The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

The Club World Cup is a valuable tournament

Expert
8th December, 2008
14
1506 Reads

Bunyodkor's Rivaldo, right, and Adelaide United's Sasa Ognenovski fight for the ball during AFC Champions League semifinals second leg match between Bunyodkor and Adelaide United in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2008. AP Photo/Anvar Ilyasov

As my Roar colleague Mike Tuckerman wrote yesterday, scepticism regarding the worthiness of the Club World Cup abounds in England, despite the opportunity it gives to the smaller clubs of the world. While calendar congestion and a Eurocentric outlook are the main reasons for this negativity, the bad taste left by the first edition of the tournament in 2000 explains much of the antagonism.

The 2000 World Club Cup was held in Brazil, a new format that included all of the confederation champions, rather than just the European and South American champs who would traditionally square off in the Intercontinental (Toyota) Cup.

Critics scorned that it was all a FIFA ploy, giving them political sway with the smaller confederations who saw the potential of the Club World Cup as a ticket to play the likes of Manchester United and gave FIFA an avenue into the riches offered by club football once reserved for UEFA and other continental confederations.

From a one off game, the new format included eight teams and involved a much larger commitment.

As Sam Wallace of The Independent wrote, “This ridiculously bloated competition has taken the place of a perfectly good one-off game – once the Intercontinental Cup.”

The tournament caused a political tsunami in England as Manchester United withdrew from the FA Cup to compete in Brazil, under pressure from UEFA, the FA and FIFA.

It didn’t do much good.

Advertisement

An uninspired United, the poster boys of the tournament, didn’t even make it out of the group stage while fellow European giants Real Madrid (invited to the tournament as the Intercontinental champions of the previous campaign) stumbled to fourth place.

Fittingly the final was played between two Brazilian teams, with Corinthians overcoming Vasco da Gama in a penalty shootout after a dour nil all stalemate.

The group stages were too drawn out and the fact the final involved two compatriots did little to endear the tournament to the greater football world.

But the current format avoids these problems.

The in-built imperialistic seeded rounds solve two problems that emerged from Brazil.

Firstly it reduces the games’ congestion for the European and South American teams, a real issue for the former who can fly in, play a maximum of two games and leave.

Secondly the seeded system sets up the potential European V South American showdown the Intercontinental Cup provided each year while allowing the chance of an upset if their opponents can upset them in the semis.

Advertisement

The first concern of the English press, calendar congestion, is justified.

Manchester United are already a game behind their rivals thanks to the UEFA Super Cup and will miss another EPL fixture while in Japan.

Their progression through to the semi-final of the Carling Cup means the two outstanding fixtures could not be squeezed into January as planned. Should they continue their progression in the UEFA Champions League and FA Cup, they will certainly have a full plate in the New Year.

But for the likes of Waitakere and Adelaide, the chance to meet the titans of European football is an incredible opportunity for club and countries.

Here in Adelaide, anticipation is rising of not just a chance at redemption against Gamba Osaka but a possible match up with Ronaldo, Rooney and co.

The Club World Cup will never be an egalitarian contest.

The economic disparity between Manchester United and Waitakere is like comparing the economic GDP of the United States of America to Djibouti.

Advertisement

But therein lies the beauty of the tournament.

It’s a chance for the clubs of the world game, not just two continents, to show their stuff.

close