be Australia??? I think CONCACAF gaining a 1/2 slot is good. Everyone would be estatic with 4, but it gives the confederation something to build on. Africa's 5 slots are very questionable though. CONMEBOL should have at least maintained the 4 1/2 they had. We'll have to wait and see after the tournament in Germany how all of this works out.
BTW, we can give thanks for this extra half slot to the slick politcal manueverings, but kissing, vote giving and money sharing to CONCACAF head Black Jack Warner. Basically, Warner backed Blatter and never wavered in his support for him and the rest of CONCACAF joined in. That's a lot of votes and this is the benefit we get for that. Yeah, Warner is corrupt and all that, but his manuevering resulted in another 1/2 for the region on the World's biggest stage. I'm all for that.
its really pretty simple, isn't it? FIFA wants to help China and their 1 billion population interested in the world cup. Same could be said for Australia. The game is already huge in south america, Fifa is just looking to expand. Its not about the quality, its about the quantity of viewers and $$$$$$$$.
Not exactly sure what your point is? All I'm trying to say is giving AFC 4.5 is laughable, especially at the expense of SA and Europe. 3.5 to Concacaf is entirely reasonable in comparision.
There's a lot of money to be made in Australia and NZ. And with a slot at stake, NZ is going to double its efforts to knock off the Aussies, so nothing is certain about who will qualify. There is also a lot of money to be made in China, what with 20%(?) of the world's population. To the europhiles let me point out that Uefa does a horrible job of selecting their best teams for the WC. That group with Ireland, Portugal and Holland was ridiculous. They also do not seed in the playoffs between 2nd place teams. As a result a minnow can get through while a heavyweight can bite the dust. Uefa is not really much affected in 2006 because the WC is in Germany, but thereafter, they will have to have a better selection process to make up for 1/2 less slot. To South Americans, let me point out that their federation only has 10 members. 2 soccer-weak South American countries actually belong to concacaf. 10 members is barely a minyan. They don't have to do preliminary rounds, they go straight to the final round of qualifying. The good news in concacaf is that Guatemala, Honduras and Jamaica (and others) have a much better shot because they can still make it regardless of the 3 heavyweights in the region (US,Mex,CR).
Afraid you've got to explain this one to me ... you think that Asia and Concacaf are noticeably worse than Africa?
Europe 13 CAF 5 AFC 4.5 Conmebol 4 Concacaf 3.5 Oceania 1 Something just looks odd about a WC where South America has the chance to have less representatives than both Africa and Asia. It makes sense in that SA is just 10 sides while Africa and Asia have a lot more, but SA also does outperform the others by a wide margin. Then again if you look at SA as an 8 country group (taking out Brazil and Argentina) then I guess I could see 2 advancing as fair especially since those 8 countries really have not done well in the past 5 cups. (AFC 1 QF, Concacaf 2 QF, CAF 2 QF, Rest of Conmebol 0QF) All this positioning is probably for naught though. Europe accepts a cut but gets a host in free. The tournament is in Europe and the last two in Europe saw 6 European teams make the quarters. What will happen before 2010 is that there will be an adjustment adding an additional slot or maybe a slot and a half to Europe.
Re: Re: Concacaf to get 3.5 WC spots For the sole reason that Africa has Nigeria I would rate them higher. I would rather play any team in CONCACAF or AFC than Nigeria. South Africa and Cameroon are also strong sides.
We are talking about places for countries that will NOT win the tournament - only ones that will make it more interesting. For me, there is nothing more interesting in the group stages, than a game involving an African team.
Thank you. Ireland beat Iran. CONMEBOL has 10, not 9. Argentina, the Guays, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Chile, Venezuala, Bolivia, Ecuador. Brazil will have to qualify.
Re: Re: Concacaf to get 3.5 WC spots Did you even watch the World Cup? Costa Rica was nothiing if not entertaining. And losing out on goal difference in a group that included the first and thrid place teams is much better than Tunesia -- or Nigeria for that matter -- achieved in terms of actual performance.
Re: Re: Re: Concacaf to get 3.5 WC spots Yes, I watched Costa Rica, but they aren't a marquee name by any stretch of the imagination. I doubt anyone in Europe was breaking their neck to get to the TV to watch them play when they weren't playing Turkey or Brazil. Costa Rica v. China probably didn't pull down huge ratings.
I think alot of people need to get past ther naive notion that the World Cup is about putting the best 32 teams on the field. It isn't. It is an event that is a combination of ecinomics and politics, with FIFA making compromises and the federations each doing their utmost to get the biggest possible piece of the pie. If you were ever to actually field a tournament with the 32 best teams in the world (as if you could ever figure that out to begin with), you'd have mass chaos and protests from every corner, and would never be able to do it again, if you could have even managed it once.
I have a suggestion: merge the CONMEBOL and CONCACAF qualifying, and have groups as is done in Europe. It will surely better for the US to meet Brazil, Argentina etc in competitve qualifying more often, rather than the mickey mouse teams in CONCACAF, and if they're good enough, they'll qualify, won't they?