By dasilva -
November 22nd 2009 @ 12:25am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Why Oceania merging with Asia isn’t that simple
One of the most common beliefs is that Oceania is an anachronistic organisation and it should join Asia to form the Asian Pacific region. This will allow New Zealand and other Oceania countries to have regular, competitive matches.
However, this isn’t that simple, and there’s simply not enough incentives for both sides to make this merger work.
When Australia joined with Asia, one of the reasons why Australia was accepted was that Australia would benefit Asia because of our professional attitude, comparatively great infrastructure, our developed nation status, decreasing the chance of Asia losing a World Cup spot, increasing the chance of winning another spot and giving Asian countries an experience playing against a European style of football. It was a mutually beneficial arrangement.
However, what’s in it for Asia to accept Oceania? Most of the benefits that Australia can offer to Asia can’t be offered by other Oceania countries. They already have the responsibility and the burden to prop up numerous national leagues and national teams because many of the countries within the region are developing countries and their football associations are not self-sustaining.
Some of these countries do not have professional leagues, and the AFC have to spend large amounts of money to help countries manage their leagues, help with logistical cost of travels for international matches and organising tournaments solely for the benefit of developing nations.
New Zealand is the most advanced nation in Oceania and they do not have a professional league and have to rely on Australia for that benefit. So accepting New Zealand and Oceania does nothing to advance AFC ongoing mission to increase professionalism in Asia.
The only thing this will do is give more countries for the AFC to prop up. AFC are not a charity and they are not going to accept any new nations unless they have to. AFC may well win an extra half a spot by accepting Oceania, but for them they would rather take their chances of attempting to beat New Zealand in a playoff than to accept Oceania and all the responsibilities that come with that.
I also like to point out that it’s a myth that Oceania joining AFC will get the teams to have regular competitive matches. Only New Zealand stands to benefit from the merger with Asia and most of the smaller countries would not. If there is a complete merger of Oceania and Asia, the OFC Champions League, OFC Nations Cup and separate Oceania qualification is disbanded. Most of the Oceania countries will play less competitive games than they do now.
Currently Oceania countries are guaranteed four games in the South Pacific Cup. But the stronger Oceania countries like New Caledonia and Fiji play up to six games in the South Pacific Cup (semi-final and finals) and then six games in the OFC Nations Cup before the potential play off with 5th place Asia.
If they join Asia, they have to win two home and away legs just to reach the group stages which is where they will get regular matches. I feel that only New Zealand is good enough to reach the group stages. Most of the other Oceania nations will have their World Cup qualifying chances dashed after two games.
What about the Asian Cup? Well all developing countries do not participate in the conventional AFC Asian Cup qualifiers. They play in a plate like tournament called AFC Challenge Cup. The winner of this tournament qualifies to the Asian Cup. They get a minimum of three games in the group stages and have to win five games to qualify to the Asian Cup.
I don’t see the Oceania teams going too far in that tournament. It’s most likely that other then New Zealand, the Oceania team will get about five competitive games every four years (three in the AFC Challenge Cup and two in the World Cup qualifiers) which is less then half of what they do now.
AFC currently have an AFC Presidential Cup. This is where emerging nations clubs can play against each other. This is where Oceania sides can get the most tangible benefits from joining Asia.
However, there are criteria saying only leagues of acceptable standards can join the Presidential Cup leaving a fair amount of nations without continental competition. It’s quite possible that AFC can decide to shaft Oceania by deciding their leagues are not to an acceptable standard as well. Considering that OFC already have an Oceania Champions League, there’s no reason to join Asia simply to join that competition.
So, therefore, there isn’t an incentive by either confederation to merge with each other. The only way I can see it happening is if FIFA forces the two confederations to merge and to have FIFA overlook the process to ensure that Oceania doesn’t get shafted.
I think the best alternative for Oceania is to lobby for the champions of the OFC to play in the final rounds of AFC qualification.
Get Australia's best Football opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(22)
If you ever find yourself watching and supporting (since their often the underdog and throw...
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:37am | Report comment
A correction.
they will participate in the AFC Challenge Cup qualifiers first with 3 games and have to finish top 2 before progressing to the AFC challenge cup. Doesn’t exactly change my point but nevertheless I made a mistake
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:43am | Report comment
If oceania ever joins Asia
This will have to be two condition
1. There will keep the South Pacific Cup.
2. They must either a) have their clubs join the president cup or b) let them keep their OFC Champions league
Only then will Oceania will get any benefit from this arrangement. FIFa has to keep a close eyes on these things.
Although saying that, what’s in that for Asia?
