 
|
Jaggy Bunnet
GET A LIFE!!! |
    
At the end of today's Scotsman article about FIFA and the confederations cup
http://www.sport.scotsman.com/football.cfm?id=713762003
there is a little snippet that FIFA have now decided that players up to the age of 21 who have dual nationality can change national teams EVEN IF they have already played for one country at international level.
Maybe its just me, but I think this is right up there with the daftest decisions FIFA has ever made. It cannot be right that players can change countries once they have started their career - once you make your decision, you stick with it.
Otherwise we will end up with players switching to bigger countries to have a better chance of playing in finals and getting the associated cash. Madness.
On a brighter note, they have overturned the decision to give Australia a place in every world cup (oops - meant Oceania  ) and have now said they will have to win a play off to get there.
-----
"What have you done to the cat - he looks half dead!" Mrs Schrodinger
|
Total Posts: 698 | Joined April 2002 | Posted on: 1:24 pm on June 30, 2003 | IP
|
|
ReekySporran
GET A LIFE!!! |
Aye, FIFA have shafted Oceania again. I didn't particulary agree with them getting a direct qualifying spot, but after giving it to them they should have stuck to their agreement, not succumb to grubby deals and backhanders, but thats FIFA for you.
As for Nationality changes, it would be a bit more acceptable if they limited the ruling to having apeared once for one country before "realising" your mistake and changing. As it is its ludicrous if eg. you hold Australian and British Passports, made your debut for Australia at 17, play 20 games for them upto 21, then decide you want to play for England! Football isn't Rugby!
-----
All right, brain. You don't like me and I don't like you, but let's just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer – Homer J Simpson
|
Total Posts: 2820 | Joined Sep. 2001 | Posted on: 1:32 pm on June 30, 2003 | IP
|
|
jimbers
GET A LIFE!!! |
does this mean Rooney can play for us!
WONDERFULL!!!!
Its disgustin Australia/NZ dont get automatic entry into the world cup
Australia would make a wonderfull addition to the world cup
|
Total Posts: 1218 | Joined Mar. 2002 | Posted on: 12:21 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Lamia
GET A LIFE!!! |
I think FIFA are almost as bad as the SPL on these two issues.
As I have said before neither of my parents are Scottish but from a very early age I had no confusion as to who I would have chosen to play for no matter how good I was!
-----
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organised violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westeners never do. - Samuel P. Huntington
|
Total Posts: 5115 | Joined Dec. 2001 | Posted on: 8:30 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
MCTEAGLE
GET A LIFE!!! |
Quote: from jimbers on 12:21 am on July 1, 2003
Its disgustin Australia/NZ dont get automatic entry into the world cup
Australia would make a wonderfull addition to the world cup
Explain why Australia should get automatic entry rather than qualify like everyone else.
And then explain why exactly they would make a 'wonderful' addition to the world cup.
-----
Who watches the watchmen?
|
Total Posts: 2110 | Joined Aug. 2002 | Posted on: 8:40 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Lamia
GET A LIFE!!! |
Quote: from MCTEAGLE on 8:40 am on July 1, 2003
Explain why Australia should get automatic entry rather than qualify like everyone else.
And then explain why exactly they would make a 'wonderful' addition to the world cup.
Have you no seen their burds...
-----
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organised violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westeners never do. - Samuel P. Huntington
|
Total Posts: 5115 | Joined Dec. 2001 | Posted on: 8:43 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
MCTEAGLE
GET A LIFE!!! |
Should return the place to a Penal Colony IMO.
-----
Who watches the watchmen?
|
Total Posts: 2110 | Joined Aug. 2002 | Posted on: 8:45 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Takasaki TAMBer
Fresh ideas |
Or a penile colony - that would be interesting
CHarlie Nicholas on the 1st boat
-----
"All that way just to pick up a chicken?" "Aye, That s devotion for ye!"
|
Total Posts: 29 | Joined Oct. 2002 | Posted on: 8:58 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Tartan Sheep
GET A LIFE!!! |
I don't think that Australia should necessarily get automatic qualification, but I do think that they're in a tricky situation. As things stand, they have to play qualifying games against the likes of American Samoa and Fiji who they beat without breaking sweat and then, assuming they beat New Zealand in order to top the Oceania qualifying section, they are thrown into a tough match against either the fourth best side in South America (who few countries would be able to beat), or the second best side in Asia (or something like that). They're not really being tested in qualifying, which must make it difficult when it comes to raising their game for the play off games.
I see that they and New Zealand have now asked FIFA to consider scrapping the Oceania Confederation and allowing them to play in Asia. This would seem to be a reasonably good solution to the problem - it wouldn't guarantee their participation in the finals, but would at least give them proper fixtures to compete in thus allowing them to qualify only if they were good enough.
