Oceania get direct qualification into the World Cup

[roostersgal4eva]

this great news

it might make the w@nkers at SA to get their act together and fix itself & the NSL - SCRAP THE LOT AND START FROM SCRATCH!.

also it might help the developement of ocanian soccer - we need to develpe soccer in every country in oceania (oz, nz, figi, papa new ginea etc.) not just in oz!

 

[Diego Forlan]

Originally posted by roostersgal4eva
this great news

it might make the w@nkers at SA to get their act together and fix itself & the NSL - SCRAP THE LOT AND START FROM SCRATCH!.

also it might help the developement of ocanian soccer - we need to develpe soccer in every country in oceania (oz, nz, figi, papa new ginea etc.) not just in oz!

Your assuming they get there, it's only one hurdle less than before and remember the last time Australia played the Kiwi's?

If anyone could stuff it up - SA can.

 

[Diego Forlan]

Originally posted by Karanicolas
Well surely there is money to be made by Soccer Australia by having games in Europe and televising them into Australia.

Have you considered applying for a spot on the SA board? Surely they wouldn't have thought of this idea

I'm not taking the **** out of what you say, as I agree, but as we know SA couldn't make money even if they wanted to, hell they'd probably give the rights to Ch 7 so we can see a half hour highlights package at 2.30am.

 

[-GB-]

Originally posted by Diego Forlan

This would spell the end of matches at the MCG too I'd imagine. There's no way 80,000 will turn up to see the Kiwis. Back to the SFS methinks....

Apparently Melbourne has a 15 year contract on all International games played in Australia. Not sure how we worked that one.. And personally I think 70,000 (no ponsford stand) would turn up, given that a win would send us through to the world cup finals.

 

[Diego Forlan]

Originally posted by -GB-
Apparently Melbourne has a 15 year contract on all International games played in Australia. Not sure how we worked that one.. And personally I think 70,000 (no ponsford stand) would turn up, given that a win would send us through to the world cup finals.

Funny because I can remember in the last campaign the home leg of the NZ match was played at the SFS. I don't recall seeing a full house either

There's no way 70,000 will turn up for a soccer match against NZ, no matter what the stakes. It would be nice, but it just won't happen. NZ is not in the same league as Uruguay, or even Iran for that matter.

 

[hotpie]

How in God's name did Australia get such an easy ride to the World cup finals? It is a disgrace and makes a mockery of the World Cup to think that teams like Chile and Peru and Uraguay struggle to qualify against the likes of Brazil and Argentina, and all we have to do is beat the Cocos Islands and New Zealand!

Its a joke. Oceania should be abolished and merged in with Asia, and we would then have to work for our spot against quality teams. Australian soccer had done nothing to deserve this handout - perhaps thats why they are broke - the bribes were just so expensive!

 

[Bomber Spirit]

Oceania is a legitimate confederation like any other, and so therefore their top team should be in the World Cup like any other. Not that there's any guarantee that'll be us - New Zealand beat Australia at their last start, and Australian soccer is so jinxed that we'll probably lose to NZ in a qualifyer.
As for Australia being competitive in the World Cup, our best chance of being competitive is if we're playing - so this won't do us any harm at all. Plus, with Australia having a better chance of qualifying, other countries likely to be there will want to play against us now to have a look at us before the WC.

Great news. Although on its own it won't solve all the game's problems.

 

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by Diego Forlan
Funny because I can remember in the last campaign the home leg of the NZ match was played at the SFS. I don't recall seeing a full house either

That game was at Stadium Australia and got around 50,000 which was quite good. It looked empty because at the time the Stadium was being re-developed with most of the lower bowl a construction zone.

The decision's somewhat surprising but I'm quite happy. It's a bit of a hollow victory since I'd prefer us to get some arrangement with Asia going but in the end FIFA have decided to grant Oceania a spot and I'll happily abide by that decision. It's good for the game not just here and in NZ but also in the Pacific, these nations are for the most part improving and this should only increase now.

