FIFA shuffles around Football World Cup berths

[Imran Siddiqui]

Since it says 'FIFA', I was pretty sure I could say Football in the title. Hopefull that was a good idea .

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soc.../fifa_meeting/

PARIS (AP) -- The 2006 World Cup will remain at 32 teams, with Oceania stripped of its guaranteed berth and South America given the chance to send a fifth team to the tournament through a playoff.

The executive committee of soccer's governing body on Saturday rejected a proposal by South America to increase the field by four nations to 36. FIFA also said the field will not be increased for the 2010 tournament.

"Things are so clear and simple with 32 teams," FIFA president Sepp Blatter said. "Give two more here, two more there, sounds easy."

He said a 36-nation field was impractical "when you have to consider the details, the practical organization."

The vote was 22-1, with Oceania dissenting and Blatter abstaining. The executive committee voted Dec. 17 to give Oceania a guaranteed spot.

Ahongalu Fusimalohi of Tonga, Oceania's only executive committee member, said FIFA had made his region a "laughingstock."

"We're being pushed around as if we never did exist," he told The Associated Press by phone. "If it was so right seven months ago, how can it be so wrong seven months later?"

Fusimalohi walked out of the meeting in protest along with Australia's Basil Scarsella, the president of the Oceania Football Confederation.

Scarsella, a nonvoting observer of the executive committee, called the matter a "politically driven decision that's got nothing to do with common sense or the development of football."

In the past, the winner of Oceania qualifying always met a team from another continent in a home-and-home playoff, and no team from Oceania has played in the World Cup since Australia in 1974. In the last tournament, Australia lost the playoff 3-1 to Uruguay, the No. 5 team in South American qualifying.

South America had been angered by December's allocation in which its berths were cut to four.

"The decision shows quality rules," said Argentina's Julio Grondona, an executive committee member.

FIFA did not determine how the playoff system for the 2006 World Cup would work, but Blatter said options are available.

Scarsella said Oceania would ask that instead of a simple home-and-home series, the playoff be combined with the one already scheduled between the No. 4 team from the North and Central American and Caribbean region and the No. 5 team from Asia.

Batter said the decision to strip Oceania of its guaranteed berth was made partly because of infighting among officials of Soccer Australia and the "poor performance" of New Zealand in the Confederations Cup. New Zealand, the Oceania champion, went 0-3 and was outscored 11-1.

"If FIFA had taken the decision for the distribution for slots for the 2006 World Cup today, Oceania would not have received a full slot," Blatter said.

Oceania already had agreed to sponsorship deals based on the berth, Fusimalohi said.

Under the allotment approved by the executive committee in December, Europe was awarded 14 spots, including host Germany, a drop from 15 at the 2002 tournament.

Africa remained at five teams, and Asia stayed at four teams with the chance to get another berth in a playoff. North and Central America and the Caribbean, which had three spots, was given the chance for a fourth through a playoff with the No. 5 Asian team.

I think this was a good set up. Oceania never should have gotten a berth in a home-and-home to decide who was going to the WC because they've just sucked royally. It is better to give their berth to North/Central America, who has better teams. I think Oceania should participate in the Asian qualifying.

Another interesting thing is that Europe had one sport taken away and given to South America. I can just see Bodds yelling up a storm. Personally I'd liked to have seen another home-and-home, with the #15 Europe v. #4 South America for the chance to go.

Though at least FIFA had the sense to keep the tournament at 32. If they expand in the future, it shouldn't be by 4 teams, but rather 8 (and then making 8 round robin divisions of 5 instead of adding new divisions).

What do y'all think of this?

[Solly]

The problem with a Europe v South America match-up is that the horrific climate in S America for playing football in terribly distorts the two-legged game.

[Solly]

How many countries are there in S America? 6?

[Solly]

And there is a reason why the European Championships tend to be a bigger event than the World Cup - you have 16 of the best 20 national teams in the world there.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And there is a reason why the European Championships tend to be a bigger event than the World Cup

BULLSHIT!

You've said some whoppers in your time, but this is probably the biggest!

The problem with a Europe v South America match-up is that the horrific climate in S America for playing football in terribly distorts the two-legged game.

I'm sure the South Americans would say the same about cold, clammy Europe. I mean really, who plays football in the cold anyway .

[C0ckney]

good move by FIFA on the oceania front, they're just not good enough. i don't know about taking away a european spot, are the teams in SA really good enough to justify that? and although asian teams did well in the last world cup, i think that had more to do with japan and south korea being at home (and some dodgy refereeing ) than the fact that asian teams are good.

overall i'd like to see how this works and maybe look to change it again if the new countries getting in fail to perform.

