News Item
Frequently Asked Questions
Letters To The Editor
23 July Update: Forget Asia
08 September Update: Scarscella Quits Oceania
13 September Update: Can't win with Fifa
30 September Update: Dempsey returns; Blatter spins more shi*t
05 October Update: Matildas World Cup elimination a portent for the
Socceroos?
13 October Update: Basil and the truth behind Oceania losing its World
Cup spot
20 October Update: Blatter says no to 4-way tournament
06 December Update: Oceania now in World Cup oblivion
14 December Update: The Washup, The Decision, Playing Home-First, The
Future
Eight months ago, the Oceania Football Confederation was consummated as a Fifa football confederation when guaranteed representation at the World Cup was finally granted with the announcement that of one direct spot. This completed a sequence of similar announcements for the two other Fifa sanctioned tournaments that Oceania previously went without direct access - the Youth World Cup and the Olympics. For any long term reader of this website, the announcement of a World Cup spot was always a fait accompli once it became apparent that Fifa's own constitution stipulated that all full member confederations must be represented at its sanctioned tournaments. When Fifa then announced that the existing World Cup champion would not have automatic access to the following World Cup any more, this removed any doubt that Fifa was about to fulfil its constitutional obligation. And as sure as the sun rises everyday, come that Fifa executive meeting last December, Oceania's spot was granted unanimously, unequivocally and without ambiguity. So when the back-flipped was announced almost two weeks ago, to say that the football world in this region was staggered beyond disbelief, would be a gross understatement.
So what the hell happened? Without recycling too much that has already been written in the Oceania History editorial, which answers many of the issues surrounding the reversed decision regarding whether Oceania ever deserved a spot, starting with the news report on the day of the event and finishing with several letters sent to various media organisations, it's time to examine the critical events of this decision, answer some frequently asked questions, and look to the future. But for all the hyperbole, opinion and analysis that's been thrown about, or that will be found here, the stark reality is that Fifa's treatment of Oceania means only one thing: the OFC, previously known as the Oceania Football Confederation, is now the Obsolete Football Confederation.
29 June 2003: Outrage as Fifa strips Oceania of World Cup spot.
Who'd have thought South America's request for another World Cup spot via increasing the World Cup to 36 teams would have such ramifications on Oceania. Fifa president Sepp Blatter was always against the increase, and at the Fifa executive committee meeting overnight, those confederations requesting the increase adhered to Blatter's request and withdrew their proposal. However, to placate the South Americans, the executive decided to award them an extra half spot, and reduce Oceania's one spot accordingly. But to provide an extra sting to the decision, Fifa also announced that this allocation would remain for the 2010 World Cup. Of course, one has to wonder if Fifa's decisions are ever that binding. Also, while the inference is that Oceania will again have to qualify through South America, no announcements have been made with that regard.
This decision defies belief in that Oceania's spot was granted originally without objection and unanimously. It had to, because, as this website has maintained for years, it's a constitutional right. Yet the decision was reversed almost just as resoundingly, 22-1. What's changed in the meantime is uncertain, but it can't be a decision Oceania should take lightly. Legal appeal must be the bare minimum response, but a World Cup boycott, especially if support is garnered from other developing confederations, the most ideal.
According to Oceania president Basil Scarscella, who labelled the decision as unethical and immoral, Fifa blamed New Zealand's poor performance in the current Confederations Cup and Soccer Australia's administrative turmoil for decision. Clearly that's lame reasoning, and Fifa have simply used them as a convenient and expedient publicity tool to reverse the "mistake" (according to vice-president Lennart Johansson) made in December to provide Oceania with a full spot.
Sure NZ lost all matches, but were not outclassed, and led Colombia for an hour before tiring. But in the same tournament, the USA, Concacaf's best team, performed little better by achieving just one draw, yet that Confederation still has 3.5 spots. Asia's team, Japan, did not make the semis either, and only beat NZ. Asia has 4.5 spots. But Fifa's conveniently forgotten Australia's third place in 2001, which saw victories over current and subsequent World Champions France and Brazil. In 1997, Australia made the final. Plus there was the result against England recently. And as recently as February, Australia defeated two England teams in one night with a combined score of 3-1. For truly bad, more relevant, performances, look to Asia in the last World Cup. Saudi Arabia and China were totally outclassed, while in 1998, neither Asia nor Concacaf did anything worthwhile.
As for a country's administration affecting a confederation's constitutional right, well, if that was the case, Africa's, South America's and Asia's allocation would be affected as well. However, most bizarre is that Soccer Australia's stability was actually far worst when the decision was originally announced last December. With several key resignations, the organisation almost bankrupt, and in the midst of a government inquiry, Scarscella even warned it could affect Oceania's chances. But it never did. So it's pure nonsense. It's solely a political decision, which Johansson confirmed when he poignantly said that something had to be done to appease the South Americans.
From Australia's perspective, the decision may not be all that bad. Oceania's spot always had the drawback of a qualifying series devoid of any real competition other than against New Zealand. Of course, that was always preferable to the Russian-roulette style playoff series that Oceania winners have been submitted to in previous years - at least in terms of fairness. The right solution could address that.
Way back in 1999, when the Oceania/South America playoff was announced, there were two other teams with half a spot each - in Asia and Europe. Instead of the two respective playoffs, this website proposed a four-way round-robin series amongst those teams with the top two qualifying. This time, there's again four teams (other two being Asia and Concacaf), and such a four-way round-robin would be, and should be, the only appeasement for Oceania. That way, Oceania's winner gets a fair qualifying run, and three big matches at home.
If the four-way round robin fails to materialise, then the only alternative that Oceania can accept is a pool-phase qualifying series amongst the confederation it will be forced to qualify through. If there's any suggestion of a playoff, it must be fought to the death. But really, any path through another confederation will always be a compromise. Oceania should be merged with another confederation. While that's been tried numerous times before, especially with Asia, who's repeated rejections actually caused Oceania to be created, this is now an opportune time for Fifa to flex its muscle and force a merge, which would create 5 spots for the region.
If no fair qualifying format can be achieved from this decision, then the ultimate, most drastic, solution would be is to disband the confederation, allowing individual nations to join another. This website as repeatedly bandied this notion as the ONLY solution to the Oceania dilemma. But it's especially the case when such a full member confederation cannot even enjoy the constitutional rights that all others enjoy. It may as well not exist at all. For all intents and purposes, it doesn't. That really is the whole sad and sorry truth of the matter. The football family is now incomplete.
Miffed that South America lost a half spot (read: full spot) for the next World Cup, they sought to increase the World Cup from 32 teams to 36. After an initial positive response from the organisers, Germany, and with the support of most other confederations, it looked to be a certainty and only needed ratification from the Fifa executive (which comprises all the confederations). The proposal would be that South America would gain one spot, Europe two more, whilst Asia and Concacaf half a spot each, to take them to 5 and 4 spots respectively. However, the ulterior motive behind this request was more of a bargaining chip in case the request failed. Also of note is that while South America lost a half a spot, so did Europe, but those half spots went to Concacaf and Asia. Oceania's spot came from the removal of automatic qualification for the defending champions.
As time transpired, Germany's investigation into hosting an extra group showed that it would not be feasible. Financially, time-wise and logistically, it would be too difficult and even detrimental to the World Cup itself. Fifa president Sepp Blatter also made it known he was against 36 teams. Fundamentally because it meant for a flawed second round promotion system. With nine groups, only seven of the best second-placed teams would progress with the nine group winners. For simplicity's sake, Blatter preferred to keep it at the top two progressing. However, the Fifa executive was about to unanimously vote for a 36 team World Cup. This is where South America's bargaining chip comes in. With South American needing to be appeased, their president, Nicolas Leoz, agreed to a compromise solution that would see his request for a 36 World Cup dropped if his region could gain that half spot back in return. European president, Lennart Johannson, supported the South Americans, and he and Leoz rallied the other confederation presidents to support a proposal to remove a half spot from Oceania by citing New Zealand's poor Confederations Cup performance and Australia's administrative chaos that even saw it fail to field a decent team in the Oceania Nations Cup loss to New Zealand.
Oceania president Basil Scarscella learnt of the motion from Blatter himself, and pleaded for mercy at the meeting. But once Leoz proposed the removal of the half spot for Oceania, Europe immediately voted as a block in support. Probably knowing that their confederations were at risk of losing a half spot, or having it diluted further, Asia and Concacaf supported. Uncertain why - possibly because a 75% majority is required to pass the motion, or they could have been a target if the vote were defeated - Africa eventually did too.