Pessimistic made a good point, see how we go in the 2006 Qualifiers (and hopefully WCF) and then approach other confederations after the WC if we bomb out. I'd say the MCG will be a packed house against NZ (or Fiji? Vanuatu?), I went with mates down to the Uruguay match and had a great time and plan to do so again.

 

[Bomber Spirit]

Originally posted by Sydneyfan
It's a bit of a hollow victory since I'd prefer us to get some arrangement with Asia going but in the end FIFA have decided to grant Oceania a spot and I'll happily abide by that decision.

In the immortal words of Andrew Denton:
"It's just not fair, but I don't care; as long as we beat New Zealand".

 

[sbagman]

Although I'd love to see Australia in the Asian confed, it just ain't gonna happen. It's not ideal, but it's better than what we have in place now. Hopefully the promise of being in the WC should mean some more meaningfull friendlies.

On the whole injustice of it all, stiff poo. How many of the 32 would be there if it really was the best 32 in the world?

It will help the game here, and I'm sick of Oceania being a joke of a confederation. We get so many disadvantages for being here, about time we got something out of it.

 

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
In the immortal words of Andrew Denton:
"It's just not fair, but I don't care; as long as we beat New Zealand".

Too right, to put it mildly I'll be a very dissappointed man if the All Whites are gracing the playing fields of Deutschland come 2006!

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

We've been getting jibbed by the qualification process for years so I think Australia deserve this

And don't tell me where not better than some of the rubbish sides that made the World Cup like Saudi Arabia

However a word of warning to all. There could be as many as 3 or 4 Barnsley players in the New Zealand side as the highly succesful Barnsley Academy recruit from New Zealand every year

Don't be surprised if David Mulligan or Jeremy Christie send us spiralling back into soccer oblivion

 

[Sydneyfan]

Whether people like the decision or not, it's been made and we can't do much about it. After all, it's not that bad and much more palatable than getting through Oceania and then face the 5th best South Americans.

Some posts around the boards appear to be almost self-loathing, we don't deserve this, we're not worthy. Who cares? FIFA have made their decision and our part of the bargain is to get through to the Finals and prove they we are indeed worthy. Let the Europeans, South Americans and others bitch and moan about the decision like they're doing on BigSoccer, our emphasis now is to make sure we're there!

The focus now should be ensuring that this qualification process works best for us so we can not only make the WC but compete well in the WC.

 

[rubberman]

The rest of Oceania got ripped off by this decision to grant Oceania direct entry. This decision only favours Australia and NZ, and development in these countries will suffer as a result.
The logical decision would be to qualify through Asia in a group competition format. This would mean teams from Oceania could play any one of a number of nations in Asia. Could you Imagine if Vanautu was grouped with Thailand and how much more in television rights Vanautu would get in comparison to just playing Australia or NZ. It would increase income across the confederation if we were gouped with Asia. This would mean Australia would get more games together and would benefit as a result of tougher competition. Does that make any sense?

Listen to Johnny Warren he knows what he's talking about. He sees the bigger picture of having to qualify through Asia. He is also a big advocate of the Australian soccer team playing more games. Do you know how many games the Socceroos played last year? yes that is right ZIP, nothing, noula, nil. Do you think that the Socceroos should play more games? It would help dont you think? or is Australia only going to show up every fourth year. The admin of Soccer Australia have made their life easier by this decision, but not to the full benefit of the game in this country.

 

[Dipper]

As an outsider I think it's about time the winner of your group was given a decent chance of making the finals, the previous system was patently unfair, if FIFA are so keen on having an OCEANA confederation (presumably for political reasons) then they are duty bound to give it an automatic palce, perhaps the present group is not now competitive enough in which case they should have put you with Asia but it's definitely fairer than it was.

Personally I think FIFA are a disgrace firstly the holders are now no longer guaranteed a place which is sh*t but more importantly what are they doing to South America?Those poor b@stards only get 4 places whilst those over rated Africans get 5 & Asia who between them have performed well at 1 WC get 4 1/2.

