World Cup 2010 -- South Africa

UFWC: A Different Take on Deciding the World Champions

 

 

The Challengers

 

Everyone knows that at the end of the FIFA World Cup, the official champions of the world will be crowned. But what if there was another, unofficial way, of determining who the champions are? What if, instead of a competition being held every four years, the champions were decided in a style similar to boxing, where the champions would attempt to ‘defend’ their title every time they played an international match?

That is the idea behind the Unofficial Football World Championships. A theoretical organisation currently existing in cyberspace, the UFWC tracks the ‘unofficial’ champions of the world. The Netherlands are the current holders of the title, having won it in November 2008 and defended it 14 times since.

The timing of this article isn’t a coincidence.  Although their match against Hungary, tomorrow, may be considered a ‘friendly’ to most, in terms of the UFWC it is one of the most important matches in years.

 

The Champions

 

Enough about the future for now, though.   First, let’s look at the past.  The UFWC has its foundations in 1967, when Scotland defeated England 3-2 in a European Championships qualifier. As this was England’s first loss since winning the World Cup in 1966, Scotland fans jokingly claimed to be the ‘unofficial’ champions of the world. The notion was brought up again in 2002, when a caller to a radio show asked who would be the then-champions of the world, following the line of succession since the Scottish victory in ’67.  It was shortly after this that Paul Brown, the founder of the UFWC, endeavoured to find the answer.

This involved going back to the very first international match ever played, a friendly in 1872, ironically, between England and Scotland. Unfortunately that match ended 0-0, so no champions were crowned. However, the next match, featuring the same teams, finished 4-2 to England, making them the first unofficial champions. For the UFWC, every time the champions would play an officially-sanctioned international match after this, it would be considered a ‘title match’, with the winners either defending the title or becoming the new champions (a draw means the title is retained). For decades the title moved between the Home Nations, before Austria claimed it from England in 1931, beginning the UFWC’s global journey.

In 1950 the UFWC title was brought to the World Cup for the first time, by England. It was at this World Cup that one of the most famous results in UFWC history occurred. The English were fully expected to run riot over a United States team, mostly made up of players who had full-time jobs off the pitch, including a teacher and a dishwasher. However, against all odds, the United States won the match 1-0, claiming the UFWC title in the process. The result was so unlikely that when it was reported back in Britain, people assumed that it was a mistake, with newspapers incorrectly reporting England had won by such outlandish scores as 10-0 or 10-1.

Another, arguably more incredible result, took place in 1963. Mexico were champions at the time, and came up against footballing minnows, the Netherlands Antilles. Most people won’t have heard of the country at all, let alone know anything about their football team.   Yet they possess a permanent place in the UFWC Hall Of Fame, incredibly winning the match 2-1, to become unofficial champions of the world, the smallest nation to ever achieve the honour.

 

 

Giant killers

 

Interestingly, the match between England and Scotland in 1967 that first sparked the idea of the UFWC, turned out to, in fact, be a title match itself, England having become undisputed champions of the world by winning the 1966 World Cup final.  That, in turn, also happened to be a championship bout.

It’s for this reason that the UFWC has become so popular. Even though the title matches can be erratic and the great teams rarely hold the title, it gives smaller countries who will never win the actual World Cup a chance for some glory. Even if they don’t receive a trophy for their troubles, they will, at the least, gain their fiteen minutes of fame in the annals of the UFWC.

 

The smaller countries winning the title on occasion, also provides an alternative list of the best teams in history, ranked in order of UFWC victories. The team at the top of this table is Scotland, with a massive 86 wins, while supposed giants like Argentina, Brazil and Germany lie 3rd, 6th and 7th respectively. Admittedly the majority of Scotland’s matches were against England, Ireland and Wales but that’s the thing about the UFWC; it provides a new perspective on just who are world champions.

That’s a brief look at the past.  Now, to look at the present and future. As already mentioned, the current champions, the Netherlands, face Hungary in a friendly tomorrow. Under normal circumstances this match doesn’t exactly jump off the page, but, in terms of UFWC history, it is a massive match.  It has been 12 years since the UFWC title was last brought to the World Cup, as the Unofficial holders in 2002 and 2006 didn’t qualify for the World Cup. Tomorrow’s match represents the final hurdle in the UFCW’s quest to finally return to the World Cup.

 

 

The Original Rumble in the Jungle....

