I know it's real early for this, but it has occurred to me that the finals in 2014 in Brazil will be the first time South America has hosted the World Cup in 36 years. Does anyone know how CONMEBOL will do its qualifying for that tournament? I would presume that Brazil would want to participate for the game experience, even though they don't need to qualify. If so, would South America then be playing for 4 spots in 2014? If that's the case, I could see CONCACAF's 4th place team having to face one of 9 second place teams from UEFA for a spot in the 2014 finals. Again, this assumes both confederations keep the same qualifying mechanism in four years that they have now. If anyone has any inside information on this, it is much appreciated.
I believe that FIFA changed it so that the host doesn't force confederations to give up a qualifying spot. So basically for South Africa 2010, Africa has 5 spots and the Host has 1 spot, rather than Africa having 6 spots, if that makes any sense.
It may be the first time CONMEBOL has hosted the World Cup in 36 years, but it will have been only 16 years since the last time CONMEBOL had only nine teams in qualifying: Brazil, as champions of the 1994 World Cup, did not participate in qualifying for the 1998 World Cup (the champion received an automatic berth up until qualification for the 2006 World Cup). For the 1998 World Cup, CONEMBOL simply ran a nine-team round-robin. I see no reason to assume that Brazil will be part of qualification. I'm not aware of any situation in which a team with an automatic berth participated in World Cup qualification that did not also serve as qualification for some other event; South Africa's participation in 2010 World Cup qualification was simultaneously participation in 2010 African Cup of Nations qualification. As you note, it's too early to say for sure how many spots South America will be playing for, but including Brazil's automatic berth, it will likely be a total of 5 (as it was in the 1998 World Cup, the first with 32 teams) or 4.5 (as it has been in every World Cup since). Of course, it's mathematically possible for CONMEBOL to provide all four semifinalists at the 2010 World Cup, in which case they'd presumably receive at least 5.5 berths; I suppose it's also mathematically possible for every CONMEBOL team to finish last in its 2010 World Cup group, in which case they'd presumably receive 4 berths at most.
This is true - although there has been talk that they will re-do the spots after South Africa based on recent performances. No idea if this is anything other than talk however. J
* I don't think Brazil would participate. Why play 18 matches when you don't have to? They'll be able to get friendlies with whoever they want before the Cup...they are Brazil, after all. * Which leaves CONMEBOL as a nine-team tournament with a 16 game league schedule. With so few members, they are able to use the fairest qualification process. * As for allocation of spots, it will be one part past performance and one part confederation lobbying. My prediction: UEFA=13 CONMEBOL=4+1 AFC=4.5 (playoff with OFC) CAF=5 CONCACAF=4 OFC=0.5 (playoff with AFC) I like the inter-confederation playoffs, but they're costly in terms of travel. New Zealand and either Saudi Arabia or Bahrain will have to travel what, 8,000 miles each way for their playoff in the fall. On one hand, OFC doesn't merit a full spot. On the other, they shouldn't be completely shut out. AFC is the closest confed in distance to OFC, so leave it as is.
Of course, Brazil will defend their Copa América title in the 2011 edition of the tournament, to be hosted by Argentina. But Copa América doesn't have qualifiers.
The question of Brazil's preparation for the 2014 tournament may be more interesting than I first realized. Between the 1994 World Cup and the 1998 World Cup, Brazil played in: the 1995 Umbro Cup (in England, with the hosts, Sweden, and Japan -- first and only edition of this tournament); the 1995 Copa América (paralleled by the 2011 Copa América); the 1996 Gold Cup (but the Gold Cup no longer invites non-CONCACAF teams); the 1997 Tournoi de France (with the hosts, England, and Italy -- but the Confederations Cup now serves as the World Cup warm-up); the 1997 Copa América (but there will not be a 2013 Copa América); the 1997 Confederations Cup (paralleled by the 2013 Confederations Cup); the 1998 Gold Cup (which still no longer invites non-CONCACAF teams); and 30 friendlies. So Brazil played in three continental championships in that timeframe that have no parallel between the 2010 World Cup and the 2014 World Cup, as well as two small tournaments that may or may not be replicated.
I think OFC merits 0.25 spots. Not only is that more fair IMO, but it would solve what was the biggest crime in 2010 WCQ (namely, the 9th-best second-place team in UEFA going straight out).