In a letter sent to all Oceania nations this week, these are the reasons offered by Sepp Blatter for the reversal: "New Zealand's weak performance at the FIFA Confederations Cup France 2003, Australia's irreverent attitude to the OFC Nations Cup final, recurrent problems in the organisation and administration of the most prominent national association (Australia) in your region etc,"
Considering that Soccer Australia was in far worst condition with significant resignations that included the chairman, almost being liquidated and in the midst of a government inquiry at the time, and that the Oceania Nations Cup was held last July, those reasons had far more value to withhold giving Oceania a spot when it was originally announced last December. In comparison, totally invalid now. Not when Fifa actually endorsed the government inquiry into the sport. Not when many other country's governing bodies are in a far more lamentable state - even corrupt - yet their confederation's entitlements are not affected.
As for New Zealand's Confederations Cup performance, the news item above and letters below highlight the absurdity of that argument. But lets just add this glaring fact. World Cup 2002: Saudi Arabia 0, Germany 8. Saudi Arabia's and China's combined record: won 0, lost 6; goals scored 0, goals conceded 21. World Cup spots for 2002: 3.5; for 2006, 4.5. Go figure.
Lets also recall that just prior to the announcement last December, Australia thrashed Fiji 11-0 in the first leg and 5-0 in the second of the final playoff of the Oceania qualifying tournament for the World Youth Cup. Some feared that would harm Oceania's chances of a full spot because of the perception it was nothing short of a guaranteed spot for Australia. But it mattered not. It seems that the sole reason Oceania was granted a spot back then was one of basic entitlement.
Of course the reasons are bunk, totally. In the time since Oceania was granted the spot last December, nothing's changed. In fact, things have improved. But what these reasons did was to provide a lever for South America and Europe to angle. The real question is: would the reversal had happened had those reasons not abounded. We'll never know. Even if Australia played in the Confederations Cup, they could just have easily lost all three matches and provided an even bigger lever. Clearly there was a desire to appease the South Americans, and I believe it was strong enough to be carried regardless of circumstance. Being the numerically weakest, Oceania no doubt would have been attacked first.
No. Clearly he has little influence over the executive. Not like Havelange used to. Blatter is merely a self-serving politician whose role now is to parrot the wishes of the executive. His promises should never be taken seriously because he has no control to enforce them. He can say what he wants, but it's the executive that has all power. However, surely he must have some control over the agenda of such meetings. Reshuffling the World Cup allocations was never on the agenda; only the vote to increase the World Cup to 36. We've seen how the current Soccer Australia board has blocked meetings with trivial legal loopholes, so why not Blatter with Fifa's executive? He could also have offered the executive a gentle reminder of Fifa's constitutional obligation. Seems he tacitly approved the vote. His morals are therefore in question. Especially when he also failed to re-affirm his original ideals regarding Oceania's spot. Sure he abstained from the vote, but never apologised to Oceania for the betrayal. Instead, he fully endorsed the absurd reasons offered and espoused them as absolute justification. He's a snake, embodies all the evilness of the corrupt organisation he heads, and is to be never trusted again.
No. Again, has no power. Oceania has one vote, and is meaningless unless the executive is dead-locked - as it was with regards to Germany being awarded the World Cup. All the lobbying, speeches, pleading, etc, has always been a waste of time. The only thing he could have done was maybe put it to the media and build a case for Oceania sympathy by exposing Fifa's politically deceitful and duplicitous ways. But the reversal was such a clandestine operation that he had no chance. And as if Europe and South America, or anyone for that matter, would care about what happens regarding the Obsolete Football Confederation. Make no mistake, the reversal was an act of political, self-serving, bastardry, and nothing could have been done to prevent it
No doubt this website is the only place you'll even hear of it. While I was aware of it several years ago, Sepp Blatter broached the subject at a meeting just prior to the last World Cup and confirmed the constitutional obligation that stipulates all confederations must have representation at all Fifa-sanction tournaments. It is that simple. The thing is, Oceania does have representation for every single Fifa tournament other than the World Cup - ironically, the tournament with the most teams. So what about that constitution? Clearly they don't adhere to it. You'd think a legal challenge based on the constitution to regain Oceania's right would succeed. But there's been no hint of such a measure. Maybe Oceania finds it improper or unethical to challenge, or maybe is in fear of a severe repercussions. But it has not stopped talk of national bodies, especially New Zealand's, suing for financial damages. Sponsorship deals have been made with certain countries on the premise that Oceania will have a team in the World Cup. Without that certainly, suddenly those deals have lost value.
To be brutally honest, the motion should have been defeated. In times of crisis like this, you really find out who your friends are. And Oceania has none. All the talk from Asia about creating links amounted to nothing. As a fellow developing region, it should have stood by the Oceania. Concacaf is just as guilty, and maybe Africa too. The motion was solely a South American/European initiative, and had a couple of those other confederations had any morals, the vote would have been defeated.
Truth of the matter, for all their whingeing, South America did not deserve an extra half spot. Three of their teams failed to make the second round of the World Cup last year. One of which was their best team - Argentina. Paraguay only fluked it. Sure Brazil won the Cup itself, but it had the softest draw ever, quite possibly should have lost to Belgium, and beat the softest World Cup final opponent ever. While South America's World Cup pedigree is undeniably excellent, in the past 50 years, only Brazil and Argentina have done anything. And they think four spots from a 10-team confederation (nine, if you exclude whipping boys Venezuela) is insufficient? With China and Saudia Arabia totally out-classed, Asia did not deserve an extra spot either. Four would have been ample. Concacaf did well enough, and an extra full spot would not have been unreasonable. But given that the allocation was decided, and if South America really had to have a spot, I'd have given them a third-spot, and reduced Asia's and Concacaf's accordingly. Then there's a three-way playoff for one spot. Or, reduce the allocation accordingly for those confederations that wanted the extra half-spot for South America - namely Europe. If they were so keen on it, they should have made the sacrifice.
Oceania has no future. If this event does not prove it, nothing will. It has no clout, no value and no role in the scheme of world football. It should be disbanded immediately. It's obsolete.
What many media commentators fail to realise is that the World Cup spot was supposed to help develop the region. It was not solely about whether Oceania (read: Australia) deserved it. While I don't believe the spot would have done anything at all, truth is we'll never find out. The only way it would help the region is if it encouraged other nations - namely from south-east Asia - to join. As for the nations outside Australia and New Zealand ever developing to World Cup level, that's an unrealistic proposition regardless of what hallucinogenic you're on. How will beating up tiny island nations every few years improve your standard? It's nonsense. So too is the suggestion that with World Cup appearances, big international teams will be lining up to play against us.
No, the spot, in essence, was a free ride for Australia. Not that should be a reason to remove it. Brazil, Argentina, Korea, Mexico, Italy, Germany have enjoyed similarly easy rides to World Cups over the years too. What the spot actually highlighted was the absurdity of Oceania's existence and the miniscule effort that its most dominant team would require to reach the World Cup. Those other confederations, with so many competitive teams, have meaningful and tough competition to determine their qualifiers. Oceania doesn't. Their powerhouses still have to work for it. Oceania's do not.
Now, that's not a black mark against awarding Oceania a spot, or even against the confederation and allocation system. It's a black mark against the very concept of Oceania. With the lack of overall competition in the region, clearly it should never have been granted Fifa membership in the first place. In fact, it should never have been allowed to develop. Fifa should have intervened long ago and realised the futility of Oceania as a potential confederation. Especially when Oceania's most powerful nation - Australia - has been attempting to abandon it for a better future with Asia almost since inception.
Ironically, this decision to remove Oceania's direct spot could prove to be the pivotal event that finally sees football in this region directed away from the dead-end concept of Oceania. It's a realisation that's become so apparent that now most people in the sport are calling for Oceania to be scrapped. Ideally, it should happen, allowing all nations to be absorbed into Asia. Of course, the insurmountable stumbling block there is that they don't want us. Never have. Never will. In fact, Oceania was formed after repeated rejections from Asia for countries like Australia and New Zealand to join. Their latest excuse is that it would too large a burden to administer another 11 countries - taking Asia's burgeoning total to almost 60 countries. Maybe so, but the more worrying concern is that Oceania officials are not in favour of it disbanding either. Losing funds and curtailing development is their reasons. However, the cynic in me suggests that losing their cosy fat-cat jobs is a bigger concern.
There's also concern that, without Oceania, losing direct spots to other tournaments will hurt financially and developmentally - key factors that were promoted as key reasons to grant a World Cup spot. On the contrary, a decent qualifying path against tougher teams would only help the Oceania team that qualifies. While Oceania's teams may miss out every now and then, and therefore lose some funding for the region, the financial benefits of going through Asia for qualifying, plus participating in all their regional competitions, would surely compensate more than generously. And all this extra competition, which includes more big World Cup qualifers, would help developmentally too. Fiji will never make the World Cup, but could squeeze past New Zealand and feature in an Asian Cup or World Cup qualifier on Tokyo. At youth level, Vanuatu has already reached the final two in Oceania. So imagine the benefit they'd glean by hosting Korea, Iran, etc in a final qualifying phase. Besides that obvious factor, almost all fans, media and players alike would prefer Australia to be part of Asia anyway.