South American sides have won more WCs than anyone & they are shabbily treated, the whole FIFA election thing is such a load of bollocks with all the selling of votes ect.These tin pot countries wield far too much power & the WC seems to be allocated to countries on a comercial basis more than anything.

 

[daicos4ever]

Originally posted by DIPPER
what are they doing to South America?Those poor b@stards only get 4 places whilst those over rated Africans get 5

Exactly. I say take two places off the Africans, give them to South America. What has Africa really done to deserve 5 places? Wow, the past two Olympic Champions are African, jee we better give them more WC places than they deserve. Oh and didn't Senegal do well at the World Cup? Making the Second Round? Nigeria and Cameroon were extraordinary as well. Lets not forget the Tunisians and Morrocans at WC98. High quality African football!

Seriously though, surely South America deserve more than four? North and Central America should have 3 (not the extra .5), Asia 4.5? They had 4 at the last world cup because Korea and Japan hosted it. 3.5 for WC98. Saudi Arabia and China are examples of why Asia is overrated. And as for Africa.... the less said the better....

 

[Diego Forlan]

Originally posted by rubberman
The rest of Oceania got ripped off by this decision to grant Oceania direct entry. This decision only favours Australia and NZ, and development in these countries will suffer as a result.
The logical decision would be to qualify through Asia in a group competition format. This would mean teams from Oceania could play any one of a number of nations in Asia. Could you Imagine if Vanautu was grouped with Thailand and how much more in television rights Vanautu would get in comparison to just playing Australia or NZ. It would increase income across the confederation if we were gouped with Asia. This would mean Australia would get more games together and would benefit as a result of tougher competition. Does that make any sense?

Listen to Johnny Warren he knows what he's talking about. He sees the bigger picture of having to qualify through Asia. He is also a big advocate of the Australian soccer team playing more games. Do you know how many games the Socceroos played last year? yes that is right ZIP, nothing, noula, nil. Do you think that the Socceroos should play more games? It would help dont you think? or is Australia only going to show up every fourth year. The admin of Soccer Australia have made their life easier by this decision, but not to the full benefit of the game in this country.

You're dead right. As much as I reckon Johnny Warren is a flog, he is right on this. Having the preparation against some reputable opposition in Asia will most likely be the difference between us winning games at the World Cup and not winning any. Either way, we would probably qualify, but i'd rather see us not embarass ourselves should we get there.

We need the preparation!! That is the key.

 

[Slax]

Australia have failed to qualify in recent years not because of lack of talent but purely because we only field our best 11 about 3 times every 4 years.

If we want to be a decent soccer nation then we must play our national side more often even if it means playing in Europe and not letting Australians see them play on home shores.

 

[rubberman]

Originally posted by Diego Forlan
You're dead right. As much as I reckon Johnny Warren is a flog, he is right on this. Having the preparation against some reputable opposition in Asia will most likely be the difference between us winning games at the World Cup and not winning any. Either way, we would probably qualify, but i'd rather see us not embarass ourselves should we get there.

We need the preparation!! That is the key.

We need to put the Socceroo's on the park more often. Keep the interest in them alive, and give them a chance to play together more often. But if you think that if we did have to play for a spot through asia, we would have 10 or 12 games as a team with something on the line rather than it all being on the line in 2 games.

 

[sbagman]

How do we get meaningful preparation? That's the question. Even if we don't join Asia, could we get invited to their continental championship?

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by DIPPER
firstly the holders are now no longer guaranteed a place which is sh*t

Why is it sh*t? Why should the winners of the previous World Cup get a spot for the next World Cup, which is a different tournament? Each World Cup is separate, and all teams (bar the host nation) should have to qualify. The fact Brazil won it in 2002 has got nothing to do with the 2006 World Cup.

