Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: porker
Date: 07-12-2003, 20:36

I know this is off topic from European Club Competitions but I was wondering what people's thoughts are on Oceania having a representative at the World Cup. Do people think they should have a half slot (as is the case now) or should they have a direct place?

If I was to add my own view, I feel they should have a direct place thus making the World Cup a truly global affair.
I struggle to understand FIFA's stance on this as currently every other World event has an Oceanic particpant:
Women's World Cup (16 participants)
World Youth Cup (24 participants)
World U17 Cup (16 participants)
Confederations Cup (8 participants)
Olympics (16 participants)

Meanwhile the World Cup has 32 participants but FIFA feels that a place can't be given to them.

What are people's thoughts?

Re: Oceanic Participation
Author: kerrbhoy Date: 07-12-2003, 20:46	an Oceania participant = Australia. Why should Australia qualify every WC automatically? I think they should play off against an Asian team and they would probably win that most years, but no way should it be a guaranteed place.

Author: drussell
Date: 08-12-2003, 08:19

I dont think they should have an automatic spot. Its too easy for NZ or Australia. I believe Oceania and Asia should merge. A playoff is also a good option.

I think a merged Oceania / Asia should have 4 spots.
Africa should have 4
A merged NA / SA should have 8
Europe should have 16
and the host should also have to qualify.

Then each group would have 2 European Nations; 1 African or Asian Nation; and 1 Nation from North or South America.

Author: Shanes
Date: 08-12-2003, 14:29

In the end it's a tradeoff between having the best 32 teams and having teams that draw public interest and exitement from all around the world.

If we wanted a WC with the best teams then probably something like this:
Europe: 20 teams
America: 6 teams
Asia/Australia: 2 teams
Africa: 4 teams

But a neutral football-fan, not to say someone who is only slighly cares, a match between, say, Slovenia and Slovakia won't have many rush to the stands or care to turn on the TV. While a match between Australia and the US would. Even if Slovenia and Slovakia probably both are better than Australia and the US.
And public intrest and TV-ratings do count.

But of course we can't have the TV-ratings decide everything either. So the current tradeoff is probably ok.

Btw, I don't think Australia should get a free spot either. If they can't beat the 5'th best South-American team, they simply aren't good enough. Playing the 4'th best Asian team would probably be easyer, but Australia have tried that before, haven't they? Either way, fine with me. But they shouldn't get a free spot.

Re: Oceanic Participation
Author: porto-1978 Date: 08-12-2003, 18:15	I agree with a play off between the first non-qualified asian team and the best team from oceania. The winner enters in WC, but no direct entry to Australia, i mean Oceania...

Author: kerrbhoy
Date: 08-12-2003, 18:50

Shanes: Slovenia & Slovakia is a bad example; they probably aren't even in Europe's top 20 teams.

It's countries from around 15 downwards like Ireland, Serbia, Belgium, Norway, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece & Switzerland which are going to miss out on the World Cup to make sure FIFA gets whatever benefits it thinks it gets from Australia/Japan/USA qualifying.

Who exactly would prefer to watch Australia v USA, than Serbia v Romania? It's all about money.

Author: jonjon
Date: 09-12-2003, 11:01

I was travelling in Australia for a year in 2001/2002. During this time the Aussies played Uraguay in a play off for the finals' spot. I have to say that i have never been sooo relieved to see a team being eliminated in my life. The arrogance was unbelievable, they thought that by topping their Oceanic group, they were now one of the most reveered teams in the world. Uraguay were dismissed as not being fit to play on the same pitch before the tie - how pleasant it was when they won the second leg 3-0. I was also told on numerous occasions they were one of the top 4 or 5 teams in the world and the semi-finals were a definite.

Aussies are fanastic people, but rather deluded when it comes to football. The standard of the teams in their qualifying group is roughly that of a 3rd Division or non-league team in England. The claim to an automatic place is quite simply laughable. I do however think that the play off is also unfair. FIFA are quite simply a disgrace for having let this issue drag on for sooo long. Austalia and New Zealand need to be incorporated into the Asian qualifiers. The current position is a little unfair on Australia, but an automatic spot for Oceania is far from just either.

Come on FIFA sort it out, its not doing anyone any favours

Re: Oceanic Participation
Author: drussell Date: 09-12-2003, 16:25	Does anyone know: (a) the history behind why Asia and Oceania are not linked? (b) why history Europe does not have a premiliary stage like Asia, Africa, and Oceania?

Author: kerrbhoy
Date: 09-12-2003, 16:32

Europe does not have a preliminary stage like Oceania/Asian/CONCACAF because we only have a handful of truly HOPE-LESS national teams in Europe, in other federations they have many.

drussel: I saw yesterday in the papers Gordon Smith slagging off Moldova & Belarus saying what a disgrace it is that Scotland have to play in "countries like these". The bottom line is none of these teams are much worse than Scotland; Hleb has been Stuttgarts best player over the last 2 or 3 years and he is Belarussian. We are not talking about the Cook Islands or Aruba here.

Re: Oceanic Participation
Author: Shanes Date: 09-12-2003, 18:17	Belchevich is another very good Belarussian player. He's The key player for Dynamo Kiev. I defenitely wouldn't rule out Belarus if I were a Scott.

Author: eoinh
Date: 10-12-2003, 00:10

someone above mentions that the Cook islands etc are at the level of a Conference side! In fact ild put them much lower than that. Australia in their last qualifiers beat some crowd from Oceania 31-0!!! ( i can remember who) If we got a team together here ild say we would beat the Cook Islands

Oceania deserves to be a separate region but it is only right that they have a play-off for a world cup spot.
The only decent side in Oceania is Australia and maybe New Zealand.

Author: mark
Date: 10-12-2003, 00:31

I think that oceainia deserve a place at the world cup.
It is quite impractical to have australia and NZ to play in asia just because the nearest country is about 8 hours flight from sydney, and the same goes for joining CONCACAF or south america. On the other hand the current situation is not fair becuase austrelia has no competition in oceania and then suddenly they have to play against a good team.

I don't think that the australian football is so bad as you write here, IMHO they would have been placed in the third level of european football and giving them a vitually free ticket is no worse then the US and mexico having a virtually free ticket right now.

Author: Rafael78
Date: 10-12-2003, 00:32

I Live in Australia and alot of People here thought it was unfair that Oceania didnt get an automatic spot but I think that would be unfair on other countries as in effect you would be giving Australia an automatic spot. New Zealand are the only team that could contest the spot and even they arent up to standard. The teams that Australia played in qualifying such as American Samoa etc have only started playing in the last few years, Even Leichtenstein would walk all over them.

I agree that it would be good to have all confederations represented but It really wouldnt be fair if a team like Australia had virtually an automatic place while a team like Netherlands goes up against teams like Portugal and thus fails to qualify.

The best system would be to have a play-off against an Asian team, but the reason why this is not happening I believe lies in the Asian confederations stubborn unwillingness to consent to this format.