This is a dilemma where Fifa needs to lose its self-absorbed attitude and intervene. Not just for Oceania, but for the good of the game overall. The best solution is for another confederation to annex Oceania and then pool tournament allocations and executive committee voting to consummate the link. That way Oceania would retain all administrative and developmental autonomy, and have an actual say in the executive. While the other confederation's only concern is making room for two Oceania teams in their competitions and final qualifying phases. If Asia don't want us, maybe a better solution is South America - to create a Pacific Rim confederation. They are numerically challenged as it stands - with even less countries than Oceania. It shows up in their nations cup where they invite teams outside the region to make up the numbers.Travel might be a slight concern with such a link, but clever scheduling on double-date international windows would reduce that factor. It's not as if Australia's that much further from Europe than Argentina is anyway. Plus, by accepting two Oceania teams into their qualifying, they could actually make two groups of six, rather than one of 10, which would mean less games and less travelling. And it must be two teams if the link is to be truly beneficial - for both regions. The only negative foreseen for the host confederation is that theoretically two Oceania teams could qualify for the various World Cups. But if you can't beat the second best Oceania team, then you don't deserve to be in the World Cup, do you?
Of course, before any merge or annex talk, Oceania must be stripped of confederation status. You can't have the anomaly of a confederation existing without all accompanying entitlements. Being a confederation is the only reason Oceania deserved a World Cup spot in the first place.
Despite this common sense solution, it's doubtful it will happen. Fifa's decision making process is mired by an unworkable voting structure that's totally bastardised by confederations and officials only concerned with themselves. So the maltreated nations of Oceania are now bracing for yet another terribly unfair playoff scenario. Regardless of where the playoff path lies, these two-game series are brutally unfair. Even if it was the 50th best Asian team, it's still wrong to subject a team to their one and final chance of qualifying for a World Cup when every other nation in the world has a group qualifying and often a second chance playoff. This factor seems to becoming more recognised, with preliminary talks suggesting a four-way round robin involving the four confederations that each have a half a spot. That means six games each, three at home, with the top two qualifying. Really, that is the only scenario worth considering, and would be fair compensation. Not just about the World Cup spot reversal, but even if Australia failed, at least the fans will have a decent ride watching the team trying to qualify.
However, here come the reality check. If there are any impediments to this four-way round robin - most specifically time - prepare for the worst. Asia will play-off against Concacaf as originally implied, whilst South America will obviously be more than content to play Oceania again. Remember, it's the Fifa executive that will decide the play-off scenarios, and the OFC - the Obsolete Football Confederation - will have no say in the matter whatsoever.
In the aftermath of the reversal decision, Asian Football Confederation general secretary Dato' Peter Velappan and former Soccer Australia chairman Sir Arthur George provided a sobering reality check of Oceania's, and most significantly, Australia's future with regards to joining Asia. While most agree that Oceania as a confederation is a joke and that the region would be best served merged into Asia, reality is that that is a forlorn hope. Velappan was riven with contradictive statements, which left little room for optimism. Firstly, he recognised that Oceania's lost spot was totally a political decision and that Asia had been on the receiving end of such victimisation in the past. But on the other hand, failed to realise that this was the perfect time to send the ultimate message to Fifa about their political ways and breaking the powerful European/South American lobby by aligning with the other developing confederations and defeating such a political motion. However, particularly chilling was the advice for the next qualifiers and degree that Asia was willing to help Oceania. Velappan stated that if Soccer Australia properly prepared the team, Australia could beat the third or fourth team in South America. And while prepared to offer coaching and youth development, the idea of Oceania teams joining Asia's final group phases was supported only on what was mutually agreeable. Essentially, that means that only if Asia agrees so. Because Oceania obviously would.
If those comments were less than encouraging about an Asia-Oceania alliance, then Velappan's final statement provided the final nail. Asia's ultimate aim is to have a guaranteed five Asian teams at the World Cup. That's why they were quick to endorse the Fifa proposal to remove Oceania's direct spot - so as to not incur the future wrath of the executive. Only once Asia has five spots would they even consider accommodating Oceania. But Oceania'd still have to provide a full spot of their own to share. Clearly, this will not happen short term, or ever, if Asian attitude against Oceania does not change.
So why such an antipathy towards Oceania? It's now no secret that they've continually rejected Australia's approaches to join. And according to Sir Arthur George, those reasons to block Australia are now strong than ever. Whilst such motives have been suspected, George, who has experienced it at first hand, endorsed it - racism. The main problem lies with the Islamic nations, who see Western countries like Australia as cesspools of all the evils that their faith prohibits. For Australia to join the final Asian qualifying phase, or even enter their nations cup competition, and to win it, would bring ultimate shame on those countries. If ever Oceania qualifies through Asia, it will be a playoff situation. That way they'll only be beating the fourth or fifth best Asian team. And don't hold your breath on Australia ever playing in the Asian Nations Cup. The bottom line is that we are not Asian. Where all other confederations' names reflect their geographical sense, it seems that the AFC's are more to do with race.
Sir Arthur, who was interviewed on SBS's The World Game TV show last week, made and confirmed other interesting points:
* The OFC should never have allowed to form. There's not the competition nor the potential for it to ever develop.
* OFC president Basil Scarscella was powerless to halt the reversal.
* Described Les Murray's and Johnny Warren's idea of handing Oceania's spot to Asia to allow for a decent qualifying series as dreamworld. He mentioned the disdain that Fifa would heap on a confederation after just receiving it's long awaited entitlement.
As we know now, Asia probably would not have accepted it anyway. In handing them the spot, the proposal was to allow two Oceania teams in the final Asian phase. However, that would not only mean the evils from Australia would have a chance of humiliating Asia's Islamic countries, but also could allow two Oceania teams to qualify. Just imagine if both Australia and New Zealand made it? Just image the embarrassment to Asia would be enormous?
* Felt that Australia would be better served trying to join Concacaf, where culturally there's far more tolerance and similarity.
Concacaf sounds fine, but distance will be a hurdle. Of course, the solution is to have a dedicated international season distinct from the club seasons so as to remove travel concerns regarding clubs with these stupid international windows during the club season. However, surmounting that hurdle, would they give up a spot? Theoretically Australia would most often qualify and take one. Really, Australia (or Oceania) would have to bring a full spot with them for their to be any incentive to join. For all Asia's antipathy, they also had that valid concern of simply handing Australia a spot at the expense of one of their traditional teams. Would we do the same? The only benefit of Oceania having a spot was to use it as a carrot to lure other teams to the confederation. But would we allow someone like Brazil to join? No. We'd only take someone capable of competing, but rarely winning.
As for Les and Johnny, dreamworld is exactly the word. It's not only an utter ridiculous concept and an insular decision, it's arrogant. The only reason for such a proposal is that Australia would still most likely qualify, but would also have those big qualifying games at home. But would Les and Johnny endorse such a notion if it crucified Australia's chances? No one would if they had any degree of sanity. The picture is much bigger than that. At every other national team level, Oceania has a direct spot - all to tournaments with less teams than the World Cup. So why is there not the equal effort to merge those spots elsewhere. Where's the consistency? Yes, there should be a merge, but it must be wholesale.
That leads to the obvious question of Australia and Oceania's future. Clearly Australia will be stuck in a regional anomaly that, without full entitlements of a confederation, is obsolete. Without actual competition within it, it has no future. Under the current confederation plan, there is no solution. Ideally, there should be a confederation shake-up to leave just four big ones. There's too many, with four of them weak in either members, performance, or both. The weak-performed Concacaf should be merged with the numerically weak South America. Oceania should merge with Asia. That's the four, all of which would have a suitable playing strength and equal in numbers. Each would have tremendous individual clout in the Fifa executive.
Problem is that Fifa don't decide the confederation composition, the confederations themselves too. Theoretically, a group of nations can go start a new one. Which is what Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and PNG did with Oceania after Asia refused to admit Australia and New Zealand as members. With Asia still not wanting us, Oceania really have to look elsewhere. A merge with South America is probably the best solution of the current confederations, and considering how numerical weak they are (just 10 teams). However, geographical problems may thwart that. So too with the more culturally familiar Concacaf.
Asia really is the only solution, but to get around the cultural problem. Considering that it's primarily the Islamic countries, the most ideal and practical solution would be to split the Asian confederation into two - an east and a west. Australia is linked with the east in a corporate and trade sense, and even in an historical football sense with countries like Korea and Japan, and would slot ideally into the east. There's also the commonwealth history with countries like India and Pakistan, which could be added to the east. In the west, leave it to Islamic countries and former Soviet countries, many of whom share Islam. The tournament allocations is the real worry here, however. Five in total does not split that well, but given the relative strengths of each side, particularly the last World Cup, the west would take just 1.5 spots whilst the east 3.5. However, with a team like Australia capable of performing at a World Cup better than nearly all Asian teams, realistically the allocation would increase sooner rather than later. Problem is that it's a short term loss (or compromise) for long term gain, but would Asia's countries make that choice? It's totally up to them.