When the 2002 tournament is over, all teams then all have to qualify for the next World Cup. It's like putting the Brisbane Lions in the AFL Finals series for 2003 wiuthout having to play the home and away season because they won in 2002. But what the hell has one season got to do with another? Nothing.

Originally posted by DIPPER
but more importantly what are they doing to South America?Those poor b@stards only get 4 places whilst those over rated Africans get 5 & Asia who between them have performed well at 1 WC get 4 1/2.

4 is about right. They only have two super powers. They only have 10 countries in the entire confederation. I know Uruguay won the Cup twice, but that was back when the participation rates for countries in the World Cup was lower. They wouldn't have a chance now. 40% is a higher participation rate in the World Cup than any other confederation.

Outside of Brazil and Argentina, South America is an overrated confederation in my view. Problem is, we only ever think of those two super powers when we think of CONMEBOL.

Originally posted by DIPPER
South American sides have won more WCs than anyone & they are shabbily treated.

The number of World Cup wins a confederation has has got nothing to do with it. They have only been won by 3 countries only two of which are powers. Yet they get four spots. What if Brazil had won 17 consecutive World Cups? Would you say that because CONMEBOL had a 100% success rate at World Cuos they should then get, say, 7 spots? Of course not.

It hasn't got anything to do with how many Cups each confederation has - it's got to do with depth, and CONMEBOL, with 10 members gets 4 spots. Four times as many as Oceania, which seems fair to me.

If anythign UEFA are shabbily treated. They get 14 of the 32 spots, yet, of the top 40 countries in world football, more than half are European. South America, however, has nothing to complain about.

 

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by rubberman
The rest of Oceania got ripped off by this decision to grant Oceania direct entry. This decision only favours Australia and NZ, and development in these countries will suffer as a result.
The logical decision would be to qualify through Asia in a group competition format. This would mean teams from Oceania could play any one of a number of nations in Asia. Could you Imagine if Vanautu was grouped with Thailand and how much more in television rights Vanautu would get in comparison to just playing Australia or NZ. It would increase income across the confederation if we were gouped with Asia. This would mean Australia would get more games together and would benefit as a result of tougher competition. Does that make any sense?

Listen to Johnny Warren he knows what he's talking about. He sees the bigger picture of having to qualify through Asia. He is also a big advocate of the Australian soccer team playing more games. Do you know how many games the Socceroos played last year? yes that is right ZIP, nothing, noula, nil. Do you think that the Socceroos should play more games? It would help dont you think? or is Australia only going to show up every fourth year. The admin of Soccer Australia have made their life easier by this decision, but not to the full benefit of the game in this country.

Good post, I agree with your comment, though just wanted to say the Socceroos did actually play last year (only 4 games but) in the Oceania Nations Cup, which we eventually lost to New Zealand after struggling past Vanuatu in the semis. It was definitely not our finest year!

I think the current set up (as much as I dislike it) does benefit the Island nations in Oceania that's why they are happy with the status quo. I guess a few of them are thinking an upset, an upset there and well be in the running to make the WC. Though, they too are not looking at the big picture in terms of exposure and tv rights, etc.

FWIW, There's a couple of teams nicely developing in Oceania, Vanuatu have come ahead in leaps and bounds, Soccer's the No.1 sport in the Solomons and they're normally not too bad, Fiji are always competitive and Tahiti are normally a decent side. Don't know what's the story with New Caledonia, they play in the Oceania Nations Cup but aren't an official member of Oceania, be good if they were since they're not too shabby. These teams are nowhere near a full strength Australia but a couple of them at their best aren't all that far behind New Zealand, give another 10 years some of these countries might reach a similar level to New Zealand and make things a little more interesting. Doubt (hope) that Oceania won't remain in its current set up by then though.

 

[Sydneyfan]

There's been some interesting responses to FIFA's decision to grant Oceania a direct spot to Germany 2006 on the following threads:

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=24982

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=25176

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=24972

 

[moomba]

Originally posted by Dan26
Why is it sh*t? Why should the winners of the previous World Cup get a spot for the next World Cup, which is a different tournament? Each World Cup is separate, and all teams (bar the host nation) should have to qualify. The fact Brazil won it in 2002 has got nothing to do with the 2006 World Cup.

