Road to Russia 2018

[Furball]

I agree about Oceania but I'm also of the opinion that each confederation should have at least 1 team representing it at a World Cup. It might virtually guarantee New Zealand always qualify, but it would give a chance for the islander teams as well, which would be epic.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah, but let's not forget that the group stages had a fair share of stinkers too. Greece etc...

Them being awful and somehow getting to the second round was pretty funny.

 

[the big bambino]

You give one back to Oceania and it makes you wonder why you'd aspire to affiliate with a larger and better league like Asia.

 

[Burgey]

How many spots does Europe take up atm at World Cups?

 

[the big bambino]

10 I think.

Actually wiki says 13.

Plus Russia.

 

[Burgey]

13 out of 32 from one Federation. I know Europe has a 54 nations, but Asia has 50 including Australia and gets, what, five spots? Likewise Africa has 54 countries and gets 5 spots. South America gets, iirc 5.5 spots from 12 countries and Oceania 0.5 from 11 with CONCACAF getting 3 from 40 plus nations. Is that right or have I miscalculated somewhere?

 

[the big bambino]

That's about right. Asia gets 4.5 spots. 5th qualifier faces off against North or South American team. I know Europe is a strong hold and its expected they'll look after themselves but 13 seems high. They probably deserve enough spaces to accommodate Germany, Italy, France and Spain. England and Holland too. Then another 4 I guess. To have enough places for the big guns to qualify and make competition keen for the rest. So anything over 10 spots would make me think hmmm ...

I think Sth America is 4.5 spots too.

 

[Uppercut]

European qualifying is tough. There's always a few serious teams that only make it through in the play-offs. France, Portugal, Croatia. Teams with an outside shot of winning it. Swapping them out for Iran or North Korea weakens the tournament too much.

I think they've basically got the balance right. Would be good to have an explicit way for federations to get more teams in, the way UEFA do with CL/Europa qualification.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I think they've basically got the balance right. Would be good to have an explicit way for federations to get more teams in, the way UEFA do with CL/Europa qualification.

Yeah that's my main gripe with it. It just feels like a political outcome rather than something that's determined based on on-field performance.

 

[Furball]

That's about right. Asia gets 4.5 spots. 5th qualifier faces off against North or South American team. I know Europe is a strong hold and its expected they'll look after themselves but 13 seems high. They probably deserve enough spaces to accommodate Germany, Italy, France and Spain. England and Holland too. Then another 4 I guess. To have enough places for the big guns to qualify and make competition keen for the rest. So anything over 10 spots would make me think hmmm ...

I think Sth America is 4.5 spots too.

10 spots for Europe would be farcical.

 

[Howe_zat]

European qualifying is tough.

Is it really? England seem to canter through it (with the mood generally being angry that they 'only' beat Liechtenstein 3-0, or picking up a draw in Macedonia, or something) before being cod ordinary in each tournament.*

At 2014 we had Uruguay and Costa Rica knocking out England and Italy, Mexico knocking out Croatia, Chile knocking out Spain and the USA knocking out Portugal. The traditional European sides seem to be dining out on history a bit.

*2002 probably the only exception I've seen, winning a group that had Germany in it and then beating Argentina at the finals.

 

[sledger]

It's tough if you're not very good.

 

[grecian]

It's tougher compared to some. In the end the Press ion this country haven't really liked many managers recently particularly the forn ones so they've pretty much ignored easy qualifying and played it down, for us that remember not qualifying, and qualifying with results from other teams, or getting goals in the last 10 minutes it's nice to easily do it, even if we just stink up the place when we're there.

 

[Uppercut]

Is it really? England seem to canter through it (with the mood generally being angry that they 'only' beat Liechtenstein 3-0, or picking up a draw in Macedonia, or something) before being cod ordinary in each tournament.*

At 2014 we had Uruguay and Costa Rica knocking out England and Italy, Mexico knocking out Croatia, Chile knocking out Spain and the USA knocking out Portugal. The traditional European sides seem to be dining out on history a bit.

*2002 probably the only exception I've seen, winning a group that had Germany in it and then beating Argentina at the finals.

Fair, but:

1. Almost all of their decline has been at the expense of South America, and nobody thinks they should have less teams
2. They have still won the last three WCs, and last time it was in Europe in 2006 all four semi finalists were European
3. Sledger's point is basically what I'm getting at. Europe has a strong second tier. North America drops off hard after Mexico and USA- Costa Rica's 2014 performance is a major outlier- and Africa rarely has more than one or two good teams. Asia rarely has any. There are always a handful of European teams better than Iran, Honduras, or Cameroon who miss out. Which I'm fine with, but I wouldn't want to go too far the other way.

 

[Ikki]

Iran is #1 in Asia...fack you mate.

 

[sledger]

Iran looked relatively handy from what I remember at the last WC. A looooong way from the worst team in the tournament anyway.

 

[Furball]

Mehdi Madhavikia was a gun.

 

[Ikki]

Iran's pretty good, got a decent young generation (especially that kid Azmoun) but I get what Uppercut means. And as much as I am into meritocracy, I think the fact that they share up the spots a bit more for global exposure is actually a good thing on the whole.

 

[the big bambino]

If you have more than 10 spots in your zone it gets iffy to argue you're in favour of meritocracy.

 

[Cabinet96]

Chile in big trouble. 7th in the group and losing 2-0 Ecuador.