More immediately pressing is Oceania's World Cup qualifying path after the final Oceania phase. That final Oceania phase was going to be a six team home and away league system, but in light of having no direct spot now, it maybe restored to the previous system of two tournament pools played in two countries with the winners of each pool playing off to determine the Oceania winner. However, that's hardly beneficial to developing the region, so the league system would be preferable to determine the Oceania winners. However, maybe reduce the number of teams to five.
As for the post-Oceania phase, the most ideal solution would be that for the four teams with half a spot would have a four-way playoff, home and way, meaning six games each with the top two progressing. However, excessive time constraints, travel and extra burden has seen preliminary talk from South America, Concacaf and Asia reject that idea. What's emerged recently has been a compromise four-way mini tournament in a neutral country over 10 days. Obviously that duration suggests just one game against each opponent (two games against each would see a match every two days), but it sees no big match at home for the Oceania winner. Of course, with Oceania's direct spot, that was gone already. It also means no home-ground advantage. But history shows that Australia's rarely taken advantage of it. But worst, has often been commensurately more disadvantaged away. The 1-0 home result against Uruguay in 2001 was our best ever non-Oceania playoff result since 1973's 3-0 defeat of Iran, yet it was still not enough. In contrast, recent Confederations Cup performances has shown Australia performing at its best in these four-way round robin neutral territory situations. Given that the four-way mini tournament allows Oceania's winner a much fairer attempt at qualifying compared to the brutally cut-throat playoff that's unduly further pressurised with the stupid away-goals rule, losing a home game is a sacrifice that must be made. And looking at the potential teams that would be in such a group (UAE, Kuwait, Uzbekistan, Iran from Asia; Uruguay, Colombia, Chile, Bolivia from South America; and Canada, Jamaica, Honduras from Concacaf), qualifying looks more than attainable. For the first time ever, we could truly say that if we don't qualify, then we don't deserve to be there.
Thankfully new Soccer Australia chairman Frank Lowy sees it similarly and has lobbied for this format towards Fifa president Sepp Blatter over the weekend to a favourable response. For the other countries, the tournament means one more game than a playoff, but on the other hand, there's no travel in between games. Asia and Concacaf may think their chances are reduced against a South American team and most likely Australia compared to simply facing each other, but South America would surely endorse it. With the rest of the Fifa executive likely wanting to redeem themselves for their earlier evils against Oceania, it seems the most likely path. However, that's just a minor issue against the overall problem that is the Obsolete Football Confederation.
Previous week they discussed how Australia did not deserve such a gift, and, Brian Taylor especially, rubbished the team. They then agreed the reasons behind the reversal were correct
After Mike Gibson introduced my belief that the panel missed the point, their edited version was shown.
It's not about Australia, it's about Oceania. It's irrelevant that Australia would have an easy ride. Same as it is for Brazil, Mexico and Italy in their regions, all of whom have similarly easy rides. It's about what's right, fair and non-discriminatory. As a full member confederation, Oceania's entitled to representation at the World Cup. If Fifa don't want to confer that right, then it should never have granted the region full membership in the first place.
The full letter.
You guys totally missed the point. It's not about Australia, it's about Oceania. It's irrelevant that Australia would have an easy ride. Same as it is for Brazil, Mexico and Italy in their regions, all of whom have similarly easy rides. It's about what's right, fair and non-discriminatory. As a full member confederation (not category, Mr Brian "King Ignoramus" Taylor), Oceania's entitled to representation at the World Cup, just like it has for all other Fifa sanctioned tournaments, and just like all other confederations have. If Fifa don't want to confer that right, then it should never have granted the region full membership in the first place. That's the crux of the issue. Everything else is irrelevant.
The accompanying sections detailing their ignorance.
And by the way, if you all bothered to retrieve your heads out of your collective rugby scrum, you'd realise that the reasons provided for the reversal are bunk. Australia's administration was in far worst condition when the original announcement was made. Fifa in fact supported the government inquiry into the sport. The spot was awarded to Oceania, not Australia, and a country's administration has never affected a confederation's entitlement before. While New Zealand lost all three games at the recent Confederations Cup, the USA, CONCACAF's champion, did little better, by only securing one draw. At the last World Cup, Saudi Arabia and China were thrashed in all three games, which included an 8-0 drubbing from Germany over the Saudis. Was Asia's spots affected? Yes, but they were actually increased!
In contrast, in the 2001 Confederations Cup, Australia finished third, and beat European and World champions France, beat subsequent World champions Brazil and beat CONCACAF champions Mexico along the way. In 1997, Australia finished second, beating CONCACAF and South American champions Mexico and Uruguay along the way. Even recently, Australia beat England and New Zealand drew with Scotland. Footballing-wise, Oceania proved long ago that could compete at the highest level.
As for the stale mantra of "if you can't beat the fifth best South American team", you don't deserve to qualify, that's typical of the those without a true understanding of the sport. Since when has Uruguay been a benchmark for World Cup qualification? I doubt any of the Asian or CONCACAF teams would have beaten them. Brazil could not even beat Uruguay in the South American qualifiers, yet still qualified.
It's a pity your show is let down in times like this through sheer ignorance and even bias. Brian Taylor's comments were derogatory and an absolute disgrace. I realise it's a show about opinions, but sometimes viewers also want answers. A bit of research would go a long way.
With regards to Fifa reducing Oceania's World Cup spot to half a place, it seems most people have missed the point. It's not about Australia, it's about Oceania. It's irrelevant that Australia would have an easy ride. Same as it's irrelevant for Brazil, Mexico and Italy in their regions, all of whom have similarly easy rides. It's irrelevant that New Zealand's performances at the recent Confederations Cup were poor. It's irrelevant that Soccer Australia's in a mess.
In fact, Soccer Australia is so irrelevant that it was actually far worst off last December when Oceania's spot was announced. New Zealand's performance is so irrelevant that at the preceding Confederations Cup, Australia finished third by beating World and European champions France, subsequent World champions Brazil, and North and Central American champions Mexico. In 1997, it finished second, this time beating Mexico and South American champions Uruguay. Oceania's already proved itself on and off the field. That's why it has a full confederation membership of Fifa.
So providing Oceania with guaranteed World Cup representation is solely about doing what's right, fair and non-discriminatory. Like all other confederations, it already has direct access to all other Fifa sanctioned tournaments. And like all other confederations, it has a right to the World Cup.
But it's the only confederation without direct access. If Fifa don't want to extol that fundamental right, then it should never have granted the region full membership in the first place. That's the crux of the issue. Everything else is irrelevant.
As for a solution, obviously Oceania should be disbanded or merged into Asia. But Asia don't want us. Never have. And still don't. In fact, Oceania was formed after continued rejections from Asia for individual countries like Australia to join. But Oceania's future is now bleak, especially without the World Cup spot. With it, south-east Asian countries might have been encouraged to join and expand it. Not now.
While Oceania could become a sub-region of Asia and maintain administrative and developmental autonomy, its tournament allocations and voting rights must be inexorably linked for it to have any real impact in world football. Clearly there needs to be a confederation shake-up. It's up to Fifa to restore some pride in its organisation, quit procrastinating, flex some muscle, and do the right thing by Oceania. The future is now.
After Johnny, and especially Les, continued their usual pontification over about not lowering the bar for Australia and of r which region would be the most appropriate for a playoff path.
Sorry Johnny and Les, but you guys are totally missing the point. It's irrelevant that Oceania's spot was "lowering the bar" too much for Australia. Same as it's irrelevent for Brazil, Mexico and Italy, all of whom have similarly easy rides in their regions. And who are you to judge that a play-off with Asia sees bar at the right level? It's actually not about Australia at all. It's about Oceania. It's about what's fair and non-discriminatory. As a full member confederation, Oceania's entitled to representation at the World Cup. Just like it has for all other Fifa sanctioned tournaments, and just like all other confederations have. If Fifa don't want to extol that right, then it should never have granted the region full membership in the first place. That's the crux of the issue. Everything else is irrelevant.
The issue is solely about Oceania's right to full membership of Fifa, or whether it should exist at all. Clearly it shouldn't. That World Cup spot was its only salvation. With it, south-east Asian countries might have been encouraged to join and expand it. Not now. So what's left? Merge with Asia? Great idea. Pity they don't want us. Never have. And still don't. In fact, Oceania was formed after continued rejections from Asia for individual countries like Australia to join.