When the 2002 tournament is over, all teams then all have to qualify for the next World Cup. It's like putting the Brisbane Lions in the AFL Finals series for 2003 wiuthout having to play the home and away season because they won in 2002. But what the hell has one season got to do with another? Nothing.

I would expect the romance of a side defending it's title to be lost somewhere in your head.

4 is about right. They only have two super powers. They only have 10 countries in the entire confederation. I know Uruguay won the Cup twice, but that was back when the participation rates for countries in the World Cup was lower. They wouldn't have a chance now. 40% is a higher participation rate in the World Cup than any other confederation.

Outside of Brazil and Argentina, South America is an overrated confederation in my view. Problem is, we only ever think of those two super powers when we think of CONMEBOL.

You might only think of the two, but I think think South America has at least half a dozen sides that would be competitive at the World Cup finals. Paraguay have made the second round in the last two World Cups, Uruguay, Bolivia, Chile and Colombia are all extremely competitive against any side on their day, yet you only think of Brazil and Argentina as worthy of respect.

The number of World Cup wins a confederation has has got nothing to do with it. They have only been won by 3 countries only two of which are powers. Yet they get four spots. What if Brazil had won 17 consecutive World Cups? Would you say that because CONMEBOL had a 100% success rate at World Cuos they should then get, say, 7 spots? Of course not.

True to an extent, however it is also an indication of a regions footballing strength. If Australia became a dominant force in world football there would be an argument that the other nations are not being given the opportunity to prove their worth, and there would be a valid argument for an extra half a spot.

It hasn't got anything to do with how many Cups each confederation has - it's got to do with depth, and CONMEBOL, with 10 members gets 4 spots. Four times as many as Oceania, which seems fair to me.

No, it has nothing to do with depth. It has to do with giving positions to the nations that can provide competitive teams. Teams at the lower end of the scale are pretty much irrelevant in terms of qualifying spots. South America could have a million uncompetitive member nations but would still have the same number of qualifying spots.

If anythign UEFA are shabbily treated. They get 14 of the 32 spots, yet, of the top 40 countries in world football, more than half are European. South America, however, has nothing to complain about.

I agree the UEFA isn't getting any favours but I would be looking at Asia and Africa before looking into undeserved positions in South America.

Moomba

 

[rubberman]

Originally posted by Sydneyfan
Good post, I agree with your comment, though just wanted to say the Socceroos did actually play last year (only 4 games but) in the Oceania Nations Cup, which we eventually lost to New Zealand after struggling past Vanuatu in the semis. It was definitely not our finest year!

I think the current set up (as much as I dislike it) does benefit the Island nations in Oceania that's why they are happy with the status quo. I guess a few of them are thinking an upset, an upset there and well be in the running to make the WC. Though, they too are not looking at the big picture in terms of exposure and tv rights, etc.

FWIW, There's a couple of teams nicely developing in Oceania, Vanuatu have come ahead in leaps and bounds, Soccer's the No.1 sport in the Solomons and they're normally not too bad, Fiji are always competitive and Tahiti are normally a decent side. Don't know what's the story with New Caledonia, they play in the Oceania Nations Cup but aren't an official member of Oceania, be good if they were since they're not too shabby. These teams are nowhere near a full strength Australia but a couple of them at their best aren't all that far behind New Zealand, give another 10 years some of these countries might reach a similar level to New Zealand and make things a little more interesting. Doubt (hope) that Oceania won't remain in its current set up by then though.

Cpuld you imagine if the Solomans, Fiji or any other struck Japan, China or even Indonesia in a group fase of the qualifying. The TV rights would run into the millions rather than the pittance they get from SA, Enough to really develop the sport in their countries just like this Australia.