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.
Jamie Anastas
Guest
I think they should merge: Then add Russia and Turkey into the new confederation. Adding Russia and Turkey will improve the quality in the confederation and make more qualifying sports for the world cup. It could look appealing because they are part of EUFA (Europe) and they could have a higher chance of qualifying through Asia and Oceania The confederation will be called; Asia and Oceania Football Confederation (AOFC) Then they should form 4 sub-groups: 1. Oceania (Australia joins back in the sub-group) 2. East and South-East Asia 3. Central and South Asia (Russia joins this one) 4. Middle East (Turkey joins this one) These groups will be used for qualifying for world cups It could also look appealing to FIFA itself for New Zealand, Turkey and Russia to join the confederation because; Asia is planned to move to 8 spots for a 48-team world cup Other than Saudi Arabia, Iran, Japan, South Korea and Australia the other countries aren't very good We don't want to see UAE, Qatar and Syria in the World Cup. New Zealand, Russia and Turkey would be much better. China isn't too bad but will continue to improve because of there Soccer project. Then Asia and Oceania confederation will have 9 world cup spots The sub-groups will only qualify with each other meaning no flying from Tahiti to Europe (Turkey for example). Or no more jetlag for the Australians when they travel to the Middle East as they do know. Oceania will have 2 world cup spots (primarily for Australia and New Zealand) East and South-East Asia will have 3 spots (primarily for China, Japan and South Korea) Central and South Asia will have 1 spot (primarily for Russia) The Middle East will have 3 spots (primarily for Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran) In Oceania, there will be one group of 6 countries (all playing each other twice, home and away) the top 2 will qualify and the top 3 will qualify for the Asia and Oceania Cup In East and South-East Asia, there will be 3 groups of 4 countries; the top team will qualify for the World Cup were the top 3 of each group (9 in total) will qualify for the Asia and Oceania Cup In Central and South Asia, there will be one group of 6 teams; the top team will qualify for the world cup (1 team) and the top 3 will qualify for the Asia and Oceania Cup In the Middle East, there will be 3 groups of 4 teams, the top team will qualify for the World Cup and the top 3 of each group will qualify for the World Cup. Meaning there will be 9 teams from the Middle East, 3 from Central and South Asia, 9 from East and South-East Asia and 3 from Oceania. Adding up to 24 teams in the Asia and Oceania Cup This makes the quality for the Asia and Oceania Cup up good enough too. We don't want to see Tahiti playing Syria. 3 teams in Oceania is suitable for the quality. This would mean 9 countries from Asia and Oceania will qualify for the World Cup; Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, South Korea, Japan, New Zealand and Australia. A lot better than having: Turkey and Russia not being able to qualify through Europe Asia by itself having teams like UAE and Qatar in the World Cup And having it too easy for New Zealand Then 2 countries from the Middle East (primarily UAE and Qatar), 1 from Central and South Asia (primarily India) and 1 from East and South-East Asia (primarily Thailand) (that haven't qualified for the world cup) will compete in playoffs together. the winning team in those matches (1 team) will then go to the international playoffs with the other 4 confederations across the world. The top 2 teams in that group will make up for the remaining world cup spots Meaning Asia and Oceania will have 9 spots for the world cup and a play-off spot. Overall, I personally think my idea is the best for the World Cup itself. It's better for Oceania. It makes the quality in the continents better. It makes the quality of the Asian Cup (previously) better. It makes the quality in Oceania better. It makes more teams having a chance (like Turkey and Russia) and makes Asia dn Oceania merger more ideal and possible I hope it happens like this, it would be the best
michael
Guest
Same thing in the americas should hapoen after all mexico and costa rica are concacaf but play in south american championship with uruguay brazil etc. Really even concacaf has a carribean union and cgampionship so why should asia and oceania be different. Africa has sub sections too and regional championships but in world cup. Either way competing against better teans makes you get better look at luxembourg beating slovakia for example. Israel joined europe for political reasons not sure about kazakhstan but it wouldnt mean necessarily travelling huge distances.
michael
Guest
I dont see why oceania cannot keep the ofc cup as asia has regional tournaments anyway that would benefit all parties as well as australia and new zeakand etc who get to play more competitive matches too
lauboy
Guest
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.
David V.
Guest
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.
dasilva
Guest
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.
AndyRoo
Guest
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.
Freud of Football
Roar Guru
"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
Guest
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.
dasilva
Guest
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.
westy
Guest
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.
albatross
Roar Pro
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.
Ben of Phnom Penh
Guest
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).
Ben of Phnom Penh
Guest
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.
Midfielder
Guest
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.
danny
Guest
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.
AndyRoo
Guest
I saw that. if it was based in say Auckland it might actually work.
Freud of Football
Roar Guru
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
Roar Guru
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
Timmuh
Roar Guru
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.