Jack Warner has said that the federation will have 3.5 or 4 slots. This was reported in the Edmonton Sun, a Canadian paper, this morning. http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonSports/es.es-11-07-0087.html
Interesting. I still think though that the CONCACAF should only get 3 1/2 spots, not 4. I think we should give teams like Honduras, Jamaica, and by this article Canada at least a chance to qualify in some sort of playoff series. However, 4 is too many right now. If CONCACAF has another good showing in Germany in 2006, then yeah, they should get 4 spots. I just feel one good World Cup for a region is not good enough to get a whole spot, especially considering the major dropoff of talent from the 3 big guns that went to Japan and South Korea and the rest of the region.
I agree, I think CONCACAF (at this point) should only get 3 1/2 spots. Four is just too many at this point.
I'm not sure this is news. It's conjecture and politicking. It won't be good news until FIFA announces where the slots will be allocated. The only news is that Warner is lobbying. That's his job.
He did say "Officially we still have three spots. But we're told we for sure will have three and a half and I'm fighting to the death to make it a full fourth. Three and a half is the worst-case scenario.'' It sounds like 3.5 is the most likely senario, and I for one would be happly with that. But I think he is right in askig for 4. If the AFC can say with a straight face they deserve 5 we can surely push for 4. Personally I would like to see a playoff between our 4th and an AFC team.
Agreed. Asian doesn't deserve more spots than Concacaf by any criteria - if they have 4, so should we. Also, I'm not sure I agree about the poster who indicated a "great drop-off" in Concacaf after the 3 who qualified for 2002. If there is a great drop off it occurs after the top 8 teams in the region, but even then its probably more accurate to say a general slope than a sheer drop.
While I agree Asia doesn't deserve more spots than Concacaf, ther are criteria that indicate otherwise. Such as: AFC = 44 member federations, with two from small (in terms of population) countries. TFC = 41 member federations, with 23 from small countries/non-countries (such as the US Virgin Islands). AFC's potential for market expansion is massive, TFC pretty limited. AFC had a team reach the semis. TFC did, too - in 1930. (however little one thinks ROK deserved to get to the semis, it is a discussion point, believe me). 3.5 seems fair to me. Who the .5 playoff is against is anyone's guess, though a regional playoff makes sense (CONMEBOL 4.5 + Concacaf 3.5 = playoff). 4 is a reach. With Asia pushing for 5 and Oceania wanting a full berth, who do you take spots away from (I know we all have "seems fair" scenarios - but would they work in the FIFA poitical world? That's the key)? One is up for grabs due to the champion not getting an automatic berth, but that doesn't point to a lessening of CONMEBOL's crew.
I understand what you are getting at, but really, if that was the criteria on which spots are to be provided (population, # of nations in the federation) Asia would have twice as many as South America & just as many as Europe. And any claim that 5 spots are warranted to Asia because 1 host nation got to the Semi's must be countered with fact that the only 2 proper Asian qualifier's finished dead last (#31 & #32) in the World Cup, & were the two teams which got hammered the most. That indicates there isn't the depth yet to warrant as many as 5 spots. I probably went over the top when I said "no criteria" - maybe I should have said "weak criteria".
It's not the criteria but it is a factor. And as long as it's the World Cup, population and number of federations should at least pay a limited role. I think 4 for Asia and 3.5 for CONCACAF is acceptable.
WC 1998 15 Europe 5 Africa 5 Conmebol 4 Asia 3 Concacaf I can't remember who had the playoffs, this is just how it wound up. WC 2002 14.5 Europe (won other half from Asia to take 15) 5 Africa 4.5 Conmebol (won other half from Ocean to take 5) 4.5 AFC (lost half to Europe) 3 Concacaf 0.5 Oceana (lost half to Conmebol) The politics AFC is lobbying to keep from losing the half that they had by arguing that they deserve 5. Oceana is lobbying that they deserve a full spot because they don't get in with a half spot. Concacaf is lobbying that they deserve another spot due to their strong performance. WC 2006 Here's my thoughts on what WC 2006 should see. 14.5 Europe 4.5 Africa 4.5 Conmebol 4 Asia 3.5 Concacaf 1 Oceana Neither Europe nor Conmebol deserve to lose the half slots that they currently have. Concacaf definitely deserves another half spot based upon world rankings and their past performance. Arguably, Oceana deserves a full spot. So, if Concacaf & Oceana deserve another spot but Europe and Conmebol don't deserve to lose one, then that only leaves Asia and Africa to give up half a spot. 4th place Concacaf plays 5th place Conmebol. 15th place Europe plays 5th place Africa.
