A better system to determine the World Cup Qualifiers
Roar Guru
By dasilva, 19 Nov 2009 dasilva is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- football, World Cup football, World Football
Portugal's Christiano Ronaldo reacts after the drawn World Cup group 1 qualifying soccer match against Denmark at Parken in Copenhagen, Denmark, Saturday Sept. 5, 2009. (AP Photo/Tariq Mikkel Khan/POLFOTO)
New Zealand’s qualification to the World Cup has brought up questions about whether they actually deserved a spot. This isn’t the first time where seemingly weak sides are questioned for their value to the World Cup.
It’s one of the perennial questions that is asked in every World Cup. Is the process meritocratic? Do sides that qualify deserve to be there over sides that missed out?
To me, it’s always been a bother that the determination of how many sides from each Confederation make the World Cup are done by politicians instead of teams earning it from the pitch.
This is the reason why there will always be mumbling that this Confederation deserves more spots or this Confederation should have less teams at the World Cup.
I believe the root of this problem is that World Cup qualification is segregated between Confederations. I don’t believe it’s a good idea that, to qualify to the World Cup, you only have to beat teams from your own region with the exception of the few Intercontinental Playoffs.
It’s such a shame that aside from the World Cup we don’t play against teams outside our Confederation in a competitive match.
So here I’ll present a new World Cup qualifying system that is radically different to the current system. In this system, no one can complain that their Confederation had too little, or not enough teams at the World Cup.
I will admit that I did not invent this idea. It was discussed on the Roar years ago and worked on by bloggers like Pippinu and others.
But there was never an article written about it, despite numerous suggestion that someone should do it.
The frst requirement is that there are only Four Confederations. So it will be the Americans, Europe, Africa and the Asian Pacific.
Second, we merge the Continental Championships with World Cup Qualifications.
Each Confederation will have their continental tournament with 16 teams, and whoever does not qualify to the Continental Championship gets eliminated from the World Cup early.
Third, the semi finalist of each continent will qualify directly to the World Cup. This means that it’s still a World Cup by ensuring that each Confederation has a minimum of 4 teams.
However, for the team that finishes 5th to 16th, they will go to the second round of World Cup qualifications.
So the 48 nations remaining from the four different Confederations are now allocated to 8 groups with 6 teams in them. Each group will not contain more then 2 teams from the same Confederation.
They will play home and away, and the top team of each group and the Top 7 second place team will qualify to the World Cup.
The 16 automatic qualifiers are placed in group of 4 to determine the top 7 seeds to ensure they get match practice before the World Cup.
I think despite any logistical issues, this will be a fairer and meritocratic system.
A Confederation could have as low as 4 teams in the World Cup to up to 17 (if the host was from that Confederation). So no Confederation can complain that they didn’t get enough spots than they deserve as they end up playing against teams from each Confederation to get there.
This will also finally end any debate about the relative strength of each Confederation.
Instead of one side boasting that their region is superior to other, they actually have to go out on the pitch and prove it. This can either confirm the European/South American dominance in world football, or it can give opportunities for lesser known countries from less fashionable regions to upstage and break the European/South American hegemony.
We can finally have a World Cup where we can’t really question the 32 teams that qualified there.
If you guys are not happy with this system, feel free to post up your own alternative non-segregated World Cup Qualifying system.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Phoenix need more than flash in the pan crowds (133)
- ‘New football’ fans may help save the game in Australia (124)
- Does Tasmania have a case for A-League inclusion? (119)
- What happened in Port Said was not a football riot (118)
- Magilton struggling to make a mark (68)
- Socceroos screwed over by FIFA, again (41)
- Gulf influence cripples the FFA again (40)
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season?
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (5)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (7)
- Does the A-League need an injection of humour? (32)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Redknapp tight-lipped over England job
- Departing Lavicka has players’ respect
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (0)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (5)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (7)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Melbourne derby reveals tale of two journeys (3)
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (16)
- Capello ‘walks’ from England’s top job (13)
- Explore:
- football, World Cup football, World Football
albe said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:46am | Report comment
the whole point of qualifying through regions is to make the Cup finals representative of the football world.
I don’t see any problem with the system as is, though i reckon Asia could do with an extra spot
There’s already fair representation from Europe and South America. I don’t see what changing the system would achieve. Can’t see any major calls for change tbh, the teams that miss out in 2010 probably don’t deserve to qualify.
Robbos said | November 19th 2009 @ 6:03am | Report comment
I totally agree, teams that miss out in 2010 either from Europe or Sth America probably don’t deserve to be there anyway, so why not help the emerging nations in the other regions.