 

 

...and the Sequel?

 

If the title is brought to the World Cup and the champions, whomever they may be, qualify from the group stages, we will be guaranteed to see a title unification at the end of the competition.  Such an achievement has only happened 14 times in the last 80 years. Most recently, it was accomplished in March 2007, when Italy claimed the UFWC title from none other than all-time champions Scotland.

So, at the conclusion of the World Cup, who will be the ‘real’ champions of the world?  The winner of the World Cup, or whomever holds the UFWC title at the end of the competition? Officially, it will be the World Cup winners. But unofficially, well, that could be a different matter entirely…

 

Editor’s Note, A UFWC update on 24 June, 2010:  With a 2-1 victory today, on goals from Robin van Persie and Klass-Jan Huntelaar, the Unofficial World Champion Netherlands side completed their group stage, taking all 9 points.  The 3 victories, all successful defences of their title guarantee that whatever country wins the World Cup in South Africa, the two titles will be unified.

written by David Holden

Advertisement

Discussion

11 Responses to “UFWC: A Different Take on Deciding the World Champions”

  1. Wow! And I thought I was a soccer nerd! I bow to your obvious superiority.

    Seriously, though, as I understand this, it's like boxing. To be the champion, all you have to do is beat the current champion. Does the champion also retain the "crown" if the match is a draw?

    Posted by mpalazzotto | 4 June, 2010, 19:26
    • That's correct, the champion has to be beaten to lose the title, if the match ends a draw the champion retains the title.

      Posted by David Holden | 4 June, 2010, 22:54
  2. That really is a superb idea.

    Posted by Matt Dalton | 4 June, 2010, 20:07
    • It is really, I am now hoping for a unification title in South Africa… Is there anywhere that we can see the hole path of this crown?

      Posted by @fapresilli | 10 June, 2010, 21:49
      • If you go over to the website, http://www.ufwc.co.uk, you'll be able to see a full list of previous matches. Also if you search for it on Wikipedia you'll find more info there as well :)

        Posted by David Holden | 15 June, 2010, 13:09
  3. Would just like to post a big thanks out to David – I was going to cover this but I thought he might be much more informed and I was right – and he did it at short notice. Welcome to the site David, first of many I hope!

    A quick question though Dave and it's something I was discussing with a friend earlier. If the UFWC go to the World Cup and don't win it then ultimately the UFCW and the World Cup winners are unified – that's right isn't it?

    Posted by Steven Jones | 4 June, 2010, 20:19
    • If the title is brought into the Last 16 then yes, that's correct. But it is possible for the UFWC champions to be eliminated in the Group Stages, preventing a unification, which has happened before in 1950, 1962 and 1994.

      Posted by David Holden | 4 June, 2010, 22:59
  4. What happens in the event of a draw and a penalty shootout? Does the match count as a draw for the UFWC, or as a win to the side that wins on penalties?

    Posted by Matt | 5 June, 2010, 13:15
    • Matt, having read all of the FAQ at ufwc.co.uk yesterday, I understand that only a friendly draw counts as a draw – if there is extra time, or penalties, or a 'final' result of any kind, then the UFWC title is awarded to the winner.

      I love the idea of this, and will be spending the four years between now and 2014 following the path of this title closely. Hoping for unification!

      Yours,

      Jock

      Posted by Jock Urquhart | 5 June, 2010, 16:07
  5. Congratulations to the Dutch! Three successive defences of the title have guaranteed re-unification. Even though l'Oranje will almost certainly have to go through Brazil, They're making an excellent case to still be the holders when all is said and done.

    Posted by mpalazzotto | 24 June, 2010, 21:57
  6. Congratulations to the Dutch! Three successive defences of the title have guaranteed re-unification. Even though l'Oranje will almost certainly have to go through Brazil, they are making an excellent case for themselves to remain holders when all is said and done.

    Posted by mpalazzotto | 24 June, 2010, 21:59

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

World Football Columns In Motion

Video Content created specifically for WFC articles.
Watch videos at Vodpod.

Articles at Large

Culture Schlock

Martin Palazzotto finds a diamond in the rough in Gordon Bartlett: Off The Bench, a down to earth account of twenty-five years in Non-League Management.

Culture Schlock

Martin Palazzotto reviews David Goldblatt's The Ball Is Round, a comprehensive history of the beautiful game.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 39 other followers