1 to 48: USA/MEX/CAN Qualification Watch

The official name is Costa Rica, and it has been for about two centuries. I believe no one has ever called them "Rich Coast". I believe the same is for Montenegro (no one has called them "Black Mountain").

The request from the Ivory Coast's government to be called "Côte d'Ivoire" in all international instances is probably a couple of decades old. And the one from Cape Verde to be called "Cabo Verde" is just a few years old.

In any case, I am all for consistency.

 

The Irony of this 48 teams joke never ends, Nigeria and Cameroon, both with based in Europe players as well as other African teams in the continental playoffs, will compete for only one spot in international playoffs! while in Concacaf you've got Panama and Surinam and similar level teams in their group as well as in other groups, not only competing for direct seats, but also for spots in international playoffs? FIFA should've given more to CAF.

 

CONCACAF number looks inflated because they have three hosts and of course all three hosts qualify directly..

CONCACAF only get three automatic spots with 2 Playoff spots cuz normally USA, Canada and Mexico wouldn't be automatic qualifiers which seems super modest compared to other confederation allocations.

 

CAF is good, I think 8, and quite likely 9 teams now given the strength of the team going to the interconfederation playoff is pretty good representation - nearly 1/5 of all teams are in CAF. It's Nigeria and Cameroon's fault that they couldn't finish above South Africa and Cape Verde. I don't favor either of those teams in the WC, they belong in there as little as Panama and Suriname IMO. Cape Verde is already the current running joke of this Cup based on who's qualified. So yeah, I would favor no more teams for CAF.

If anything I would have dumped the automatic OFC team - NZ should just get an auto bye to the interconfederation playoff. And remove one AFC team. Add those two additional spots to UEFA and it would be perfect IMO. CONCACAF will lose their disproportionately large amount slots once they're no longer host and they'll be properly represented again. Host country should always get their additional slot(s), I've no problem with that even if it throws off the balance a bit.

 

Not sure if I'd give more to CAF, Cameroon finished 4 points behind Cabo Verde, who are not loaded with international stars - that's why they're here. However, I do think that FIFA could have expanded the playoffs to include 2 AFC + 2 CAF teams. Thus, allowing 8/9 runner ups into the CAF playoffs. The Inter Confederation playoffs would therefore have 2 brackets of semifinal / final containing 1 AFC, 1 CAF, 1 Concacaf, and 1 OFC or Conmebol teams for the 2 places.

 

CONCACAF, CAF and AFC all have a similar percentage of members qualifying for the world cup (around 17%). OFC have less and UEFA and CONMEBOL more due to the strength of the confederation. CONCACAF get an extra playoff this time because they are hosts. Hosts used to get a full extra spot. I think the allocation is pretty fair. Some confederations try to make sure their best teams qualify and some like to make it a bit more cut throat.

 

AFRICAN PLAYOFF

Nigeria v Gabon
Cameroon v DR. Congo

ASIAN PLAYOFF

UAE v Iraq

November will be exciting. I called it from the get go that the African playoff would include a number of the top seeds.

Those are AFCON quarter finals quality matches.

Now that Nigeria has come back from the dead I predict them to qualify for the World Cup, but it will be tough.

I'm glad DR Congo and Cameroon play each other. That game will be grueling.

 

Giving how things look now at the FIFA ranking, and since Bolivia won't be laying official games in November, therefore there's no 25 point factor compared to the 10 point factor in friendly games, I'm confident that the winners of CAF and AFC playoffs are gonna be seeded in the playoffs, I'd also guess that FIFA will separate the two Concacaf teams in playoffs...

So we'll have path number 1, with Bolivia playing a Concacaf team, the winner takes on either the CAF team or the AFC team for a World Cup spot, And path 2 with New Caledonia playing another Concacaf team, the winner takes on either the CAF team or the AFC team for the other WC spot.

 

We may have a concacaf team that is seeded if Panama have to go through playoffs. Also Costa Rica would likely be seeded as long as Nigeria doesn't qualify along with Panama.

The Asian team is not likely to be seeded.

