2010: Europe (UEFA): 13 places Africa (CAF): 6 places (including host South Africa) Asia (AFC): 4.5 places Oceania (Oceania Football Confederation): 0.5 place South America (CONMEBOL) 4.5 places North, Central American and Caribbean (CONCACAF): 3.5 places 2014: ?
So the obviously question is: does "no change" mean no change from what PC4TH wrote or does it mean no change from what PC4TH didn't write? Interestingly, the most important word in that quote of Valcke on your website is the one word that he DIDN'T say (and that has been added by skysports). If he meant to say the word then the whole meaning of the sentence changes. Certainly, this could be a case of putting words (well, one word) in his mouth. J
I would imagine that C-Bol would get the hosting spot but otherwise no change - nor should there be. C-Bol only has 10 members so if they want more spots they should combine with/ take some members from C-Caf or even OFC and take responsibility for developing weaker nations. Otherwise, yes, the rest of the world has at least done enough to keep their spots (Even CAF only had Cameroon that really performed badly, Algeria and Nigeria especially were unlucky to finish last) and seems to have caught up to UEFA somewhat but really no other Confed has done enough to take spots away from them.
Based on past experience, the allocation of places/slots/spots/berths etc will be officially announced in December 2010.
I'm pretty sure that the media is interpreting Valcke wrong... what he actually says is that there is no discussion about slots now. The slots will be decided next year, that's when there will be a discussion.. I'm pretty sure Europe will lose a slot, Asia might get half a slot, maybe even a full slot.
New Zealand should go to the AFC no matter what. Like Australia, New Zealand would benefit alot from better competition, especially considering how much more popular the sport will get just based on how close NZ came from moving on in the WC this year
well it would just add another rapidly growing football nation to their federation. Plus they took out Bahrain, who came 5th in AFC qualifying, so they are definitely competitive enough.
I think in terms of just World Cup qualification, it's beneficial for NZ to stay in Oceania, cause the path to the World Cup is easier going through OFC than to go to AFC. I wonder if Australia would have initiated the move to AFC if they had known that in the next cycle, the OFC-CONMEBOL playoff would be changed to a OFC-AFC playoff.
Given that Australia had tried to get into Asia even when it was a OFC-AFC playoff in the past I think that's an easy question to answer. The move to Asia was about a lot more than just WC qualification. J
2014: Europe (UEFA): 13 places Africa (CAF): 5 places Asia (AFC): 4.5 places Oceania (Oceania Football Confederation): 0.5 place South America (CONMEBOL) 5.5 places (including host Brazil) North, Central American and Caribbean (CONCACAF): 3.5 places
Are they rotating the playoff series with each cycle? In the past two cycles, they were the following (the 0.5 spot alignments changed after 2002, with CONCACAF picking up one and UEFA losing one): 2006: OFC vs CONMEBOL AFC vs CONCACAF 2010: CONCACAF vs CONMEBOL AFC vs OFC If they rotate them to new ones, it would be the following in 2014: CONCACAF vs OFC AFC vs CONMEBOL
If I remember correctly, at one point OFC had a full spot, but CONMEBOL asked FIFA for 0.5 more and they got it from OFC. Since the AFC - CONCACAF playoff was already set, FIFA paired OFC and CONMEBOL for the playoff.
UEFA: 12 CONMEBOL: 5+1 AFC: 5 CAF: 5 CONCACAF: 3.5 OFC: 0.5 Of UEFAs many teams, only very few made an impact, and those were all "they'll qualify anyway" teams, no need to keep that many more slots than any other federation. There's the argument that UEFA was mishandled after the last 2 cups, which is true, that's why I would not take away more than a single slot, and there's the argument that we should wait first to see if this is an exception (so many good teams didn't qualify, Italy/France/England etc will be better the next time around), but following that consequently in a tournament that is only played every 4 years is way too rigid for my tastes. CAF: You could argue about taking something away for them, but losing the host slot's enough for now in my view. AFC: no reason to give them less than CAF. CONMEBOL was too good to take half a slot away, and since the only reason they don't get more is the size of the confederation, you can as well round it up. CONCACAF: The decline of quality is very steep. In the last 2 World Cups, only Mexico and the US made an impact, and they also prove in qualification and the Gold Cup that the rest is not at their level. Honduras no goals, Trinidad no goals, Costa Rica 3 losses. Shouldn't be less, Costa Rica and Honduras had competetive teams in the past and might have some in the future (actually, Honduras might have one now, if not for injuries), but defnitely not more. OFC: 1 would be too much, can't guarantee that NZ will always have a competetive team (and for this one, it's already somewhat debatable).
No way Eufa would accept a reduction from 13 to 12....no way. There are already many Euro teams who didn't make it who would be better than some of the sides that did....Ireland, Russia and Sweden for sure....
We went to Asia to be able to participate in International competition on a regular basis, at club and national team level. There is no professional league in OFC, and indeed the club competition was only organised when a team was required for the CWC. We even had the case that in the 1st edition of the revamped comnpetition OFC's team (Sydney FC) qualified before they had played a league match in their home country. Now our youth teams play a series of qualifiers against similar opposition, and a finals tournament if good enough, and then a FIFA tournament if good enough. Our national team has a series of meaningful matches in Asian Cup competition and WCQ. In any case, don't forget that we won the last OFC/CONMEBOL playoff, and that the OFC/AFC playoff was organised as a part of the deal that saw us go to Asia.
Firstly, this is a problem with UEFA qualifying not the number of spots, if you sent teams that were worse than some who missed out then that is your problem. Personally I don't think that Colombia, Ecuador, Egypt or maybe even Iran, KSA or Costa Rica, would have been any worse at this world cup than Slovenia, Greece or even France or Italy and maybe Denmark. Even though Slovakia made it into the 2nd round I wouldn't say that they were any better than other ROTW teams that missed out. Out of the 3 teams you mentioned: Sweden have been poor - no way they would be "for sure" better than anyone. Russia was knocked out by Slovenia - a tough team but hardly a giant of the game. Ireland perhaps could have a slight case as it took the hand of frog to knock them out, but still I don't think they would "for sure" beat any of the bigger rest of the world teams that missed out.
No need for any change. Just transfer the Host spot to CONMEBOL. To get six, they still need to win a playoff against another confederation. If six spots is too much for them then they won't win the playoff. The last two World Cups haven't seen any side get blown off the park in 3 matches.
It's just happenstance, though -- the entire confederation is composed of pretty solid squads. By your logic, if Surinam and Guyana (and perhaps some Caribbean countries) joined CONMEBOL, they'd be worthy of more bids? Just because they'd be bigger? Is there any reason to believe that if, say, Colombia or Ecuador were in the 2010 WC that they'd be out of place and unworthy? Because that's basically what we'd be looking at with 6 CONMEBOL bids. And since every team in CONMEBOL made it to the round of 16 this year, it's tough to argue that they didn't deserve every bid and more. I'm not saying that CONMEBOL should get 6 bids permanently, but there's nothing wrong with them getting their regular 4.5 plus the host's spot. They'll have to earn it to get to 6 (with the intercontinental playoff).