CONCACAF Qualifying

[Reza]

This obviously comes based on the experience of 2000 and also watching the qualification evolve this time around, but I think it's time for CONCACAF to revisit its qualifying formula.

If you look at USA's group, there is little to separate the four teams and if it wasn't for some very timely goals in injury times, USA would have been in third place right now. Can you imagine a Hex without the Yanks?

The same probably wouldn't have happened to Mexico because of its home advantage, but they could definitely be challenged.

And then in Canada's group, there is very little that separates the four and anyone who has watched the group, would agree.

And then, to think that Cuba missed out on this round, after two ties against Costa Rica.

The fact is that there is about 10-12 competitive teams in CONCACAF now and it's not very fair to have any of them knocked out after only 6 games, almost 1 year before qualifying ends everywhere else. No other continent does it this way. In Africa, Europe or South America, qualifying goes well into 2005 for their top teams while in Asia, their top 10 teams make the final cut.

I think CONCACAF should start making its qualifying similar to Asia.

We have about 30 odd countries in this region. Sure, most probably wouldn't do much, but that's the whole point.

If we can break the 33 or 36 teams we have into 12 groups of 2 and 3 and make that the first round of qualifying, we give everyone some tune up time, especially with the busy international calendar.

Then, breaking the 12 teams into 2 groups of 6, would allow for 10 more games that would stretch over a longer perod of time and which would give teams more ample opportunity to overcome 1 bad result or 1 bad ref call.

Finally, we take the top 2 of each group and make them play playoff matches or make the top team of each group go through while the 2nd place teams play one another. And the loser ends up playing the Asian fifth team.

[Natesta]

Man, there are already more than enough qualifying games in CONCACAF

[Reza]

Well, this would be less than what we have now...

30 odd teams ==> 12 groups of 2 or 3 means ==> 2-4 first round matches

2 groups of 6 ==> means 10 matches

You could have two groups like below:

Mexico, Honduras, Canada, Cuba, Jamaic, Panama

USA, T&T, Costa Rica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Haiti

Top teams qualify with potentially 12-14 total including the first round matches which is 4-6 less than now.

home and away for 2nd place teams means 2 more games.

3rd team goes up with 14-16 matches which is 2-4 matches less than now.

4th team could go to WC with 16-18 matches which is again 2-4 matches less than now.

And even, if they decide it's not enough, they can always make the top 2 of each group play in a mini-playoff which brings us to the total of 18 matches we have to play now to go up to WC.

That's pretty much what Asia does. And this way it's a bit more fair. IT's harder to get an easy pass to a 50% round like T&T is getting this year and it will take longer to be eliminated than now.

[Canadienfan]

I'd be all for a format like an Asian set up like Reza points out!

[The Ref]

Correct me if I am wrong, but getting past this Concacaf group of four, Canada, CR, Honduras, Guatemala; only moves us to a next group of six. It does not qualify us to Germany. We still need to get past the group of six to make it to Germany. Hoping for the best and wishing Yallop the best of lucks, it is still a long way to Germany.

[Reza]

But that's where the problem is in my opinion. You get a couple of bad ref calls or couple of lucky bounces and you are either out or you have more than 50% chance of qualifying. This does not happen in any other region for their better teams.

Considering how costly mistakes can be, I think the goal should be to give teams a chance to recover from a bad call, multiple injuries, or others and if you have 10 games versus 6, it does make a huge difference.

Based on the play of CONCACAF sides in the last two world cups, the top two teams in CONCACAF shouldn't really have to play more than 12 games to qualify anyways. They showed they are at the same level as the mid-level European teams and they typically play 10-12 qualifiers to make it to the big show. And that's why I think the top team of each of these groups (probably USA and Mexico) should automatically qualify. For example, this round would have started in August 2004 for instance and ended in June-July of 2005 while the final playoffs could have been played in August, September, October and NOvember of next year, all on FIFA calendar.

The 2nd team of each group would then play a home and away series in August & September of 2005 and the winner becomes the third CONCACAF team and the loser goes for the 1/2 spot that is available in October and November of 2005.

Not only this would give teams a chance to play longer, I think it will help soccer in any of these countries and afterall, shouldn't that be one goal of World Cup qualifying? All top 12 CONCACAF teams would be playing football well into 2005 which would help the interest levels in their respective nations. Plus, now you might even be able to shove Gold Cup somewhere proper as opposed to in the middle of Hex.

In Asian football, where they have about 40-50 nations, they break it into 10 groups and each of the top teams like South Korea, Iran, Japan, China, Saudi get their group. Typically, they have a very easy first round, although some teams like Iran had a bit of a challenge this time around. But still, almost all the big guns, end up in the final round which is two groups of 5.

There is really four or five decent teams in Asia, but they still give up to 10 teams a chance to be in that final round.

One other advantage of this is that it minimizes the possiblity of groupings like we have now with T&T facing two little Islands and then making it to the final stage while teams like Canada, CR, Honduras and Guatemala, USA, Panama, El Salvador and Jamaica have to fight like hell to be in that final group.

[nolando]

I like the Asia model myself.

[Gian-Luca]

Totally agree, Reza, and I've been saying the same thing for several years.

With that Mexico & T&T group, it makes the current qualifying system an even bigger mockery.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by Reza

But that's where the problem is in my opinion. You get a couple of bad ref calls or couple of lucky bounces and you are either out or you have more than 50% chance of qualifying. This does not happen in any other region for their better teams.

With your idea, to qualify directly you would have to finish no worse than second in a group of 6 just to have a chance of qualifying. If a couple of bad referee calls and bounces can cause Canada to finish 4th in a group of 4, you better believe it can also cause them to finish somewhere below second in a group of 6.

Your idea might be more interesting, but I don't see how it would diminish the referee effect.

[Reza]

In this model, teams are alive for almost a year. In a three months window like we have now with the semi-final round, all is needed is to have a few injuries mixed with one or two mistakes and bad calls and you are done. When you stretch the games over a long period, there is more time to get over stuff. It's more chances for more teams for a longer period of times.

The odds from a statisical point of view might be slightly better for the current model, but that hides the reality that 50% of teams are removed from competition a year before the end of qualifyings and really, out of your top 12 teams, 6 are gone after 3 months of qualifying (i.e. end of August till early November of 2004). It's all about how much time you have to recover from mistakes and injuries and how many games.