Just because France or Portugal (which I think would be ashame because of Ronaldo) did not quality is because they did not deserve to, nothing to do with New Zealand or Houndras. I’m all for the minows qualifying, look at how Australia captured the imagination of the footballing world in 06 & it’s public over here, this is the REAL world cup.
Robbos said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:56am | Report comment
Viva la Nova Zealander. Well Done New Zealand. Enough said.
K B said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:53am | Report comment
I’ll second that… Well done New Zealand and I love their nick name “All Whites” anything but Sokkahwhites — just for the record I also love the Rugby nick name “All Blacks” that’s a real cool tag…
~~~~~~~~
KB
midfield general said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:27pm | Report comment
I wonder how the nickname `All Whites’ will be received by South Africans….I know skin colour is the last thing Kiwis are implying here but may not be the case in some other places in the world. You can’t order a long black in the US, for example.
KB said | November 19th 2009 @ 9:10pm | Report comment
I agree, it could be tricky and totally misunderstood … I hope not, it would be a travesty
albe said | November 20th 2009 @ 6:57am | Report comment
did u guys see the ‘WHITE POWER’ sign being held up at the NZ game on saturday? caught a quick glimpse in a crowd shot but they cut away pretty fast !!!
hope they don’t take that one with em to SA
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 6:07am | Report comment
albe
to be honest my main motivating reason for wanting this change in system simply because I just want to see Australia play sides from another confederation in a competitive match. I do not want to wait until it’s the world cup to take on the rest of the world
One of the things I hate is when Eurosnobs look down on anything outside Europe and South America and say we have an easy route, asia is an easy confederation.
Even if we beat those sides in friendly like we did against England and Holland and IReland. They will still say it’s just a friendly
In any case, wouldn’t you want to see Australia taking on Holland one week, USA the other week and lets say Egypt or Algeria the week after.
“it can give opportunities for lesser known countries from less fashionable regions to upstage and break the European/South American hegemony.”
This is what I firmly believe this system will do. I am absolutely convince that Europeans sides would not get 16-17 spots if this system is in place and that Africans, Asians will be able to stand on their two feets and get far more then 4 spots for the World Cup.
In any case, Africa and Asia are already guarantee 4 places in this system. They could get a lot more spots in this system if they are good enough. I believe Africa and Asia is good enough but I don’t have any proof and this change could prove me right or wrong whether my faith in the less reputable region is right.
This separation of confederation is just reinforcing European and South American dominance. I also don’t like politicians determining who gets how many spots as well.
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:13am | Report comment
“In any case, wouldn’t you want to see Australia taking on Holland one week, USA the other week and lets say Egypt or Algeria the week after.” – Dasilva, while you are obviously Anti-European you might as well be Anti-Asian or Anti-Oceania.
How is Fiji or Samoa meant to afford what you propose? Flying to Holland one week, USA the next?
If you are worried about reinforcing the power of Europe and South America, then split the condfederations to spread the power, you’ve done exactly the opposite in your hypothesis.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:15am | Report comment
how could Fiji and Samoa be good enough to be top 16 in the Asia/Pacific region?
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:33am | Report comment
I’m not anti-european. I just like to see sides proving it out on the pitch rather then just looking down on a nation and assuming they are crap because of reputation
Whoever gets in deserves it.
Darwin hammer said | November 19th 2009 @ 9:36am | Report comment
The problem with the argument DS is it’s not all about Australia …. just because you or anyone else wants Aussie to be pitted against the world – doesn’t mean the whole footballing world should be reconfigured … and before that happens surely Australia should prove themselves in Asia first – like performing in the Asian Cup …
the world cup is a chance for all nations to get a sniff of what it’s like … never in my wildest dreams did I ever think NZ would qualify again – but they have and for them and the supporters they off again on a great journey – similar to possibly yourself in germany last time out … why deny them or Houndras, or T & T, Cameroon etc their chance to join the party – that’s what the W/cup is all about – it’s never been about the top 32 ….
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Darwin hammer
I think New Zealand will be beneficiary to this as much as all the other nations. They will probably get to have 10 matches against decent opposition
I’m not denying opportunity. I’m giving team from Africa and Asia who are 5th to 16th best side a challenge by bitting them against the 5th-6th best side of Americans and Europeans. I like to think I’m giving them more opportunity then less especially when Asia and Africa will already be guaranteed 4 spots in my system
The North American sides will probably be pissed with this system but Asian and Africans got nothing to complain about as it just gives them more opportunities to qualify
Darwin hammer said | November 19th 2009 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Dasilva – i’m all for giving NZ a more meaningful qualification process – but I just don’t think the whole W/cup system needs to be revamped in order for it to happen or to satisfy those (and I’m not implying that this is you) who think the W/cup should try and get the best 32 teams in the world there ….
