There has been a lot of debate over which confederation should get how many spots for the World Cup, the talk of expanding the World Cup yet again is sickening, so I am going to try to put a stop to the madness of it all. Here is my idea for World Cup allocations: UEFA (13) CONMEBOL (4.5) CAF (4) AFC (3) CONCACAF (3) OFC (0.5) World Cup defending champion (1) Host (1) + additional spot for its confederation (1) If Germany hosts, than UEFA gets extra spot; If Korea hosts, than AFC gets extra spot; if an OFC nation hosts, their allocation gets bumped to 1.0 (host + guaranteed spot). Confederation of the Confederations Cup champion (1) This might enhance the importance of the tournament. It would increase nations' interest in hosting the event (as it would give a confederation more cracks at winning the extra spot). The participating teams might actually send their best players, fans might pay more interest. Best of all, if a confederation is unhappy with their allotment, instead of the politiking and bickering, they can prove it on the field. While some complaining might go on, keep this in mind, if UEFA hosts the tournament, and has the World Cup defending champion, and a team from UEFA wins the Confederation Cup they can have as many as 17 spots. It's just a concept right now, there are some holes and logistics problems (such as the constant adjustment of World Cup qualifying formats), this would be a way to improve the Confederations Cup and in particular the Confeds Cup spot to determine an allocation can be some outlet for those arguments about which confederation deserves what. Also, the additional spot to the hosting confederation brings a regional interest to the host nation (more UEFA teams when its in Europe, more CONMEBOL teams when its in S.A., and so on...). I think that's how it should be.
If people aren't sick about debating this, we can make this the official World Cup allocation debate thread. Otherwise I can just take feedback.
This seems like a fine idea, more sensible that the current allocation--but what's the point of debating this topic? Isn't the allocation for the next World Cup a done deal, not subject to any change?
Well yes, but that hasn't stopped representatives in FIFA from floating the idea of a 36 team World Cup. Lots of things are a done deal, but people still debate crap over and over. I feel bad for perpetuating this subject even more, but I think this is a really killer idea.
I would prefer to have more qualifiers, as in giving 24 teams direct entry into the finals and giving another 16 the chance to play home and away qualifying rounds for the remaining 8. The makeup of who gets which spots in the next tournament would then be determined by each continent's results in the final itself, but there would be a minimum of two qualifying games per continent, so that every continent gets at least two shots at getting into the final, and if they are really good enough to go, then those shots should be about a 50:50 chance. This way, rather than endless FIFA debating about whether the top two in the OFC are better than the runners-up in the AFC, or whether UEFA teams that come third in their qualifying groups are better than a winning OFC team, they could settle it in the only fair way, by playing each other for a place. As a european I would be quite happy to lose 4 guaranteed spots for UEFA in the current system in place of 8 qualifying spots, because I believe we could win more than 4 out of the 8 qualifying games. If you wouldn't be happy swapping one guaranteed spot for two potential spots, you have to ask, does your continent really merit that guaranteed spot. I don't like giving places in the Confederations Cup, because while NZ or Aus would be playing for their own qualifying place, France and Brazil would be playing for a qualifying place for another team, as they would be pretty confident of qualifying through the normal route anyway. I also don't like giving a place to the previous winner or host, as there is a big time gap between the tournaments and plenty of time for a team to get worse or better if they won and hosting isn't a guarantee of ability, I would prefer that every team in the World Cup Finals had earned it by playing football, and earned it recently.
You have an intriguing qualifying idea too, which I would also be a supporter of. If they ever do expand the World Cup, I would hope that they go with some sort of preliminary like that to bring the field back to 32 (but they probably won't) instead of 10 groups of 4. As far as your criticism of the Confederation Cup idea, well there were some pretty good teams that missed out or almost missed out on the World Cup in the last qualifying (including Brazil). It may not affect the dynamics of UEFA qualifying so much because the group format divides the quality teams pretty evenly across the groups, but it could be very helpful in AFC or CAF where the draw can be the difference between qualifying and not qualifying (see: Iran, Morocco, and so forth). In qualifying, nothing is secure even for good sides like Nigeria, Japan, United States, Colombia (the last three of course, are in the CC this year). These countries would play hard for another available World Cup berth in their conference (in addition to New Zealand or Australia). And if Brazil and France believe they are good enough to qualify in their own right, good for them, then they can do as they please in the tournament and send in the scrubs (which is what they do anyway). It is kind of a hairbrained idea, but I wanted to see what people thought. peace
All confederations need a spot so i am disapointed you left out a full spot for the OFC. remember this is the WORLD GAME. FIFA needs to work on the Confed cup to make it worthwhile, give it a purpose. The Confed Cup still has that 'Saudi feel' because after all it was originally are cup that was held in Saudi Arabia and was like a mini tournament. FIFA simply took the idea and made it bigger. But now it needs a true focus. And until then Managers will continue to rubbish a good idea.
Would it be possible to do something similar to the way allocations for the Uefa cup and champions league work, based on the results on the last wc? It would be decided based on actual strength, perhaps ommiting the host nation?
The Confederations Cup shouldn't enter into the equation. Trust me, I'd say the same thing if the USA was doing better. It's a pointless competition.
OFC does not deserve a full spot. They should have a playoff with an AFC side. If Australia can't beat a 3rd/4th placed Asian side (i.e. China / Iran) then they don't deserve to be at the World Cup.