The article is pretty much saying that AFC has the potential to shaft the oceania nations and get them in a position even worst then they had before and therefore the idea of merging Oceania to Asia has to be proceeded with caution
The theory that OFC will have more competitive games is not a sure thing and relies on Oceania nation beating other teams in the Asian regions
danny said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
if oceania was merged into asia, and became a federation within the AFC (in addition to current federations ASEAN, east asia, west asia, and central&south asia), the OFC nations cup could continue in basically an identical manner. australia could return to oceania (currently is an ‘invitee’ with ASEAN but don’t participate in any ASEAN tournaments).
the OFC cup could double as the first round of either world cup or asian cup qualifiers. so OFC nations would play at a minimum the same number of games, and if they’re good enough can progress further. if not, they play the same amount and travel the same amount.
there are certainly hurdles but they are far from insurmountable. just depends if the powerbrokers in KL view the benefits are sufficient.
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 2:07am | Report comment
I like to see a closer relationship between Asia and Oceania to be similar to the relationship between North and South America.
South America allows mexican sides to compete in the Copa libertadores (There version of Champions League). They also allow Mexico, Costa Rica, USA, Honduras at times in the past to compete in the Copa America.
So without merging they are developing close ties with each other.
I hope that Bin Hammen will just accept PHoenix in the A-league and allow champions of Oceania to participate in the final round of qualifier. Perhaps someday allow the winner of the OFC Champions LEague to compete in the Champions League or AFC cup (UEFA cup equivalent) and perhaps Oceania champions even compete in the Asian Cup.
However so far, Bin hammen has taken an antagonistic approach to Oceania and it’s not looking so good
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:30am | Report comment
Dasilva, again, there is far more to this argument then you have let the readers know about.
What’s in it for Asia? How about 16 more votes to go the way of Bin Hammam or whoever he chooses to back as FIFA President? I’d say Asia having 25% of the votes at FIFA is certainly an advantage any AFC President would want to get his hands on.
Secondly, there wouldn’t be any huge funding needed from the AFC as FIFA are the major backers of the minnow nations.
Third, yes some competitions would need to be revamped but more members = more games = more money for everyone – I fail to see how any Asian nation or member of Oceania would be against that?
Oceania members would (like Australia now has) have the opportunity to directly qualify, I’d say that this alone is reason for them to want to be admitted into Asia and in return, Asia is likely to get an increase in direct qualification places which are going to be competed for by the “lesser” nations, as such 50% of Asia have every reason to support a merger.
This is a win-win, not a lose-lose.
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:16am | Report comment
I may be simplistic but I think a win-win situation is equally as simplistic.
if it was a win-win then clearly oceania and asia would have already merge
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 10:10am | Report comment
It’s not as simple as two president’s talking and deciding a merge is the go. How do you think the other federations would react to this?
You don’t seem to realise that football isn’t played on the field by athletes, it’s played in Hilton hotels across the world by fat men who’ve made their fortune selling carpets. These are the one’s who make the decisions and I cannot see the other federations just accepting this, FIFA is a synonym for “struggle for power”, why would any federation willingly concede that many extra votes to Asia?
Asia would have 25% of the vote, that is huge for an area that is crap at football.
Oceania might just as well be integrated into CONMEBOL or CONCACAF, I’m sure both federations would love to absorb the extra 16 votes.
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:53pm | Report comment
I have to question on the significance of these potential votes you are talking about.
It’s not like every country in the region is going to vote for whatever thing Bin Hammen wants. After all he isn’t that popular in Asia judging by the last election.
Votes can be gain without the need to join confederation. If the votes from Oceania was so important. Asia would take a far more conciliatory approach toward Oceania.
They would be open to Phoenix playing in the A-league instead of grudgingly accepting it due to FIFA directives. They would of been open to the idea of an Oceania side playing in the Asia Cup and Asian Champions league. After all if the votes was a be all and end all I’m quite sure Oceania will be willing to support Asia politcally in return for support for participation in AFC major competition.
Whilst the CONMEBOL and CONCACAF forms links together effectively forming a voting bloc. Asia has made zero efforts to develop ties with Oceania and therefore have no influence whatsoever on what the Oceania region does in the political arena.
Freud of Football said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:02am | Report comment
“It’s not like every country in the region is going to vote for whatever thing Bin Hammen wants” – Yes it is. It is the exception when a country votes against their federation, hence,whatever Bin Hammam says goes, it’s the same for Aus right now, they wouldn’t dare vote any other way than how Bin Hammam tells them.
dasilva said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:34am | Report comment
My point is for whatever benefits that the votes from Oceania is.
AFC has determine it doesn’t outweigh any cost it takes to buy those votes.
If it was so important, AFC would be developing far closer ties with Oceania then what they are doing now.
Robbos said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:43am | Report comment
Oceancia are attempting to get a side in the A-League via some corporate backing from France with Christian Karembeu, New Caledonia born French World cup winner accoring to SBS.
AndyRoo said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:28am | Report comment
I saw that. if it was based in say Auckland it might actually work.
Ben of Phnom Penh said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
it would be good if it was based in New Caledonia and played the occasional home match in Port Morseby (v Fury), Honiara (v Roar or Gold Coast) and Port Vila (v Sydney). They would get very good crowds however the tickets would have to be heavily discounted, hence they would have to rely much upon sponsorship or largess, neither of which are found in abundance in the Pacific.