Then again, since it's clearly a good idea, FIFA will no doubt turn it down
-----
If we join, we can win. If we win, well then we'll have something we've never had. A country of our own.
|
Total Posts: 2231 | Joined Sep. 2001 | Posted on: 9:30 am on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Jaggy Bunnet
GET A LIFE!!! |
And how are the likes of American Samoa expected to find the additional cash needed to travel to play the away ties if they are involved in Asian qualifying?
Currently Australia are virtually guaranteed to win their group (2-0, 11-0, 22-0 and 31-0 wins last time round) and then must beat NZ (2-0, 5-0, 5-1 & 7-0) over two legs. If they do that, they earn a play off against a side from another confederation to get into the finals. It is NOT a difficult qualifying route compared to Europe or South America.
Last time they lost to Uruguay (qualifying for their first finals in 12 years). The time before to Iran (qualifying for their first finals in 20 years). In 1994 they beat Canada in a first play off but lost to Argentina. In 1990, they lost in a three way play off with Israel and NZ to get into a play-off against Columbia. We all know who beat them in 1986! (to get into the play off Australia won a group including NZ, Israel and Taiwan  ) In 82, they failed to win the Oceania group, and NZ beat China to qualify for the finals.
So over the period from 1982 to 2002, to qualify they would have needed to have beaten China, Scotland, Columbia, Argentina, Iran or Uruguay. Some tough ties, but is it really any tougher than winning a European group? Or finishing second and winning a play off against a 2nd place team (currently second place teams in Euro 2004 groups include Netherlands, England, Italy, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Croatia)?
-----
"What have you done to the cat - he looks half dead!" Mrs Schrodinger
|
Total Posts: 698 | Joined April 2002 | Posted on: 12:27 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Bzzzz
One and Only! |
I think the Australia thing is right and fair.
Especially to all those around them that they will have to play. It's not the point that they will hump each team easily, these teams must be given a chance to experience a higher standard of fitba in order to progress themselves.
Dual nationality?
GTF.
-----
"CHEATS!FU**ING DIVIN CHEATS!"
Dundee philosopher Christian "fu**ing" Daillys views on German tactics, Sept 10 2003
|
Total Posts: 6018 | Joined Sep. 2001 | Posted on: 12:38 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
randers
GET A LIFE!!! |
If the Oceania teams join in with the Asia group how many places are available? The Asia group already has what looks like too many teams (China had won a pre-qualifying group to get into a main Asia group, won the main Asia group to get into the Oceania final qualifying group, and qualified for the final play-offs of the Oceania final qualifying group in that NZ deciding match in 82. They'd played about 25-30 matches, travelled repeatedly to the Middle East, and around the Russian satellite states and all over Asia before going down to Aus/NZ. The Asian grouping includes some relatively poor countries (it would bankrupt us having to do all that).
I know that FIFA are under pressure - Africa wanting more places, Oceania wanting one, South Korea's performance suggesting Asia should get one, and nobody willing to give one up. Maybe a redefining of how qualifying should work (a more even number of matches and limits on how far teams should be expected to travel) would solve some of the issues. Or maybe increasing the number of WC places was right after all....?
As for Australia being the strongest in their region - I think it's a case of that's just how it is. Europe & S America have their traditionally strong sides though at least you have a chance of avoiding them. What does seem unfair is the number of places complared to the number of sides competing for them that S America enjoys.
-----
dream on...
|
Total Posts: 395 | Joined Feb. 2002 | Posted on: 12:49 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Jaggy Bunnet
GET A LIFE!!! |
Depends what you believe the WC is for. Is it to try and get the best 32 teams in the World together or is it more like the Confederations cup where you want representation from each confederation. In my view it should be the former. At the moment it is somewhere between the two, as Europe/Sth America are overrepresented (for historical reasons) but also have more good teams.
At the last WC the two non-host Asian nations got no points and scored no goals. Would it have been a better tournament if, say, Holland and Australia had been there instead? Does that justify cutting the number of Asian qualifying places?
To really move to a merit based system, you need to have the possibility that all 32 finalists could come from one confederation. That could mean worldwide qualifying groups (too expensive now but maybe in the future).
Alternatively you could have each confederation identify the best 32 member teams (through regional qualifiers) and then have play offs between them for the finals. So the best 32 European teams play the best 32 African teams, with the winners of those ties playing the winners of Best 32 Asian/Oceania teams v Best 32 American teams. Cost is reduced as a maximum of two matches are played outside the region.