So it's now up to Fifa to restore some credibility in its organisation, quit procrastinating, flex some muscle, and do the right thing by Oceania. While the mooted four-way playoff scenario is a suitable short-term compromise, it doesn't resolve the Oceania issue. A confederation shake-up that links Oceania to Asia is what's clearly required. By pooling all tournament allocations and voting rights, Oceania could become a sub-region of Asia whilst still maintaining administrative and developmental autonomy in its region. It's the only solution. Either Oceania has World Cup representation, or it doesn't exist at all. There can be no in-between.
On the back page of the sports liftout, there's an editorial section, and this was in response to their totally ignorant claim that the reversal decision was right because better teams like Holland missed out. Also, they contended that Australia should win a World Cup spot on merit, not on a hand-out.
Come on guys, that's a lame excuse when declaring Oceania's World Cup spot reversal was
correct. Sure some of the best teams in the world missed out, but the reason the
Netherlands missed was because they lost to Ireland, not because of a lack of spots for
Europe. If you were to extend that attitude, you would also cut Asia's spots in half, and
reduce and North and Central America's quota, and even South America's.
Of the five South American teams to qualify last time, three - included their best team
Argentina - failed to make it past the first round. And if you recall, China and Saudi
Arabia were destroyed and lost all their games. One of Saudi's was an 8-0 thumping by
Germany. Not even Oceania's second best team performed that badly at the recently
Confederations Cup. And remember, two years ago, Australia finished third after beating
current world and European champions France, CONCACAF champs Mexico, and subsequent world
champions Brazil. Plus, there was not too subtle result against England last February,
when England fielded two teams in the one match and still lost 3-1.
Also, remember that Oceania's spot came from removal of the automatic place for the
champion. South America's and Europe's lost half spot actually went to Asia and CONCACAF.
I agree it's more preferable to have a tougher campaign than just to win Oceania, but
you're ignoring the fundamental fact that Oceania is a full member confederation and is
actually entitled to representation to all Fifa tournaments. It already has this for all
others (U17s, U21s, Women's & Olympics), so why not for the World Cup - ironically the
one with the most teams? And does it not reek of hypocrisy that those against direct
access for the World Cup are not campaigning against it for these other tournaments when
the reasons are just as valid? Of course it is.
The only issue that's even remotely relevant regarding direct access is whether Oceania
should exist as a confederation at all. Clearly it shouldn't. But with no other
confederation willing to accept Oceania's nations, it has no choice to go it alone. And in
the interests of fairness, that should be complete with the same entitlements that all
other confederations enjoy.
Basil Scarscella, the Australian president of the Obsolete Football Confederation, resigned over the weekend after a no confidence motion was passed in his services after Oceania recently lost its right to a direct spot at the World Cup. The Cook Islands, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Western Samoa and Vanuatu supported the no-confidence motion whilst Australia, New Zealand, the Solomon Islands, Tahiti and Tonga opposed it. While Scarscella heeded the motion, his Tongan vice-president, Ahongalu Fusimalohi, did not. This leaves the confederation in political chaos as the representatives of 10 insignificant island nations fight each other for control of this nonsensical entity. It really is time for the two "powerhouses" of Australia and New Zealand to simply quit the confederation, which would surely force it dissolution. Countries are not required to be members of a confederation, and still would have access to all Fifa tournaments. Fifa would simply make special plans for their qualifying. Who knows, the path maybe better than the existing playoff nonsense. And with the turmoil in the region, and maybe even the disdain Australia wrought on Jamaica - a potential candidate in the mooted four-way confederation playoff that may see their confederation reluctant to agree to such a series - that playoff nonsense could be around for a bit longer.
On the dawn of the next Fifa executive meeting that was to decide Oceania's World Cup path, news arrives that this decision will be delayed until December or even early next year. No one knows what to make of this delay, but a rumour circulating is that Oceania will be forced into a playoff against South America again. Fifa president Sepp Blatter has even suggested that the recent no-confidence resignation of Obsolete Football Confederation president Basil Scarscella and general unrest in the region won't help Oceania's cause for their desired four-way playoff system that would involve the three other confederations that have a half-spot. On the other hand, with suggestions that the instability and lack of direction and hope in the region may even see Australia and New Zealand leave the OFC, Fifa could be waiting for the region to settle before making any decision.
The irony is that the turmoil in the region that Fifa is playing on was caused by Fifa itself. One of the excuses used to reverse the direct-spot decision was Australia's irreverence to the the Oceania Nations Cup last year. But it's been Fifa's irreverence towards Oceania that's solely caused these latest problems. Fifa claim that it's up to Australia to help build the region, but they don't understand that without real support from Fifa - ie: World Cup recognition - there's forlorn hope. The World Cup spot is the only carrot that would strengthen the region by possibly enticing other nations to join. We saw all the positive talk surrounding Oceania when the decision was originally made. Now that it's been reversed, it's all negative and the region is in disarray.
Anyway, there's no good postulating about the possible outcome of Fifa's meeting, nor the ramifications. In the worst case scenario of a playoff, for Australia and NZ to leave the OFC then, it will be too late. This needed to happen immediately the decision was reversed. This website once advocated a total boycott by Oceania of the World Cup qualifiers if Oceania was to be gypped for the 2006 Cup, but with the realisation that countries can retain their Fifa membership and rights to qualifying for Fifa's tournaments without being members of a confederation (which we've seen in the past with Israel and Taiwan lumped into Oceania's qualifiers), a serious stand can be made at a national level. While Australia would be at the mercy of Fifa's whims for tournament qualifying, in retrospect, the treatment dished out to Oceania has been no better.
However, at present, it is a wait and see approach. Soccer Australia is viewing things similarly, and will see how Oceania copes under the new leadership of Samoa's Tautulu Roebeck. Ultimately, stability is the key for both Fifa and Soccer Australia. But for the real good of the game, it's a pity that Australia and New Zealand missed the opportunity to make the most poignant and definitive move possible - to quit Oceania and force its dissolution.
Charles Dempsey, the maligned former OFC president that supposedly derailed Africa's bid for the 2006 World Cup, has returned to the OFC fold as a special envoy to Fifa for Oceania. His recall was at the behest of new OFC president, Samoa's Tautulu Roebeck, who used him in a recent meeting with Soccer Australia. There were fears that Roebeck would not have the political or even diplomatic nous to communicate with Fifa properly, but by using Dempsey to meet with SA, those fears not only ring true, they paint an even bleaker picture of the capacity of Oceania's to influence the Fifa executive of its wishes at all.
With Dempsey's appearance, however, also came media interviews. They proved enlightening as to how politically adept this man is. Firstly, he refuted the blame proportioned to him with the 2006 World Cup decision by vindicating his decision to abstain, and went one step further by blaming the other confederations that actually voted against Africa. This, in fact, is the stark reality of what happened, and Dempsey being solely blamed was totally unfair. This website noted this fact in an editorial at the time, and also noted that he merely played the political game that totally encompassed that decision to a degree that would maximise Oceania's hopes of gaining its World Cup recognition in the near future. No one knows how influential his role proved to be, but the fact was the decision was originally ratified with a unanimous decision and that Europe was most supportive. Of course, Dempsey had already been dumped by his own executive for betraying the wishes of Oceania by this time, and then later on, Oceania was back-stabbed and lost its spot.
Interestingly, Oceania blamed the incumbent OFC president of the time, Basil Scarscella, for not foreseeing any trouble brewing. So too did Dempsey, who, had he been not sacked as president, most likely would have foreseen the drama and acted. Oh for the irony that the man that did the ground-work in gaining Oceania's World Cup spot was sacked, only to be recalled by those men that sacked him in the first place to get the spot back.
Stunning stuff really, but the OFC is nothing short of a microcosm of Fifa's "democratic" system, where it's every man for himself. So it's therefore quite dismaying and oxymoronic to hear Fifa president Sepp Blatter's call for Oceania to show some leadership and stability for fear of the ramifications on its desire for a fair World Cup path. Of course, this call for stability is an absolute crock, for Fifa should be making decisions in the interest of the sport, not in the interests of delegates' abilities to suck-up. Oceania has already tried that, and it proved a failure.
When it comes to the crunch, Oceania has no allies. Their solitary vote is meaningless in the Fifa executive when it comes to decisions that are self-serving to individual confederations. No, sorry Mr Blatter, what you say is rubbish. Oceania's instability or so-called short-term presidential mandates was immaterial in it losing that World Cup spot. So too was New Zealand's poor performance in the last Confederations Cup. You're just echoing the sentiment of your putrid executive.
You know what really disappoints? In the interviews that Blatter has conveyed such nonsense, no one has had the bother, or maybe even the courage, to rebuff him. And yes, I'm talking directly to you, Mr Les Murray. You had the chance to represent all football fans in this country with the obvious questions, but instead were more concerned with your own personal crusade of giving Oceania's World Spot to Asia - a region that doesn't want it, or us. Why not some objective journalism and a reminder of similiar examples of poor performances that actually did not affect a confederation's allocation? The most glaring of which is Saudi Arabia's and China's performance at the last World Cup. They lost all six games, scored no goals, and conceded 22. Their punishment? An extra spot for 2006! As for the administrative instability in the region and irreverence to the Oceania Nations Cup that Blatter continues to extol, why has he not been rebutted with the fact that Australia's stability was actually worst when the decision was originally granted for that World Cup spot, the ONC was held before then too, and Oceania's instability has been solely caused by Fifa unjustly and disgracefully reversing the World Cup spot?