I think you meant to say "arguably Australia deseves a full spot". Oceania is a joke. If Australia cannot beat the 5th team from CONMEBOL, they don't belong.
Asian football isn't very good either. They deserve 2.5 spots. 3 at the most. Spots should be awarded based on quality, not population.
I think there is a significant drop off after the top 4 teams. Honduras nearly qualified and should make a good run during the next set of qualifiers. Look at how poorly Jamaica and T&T performed. T&T looked like world beaters during the semi-final round, but sucked it up during the hex.
It's not considered good news for us, we (always) qualify with three slots, its good news for teams other than: US, Mexico, Costa Rica.
I would agree. The fact that India has a much larger population than Honduras shouldn't be anywhere as significant of a factor as the fact that Honduras has a much better team than India.
Here's my thoughts on what WC 2006 should see: 15 Europe (Germany in as host) 4.5 Africa 4.5 Asia+OFC (2 OFC teams meet 10 AFC group winners to form 2 groups. Group 3rds play to see who plays CAF 5th for spot) 3.5 Concacaf 4.5 Conmebol (NA 4th vs. SA 5th)
I like this layout the best, but I don't know if it will be incorporated for 2006. I think the AFC and OFC and been bickering about bringing the two groups together. I personally think money, population, and past performance should all play a role in the selection process. Well money should not, but it will. I think FIFA wants to guarentee that teams like China have a great chance at making the cup.
Everyone is very high on Costa Rica - and yes they did well, but I really don't think they're a shoe-in to make the next WC. Anyway, I'd look at it according to strength of federation. IMO, CONMEBOL shoudl definitely have more spots than CAF. I'd give a full 5 to CONMEBOL. Yes, the federation is smaller - but the teams have historically and even recently done better than CAF ever has. CONCACAF does deserve more weight as that federation has improved - despite Mexico's poor showing in the build-up to the WC 2002. A half slot would be fair - a full slot would be more than generous. But then again I guess there are a few ways to look at it. As a "World" cup, or a "Competitive" cup with the real top teams playing. In a "Competitive" Cup, with a tad bit more emphasizes being on competitive sides, my rankings would be with these examples of possible teams: 16 Europe (Germany, Denmark, Spain, England, France, Portugal, Italy, Netherlands, Ireland, Croatia, Sweden, Yugoslavia, Poland, Turkey, Russia, Ukraine, Norway, Belgium, Greece) 5 CONMEBOL (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador) 3.0 CONCACAF (Mexico, United States, Jamaica, Costa Rica, Canada, Guatemala) 3.0 ASIA (Japan, China, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran) 5 CAF (Morocco, South Africa, Cameroon, Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal, Tunisia) A somewhat "competitive World" cup would be: 15 Europe 5 CONMEBOL 3.5 CONCACAF 3.5 ASIA 4 CAF 1 Oceana But Ideally, this is my set-up: 15 Europe 5 CONMEBOL 3.5 CONCACAF 3.5 ASIA 4.5 CAF 0.5 OCEANA I believe that North America and Asia are similar through and through. However I rate North America as a bit stronger, believe it or not. Be my guest as to who would play the other for the final two spots. I might go with OCEANA vs. CAF and N.A. vs. Asia. To be honest, Australia lost to Iran and Uruguay the "worst" qualifiers from their respective areas - they didn't deserve the full spot.
I would rate concacaf stronger than caf. Our teams have performed a lot better, and taken more points at the world cup.
Concacaf potentials: USA: should be a lock to qualify, especially given our talented youngsters coming up. Mexico: should also be a lock to qualify given their quality. They also have a very strong domestic league. Costa Rica: depends on how good their next generation is. I really don't know a lot about them. Honduras: a very dangerous team, their blend of youth and experience should help their longivity (sp?). Inconsistency hurts them. Canada: Have some good players coming up. DeGuzmen is making his mark on the Bundesliga. Has won a starting job for Hannover96. If DeRosario can earn a starting job he should start banging in more goals. These are the teams I think have a legitmate chance to qualify. Basically it's between Honduras, Costa Rica, and Canada for the final spot/s.