i was thinking what would happen if colombia won concacaf's domestic tournement. i thought that the winner from every domestic tourny gets a spot into the next confederations cup. so if colombia wins the gold cup, concacaf wouldnt have a representative?
2 scenarios (not sure which one applies): 1. Runner up goes 2. A playoff is held between runner up and the team that lost to Colombia in the semifinals. I'm not sure there's a 2007 Confederations Cup so it may not matter.
It would go to the higest finishing CONCACAF member as Columbia is a guest who won and therefor inelegable to accept that particular prize.
Firstly, of course, CONCACAF would look terribly bad. A C- team from CONMEBOL #4 or #5 wins our confederation tournament. I think Jack and Chuck would just meet in a room somewhere and walk out declaring T&T the confederation champion...
exactly, same thing with México in Libertadores, they are a several clubs that get left out because they take their spots.
I am sorry to differ with you, for me there's no such things as "B team, C team", there are 11 men on the field kicking the ball playing for their country. As for the question, really really interesting.
The Confederations Cup has gone to every four years, one year before the World Cup, in the WC host country. So, the next will be in 2009, presumably with the 2007 Gold Cup winner. I'd guess that while a guest could be the Gold Cup winner, the highest-finishing CONCACAF team would be the confederation representative. Quote from link above: Of course, if the European and South American champs don't choose to take part, there's a possibilty of bringing in some other teams, such as 2005 Gold Cup winner, etc. Turkey participated in the last Confederations Cup as an invited guest based on their World Cup 2002 finish. If a team or two bail, I'd guess there'd be an extra invite or two and the tournament would still be kept at 8 teams.
Obviously you've read the CONCACAF gold cup statutes. Is that you Leo Beenhaker? https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219159
Never read that before but I have always thought about it that way. Of course that refers to my personal opinion.
I'm just having fun with ya, Balam_Acab, and in principle I agree with you. I don't watch Mexico and say to myself, "Damn, where's Blanco?" or, "Why does Columbia have to experiment like this?" or whatever. I just think that the legitimacy of the competition can definitely be questioned. The top CONCACAF teams and the invitees never bring their full squads 'cause the Cup itself doesn't really mean much. And it is not so much for me the fact that top players are missing but more about the fact that the teams that are there have a tendency to not have a lot of playing time together, and stupid things happen like the Mexican defensive screw up against Columbia and the ridiculous goals that Costa Rica allowed against Honduras. That kind of stuff borders on the amateurish and I don't think you would see that with the regular squads. Which maybe isn't such a bad thing. The Columbian 11 have certainly come together and played with a lot of pride since dropping the first two games and it wouldn't surprise me if they end up winning this thing.
On the surface, I agree with your post FIFARay. However, consider that Colombia is ranked 25th by FIFA and South Africa is 39th. The two highest CONCACAF teams that did not qualify for the Gold Cup are Haiti at the 88th spot and El Salvador who are 110th. I don't mind guest teams in the Gold Cup, but it would be embarassing if one of them ever did win it (which they have never done, so far). On the flip side of that, Panama had the lowest ranking of the 12 competing teams (98th), and look at the canaleros now--surprise semi-finalists! I would expect Panama's rating to improve vastly when the August rankings are released. Also, look for Cuba, Guatemala, and Canada to slip a bit.
This is all true, but look at Greece at the last Euro. They must have been ranked very very low, but they still (obviously) had a chance. It brought them a lot of glory because it was a low ranked team, upsetting higher ranked teams. If we get rid of the 2 guest teams, we would give 2 more teams, in our confederation, the chance of a lifetime. Great moments are started like that. Now if a guest team wins, it completely ruins what little image the Gold Cup already has.
this is such a great point. Who would of thought that a weak country like Greece would win one of fifa's most prestigious titles. we should defintely get rid of having 2 guest teams because it fails to give two lower ranked concacaf teams the opportunity too show how good they are in tournements and it does nothing for this region's world credibility
I'm still torn on this. Without guest teams, the quality of competition for the top Concacaf teams would be lacking. (As for Mexico bowing out against Columbia; it matches the USA's ouster by Columbia in 2000. A good team will lose occasionally to another good team, as you know.) However, I also wouldn't want an invitee to win it. So here's the compromise: have 12 Concacaf teams and four invited teams. Four gruoups, one invitee per group. They participate in group play (and the games count for points), but can't play in the knockout rounds. Only Concacaf teams advance to the knockouts.
Actually there are only 35, but still, that is more than enough to fill a 12 team tournament. I don't get why we don't run it like the Euro Cup, Asian Cup, or African Cup though... 16 teams: 4 groups of 4, top 2 from each advance to quarterfinals... no "guest" teams. This year (using FIFA ranks to determine the top 16 and balance the groups), the groups could have been: Group A: Mexico Cuba Panama St. Vincent/Grenadines Group B: United States Guatemala Canada St. Kitts & Nevis Group C: Costa Rica Trinidad & Tobago Haiti Barbados Group D: Honduras Jamaica El Salvador St. Lucia And then (again, going by ranks to determine winners) you have a quarterfinal field: Mexico vs Trinidad & Tobago USA vs Jamaica Costa Rica vs Cuba Honduras vs Guatemala Sure the group stage is a little sub-par, but once you get to the later rounds, it will be an "alright" tournament.
Actually I believe CONCACAF has 40, but 5 are not members of FIFA (like Martinique, which has made the Gold Cup in the past).
Zeek, I'm with you. Open it up to more teams, cuz it can only help them get better. If more small teams get a chance to play, maybe one day we'll have our own "Greece" win the Gold Cup.
This is the most crucial point and I have yet to see an answer for this. Does this Gold Cup even matter at all? I have heard people (posters, websites, commentators) say that the winner of this Gold Cup goes to the Confederations Cup, but I see no proof for this. Are they just misinformed or is this really the case? It would seem a lot more logical that the winner in 2007 would go to the Confederations Cup.
Greece was ranked low last time around true, but not as low as people might think: #34 overall as of May 2004 and #18 in Europe, which is roughly where Honduras is now. If we went to a 16 team, CONCACAF only tournament, the lowest ranked team (best case scenario) would be St. Vincent and the Grenadines at #128. They lost on aggregate 37-3 over their last 7 matches played against the stronger teams in CONCACAF (including Mexico, Honduras, Costa Rica and El Salvador.) Considering the current depth of CONCACAF, there couldn't be another Greece from this region.
granted, the overall quality is lower here, so in that case, keep it at a 12 team tourney. No need to bring in outsiders.
Well, Greece was pretty much the 15th favourite at Euro2004 (in front of Latvia). We had Canada in 2000 and maybe Panama this year.