(no subject)

[den]

How is it the USA qualifies to play in the World Cup, and Australia doesn't?

Comments

[http://users.livejournal.com/crossfire_/]

We're all kind of wondering that ourselves...

Simple

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

There's a set of playoffs in each of four (or five, I forget) confederations of FIFA. The USA won enough games in their confederation to qualify; Australia didn't.

Re: Simple

[dewhitton.livejournal.com]

The Socceroos won the Oceania play-off (they beat W Samoa 31-0 during that) and still had to play against Uraguay to qualify.

How is it that Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Russia, Italy, England and Ireland all qualify? Did they have to beat Greece?

Under those rules the Kiwi All Whites should be playing as well.

Re: Simple

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

Sorry Den, sounds like you know more about it than I do. What I posted is the little I remembered from NZ's only successful campaign to get into the finals, in 1982. That's what I get for assuming, I guess.

Re: Simple

[dewhitton.livejournal.com]

I'm just frustrated that, to qualify in past cups, Aus has had to play Scotland, Iran, Uraguay, and Argentina. There seems to be no consistency to the method.

I would prefer an amalgamation of the Asia and Oceania confederacies.

Re: Simple

[targaff.livejournal.com]

It should be noted that a third of the positions available to European teams are only decided through play-offs after the group stages have been played, one of those being against the third or fourth placed team from the Asian group (hence to qualify Ireland had to beat Iran in a two-leg play off, similarly to Australia and Uruguay). The Oceania group consisted of a total of 4 qualifier games and two two-leg playoffs (i.e. 8 games) as opposed to e.g. Asian teams, who had to come through 2 groups totalling 14 games (plus 1 for the runner up spot), the single table South America group where they play 18 games each (plus the same runner up game), the two round North American group consisting of 16 games in total and the European qualifiers, where they play 10 games (again, plus a qualifier). The African group plays an 8-game series and only teams that win go through.

When you look at that, having to play two two-leg play-off games (one against New Zealand and one against Uruguay, this time around) still only means you play an equal number of games to the least taxed teams from any other group, i.e. the Africans. The simple fact is that the Oceania group is so small in number that granting it even the one automatic qualifying place skews the entry qualifications wildly in their favour as it would only require a total of 6 games to actually go through. Hardly a challenge for a team as proficient as the Socceroos (66 goals for, 0 against, in the qualifying rounds).

Of course, maybe if the Australian Soccer Association hadn't wasted the money they'd been given towards their World Cup qualification and coverage instead of putting it into the actual team, as they apparently have done, then maybe things would've worked out better for them in any event...

Re: Simple

[targaff.livejournal.com]

And much though it pains me to say it, the USA won the games they were required to play whilst the Australians... didn't ;) I would agree with your suggestion that Oceania be merged with the Asian group, though; or alternatively, at least have the second play-off be between Oceania and Asia rather than Oceania and South America (put the "spare" European team up against them), since it would make more sense that way.

Re: Simple

[charles.livejournal.com]

You know too much.

Of course, another problem is how difficult it is to actually get any of our good players released from their European clubs for the early qualifiers. Every time the Socceroos want access to, say, Viduka or Kewell, they tend to get mysterious injuries. I can imagine the conversations:

"Leeds is paying me several million dollars, and the last thing they want is for me to fly halfway around the world, get jet-lag and risk injury playing Western-bloody-Samoa. What are you offering me?"

"You can have a green and gold tracksuit, and this really cute stuffed kangaroo!"

"Ow! My ankle!"

The result is that when they do finally turn up for the crunch games, nobody in the rest of the team has ever trained with them and half the team resents them. It's not really a good formula for winning matches.

Re: Simple

[targaff.livejournal.com]

You know too much.

More like I actually had too much spare time on my hands to actually go and look this stuff up ;)

I think you're being somewhat unfair as regards the injuries, too; neither Kewell nor Viduka - surely the most high-profile Australians playing in the Premiership at the moment - played a really significant role in the team this last year, when most of the qualifying was taking place, with Kewell coming back from a long-term injury and Viduka suffering an injury mid-season and actually losing his place in the team. Still, you can see where they're coming from - not so much as far as the money/injury thing is concerned, but the majority of the games in the Oceania group are fairly pointless, and it's not as if the Socceroos were unable to cope without them (a goal difference of 66-0? heh). I also believe both were available for the Uruguay games, which were the ones which were most important as far as qualification is concerned.

[baxil.livejournal.com]

To answer your question:

Because we've got 250 million people with nothing better to do than howl at Dubya to bomb the damn World Cup offices flat if we don't prove the size of our national brassies by taking home top honors in a sport we can't even name properly.

I apologize on behalf of the sane parts of America.

[smof.livejournal.com]

Because the USA is the world, obviously

The REAL Reason may be:

[wabbitcalif.livejournal.com]

....Because you kick our tails at RUGBY! *grins*