[Solly]

Every footballer has played in "cold" weather (you are nevertheless forgetting that the avergae temperature for play-off in Europe would at the lowest be low sixties).

I would also say that for the same reasons it is not fair to ask a country to play a play-off against the likes of Ukraine during the winter months.

"I mean really, who plays football in the cold anyway ."

It's sport..you run around..cooler weather helps the athlete. But I suppose Americans would like to reduce even the participation in a sport to an armchair game.

[Sava]

FIFA IS BLASPHEMY... ITS SOCCER DAMMIT!

[Solly]

But then again, if qualifying was due to merits it would simply be called the Europe and South America Cup. No other teams would qualify. So other countries need positive discrimination in order to make it a truly World Cup.

Don't kid yourself that it has the best teams in there that the world can offer though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It's sport..you run around..cooler weather helps the athlete. But I suppose Americans would like to reduce even the participation in a sport to an armchair game.

Remind me again when the World Cup is? Oh right, June. It's in a hot month, and sometimes played in places where it is very warm in those months (like Florida during USA '94, and the WC in Mexico).

Obviously not all football countries play in the cold. After all it is the World Cup, not let's bend over to Europe cup.

Europe already gets 14 spots! That's almost half the spots. Perhaps they deserve them, but if you can't be the 14th best team in your region, does anyone really think you'll be able to do anything in the tournament? Maybe they are better than the African 3rd team, but how would you know? They don't play each other. It'd be impractible to have every team play every team to determine who is most worthy.

Undoubtably the African 3rd team qualifying allows more people around the world to enjoy the World Cup, and brings more fans in from those countries.

And Hell, if they are assured of losing in the round robin, does it REALLY matter who goes?

[Solly]

Exactly. My argument is that we need affirmative action in the World Cup, you know, putting the weaker applicants where they don't deserve to be. Without it, we can't call it the World Cup.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't know if all the countries outside of South American and Europe are 'weaker'. Remember that the United States and South Korea got very far last time (and the US almost knocked off the finals loser, Germany).

I also remember Cameroon's run in '90 as another example of this.

[Solly]

Weaker teams get so far because there are too many of them?

[yavoon]

Originally posted by C0ckney
good move by FIFA on the oceania front, they're just not good enough. i don't know about taking away a european spot, are the teams in SA really good enough to justify that? and although asian teams did well in the last world cup, i think that had more to do with japan and south korea being at home (and some dodgy refereeing ) than the fact that asian teams are good.

overall i'd like to see how this works and maybe look to change it again if the new countries getting in fail to perform.

not all 32 spots in the worldcup are for the "top teams." FIFA actually sets spots aside to develop soccer globally. thats why europe doesn't hog them all to begin w/. so ur just gna have to accept some crap teams.

[Wernazuma III]

Although the ratio for SA countries going to the WC is still pretty high, I can understand that they're kind of pissed when North and Central America now get 4 or even 5 spots!!!! I mean, come on. That means USA and Mexico will always classify.
I'd say, lump all America together and make them get 8 spots. That'd be great.

[GePap]

How many states in Europe? There are 13 states in South America, so the best that can happen is 5 of 13. That ration is probalby about the same as Europe.

Hey Bodds, whern an European team lead the list of most WC wins again, then you can talk. If the Argies. aren't beating you, that is.

Asia and Ocenia send the worst team overall, until last gaes were these was ahuge imporvement from the Japanese and Koreans.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
Although the ratio for SA countries going to the WC is still pretty high, I can understand that they're kind of pissed when North and Central America now get 4 or even 5 spots!!!! I mean, come on. That means USA and Mexico will always classify.
I'd say, lump all America together and make them get 8 spots. That'd be great.

Why should europe have 14????

And if the Us is good enough to make it all the time from now on, fine.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I can understand that they're kind of pissed when North and Central America now get 4 or even 5 spots!!!!

The quality of play in CONACAF is getting much better these days.

Secondly, THERE IS NO WAY NORTH AND CENTRAL AMERICAN CAN GET FIVE SPOTS! Thank you . They can only get 4 spots, if their #4 team beats Asia's #5. They can get five only if they win out against Asia. If not, it will be 3, as it has been.

I'd say, lump all America together and make them get 8 spots.

If you are going to lump America together why not lump Asia and Afica together? There is a reason they are seperate continents.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Though at least FIFA had the sense to keep the tournament at 32. If they expand in the future, it shouldn't be by 4 teams, but rather 8 (and then making 8 round robin divisions of 5 instead of adding new divisions).

