By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Slimebeast on 03 October 2009
Edit Thread
Esmoreit said:
Slimebeast said:
kowenicki said:
world cup qualifying is actually biased against good to strong european nations, thats the main problem here.

You are insane. Why?


What I think that Kowenicki is saying is that it is unfair against strong European nations because they have an infair chance of being knocked out in favor of weaker non-european nations.

Europe is a continent that loves football, no exceptions really. The internal competition is incredibly strong (Uefa) and the continent has more nations here then for instance northern America or south Amerika... maybe even more so then Afrika I have to check on that. The result is that on paper at least we can expect a nation like Portugal, Finland, Austria, Turkey or the Czech republic to be somewhat better then the US for instance (Again, I would have to check the rankings but you get the gist). Still, Portugal, Finland, Austria, Turkey or the Czech republic seem to be not qualifying. While I'm sure that if we had cross-global competition they would sure to be in by now while it diminishes the chances for the on paper weaker US.

I know that FIFa will compensate by adjusting for the number of groups in each poule and I certainly welcome the US in the fray (with a bit of luck they might even get to enjoy the sport) but I think that Kowenicki means that it is biased like that.

Oh.. so that's what he meant (not the seeding or ranking of groups within Europe or anything like that.)

Well, everyone knows that Europe could have 20 good teams in the World Cup, but it wouldn't be a World cup if 2/3 of the teams would be from one continent, would it?

But okay, maybe they should't have given Asia 5 spots or whatever they have. When World Cup went from 24 teams to 32 teams, Europe only got like one spot extra.