-----
"What have you done to the cat - he looks half dead!" Mrs Schrodinger
|
Total Posts: 698 | Joined April 2002 | Posted on: 1:27 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
randers
GET A LIFE!!! |
Agree I'd like to see the best 32 teams in the world competing for the WC. (In a sense they do - they ALL get to play the qualifiers before the finals which if good enough on the day they can go to). But like you said it'd be too expensive and too many matches.
I also was disappointed that Netherlands & Australia weren't at the tournament, but I was at e.g. a South Africa game, all of South Korea's group-stage games etc., and they added loads of colour and excitement and interest to the event. Compare that to a 'strong' side like Portugal who, against Asia's South Korea who may not have qualified through any other route, were negative, dull, defensive, cynical and time-wasting to try to get the point that would put them through. The lesser footballing nation of South Korea just attacked them looking for the win, and both countries got what they deserved. (In portugal's case an early flight home).
I'm really saying that the 'best' sides might be best on the day of qualifying but not once they get there, or the opposite as in Netherlands case (they didn't get there 'cos they weren't good enough on the day of their qualifying games). Whereas some smaller teams put on a great spectacle. I like the fact that our qualifying method allows some 'little' teams to get there and have their day. I'd like to see the best 32 against each other too. Greedy eh?
-----
dream on...
|
Total Posts: 395 | Joined Feb. 2002 | Posted on: 2:01 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Tartan Tank
GET A LIFE!!! |
i think oceiana should have there champions automatically qualifying, doesnt matter how sh!t they are its ment to be a "world" cup.
only other way would be to have the qualifying groups from all roung the world as well.
also i think its a disgrace that the holders have now got to qualify, they should be allowed atomatic entry to defend the trophy!!!
-----
ballack, bollock more like
|
Total Posts: 494 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 4:41 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Tartan Sheep
GET A LIFE!!! |
Hey - I like the idea of world qualifying groups. That way we might get to go somewhere warm for a qualifying match as opposed to Lithuania and Iceland
What a nice thought for my 2000th post 
-----
If we join, we can win. If we win, well then we'll have something we've never had. A country of our own.
|
Total Posts: 2231 | Joined Sep. 2001 | Posted on: 4:46 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
Jaggy Bunnet
GET A LIFE!!! |
TT - what about my suggestion for playoffs between the top teams in each continent so that it is possible for all 32 countries to come from the same confederation IF they are the best 32?
For example, Europe has 50 entrants for Euro 2004, so it would have 14 groups of 3 and two of 4. Top two in each group qualify for play offs. Would mean 4 or 6 local games plus 2 or 4 play off games. Results in no extra internationals (max 10 is the same as 8 group matches plus 2 in playoffs so should keep the clubs happy).
Playoffs could be seeded so that top 16 European teams plays bottom 16 African team and vice versa.
End result is everyone has a fair chance of getting to the finals and potential exists for competitive TA trips to Australia, Brazil or South Africa.
-----
"What have you done to the cat - he looks half dead!" Mrs Schrodinger
|
Total Posts: 698 | Joined April 2002 | Posted on: 4:58 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
jimbers
GET A LIFE!!! |
WORLD CUP means cup representing all of the worlds areas that includes Oceania
personally I think Australia should play in UEFA groups
they are a good team with good players and id love to see them at the World cup as would the people of Australia (they are a cracking people and its a cracking nation i love!)
|
Total Posts: 1218 | Joined Mar. 2002 | Posted on: 6:37 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
tommydoc3
Opinionated Wind Bag |
If the Oceania group was allowed to continue with either Oz or NZ qualifying every 4 years all these two have to do is agree that every 8 years one of them doesnt try too hard.That way each country can go to every second World Cup finals.
What I would like to see is,all the small teams i.e. Western Samoa etcetera all play qualifiers and the winner goes into a group with Australia,New Zealand and those two 'European' nomads,Israel and Turkey.The winner of this section directly qualifying for the finals.
-----
there are only 2 places in the world,Scotland and.....everywhere else.
|
Total Posts: 169 | Joined April 2003 | Posted on: 6:48 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
ReekySporran
GET A LIFE!!! |
The suggestion that Oceania "joins" Asia would probably mean that the Oceania Qualifying section would remain unchanged, hence allowing the likes of American Samoa, Vanauatu etc the opportunity still to develop their game without huge travelling costs, but the top two teams from the final group (most likely Australia & NZ) would then join the Asian Final Qualifying Group with the likes of South Korea, Japan, UAE, China etc for a place in the finals.
The only other option would be to split Asia into two Confederations, West and East, with Oceania joining the East Asia region, it would make more sense.
-----
All right, brain. You don't like me and I don't like you, but let's just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer – Homer J Simpson
|
Total Posts: 2820 | Joined Sep. 2001 | Posted on: 7:09 pm on July 1, 2003 | IP
|
|
|
|
|
Tartan Army Message Board
Switching nationalities
