Reflections on World Cup qualifying

The latest comments from a regular blog reader, I have woken up thinking about the World Cup qualification system. Is it worth the Americas the eight sites that are offered? All depends on the approach, as in the case of the Champions League. For example, the new format of UCL football democratization made more accessible to the arrival of minor league championship teams, but leave others with higher level on the road. What do you prefer: the variety to ensure soccer in every corner, or the elitism that gives us a high level competition?

The case of America is curious: has four berths CONMEBOL and CONCACAF, three, over the pass that will be played both confederations. In the south, we have the historical Argentina and Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay and Ecuador as the first level selections, to Colombia and Venezuela with good teams, only Bolivia and Peru stagnant.

In the north, U.S. and Mexico are forced World Cup with Costa Rica and Honduras with less assistance but a decent level to participate. El Salvador and Trinidad and Tobago would, a priori, espárrings in the World Cup (but how forget the Trinidadian Beenhakker in Germany 2006). And are behind Panama, Canada and Jamaica, good progress but with little opportunity to compare their level to other sites

Several questions are raised when reviewing the qualifying format. Do the math. America has 50 affiliates (40 in CONCACAF, CONMEBOL 10), and Europe with 53 associations. Enter the World Cup eight Americans (about one-sixth), and 13 places for Europeans (one quarter). What if we put the tickets of America to fight among all? Simple: CONCACAF lost. In itself, three walks insurance for 40 countries is meager average, is a balance to the low level of the area. In the case of CONMEBOL, four passes for 10 countries (plus playoffs) allows for almost half the members come, but history and the strength of your selections are granted that privilege. If America played all their tickets in a confederation, probably Mexico and the United States would get get, but other possibilities would be undermined. Is a question of democratization.

So what about the playoffs? Are CONCACAF's room up to the fifth of CONMEBOL? I say yes, but only to a return match. Honduras or Costa Rica can give battle even to Uruguay, Ecuador, Colombia and Venezuela in a series. It is the same for a CONCACAF team know that you can get the three points of San Salvador or Port of Spain, of Buenos Aires or Asuncion.

Of course a single confederation promote, ultimately, the development of soccer in the north of the continent. It has shown Mexico in the Copa America. So, why not? Mostly because the confederations are divorced, almost irreconcilably. CONCACAF's participation in South American tournaments reads like a drop in the level. Only Mexico, who by dint of good performances (and of course, to attract high caliber sponsors), manages to get Libertadores or Sudamericana. And even that, with their brushes. Concacaf should go step by step. It does so with the Concachampions, tournament so reviled by the Mexican teams, but with the touch allows other league football development in the area.

The example is Europe. The inclusion of some countries which, in theory, should integrate the AFC, has enabled them to progress. Turkey has reached the seats of honor, and Israel will be flying for his first ranking. That's why, aparetenmente, 13 sites not achieved: for the widening closes more. Under this reflection, it seems is no longer seen as unjust classification elsewhere in the world about Europe and South America. Africa, with 53 members, receives five passes, but has the same problem as Concacaf. The progress African football and pools with the same ease. The case of Asia, which has 46 teams, has four locations. And yet, the best examples rid seldom reach the group stage. Nor say of Oceania, where Australia had to renege on their continent to secure more than half pass.

Thus, the classification system, however imperfect, for weighing the democratization of football with the proper level. It is clear that Europe will always advanced in the second round. Said a friend, in jest, that the Euro, plus Brazil, Argentina, another South American, Mexico (or U.S.) and a good pair of African (or Asian, Japan and South Korea for a change) is like knockout phase. We know that the rod remains in the hands of a few, but for others, nothing for us to dream about the exploits of Senegal, Turkey, South Korea or Croatia.

Share this entry