What do y'all think of this?

Ever played Sensible Soccer?


Anyway,

The tournament is just over a month long and you can't really play more than about 7-8 games in that time period.

5 teams each in 8 groups with only the the top two going through to the half-quarters is pushing the tournament to the limits. The alternative (as I see it) is 6 teams each in 8 groups with the best team going through to the quarters. In the latter scenario every team entering the tournament has at least 5 games, giving the supporters and players a good experience, and the final 8 will truly deserve to be there, having bested 5 other teams in a league scenario.

[Case]

As an Australian, I'm happy to see Oceania (read: Australia) lose the guaranteed spot. The Australian team hasn't qualified for the cup since the 70s, and certainly doesn't deserve a guaranteed spot, especially given the overall low level of interest in professional soccer here in Australia and the near total incompetance of Soccer Australia.

The fact that Australia only got the spot in return for helping get the very dodgy sounding president of FIFA re-elected is another good reason why the spot should have been taken away.

[Imran Siddiqui]

BC: There is no rule that says the tourney can't be expanded in duration .

But my #1 choice is to keep it where it is. But there is a LOT of pressure to expand. So who knows.

[reds4ever]

Much as I hate to agree with a Man United fan, (Bods), the World Cup is a far weaker competition as a whole than the European Championships, and as he said the reason weaker teams sometimes progress is because there are so many of them, not because they ALL deserve to be there

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
BC: There is no rule that says the tourney can't be expanded in duration .

There may be no rules, but realistically how long can you extend the competition without tiring your players or causing serious domestic club concerns.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think half-a-month wouldn't be that long of an expansion.

[notyoueither]

I'm of mixed feelings. I would love to see Canada get to more World Cups. OTOH, the fact that we haven't been able to qualify since Mexico in an extremely weak field, while a team like Holland missed the last WC leads me to think I wouldn't want to be there when teams that are heads and shoulders better miss it.

I'm not sure how CONACAF is supposed to get better though. The teams over here are isolated and rarely get to play the better sides in serious matches. You don't get better by playing cripples continuously. Of course, it's also hard for Canadians to get better when our minor system sucks donkey balls to an extreme extent.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I think half-a-month wouldn't be that long of an expansion.

Do you know how long the football season is in England? There are already calls to shorten it.

Crunch, in your league system what happens if the two top sides draw and beat all the other teams? One side gets knocked out on goal difference beause they only put 7 goals past Barbados not 8?

If you have big initial groups in a competition that occurs every 4 years, you've got to allow for things like that

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by reds4ever
Crunch, in your league system what happens if the two top sides draw and beat all the other teams? One side gets knocked out on goal difference beause they only put 7 goals past Barbados not 8?

If you have big initial groups in a competition that occurs every 4 years, you've got to allow for things like that

I would follow the European qualification system. If two teams are equal you first go on the performance between the two teams involved before looking at goal difference or goals scored.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Do you know how long the football season is in England? There are already calls to shorten it.

Bah, the World Cup is more important than a silly season .

I'm not sure how CONACAF is supposed to get better though. The teams over here are isolated and rarely get to play the better sides in serious matches. You don't get better by playing cripples continuously. Of course, it's also hard for Canadians to get better when our minor system sucks donkey balls to an extreme extent.

I didn't have Canada in mind when I said that . I was thinking of teams like Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Honduras, etc... sides that are getting a bit better every single WC qualifying. They should have a chance to face the 5th Asian squad, because I think at least half of the time, NA can win.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by Big Crunch


I would follow the European qualification system. If two teams are equal you first go on the performance between the two teams involved before looking at goal difference or goals scored.

Youre looking at a draw, that was my point!

eg

Group A

Brazil
Italy
Canada
Honduas
Equador
Wales

if Brazil and Italy draw then the group is a joke?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

I'm not sure how CONACAF is supposed to get better though. The teams over here are isolated and rarely get to play the better sides in serious matches. You don't get better by playing cripples continuously. Of course, it's also hard for Canadians to get better when our minor system sucks donkey balls to an extreme extent.

I didn't have Canada in mind when I said that . I was thinking of teams like Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Honduras, etc... sides that are getting a bit better every single WC qualifying. They should have a chance to face the 5th Asian squad, because I think at least half of the time, NA can win.

We beat those teams handily on a regular basis (ususally). Our system doesn't suck massive donkey balls to an extreme extent

The US and Mexico have pulled away from the rest of the conference. Which isn't saying too much for the rest of us. I'm sorry, I can't see 3 or 4 teams from NA while teams like Scotland and Holland sit.