Iraq is currently slightly above only DR Congo. If DR Congo were to qualify after playing 2 matches to Iraqs 1 they would likely overtake Iraq.

All this of course is assuming one of Panama or Costa Rica are in the playoffs.

Iraq could be seeded if neither Panama or Costa Rica are in the playoffs.

Nigeria would almost be a lock to be seeded.

Any African team would be a lock as long as both Panama and Costa Rica don't qualify.

 

The hosts did not get additional direct slots; CONCACAF was allocated 6 slots with the decision to expand to 48, before the host bidding process. The only extra is the second playoff slot.

 

In essence, the allocation of the 6 playoff spots is as follows:

• 1 for AFC
• 1 for CAF
• 1 for CONCACAF
• 1 for CONMEBOL
• 1 for OFC
• 1 for the confederation who is hosting the tournament.

It will be interesting to see which confederation is allocated that extra spot for the 2030 World Cup, given that it will be played in 3 confederations. Perhaps FIFA will expand the playoffs to 8 teams, and give one extra slot to CAF and CONMEBOL, and one to UEFA.

 

Using the yet to be released FIFA Rankings:

1. Panama (#31)
2. Nigeria (#41)
3. Costa Rica (#45)
4. Cameroon (#54)
5. Iraq (#58)
6. DR Congo (#60)
7. Honduras (#64)
8. UAE (#67)
9. Jamaica (#68)
10. Bolivia (#76)
11. Gabon (#77)
12. Curacao (#81)
13. Haiti (#88)
14. Guatemala (#95)
15. Trinidad & Tobago (#100)
16. Surinam (#126)
17. New Caledonia (#150)

Bolivia doesn't have any scheduled matches in November so they won't be seeded because the CAF and AFC teams will end up above them whatever happens. (Gabon will pass Bolivia if they win the play-offs)

Only realistic shoot of CONCACAF getting seeded are Panama & Costa Rica and perhaps Honduras if UAE is the AFC team. Jamaica can only be seeded if UAE is the AFC team, and only if UAE doesn't win both matches, all the other CONCACAF nations don't have a chance to be seeded.

As vancity_eagle pointed out, if DR Congo will end up above Iraq if they are the CAF play-off team and beat both Cameroon and Nigeria. (Although they will end up above Iraq as well if Gabon is their second rival and Iraq doesn't win both matches against UAE)

DR Congo points if they win against Cameroon & Nigeria: 1448.543
Iraq points if they won both matches against the UAE: 1447.97
DR Congo points if they win against Cameroon & Gabon: 1444.976

So in short, I think the CAF team and Iraq will be the top seeds unless Panama or Costa Rica end up in the play-offs.

 

Oh yeah i forget about Panama's ranking I was focused on the likes of Surinam, too bad can't edit my comment now, my previous comment stands only if PAN & CRC won't make it to the WC directly, thanks for giving me the opportunity to clear that up.

 

There are 320 possible combinations of teams that could be in the interconfederational playoffs. There are 40 in Concacaf multiplied by 4 in CAF multiplied by 2 in AFC. If you want to know the math of why Concacaf has 40 combinations, type @ my username or send me a message. If any two teams other than eliminated Bermuda could go to the playoffs, there would be 55 combinations, but 15 of them include two teams from the same group.

 

16 might seem like a lot of places, but UEFA has 25 of what FIFA considers the best 48 teams in the world.

 

EUROs exist for that. Hope this helps

 

26 of the highest-ranked 48 as of today's updated ranking!

 

I still can't accept this qualifying system, while Nigeria and Cameroon having to compete for a spot in the CAF playoffs final, only to compete in that final for a chance in the international playoffs! while Panama & Suriname & Guatemala & El Salvador gets to compete for a direct spot? and Jamaica & Trinidad & Curacao & Bermuda competes for a direct sport? are you kidding me?