At least if they were in Auckland they could charge a decent price for tickets and many of the top players from the region are there already (eg Benjamin Tototori).
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:56pm | Report comment
If AFC are pissed of about Wellington Phoenix, how are they going to handle about us considering another Oceania side in the A-league.
FFA better be careful, they might end up biting the hand that feeds them.
AndyRoo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
If Fifa are on board then I don’t think the AFC should really get involved. It’s supposed to be about the good of the game and no one can argue that giving nations like NZ and the pacific a chance at professional football that would otherwise be impossible isn’t a good thing.
I know AFC politics aren’t always based on what’s for the “good of the game” but that still caries some weight with it and I doubt the AFC want tog et into a tussel with Fifa about something as small and unimportant as one or two A league teams.
Timmuh said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:07am | Report comment
The support issue seems a real one, but could be resolved if FIFA were to help out. How does Oceania help these countries now?
The South Pacific Cup could remain, and there could be two phases of qualifying for Asian Cups and an early phase for Asian World Cup places. This could mean countries which struggle in Asia; Bhutan, Nepal, etc; could get games closer to their own levels before going into the “main” qualifying rounds.
The costs and times involved with flying Vanuatu to Bhutan to play in front of 500 people, for example, would also be an issue but a relatively minor one.
Midfielder said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:04pm | Report comment
Don’t write off Fiji … they are stronger than you think and have a rich football history and in many parts of the country Football is the main sport.
lauboy said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:53pm | Report comment
I come from Fiji. You have no idea what you’re talking about!
“… in many parts of the country, football is the main sport” HA!!
Football in Oceania (excluding NZ) is a massive financial blackhole.
To make these teams competitive on even a regional level is the work of many generations, involving many millions of dollars to be spent annually.
Ben of Phnom Penh said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
In the end it would benefit Oceania, not least if one or two islander sides are entered into the A-League. Nations such as Solomon Islands and Fiji which have half decent footballers would benefit greatly from the extra exposure.
The problem though is the vested interest inside Oceania and the fear that the lesser voice in FIFA will result in less attention to the region. I believe that this lessening of voice would be more than compensated by the benefits of being in Asia having the members of the OFC are unlikely to see it that way.
albatross said | November 22nd 2009 @ 2:34pm | Report comment
There are actually only 11 full members of the OFC. Kiribati, FSM, Niue, Palau and Tuvalu are only associate members of the OFC and are not members of FIFA.
In reality the OFC is in a sorry state. For instance PNG (by far and away the most populous country in the OFC) was disqualified from competing in the current WC. Most national teams play very few matches let alone competitive ones.
FIFA needs to take the OFC in hand and putting in the care and control of the AFC would be the answer as the problems in many OFC nations mirror those of the tropical and/or smaller AFC nations. For example splenic enlargement due to chronic malaria is a real issue in the tropics making participation in body contact sports problematic unless managed carefully. The AFC with FIFA support would have the resources and motivation to address this.
Let’s hope that after the WC2010 someone in FIFA will turn their attention to the problems of the OFC.
westy said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
Dasilva as always your heart is in the right place but the AFC is not a transparent organisation who fulfil the objects you say they do. There hierarchy is often to dominated by moneyed Middle East clique who have economic interests at heart and an appalling record of developing the game or even a coherent plan in some of Asia’s most populous nations. there record in Indis , Pakistan, Indonesia even China has left much to be desired. Bluntly from North korea’s great effort in 1966 football in Asia has not come very far in nearly 50 years. Much of the positive direction has come from FIFA rather than the AFC.
i support Australia’s membership of the AFC however thier record of objectively developing football is indifferent.
India’s 300 million middle class is not financially hamstrung.
Bahrain or Australia will never be the measure of success for football in Asia it will be when Indis 1.3 billion ) and China ( 1.2 billion ) start to play well.
The AFC is an unrepresentative hotpoch that fails to recognise the geographical linkages of the world’s largest continent. . The middle east should have one place including the Turkistan nations . Asia proper should have distinct zonal qualifying groups to place India / China/ Pakistan/ Afghanistan/ Mongolia/ Nepal/ Sri lanka with a further place to South East Asia( Indonesia/ Sinapore/ thailand/ Vietnam/ including Australia and new Zealand and Oceania/ and a fourth place to japan / South korea north korea/ Taiwan/ Phillipines/, the extra half place may well go to a play off between the second placed best qualifiers.
Basically the middle east have little incentive to develop football in India or pakistan and the same could be said for Japan and South Korea in relation to China.
By the way we would not like a strong Indonessian team.
David V. said | November 25th 2009 @ 11:43am | Report comment
Asia’s problem is that it is too big, too unwieldy and too uneven. It is not a coherent entity in any meaningful way, just a geographic expression to describe the eastern half of the Eurasian super-continent. For the sheer population and resources, Asia doesn’t deliver enough compared to other continents. Few Asians have ever made it to the biggest stage compared to Africa and Latin America.