A New WCQ format....

[coppercanuck]

It may be too soon to discuss the next WCQ season but the format needs to be addressed. Currently Asia, Africa and Oceania have no teams in the top ten of the FIFA rankings (the FIFA ranking discussion can be found next to the NCAA/BCS discussion on another page[xx(]). These confederations are going to have 10 teams out of 32 in Germany. Bizarre? It gets better, one of Bahrain (55) and Trinidad & Tobago (53) are going to get to the show while a team like Uruguay (17) has to play a playoff against Austrailia (54). I'm all for regional balance and breaking new ground for the global game but does this cross the line of unfair competition?

Here's an idea for a 32 team event.

Host (1)

Champ (1)

FIFA Top Ten (10)

The other 20 teams would be divided up based on the top 5 FIFA ranked teams in you confederation. Based on Oct-2005 points (Brazil 840) the break down would be..

Asia (3)

Africa (3)

CONCACAF (4)

CONMEBOL (4)

Oceanian (2)

UEFA (4)

Based on Oct-2005 ranking (Brazil 1) the break down would be..

Asia (2)

Africa (2)

CONCACAF (2)

CONMEBOL (3.5)

Oceanian (0.5)

UEFA (10)

You can see quickly how subjective the ranking procedures can be. How would you compare confederations?

[Daniel]

No offense, but the point of World Cup *qualifying* is to put everyone in the same boat and to have everyone *qualify* for the World Cup. If we start just letting the best teams "because", then we get the World Cup of Hockey, which is a farce.

You can always make a case for Europe, but 14 spots out of 32 for any continent is enough. South America gets to potentially qualify nearly half their continent, which is a LOT considering. I think Asia gets one too many spots and Africa could use it. The playoffs are always changing, so you can always make a case for them. But if you give the .5 Asian spot to Africa and actually balance CONCACAF qualifying so a decent team might emerge as the .5, you get a decent set of playoffs.

Africa is rarely well placed in the rankings but their teams can always surprise (ask France of 2002, Spain of 1998, Argentina of 1994 or of 1990...).

[morrison]

I do feel that with Australia (allegedly) moving to the AFC for the 2010 Qualifying that Asia's .5 spot becomes more justifiable. However, Oceania's .5 loses 90% (ok, I won't be so harsh on New Zeland even if they couldn't even beat the Solomon Islands.... 75%) of it's purpose.

Proposition: Let the AFC absorb the entire Oceania federation (to the great displeasure of New Zeland and that guy (can't remember the name) who stormed out of a meeting once. And give the former Oceania .5 to Africa

Europe (14)

Africa (5.5)

South America (4.5)

Asia (4.5)

North America (3.5)

It's not a drastic change but ever so slightly addresses the current development of Africa.

There will not be a major change for years to come I don't feel, and forget this 36 team tournament, keep it at 32 otherwise it would take too long.

Yes you lose an entire federation... but Australia's already leaving it (in Qualifying at least) hence depleating any sense of keeping it for Qualification reasons.

I feel that, although harsh to New Zeland (and maybe the Solomon Islands *snigger*) it seems an obvious thing to do now that Australia has left the Oceania behind.

[MFC]

Without competitive games how could the FIFA Top 10 be accurate?

[Cheeta]

And the points ranking system is not balanced. Not by a long shot. It's a system which clearly rewards the most active teams, odviously sometimes not quite fairly. It's realy not that bad a system but it certainly can be tuned up a little.

I'm actualy not that displeased with the way the various zones are being allocated their available slots this go around.

Yes, Oceania's 1/2 spot is as good as a give away to SA once Australia leaves but you never know. NZ will be happy to take their chances I'm sure. If Australia wants to take their chances with Asia that's their business but keep the Oceania region. The possablity of NZ going through to qualify and Australia not even making a playoff spot is just too delicious.

I think 32 teams is too many anyway. Yeah, it's a nice scheduling number but it's too many.

Interesting topic anyway.

[Cheeta]

And the points ranking system is not balanced. Not by a long shot. It's a system which clearly rewards the most active teams, odviously sometimes not quite fairly. It's realy not that bad a system but it certainly can be tuned up a little.

I'm actualy not that displeased with the way the various zones are being allocated their available slots this go around.

Yes, Oceania's 1/2 spot is as good as a give away to SA once Australia leaves but you never know. NZ will be happy to take their chances I'm sure. If Australia wants to take their chances with Asia that's their business but keep the Oceania region. The possablity of NZ going through to qualify and Australia not even making a playoff spot is just too delicious.

I think 32 teams is too many anyway. Yeah, it's a nice scheduling number but it's too many.

Interesting topic anyway.

[Cheeta]

Oh. Forgot to bring up something that was mentioned the last time this sort of topic came up and what I thought was a pretty good idea.

A playoff draw. Make those who've qualified for a playoff slot draw lots for their opponent. Just to keep things fresh. Increase the chances of Oceania (for one) of qualifying. I know their half slot is against SA so they DON'T qualify, or at least have the hardest go of it, but the fairness of deciding who plays whom on a fixed schedule is subjective anyway.

As they say, just a thought. Think it would be great fun.

[Cheeta]

Oh. Forgot to bring up something that was mentioned the last time this sort of topic came up and what I thought was a pretty good idea.

A playoff draw. Make those who've qualified for a playoff slot draw lots for their opponent. Just to keep things fresh. Increase the chances of Oceania (for one) of qualifying. I know their half slot is against SA so they DON'T qualify, or at least have the hardest go of it, but the fairness of deciding who plays whom on a fixed schedule is subjective anyway.

As they say, just a thought. Think it would be great fun.

[Daniel]

I like 32 teams. While there might be a few teams that really don't belong there, it assures a straightforward competition and none of this "best 3rd place".

Australia will completely integrate the Asian confederation, apparently, also playing in the ACL. Kind of like Israel in UEFA. I couldn't see the Oceania confederation absorbed by Asia because that would probably mean the death of all its small constituents. I mean, if the small Carribean countries complain about travel costs to Costa Rica and Canada, imagine Tonga going to Lebanon or Uzbekistan.

[Daniel]

I like 32 teams. While there might be a few teams that really don't belong there, it assures a straightforward competition and none of this "best 3rd place".

Australia will completely integrate the Asian confederation, apparently, also playing in the ACL. Kind of like Israel in UEFA. I couldn't see the Oceania confederation absorbed by Asia because that would probably mean the death of all its small constituents. I mean, if the small Carribean countries complain about travel costs to Costa Rica and Canada, imagine Tonga going to Lebanon or Uzbekistan.