My favorite national team (USA) is in CONCACAF but I would say CONCACAF would need their teams to advance a total of at least three rounds to be worthy of 4 spots in World Cup 2014, and CONCACAF teams advanced only one round in World Cup 2006. It would probably be more fair to give UEFA 13.5 and CONCACAF 3.5 with a playoff between them (of coure pending World Cup 2010 results).
I did a quick tally last night of WC total points in group play. I figured since seeding takes the last two World Cups into consideration, so should my calculations. (First number is 2006, second number is 2002...I bet this doesn't format right anyway): 2006 2002 Confederation Points Teams Pts/Team Points Teams Pts/Team UEFA 79 14 5.6 64 15 4.3 CONMEBOL 25 4 6.3 22 5 4.4 CAF 12 5 2.4 15 5 3.0 AFC/OFC 11 5 2.2 14 4 3.5 CONCACAF 6 4 1.5 15 3 5.0 If CONCACAF bombs out again like last time, then yes the status quo should remain. But I have a feeling Jack Warner will pull some massive chicanery related to voting for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, and gets another half spot. As far as a quarter spot, it happened back in the 70s. (?) For example, if the OFC/AFC 5th winner had to play another team for one spot, that's how you get a 0.25 for OFC.
OFC #1 v AFC #5 winner of that match v UEFA #14 SO you have: OFC 0.25 spots AFC 5.25 UEFA 13.5 That would be far more fair.
Reducing UEFA to 12.0 and redistributing the extra 1.0 across OFC (1.0) & CAF (5.5) would be fairer, to the ROW (ie non-UEFA) teams.
It happened in qualifying for 1994. OFC played off against the second placed CONCACAF nation (Canada) and then played the runner up of one of the South American groups (Argentina).
I think they deserve a full spot. After all, they managed to get their one and only rep last time into the second round
Why should New Zealand get to participate in every World Cup while all other nations have to earn their way (unless they are hosting)? Doesn't sound fair to me at all.
I'm pretty sure they will review it. Its too early to say what will change. Right now AFC is probably the most under threat but no one has convincingly put their hand up for more spots. A strong showing from Africa may help their cause, as it did Asia in 2002. IMO they should increase the amount of intercontinental playoffs to determine the final allocation, with each area having a guaranteed allocation less than they do now and the opportunity to increase their numbers through playoffs if the teams are good enough. Something like below UEFA 8 spots + 8 playoffs Conmebol 3 spots + 3 playoffs AFC 3 spots + 3 playoffs CONCACAF 3 spots + 2 playoffs CAF 3 spots + 4 playoffs OFC 0 spots + 2 playoffs Host 1 spot UEFA/CONMEBOL in one pot for the playoff draw and all others in the other pot. The permanent spots can last for some time with maybe some tweaking of playoff allocations if one confederation consistantly wins them and others consistantly lose them. All confederations could qualify more teams than they do now under such a system, provided their teams are good enough to beat others.
NZ would have to earn its place via the OFC WCQ's just as much as the USA does via the CONCACAF WCQ's. I see no difference in degree of difficulty in both WCQ pathways. Period.
They may experience the same level of difficulty (or lack thereof) during the qualifying process, but it's only because USA's and New Zealand's opponents are at about the same level compared to that team and not because the two confederations are equally strong. Mexico and Costa Rica have both shown excellent performances at World Cups and teams like Trinidad and Jamaica have also participated in recent times without embarassing themselves. I'm sure Honduras will also make a decent showing if they manage to qualify this time. New Zealand is by far the best team in Oceania, but they're just not a very good team. The Confederations Cup, even if it's not a perfect yardstick for measuring strength, quite clearly showed this. Spain wiped the floor with them and against the two other teams in the very easy group, as it was labeled, they managed a 0-0 draw and lost 0-2. Based on this, and NZ's previous performances, I don't see anything indicating that NZ will be able to make a decent showing at the World Cup. They may easily be embarassed actually, and if the surprise happens and some other team pips them to the direct qualifying spot, I can't even begin to imagine the massacre that would take place in the final tournament. Yes, I like diversity at the World Cup, but giving a full spot at the WC to an Australia-less Oceania would simply be an insult to a lot of the teams throughout the world who fail to qualify.