Amazing how things can change. One minute World Cup spot, next minute World Cup irrelevancy. Things are grim. Even Dempsey could not impart anything encouraging. He felt that the four-way tournament was a no go; nor a final group qualifying through Asia. He seems to think time constraints ruin the four-way tournament. Weird, considering that it would take only a week and there'd be only one travel section: from clubs to the playoff venue. That's less than a playoff, where players must travel twice: from clubs to the first leg venue, then first leg venue to the second. I suspect Dempsey is just playing the political game by aiming low and unobtrusive. If a playoff is the eventuality, his idea is that the four half-spot teams should be paired by drawing from a hat. The thing is, Blatter's also suggesting that a playoff will be the eventuality, and that Oceania should aim to play against the geographically obvious Asia, while Concacaf should, as logic dictates, pair-off with South America. That won't happen, as both Asia and Concacaf know that they're the two weakest of the probable four teams and will prefer to play each other. South America obviously would be happy with Oceania. With the Fifa executive making the decision, Oceania has no hope of gaining such an outcome.
However, this is where Dempsey's ploy comes in. While drawing from a hat would see Oceania have a 2/3 chance of avoiding South America, it just happens to be the most democratic and fair thing to do. If the Fifa executive has one shred of fairness in it, this should be the mechanism to decide the playoff partners should the four-way tournament not eventuate. And if Oceania ever wants to have an influential force on the Fifa executive, aiming for something democratic and fair rather than self-serving is only way to go.
In what should have been an easy draw to finally gain some respect at World Cup level and qualify for the second phase, the national women's team - the Matildas - bowed out today after losing 2-1 to Ghana. This preceded a commendable 1-1 draw to China, but also a disappointing loss to Russia. While they were unlucky against Russia in suffering a last minute goal on the counter attack when dominating play, the team had the pedigree to beat them and Ghana. Especially Ghana - a team ranked much lower than Australia.
While disappointing that they led both against Russia and China before succumbing, the loss against Ghana is a more galling indication on the team's true ability. There's also the fact that their group winners - China and Russia - were immediately knocked out in the next round. While China were upset in a 1-0 defeat by Canada, Russia was pulverised 7-1 by Germany.
It seems the rest of the world is catching up, whilst Australia is going backwards. They also lost four of five preparation matches, which included losses against lower-ranked nations like England and Canada. Only against the even lower ranked Scotland could they muster a 1-0 win.
And then there's the younger men's teams that have failed to really produce at recent World Cups. The U17 Joeys were ranked last of the sixteen nations competing at their recent World Cup, and were noted to have an almost embarrassing low technical capability. In 2001, whilst both the U17s and U20s made the second phase, they were both dumped out with ease. It will be interesting to see how the U20s go later this year and the Olympic team next year. What does this all mean?
In this era of automatic qualifying of Oceania's top team at all levels bar the Socceroos, could we be seeing the materialisation of the fears of our national teams being uncompetitive at world level because of their easy qualifying campaigns? Too early to tell yet, but the signs don't portend well. But on a different level, should we now dare say that if Fifa are consistent with their performance requirements for World Cup spots that saw New Zealand's Confederations Cup performance affect Oceania's World Cup allocation, should they also be moving to remove direct access from other World Cups for such poor performances? They won't. Direct access is strangely seen as a developmental mechanism for the region, while at a senior level it isn't. Direct access there is more about sucking-up, politically.
If Fifa truly had their pulse on the game, these results should be observed as the potentional indicators of Oceania's prowess and developmental potential that they appear to be, and act now. Even without these results, the ramifications for such flimsy opposition and competition are obvious regardless of what this recent trend of poor performances may suggest anyhow. That's the problem with Oceania. Sure, competing solely within Oceania will see the island nations improve over time, but in the process the top nations will be dragged down. Australia's, and even New Zealand's goals are much higher than being king-pin in Oceania. Their goal is to improve at world level. Oceania will never offer that because the island nations will never reach a performance level to push them. That's the inescapable eventuality of why Oceania's future is so terminal.
So it's really reaching crunch time. Something must be done. With Fifa nor Oceania willing to oblige, nor any other confederation for that matter, Australia and New Zealand have their destiny in their own hands. They missed the window of opportunity to make a stand when Fifa reversed their World Cup spot some months back. But thankfully, another opportunity is about to open. That day will be the announcement of Oceania's World Cup path later 2003, or early 2004. Anything other than a group qualifying scenario, and it's time to quit the Obsolete Football Confederation. It'll be game over.
Amazing what being kicked out of office does to someone's mindset. When president of Oceania, Basil Scarscella was always protective of his role in Fifa and Fifa itself when it came to his position and their decisions. But now that he's gone from Oceania after his forced resignation, he's revealed that the decision to remove Oceania's spot had everything to do with what every outsider already knew. That the decision was totally about the self-interests of the other confederations, all reasons offered were flimsy excuses, and that ultimately all power lies with the self-absorbing executive where Oceania has effectively no rights. Thank's for that Basil. We'd never have known.
As expected, and as for the totally flimsy excuse expected, Fifa president Sepp Blatter put end to speculation for a possible 4-way tournament between all the confederations with half spots for the next World Cup. Of course, the reason of time constraints simply does not wash when such a tournament would take only one week and would involve only one travel phase (to the venue). Truth is that neither of the other confederations wanted it. South America didn't want to play the extra game, and Concacaf and Asia - slated to play each other before Oceania was stripping of its spot - see it as a tougher challenge to qualify.
So the playoff will happen, but there is rumour that an anticipated random draw for the pairings might be in the offing. Oceania's preference is to play Asia, but that's obviously seen more as self-serving than of any geographical convenience. But their second option of a random draw is totally fair, and is the least Fifa can do in light of the accepted travesty of removing the spot. Problem will be convincing the executive, which has all the power, and cares nothing for Oceania. With Asia and Concacaf more than happy to play each other as originally planned, and South America not fussed either way, the random draw, in all reality, seems a forlon hope. Fifa will announce the procedure on December 3, and the World Cup draw itself will be held on December 6 at 3am. Live coverage will be on SBS.
Gee, despite all the turmoil, unfairness, anger with the way things turned against Oceania and seemingly the inevitable path back through South America, it's still hard not to get excited. After all, it is THE World Cup.
Shame Fifa, shame. On a day when the nation should be rejoicing the Young Socceroos 3-2 victory over Brazil in the World Youth Cup overnight, Fifa's putrid and self-absorbed executive committee has destroyed Oceania's hopes for a fairer World Cup qualifying path by returning in back to square one. To the surprise of only the foolishly optimistic, Oceania's regional qualifying winners will again play-off against the fifth best South American team.
It's just sickening how any international sporting body, let alone the one the magnitude of Fifa, the governing body of the world's greatest and most popular sport, can behave with such a selfish and self-serving interest, that it can deny one of its very own members their basic constitutional right. Over the past several months, the world has been privy to the most disgraceful antics of a an organisation that could be possibly be imagined. And this is one whose motto is "for the good of the game". It's not only seen the removal of Oceania's direct World Cup spot, but has seen the absolute rejection of any suggestion to at least provide Oceania with a fairer proposition at qualifying than simply a two-match playoff series.
The very least Fifa could do is make that series a best of three type series, rather than a playoff that involves stupid aggregate goals and the insanely stupid away goals rule. They are fine for second-chance scenarios and tournaments, but not for primary qualifying and totally independent competitive series.
In a best-of-three series, if results are tied after two matches, the third match is played in a neutral country, similar to how Australia qualified for the 1974 when it faced Korea in Hong Kong. Back then, however, aggregate goals were in play, and that series went to a third match because the away-goal rule and penalty shootous had not yet been invented. But in the interests of absolute fairness, only match results should count.
Goals are difficult and/or fluky enough to come by at present, so to embellish them with greater value than an ordinary goal is wrong. Against Iran, their first goal was offside, yet that refereeing error doubled the value of that goal and allowed Iran to qualify. In 1993, both Argentina's goals were quirky: the one in Sydney came from a defensive error and then a one-in-a-million cross and header combination; whilst the one in Buenos Aires was a deflected cross that looped into goal. Remove aggregate and away goals, and you have a much fairer situation where the premium is simply on winning the games. Of course, in 1993, Argentina still did win the playoff fair and square, and would have won a best-of-three series with a draw and a win and there'd have been no third game. But in 1997 and 2002, the Iran series saw two draws and the Uruguay series saw a win a piece, respectively. To find a truly deserved winner, a third match would have been very interesting and much fairer.