Oceania needs to lobby to be omitted into the 2nd round of Asian qualifiers thereby Asia has a firm 5 spots from the outset – and Oceania teams have a meaningful home and away qualification pathway …. NZ need to capitalise on the Wgtn crowd and try and ensure that they replicate that in the future
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
The main reason why I want this. Is I want to see Asia and Africa to show the world what they are made off.
What they made off may well be good or bad. I don’t know. I like to find out.
The thing is what happens if the depth of the confederation improves.
Let say that there has been a large improvement in the last 10 years in Africa. I strongly suspect that the 5th-16th best team are actually quite strong and give the europeans a run for their money
Well we’ll never know because they don’t play against each other in a competitive match. Only this system will find out.
Like I said before. who to say that Europe has too many places in the world cup. They may only deserve 10 instead of 13.
Well this will find out.
I like to think that this got the balance between meritocracy and world represention
I also believe that this is more of a globalised society and I think that the qualification should reflect that.
I also don’t like politicians in FIFA executives determining how many places a confederation should get
These things should be resolve on the field
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 6:41am | Report comment
Dasilva, what do you mean we don’t play games against teams from other confederations??? Didn’t you hear that England played Brazil in Qatar? A pointless money making exercise but exactly what people like yourself seem to crave and not dissimilar to the dutch playing against Australia (I mean really, like they care, if we didn’t have Pim they wouldn’t even talk to Australia).
Further, combining the Federations into 4 would be about the worst thing that could happen to football – ok Blatter’s “WC every 2 years” was worse, but that is certainly up there.
The Confederations must to an extent remain in place as there is no point in Australia having to play Luxembourg in qualifiers, remember there are still a lot of poor nations in world football and not everyone can jet around the world with their amateur sides to get thumped by the powerhouses of the game which is what would happen if Fiji enters Asia.
Further, by diluting the power you will simply further corruption and ruin the sport even more.
I’d prefer to see a version of the “Sub-Federations” – ASEAN, WAFF etc. – be used for qualifications. As they stand, most are comprised of 10-20 teams which is enough to stage qualifying. Further, this would give some more of the “lesser” nations more of the power, as it stands the smaller countries get sucked into the massive federations who aren’t there to look out for their interests and while they still have their vote, those votes are generally cast as part of the federation who all vote one way.
The only problem would be dividing Europe up “fairly”, most other areas could be divided along geographic/cultural/ethnic lines without to much of a problem and we’d lose the “unfairness” of having Australia fly all the way to Bahrain when many other countries don’t have to travel more than 2 hours for their entire campaign.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 6:54am | Report comment
I said we don’t play COMPETITIVE matches against other confederation – eg. WCQ not friendlys
Again I said that the initial stages will be done via geographics term
Just the second round will there be separation.
In any case its very unlikely that Australia will play Luxembourg.
when has Luxembourg ever been a top 16 side in Europe.
Quite frankly Freud. I’m not even too sure you even actually read what I’m saying.
If you read my comments I realise before that we play friendly against European sides that don’t mean anything. Quite frankly I want competitive matches not exhibition matches that are meaningless
Combining Confederation in to 4 – I’m not particularly fussed either way. I just did that out of convenience sake. If someone can create a better system without that then fine. I just would like to see a WCQ where teams get to play regularly against other confederation.
To be honest I believe this system would not humiliate other confederation. I don’t believe the gap of let say France or whatever to San Marino is as big as gap as France to Bahrain etc
We only using the top 16 sides of each confederation. Therefore I don’t forsee massive floggings on a regular basis.
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:09am | Report comment
Well conveniences sake might just ruin the game of football. You’d end up with a pure dictatorship and dilute the power even more than it is now, to the detriment of smaller nations and the benefit of the FIFA officials lining their pockets.
On San Marino. I think the European micro-nations are far more likely to receive the floggings, they only get accepted because it provides extra votes for UEFA.
How often do you hear of good players coming from these little countries? Very rarely mainly because their population is equivalent to that of a small city. I’m not saying Bahrain would flog San Marino but my money would certainly not be on SM.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:12am | Report comment
Look Bahrain will never play San Marino in this system
The top 16 sides from each confederation will face each other off for WCQ
Every team from each confederation will have opportunities to become the top 16 from each confederation
I’m taking WCQ positions out of the politicians hands and onto the field like it should be
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:14am | Report comment
You’re removing everyone who isn’t a power nation is what you’re doing. You would basically be excluding Australia because their FIFA rank doesn’t tell the real story.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:19am | Report comment
How?
