Following another round of World Cup qualifiers in Europe is it time to say enough is enough? For every close game such as the England vs. Ukraine (2-1) there’s a Poland vs. San Marino (10-0). Each round seems to produce at least one game that is settled by a large margin and it’s not doing anybody any good– surely UEFA have to change this.
The evidence is clear from all angles – from the winning teams, the losing teams and even the club teams. There are always two sides to the story but the evidence for change is compelling.
From the winning teams’ point of view – it can give the team an opportunity to get their confidence back. It gives them plenty of chances in front of goal and allows youth players to be given a run out. On the negative side though it doesn’t provide a test for the players on the field and off it teams are left with half empty stands watching a half strength team.
The losing teams? Well it’s good to play against the best players in the world. San Mario players can tell their friends and family how they’ve played against Del Piero, Raul, Beckham and the like. In footballing terms however it’s embarrassment after embarrassment – wouldn’t they rather be competing against similar teams where they have a chance of winning?
And finally the club teams. Do they want their best players being released to be playing pointless qualifying matches? National managers will attempt to rest some of their top players against weaker side but will field relatively strong teams in case of any potential slip-ups – this therefore presents an unnecessary risk of injury for the players.
So what’s the solution? Well there are many – all posing their own stumbling blocks. The decision I feel though is one that benefits the masses – to have preliminary qualifying. A qualifying round to qualify for qualification. It’s a simpler solution than the previous sentence suggests which pits the smaller teams together to begin with, like the UEFA champions league.
This means smaller teams play smaller teams and only the best of those smaller teams have a chance to compete with the big boys. Of course nothing is simple with UEFA, or FIFA or any of the big wigs in charge of football – but it’s time something is done, as I don’t see any fun in winning, or being beat by a ten-goal margin.
So should Argentina be included in the preliminary qualifiers?
Seriously though, this debate has come up before and a good answer was a quote from the second world war, something along the lines of ” when they came for the minnows, I did nothing, when they came for the 3rd tier nations i did nothing, when they came for me, there was noone left”.
To summarise, if you boot out the smallest teams, who is to say you shouldn’t boot out the other weaker teams, eg Romania currently have 4 points from 5 matches get rid of them, Scotland haven’t done too well, boot them out. Eventually you are left with Germany playing Italy, France and Spain once a year for European champions.
Posted by AJC | 3 April, 2009, 14:13AJC – I think what I’d attempt to do is do it by seeding. If you took the bottom seedings out and made them play a preliminary round – like the champions league – that could work. I maybe should have elborated on that more but I wouldn’t do it based on one off results. San Marino and Faroe Islands are usual culprits for high scoring losses, Argentina aren’t.
You’re right though it could get out of hand and teams could be wrongfully taken out of qualification therefore it’s a sensative sitauation.
Do you disagree entirely in that nothing should be done or would you look for an alternative approach?
Posted by Steven Jones | 3 April, 2009, 14:20I personally don’t think change is necessary. The teams are already seeded, giving the stronger teams a better chance of qualifying so that UEFA is well represented at the World Cup. That teams get beaten heavily on occasion (Can’t imagine Scotland or England winning by such a margin) is not an issue, the lower teams can only get better by working hard and playing against better players.
The club argument has nothing to do with it. International football is the pinnacle of a players career and should be treated as a great honour. Also, you would effectively be punishing teams that have players from lower ranked European countries, as they would now have to play more games to qualify. Unless there are more International friendlies to compensate?
Some of the lower ranked European teams have large populations that love football. Montenegro have some quality players for instance. As AJC says, where does it all stop?
Posted by Steve Atkinson | 3 April, 2009, 14:51I agree in the fact that my article may seem elitist, but 10-0 scorelines should only occur in the playground – it simply means (without having seen the match) that one team clearly weren’t anywhere near good enough.
As for the club team issue – those are the people who pay the wages to the players – hundreds of thousands of pounds/euros. I know the pinnacle is the national team but don’t clubs play a huge part in bringing these players to prominance in the first place? A better relationship between the club & country is the least that could happen, but since FIFA have tried that and essentially failed I feel something still needs doing as its unfinished business
Posted by Steven Jones | 3 April, 2009, 15:02Some of those players play for the lower ranked countries though, not just the top ones. Means that their clubs are being punished as they lose their player when rival teams do not.
I think that the freedom of movement within the EU has made a difference too, means that talented players from anywhere naturally gravitate to the top leagues. I don’t think many nations are incapable of pulling off upsets. There are a lot more European teams capable of qualifying now than there was a few years ago.
That San Marino got beaten heavily doesn’t mean that they should be punished. They are a footballing nation and should be allowed the same opportunities as everyone else, irrespective of whether or not they take them.
Posted by Steve Atkinson | 3 April, 2009, 15:55I agree with equal opportunities but let’s have a look at Australia for example – they were walking their section year after year and they’ve moved regions now for qualification.
I see this as a positive move so that the gaps are bridged and less meaningless matches are played.
I just feel it’s awful for managers who lose their best players through injury in a match that could have been easily avoided. Most of my mates didn’t even bother watching the England game on Saturday which at the same time as being a shame, I see why they didn’t mind missing it.
Posted by Steven Jones | 3 April, 2009, 16:36There is generally only one side per group (max) that can be considered as a pure makeweight, particularly in the European sections. And whilst they can occasionally produce laughable results, such as that of Poland on Wednesday, these countries are still fully entitled to compete. I mean, look at what Luxembourg did to Switzerland earlier in the campaign.
Besides, fragmenting what is currently a pretty streamlined qualifying process seems illogical. Plus, where do you draw the line on these poor teams? You mentioned nobody wanting to watch England v Slovakia on Saturday, but the Slovaks were actually top of their qualifying group going into the weekend, and won in the Czech Republic the other night.
Posted by Marcus Haydon | 3 April, 2009, 18:08Thanks for the discussion guys – it looks like I may have my elitist hat on here when writing this column.
I still feel something has to be done, but maybe a subtle change, not the drastic measures I propose.
I guess that’s what the guys at FIFA and UEFA get paid all that money for!
Posted by Steven Jones | 6 April, 2009, 10:50I understand your argument but don’t think any change at all is warranted. Whether a player gets injured or not is irrelevant. Potentially unfortunate but is an aspect of the game, they could choose not to play for their country like Scholes, Nesta or Carragher? This is coming from a Newcastle fan too, who’s team lost Michael Owen after such an incident. The way it should be, and is currently under Capello for England, is that players are desperate to play every game, else they know they will be dropped for the big games. He’s brought pride back into it. I get the impression that the same ethos exists in Spain and Italy as well.
Thinking about it from an international manager’s perspective, you want to play as many games as possible. To forge a team ethic, get to understand players and their capabilities etc.
If UEFA wants to be seen as being fair then it can’t be seen to be making things more difficult for the lower ranked countries.
Posted by Steve Atkinson | 8 April, 2009, 13:29