Remember, had Viduka scored that close range header from Okon's throw, or someone read Kewell's brilliance with that late cross, Australia would have won the playoff. That's not to forget the juvenile defending that allowed Uruguay's goals. One mistake, or for a few inches too high, or a quirky moment missed, and you're out. With the third game, you at least have a second chance and remove further those intangibles out of the series. Especially that of aggregate and away-goals rule.
Anyway, there's no use pouring over previous arguments that sought much fairer alternate qualifying scenarios with other regions, nor to reasons that totally justified Oceania's World Cup spot, so it's time to look to the future. The fact is that the Obsolete Football Confederation's champion will meet a team from South America in late November 2005 for their one and only chance to qualify for the World Cup.
The OFC, in their wisdom, has had the good sense to merge the Oceania Nations Cup with the WC qualifying campaign, and have produced a format that will remove those embarrassing 31-0 scores against the really small countries.
* The top ranking OFC countries, Australia and New Zealand, will receive a bye for the
first stage with the remaining ten countries playing off in two group tournaments for four
places to the second stage.
* The second stage will see Australia, New Zealand and the four qualifying teams involved
in a round robin tournament played at a yet to be determined venue.
* The winner and runner up from the second stage will meet in the OFC Nations Cup final in
late 2004. The winner of the OFC Nations Cup final will represent Oceania at both the FIFA
Confederations Cup and AFC-OFC Challenge Cup in 2005.
* The winner and runner up from the second stage will meet again in late 2005 to decide
the Oceania champion to playoff in the final stage of the 2006 World Cup qualifying
process.
In terms of the World Cup, the key to the final playoff involving the top two Oceanic countries, this must be played as close as possible to the Oceania/South America playoff in order to provide some significant and real preparation. Though it's doubtful New Zealand will absolutely test Australia, it will at least provide serious playoff experience. That's especially so if New Zealand can grab an away goal. Preceding that, obviously the team must win the Oceania Nations Cup and qualify for the Confederations Cup of that year. Until then, the odd friendly will suffice, especially if one or two can be arranged against South American nations. A guest spot in the Concacaf Gold Cup or Copa America (SA Nations Championships) would be ideal.
Whether that works, who knows. As we've seen in the past, in these playoffs, all the planning, all the preparation, having the better players, being the better team, or simply playing the best football on the day, is often irrelevant. Especially in this situation where the two teams arrive at the juncture from contrasting points. One's battle hardened over 18 games and spurned four previous chances to qualify; the other is spoon-fed canon fodder and forced to wait idly for months for their opponents to be known before engaging in their one and only chance to qualify. Then there comes the travel and its possible effects, whether you play at home first, refereeing errors, a slip-up, bizarre Fifa rules that render a goal useless, a rogue seagull deflecting a shot from scoring, an alien attack as the referee's about to blow the whistle with you 10 goals up. Anything.
Suppose it's just a case of sitting around for a couple more years, taking it easy, and hoping for the best for a few days in late November 2005. That's the nett result of how Fifa's handy-work expects football fans in this country to follow their national team. Can hardly wait. But to avoid any future heartbreak, this advice can offered: Australia's quest is not a four year one, it's one that only ends when we finally qualify. If we fail in two years time, it's not a failure of the quest, it just means it continues on. I'll try it again. (Footnote: This theory was engaged prior to the Uruguay series. It didn't work.)
That takes care of the World Cup, but what about the bigger picture? What about Oceania? It was mentioned in an early update that if the decision went against Oceania last night, that it's time to quit. However, doing that at present would achieve little. The time to act will be after the 2006 World Cup. Australia and New Zealand must act in unison and leave the confederation. They are the life-blood of the region, and without them, its disbandment would surely be inevitable.
And it must act at that time regardless. Whether Oceania's team qualifies is irrelevant. Its performance at the World Cup is irrelevant. There's no point waiting. Don't bother with the lobbying for a spot in the next World Cup. We know how Fifa operates. Promises are empty. Decisions can be reversed. Oceania is irrelevant. It's time Australia looked after itself. Apply to join Europe. All our players are there. Distance is irrelevant for the other European nations because only a handful would have to travel to Australia for regional and World Cup qualifiers every four years, and that's only one travel each. That's nothing. But for Australia, playing away games that involve little travel, effectively being at "home", is something the other confederations can't offer. Besides that, Asia doesn't want us, South America are too snobbish, we'd be too strong for Concacaf, and Africa is over-burdened. If joining Europe fails, then we'll be wandering rogues.
There's no requirement to belong to a confederation. Belonging to Oceania has been no benefit. We've done all that's possible to help and promote it. But it's a hopeless cause against the Fifa tide of corruption and heinous selfishness. During this soul-destroying period where we've witness the maturation of Oceania as a fully fledged confederation with the award of a World Cup spot, we've also seen it stripped in an instant and without justification. While that decision highlighted Oceania's obsolescence as a legitimate Fifa confederation, last night's decision went far beyond that. It cut through the very fabric of what the sport is all about - a competition representative of the world. Clearly, Fifa's concept of a world is one without Oceania. With that, the Obsolete Football Confederation has been launched into World Cup oblivion.
"The Socceroos now face another treacherous route through South America" - that's the common line spieled by the media throughout the week. "We should be going through Asia" is one you'll hear from the so-called experts like SBS's Johnny Warren. Lost in the race to voice an opinion is the critical element of why this decision is wrong: it has nothing to do with the opposition; it's all to do with the system - that of a play-off as the Oceania's representative's one and only chance to qualify.
South America's fine - but put us in a group. Give us the chance to lose six games, miss four automatic spots, and gain another chance like Uruguay did. Give us the chance to lose three and draw three of our last six games and still qualify for the World Cup like Iran did. Give us the chance to qualify through consistency, not lose by luck, deflections, refereeing errors or simply one mistake. Put us in a group of the best team from each region and force us to win the league. Even that's fairer than a playoff - even against the best teams in the world. That's the point. It's about the system, not the opposition.
The thing that's so frustrating here is that Fifa have had six months to do something. When Oceania lost its spot back in June, South America should have been forced to accommodate the top Oceania team or two in a group system. Instead of allowing all the futile lobbying, accept that Oceania would meet South America and do something fair. Even the then Oceania president Basil Scarscella and the OFC should have done something. Instead of bickering, pointing fingers and forcing resignations, approach the South Americans with a group idea of two teams of six, with five South American and one Oceania team in each. But no, they've tried lobbying for a 4-way tournament that was always objectionable by the other three confederations involved, and then the random draw for the playoff spots - also objected. Asia and Concacaf were rooted into playing each other. That would never change, no matter how much lobbying happened.
So much for Oceania's special international ambassador, former president Charles Dempsey. For he revealed that the idea for a random draw never even went to a vote. But the procedure had a more dubious journey than simply not being put forward onto the Fifa executive. For an example of how ridiculous the Fifa process is, Dempsey confirmed he had the 100% support of the UEFA representative for the motion to be put forth to the Fifa commission. And if arbitrated on, he was 100% convinced they'd pass the motion because of Europe's endorsement. But the UEFA representative had a medical operation on the day of the meeting, meaning the commission never received the submission. With them unable to arbitrate, it could have been passed onto the executive. But with Fifa president Sepp Blatter totally aware that Asia and Concacaf would vote against it, there was no point in passing it on. Therefore there was was no choice but to ratify the playoff between Oceania and South America
From the football community, there was anger from current Socceroo captain Paul Okon, whilst coach Frank Farina merely state he was "over it". For him, it's a relief that the path is known and that the team can knuckle down to business. And with a bit of luck about which legs are played first, he felt the team would qualify. This "luck" involves Australia having the chance to play at home last. Without going over old ground that was extensively covered the "Home First" editorial, any concept of playing away first is absurd. It goes against the very fabric of all sports where the any opportunity for advantage is taken first when you're under least pressure. It's the simple philosophy of having the lead and forcing the other team to come from behind.
This exactly is what Uruguay had to do, and Farina must have such short memory not to realise just how close Australia came to qualifying. That was especially evident in the away goals rule in that it meant than even at 2-0 down, Australia only had to score once to qualify, and nearly did so on two occasions. In contrast, could Australia have overcome a 2-0 deficit if it played at home last? Oh yeah, they were 3-0 down, but we'll forget that third goal just like SBS's Les Murray did when he justified the home-first option as the reason for our exit. After all, it was scored in junk time.
Bizarrely, Murray felt that Australia would (not could) have won the tie had they played home-last. Personally, I find the concept that Australia could have scored three goals at home (to win) in the last leg totally absurd, and am in total dismay that someone with the football knowledge of our dear Les could honestly think that. Australia struggled just to score one goal in the home leg, so how the hell would they score three against a team like Uruguay protecting a 2-0 lead? The only advantage in playing home-last is when the team is a good a traveller and that an away result is achievable. Effectively the away game is the advantage, so it's used first.