The Top 4 will automatically 4 qualify
That’s already how much Asian teams have at the world cup.
So we are not taking away spots from Asia. We are only taking 1-2 spots from Africa. however those african teams can get more if they are good enough. if they aren’t then they get 4
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:26am | Report comment
I’m not removing anyone
If you are San Marino, Latvia and Fiji or Samoa. You will have to qualify to to become the top 16 of your confederation
You are not excluded from WCQ. It just WCQ takes part earlier.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:12am | Report comment
My point on San Marino is this
The 2nd round of WCQ in my system (although I didn’t thought it up)
The weakest team in European group will be San Marino, Kazahstan etc
The weakest team in my system
Will be Oman, Kuwait etc
Therefore it will actually be a bit more difficult for the Europeans side to qualify. It will be like Croatia, Venezuela, Oman, Algeria, USA, Bahrain
That’s a pretty tough group and the top 2 qualifies to the world cup. I wouldn’t say it’s a guarantee that the European or South American side will make it.
Luke W said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:04am | Report comment
Like Jesse Fink wrote in his TWG blog, its the best teams OF the world, not the best teams IN the world. No one wants to see 32 teams from Europe and South America.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:07am | Report comment
Come on Luke W
Did you actually read the article
Did you actually read my following comments that I believe that this is opportunities for Africa and Asia to get more spots if they are good enough.
32 teams from south america and europe will be impossible in this system.
The only way Asia and Africa can get better is by standing on their two feet and taking on sides on different confederation on a regular basis.
Freud of Football said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:10am | Report comment
Dasilva, Africa and Asia AREN’T good enough. Look at the teams from Europe and South America that have missed out. They’d likely wipe the floor with the Asian and African teams that did qualify, let alone those who weren’t good enough to make the cut.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:22am | Report comment
If they aren’t good enough so be it. they will have 4 teams at the world cup as minimum
However they will have opportunities to take on other teams and get more if they are good enough. If they aren’t then the realise they have target to improved on by playing against them regularly.
If the european sides are so much better then Asian and Africans. They they have to prove it.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:58am | Report comment
Really the only sides that lose by this system is probably north america due to their merger with south america. I admit the merger may not be ideal. L
Really Africa and Asia really only stands to gain. They don’t lose anything and they just get opportunities for more
Robbos said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:28am | Report comment
What like Ireland & Australia?
Tom said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Bit tough on Africa.
Ghana, Ivory Coast, NIgeria and Cameroon would at least be on a par with any of the European countries that didn’t qualify. In terms of the quality of the players, at any rate.
Robbos said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:35am | Report comment
Russia is out of the World cup, can we have Guus back now.
Robbos said | November 19th 2009 @ 7:55am | Report comment
Ronaldo will grace the World cup, fitness permitting as Portugal advances with 1-0 win over Bosnia. But Arshavin will not.
Fisher Price said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:54am | Report comment
And neither will John O’Shea.
AndyRoo said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:54am | Report comment
I think Dasilva’s system is quite good but I am happy enough with the status quo except I don’t think NZ got a fair run. Every team should be allowed at least 6 comeptitive games to show they deserve an automatic spot (i am aware some of the really small nations go straight to a playoff before the group stage even though).
Europe get plenty of spots. It’s very important that Asia some how comes up with a competition to rival the ECL. When the top club competiton in the world remains set up so that each team starts with 8 european plyers and at most 3 non european players they are going to have the advantage.
Either the AFC leagues have to keep developing or the AFC have to do something radical like form a petro dollar funded super league in the middle east.
dasilva said | November 19th 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Thanks Andyroo. At least you actually read it and understood it.
My system is based on curiosity in how sides will go ahead.
This status quo isn’t bad but I don’t like how WC spots are determine in the board room by FIFA executives
I like to see the Confederation becoming closer together and competing together more often more often
I like to see stuff like Global Champions Leagues in club football as well where we have clubs from different confederation duking it out. But that’s another article
People look down on a region even though they never or seldomly play against each other.
This will finally settle the debate one way or the other. Maybe I’m too optimistic and overate the 5-16 best sides of Africa and Asia. I’ll know they will not disgrace themselves.
Fisher Price said | November 19th 2009 @ 8:58am | Report comment
I like the idea of just four conferations instead of the current six.
Not sure the CONCACAF nations would concur.