I highly advise FIFA not to allocate full 48 seats to confederations and instead let 16 seats be playoffs! meaning the first 32 seats should be directly split between the confederations to assure fair presentations, for example UEFA=10 CAF=7 AFC=5 CONMEBOL=5 CONCACAF=4 OCEANIA=1, as for the other 16 spots, they should be all international playoffs, therefore each confederation will have its deserved number of qualified nations, if Europe deserves 20 so be it and so on, but first they must deduct few seats from those 16 playoff spots and give them to the hosts, as for how to decide how many teams from each confederation will be in playoffs? well that is up to FIFA to decide, but make the playoffs all home and away single matches, the winners qualifies directly for the world cup,

I believe that would keep the excitement in the actual continental qualifiers because everyone would want to avoid the playoffs, plus we'll have exciting international playoffs with teams traveling to other continents depending on the draw.

 

While it seems ridiculous that Nigeria, Cameroon, DRC, and Gabon are fighting for 1 spot to advance to a final playoff, while those concacaf teams you mentioned fight for 3 direct spots and 2 playoffs we have to remember that Nigeria and Cameroon put themselves into that situation by failing to top groups they had no business messing up.

We should really be talking about a playoff between South Africa, Cape Verde, DRC, and Gabon.

Having said that I do think concacaf is over represented compared to CAF, when you consider overall quality and populations.

Concacaf should not have 6 direct spots to CAFs 9.

5 to 10 seems more reasonable.

As for more Intercontinental playoff spots, I agree.

Each confederation should be given a minimum allotment, and then gain more in the Intercontinental playoff. This would also add more excitement to an increasingly less eventful world cup qualifying with the expanded field.

You could have a number of mini Intercontinental playoff tournaments to cap off the qualifying system.

 

I think the representation amongst CAF, AFC and CONCACAF is based more on number of members rather than strength with each having approx 17% of their members qualifying directly (CAF 16.6, AFC 17.4 and CONCACAF 17.1). CAF seems to like more cut throat qualifying systems where AFC and CONCACAF allow more time for the best teams to overcome a poor match or two resulting in the playoffs we have now. I've always preferred more playoff spots but I'm not sure how you fit them into the calendar these days.

 

It shouldn't simply be the number of federations and 17%.

There should at least be some population aspect to it.

For example Concacaf has only 8 countries with a population over 10 million and 11 countries with a population over 5 million.

A significant portion of Concacaf members are tiny vacation islands, or Island nations created for laundering money.

In contrast CAF has 33 countries with a population over 10 million and 41 countries with a population over 5 million.

CAF is just far bigger than Concacaf. There are far more countries with significant populations. Concacaf should have nowhere near 66% of the representation that CAF has. Especially when you consider that the quality of football also is nowhere up to par with CAF when you compare the average CAF team to the average Concacaf team.

AFC has a similar population dynamic to CAF, so I'm fine with them having a larger representation even if their average side also is not up to par with whatever CAFs average quality would be.

I think there is an importance to representation based on populations to then be balanced with overall quality of each confederation. Concacaf lacks both the overall quality and population.

As for CAF "preferring cutthroat qualifying" It more a lack of foresight and squeezing in qualifying matches for an extra continental tournament that AFC does not have to do. So they don't have the luxury AFC has and have to make qualifying a quicker process. They used to combine WCQ with Afcon qualifying. They should go back to this.

 

I agree it shouldn't just be about the number of members, but it does seem to me to be how FIFA did it. It would probably have been slightly fairer to allocate 10, 8 and 5 to the 3 confederations in question but it is what it is. Lets how the teams go before changing it for next time.

I agree with you here. UEFA has a similar problem but at least all 2nd placed teams get another chance. The 4 African teams that get a second chance also have to win twice as many matches to make it through. I quite like the way AFC has combined the qualifying before one group goes on to play for WC spots, and the other plays for the remaining Asian Cup spots.

 

Again, CONCACAF doesn't have 6 direct spots lol... It seems that way because the hosts are from CONCACAF and it's three of them...

It's really 3.5, so what's the problem?

 

3.5 is what they had with a 32 team format.

It's 6 direct spots with the expansion to 48 teams, regardless of the 3 hosts.

The only thing extra concacaf gets for hosting is an additional playoff spot.

 

Wait, we get 6 spots!?! LMAO man that's crazy.

I thought that was just a this edition sort of thing. Ah hell naw