Flicking through football results - and checking these playoff results is something I really do note - any upsets are almost exclusively caused by the team playing home first. Just recently we saw what Latvia did to Turkey in the Euro qualifiers. Even amongst Australian teams, most failures have been home-last scenarios, with successes being home-first. Playing home-first is such a no-brainer. Even if it fails, you still have the second chance option of the away leg. But to put all your eggs in one basket, concede the away leg, and hope to win at home last, all with all the associated extra pressure, is the sheer lunacy that most coaches and so-called experts subscribe to.
Lets look at some cold, hard facts first.
* The Fifa executive - comprised of members representing the six confederations - is ultimately responsible for all decisions in their so-called democratic process. In reality, each confederation is self-absorbed and out to look after themselves, not for the membership as a whole. There's also a Fifa congress, which comprises one member representing each and every country affiliated with Fifa. This makes the far reaching decisions, like the granting a region confederation status, as it did with Oceania in 1996, and accepting new countries into Fifa. There's actually no Fifa board or commission that makes independent decisions for the likes of World Cup allocations. The Fifa commission is mostly responsible for administrative decisions, though, these can still be passed on to the executive.
* Oceania, with just one vote of 24, obviously has no clout in the Fifa executive. This is the grossest flaw in Fifa's so-called democracy. A true democracy should see each member have equal votes. Therefore one confederation, one vote. With a total of just 7 votes in the executive, Oceania's power would be an equitable 1/7th, and they'd have more influence. At present, it only takes one or two confederations to block vote and Oceania's motions are quashed. That's the perennial problem that Oceania has faced, and will continue to face under Fifa's sham democracy.
* Oceania has no allies in the Fifa executive.
* The only way for Oceania to achieve anything for itself is to suck-up, or "lobby", the other confederations.
* Even then, decisions are not binding, and can be overturned at the whim of the executive.
* Oceania is irrelevant in Fifa's interpretation of what it constitutes the world.
* Australia is far too strong for Oceania and Oceania cannot ever hope to meet the needs of Australia.
* The Asian Football Confederation has historically rejected all advances from Australia to join. In fact, Oceania was founded for such reasons when the four founding teams of Oceania had no where else to go. The AFC publicly stated that its desire is for five full World Cup spots, and would only entertain encompassing Oceania if it could provide another. No guarantees, however.
* No country is required to be a member of a confederation, and equally, membership of a confederation is not restricted to geographical location.
Any regular reader of this website will be already aware of its view of Oceania that as a footballing entity its purpose is pointless, its existence is futile, its concept is absurd, its value is zero. It is obsolete. It should be disbanded. However, the fat cats that run Oceania will never let that happen because it will ruin their cosy existence. Nor will the foolhardy administrators of Oceania's member nations, who feel that Oceania can somehow work.
Those readers will also be aware that this website's support for Oceania having a World Cup spot is solely based on the fact that as a full member confederation, Oceania is entitled to one. And as a mechanism for advancing the region, the World Cup spot would only serve as carrot to lure new teams to the region in order to expand it. But as a tool designed to develop Oceania's nations, especially the island ones, to the level of Australia so that the region will somehow be a competent footballing region on the world stage, that concept is as mythical as the ability for me to carry Australia to World Cup victory with my very own left foot.
Even as a carrot to lure other teams, that has a double-edged sword. Just like Asia rejects Australia (and probably even New Zealand) because of their strength and fear of losing a World Cup spot to one of their traditional teams, would Oceania accept similarly strong countries? While Australia may welcome an Indonesia or Malaysia, would NZ, or even the island countries? In essence, Oceania wants more countries, but not too many that could push the incumbent nations out of World Cup qualifying. So in all probability, as a lure to broaden the region, the merits of a World Cup spot achieving such a task would be highly problematic.
The other theory about the spot was that it be used as a lure for another confederation into absorbing Oceania into their footballing operations. Asia have said they might entertain such a notion if they already had 5 spots, but really, regardless of any possible invitees, would the member countries of Oceania give up their newly granted free ticket to World Cup riches? Australia might, but that's only because of confidence in still qualifying and would welcome the much need intense preparation that a serious qualification campaign can offer. But the others? Doubtful. Not only that, it would be slap in the face of Fifa that after just awarding a spot, Oceania'd just give it away. No, for such a merge to be a realistic proposition, Asia and Oceania would need their agreement before any World Cup allocations are made. Otherwise, the only the thing that the World Cup spot would do is strengthen Oceania's resolve to stick around. And we can't have that. But Oceania's intentions is to go it alone - regardless of World Cup spots or not. Therefore, if Australia wants a fairer go, it's future is now in its own hands.
The realisation is that it's time to quit the region. It really should have been made at the instant the Oceania World Cup spot decision was revoke, but ironically, more use can be served by delaying this decision. Quitting back then, and Fifa may have just given it back, and Australia would be stuck in Oceania. Now's the chance to make a clean break for new pastures. Forget the fact that Oceania is in disarray. Even with its act together, who wants to be part of a putrid process that still requires enormous sucking-up (or "lobbying") to gain any favours, especially those that should be mandatory entitlements. No, not me, not I (used with permission, Delta Goodrem).
Timing is the key. Australia must quit the Obsolete Football Confederation immediately that it's eliminated from the next World Cup. Whether that be the qualifying stage or the World Cup itself, it must be as soon as possible as to allow time for Oceania and its other nations to react and for Fifa to react. Hopefully New Zealand would join Australia, which would render Oceania as obsolete in the eyes of surely all. At the very least, Fifa would look at removing Oceania of confederation status. Oceania may just dissolve right then and there. Regardless of that outcome, Fifa would be forced to react and encourage other confederations to pick up the refugee and remnant nations of Oceania. That would be the most ideal outcome. But if it didn't happen, and Oceania remains in existence, Australia can either start knocking the doors of other confederations or live the life as a rogue nation unaffiliated to any confederation. Which is perfectly legal, and something that Australia has actually done in the past.
Looking at the other confederation option first, after a process of elimination, strange as it might seem, Europe is probably the most suitable option in such an eventuality. As mentioned many times, Asia doesn't want us. Just ignore any notion of an Asian approach. It won't work. As for the others, while South America would be the most realistic, especially because their membership is so small, and they wouldn't fear Australia, and a south Pacific Rim confederation does make good sense, they are probably too snobbish. With Concacaf, we'd be too strong, whilst Africa is over-burdened.
Plus there's the travel factor for those regions. With Europe, travel's actually the most minimal because all our players are there. The away games would be ostensibly home fixtures for them. For Europe's teams, travel's no dilemma either. Only a handful of teams would be affected each quadrennium, and they would only travel to Australia once.
One compromise, though, would be that Australian club teams would have to be excluded from Europe's club competitions. It's totally unrealistic to expect Europe's clubs to travel around the world mid-season, and equally Australia's clubs to travel to Europe repeatedly. But considering we have no regional club competition at present, that's an acceptable compromise.
The only negative is that it would mean an end to constant qualifying for youth tournaments. But given the recent trend of early exits, under-preparation seems to be the cause, and that would not be the case in Europe. We may also start taking notice of the team too, at these tournaments. None have been televised since the 1997 Youth Cup. What's the point in qualifying if fans can't watch the team and kids can't aspire? Complacency has set it. The type of complacency that would set in for the senior World Cup in time if Australia routinely qualified and proved to be non-factors. But in terms of the actual qualifying campaigns, Australia would be easily absorbed into Europe's allocations. You could not imagine Europe being too concerned with Australia automatically taking a spot for World Cups and European Championships. And if Oceania did dissolve with the other nations swept into Asia, Europe could pick up Oceania's existing allocations for all world tournaments.
Having said all that, it's most probable that no one takes Australia at all and Australia finds itself unaffiliated to any confederation. Australia could be seen as selfish, and might be shunned, or simply be too difficult to accommodate. So be it. No harm in being a rogue. Besides, Australia's carried Oceania long enough and there's been no benefit in return. As a rogue nation, potentially Australia could be just thrown back into Oceania's World Cup qualifying campaign and then the playoff, like Israel once was. Again, so be it. That's the lot served up being with Oceania - effectively a rogue confederation - so it's hardly any worse. However, it could also be thrown into Europe, with the youth teams only thrown into Oceania, to where there is a direct World Cup spot that needs to be utilised properly. The thing is, as a rogue nation, anything can happen, and it would change from competition to competition. Life as a rogue could potentially be far more interesting than as an unfulfilled member of Oceania.
The critical thing is to look long-term, realise the futility of remaining with Oceania, and take some action. It must be drastic, and it must be decisive. Quitting the Obsolete Football Confederation is the only answer.