Advertisement

FIFA politicians could decide Socceroos’ fate

May 25, 2015
Sepp Blatter: Likely to remain FIFA President after this week’s election.

Sepp Blatter: Likely to remain FIFA President after this week’s election.

We’re just days away from one of the most important gatherings of global power players in years.

Surprisingly it has received little media coverage – certainly less than you’d expect for such a momentous event.

And much of what has been written and said about the 65th FIFA Congress, which begins on Thursday, has focussed on its presidential election.

You could call the FIFA Congress a sporting version of the United Nations General Assembly (there’s even an Israel/Palestine dispute on the agenda). But I wouldn’t make too many comparisons between the two bodies. Decisions made by the FIFA Congress actually carry weight.

Now, as Sepp Blatter is likely to retain the presidency, let’s talk about something else – something relevant to Australia’s chance of qualifying for the World Cup in Russia in 2018.

That’s right. Even though the qualification process for the 2018 World Cup has already started, a decision that will soon be made by administrators could affect whether we make it or not.

After the congress ends, FIFA’s powerful Executive Committee (ExCo) will allocate the 32 berths at the next World Cup finals among the six regional confederations: in other words, how many of the 32 spots will go to Asia, how many to Europe, etc.

I will use geographic names for each regional confederation but, to save column inches, for the confederation for North America, Central America and the Caribbean, I’ll use its alliteratively pleasing acronym: CONCACAF.

The allocation of berths has been the same for the last three World Cups:

Europe 13

Africa 5

Asia 4.5

South America 4.5

CONCACAF 3.5

Oceania 0.5

Host nation 1

A half spot means going into a play-off against a country from another confederation with the winner advancing to the World Cup finals.

Long-suffering Aussie fans know all about that. The Socceroos won the Oceania qualifiers for the 1986, 1994, 1998, 2002 and 2006 World Cups. Until the 2006 edition, we went on to lose in intercontinental play-offs every time.

Once Australia joined Asia, four direct berths were available but note that Asia has had 4.5 places so the confederation’s fifth team has been getting another chance through play-offs.

In the 2010 World Cup qualifiers, Bahrain was fifth in Asia and New Zealand won Oceania. That’s why it was a win over Bahrain which sent the All Whites to the finals in South Africa.

Australia's Tim Cahill celebrates a goal against the Netherlands at the 2014 World Cup. AFP photo

Australia’s Tim Cahill celebrates a goal against the Netherlands at the 2014 World Cup. AFP photo

For 2014 FIFA drew lots to decide what the pairings would be for the intercontinental play-offs. This time the Oceania winner had to face the team that finished fourth in CONCACAF (while fifth in Asia played fifth in South America). The result was New Zealand against Mexico and that didn’t work out quite as well for our friends across the ditch.

The other thing to note about the allocation is the berth given to the host nation.

That seems straightforward enough (the World Cup host should probably be playing!) but the effect of the host’s berth is a bonus spot for its confederation. Five African nations went to Brazil last year. When the 2010 World Cup was in South Africa, there were six.

It hasn’t always worked that way. CONCACAF had two berths in 1982 (a 24-team World Cup finals in those days). In 1986, Mexico hosted the tournament and only one place was given to the rest of the confederation. For 1990, the 1982 arrangement was restored.

There has never been a system that used either rankings or historic results to determine the allocation of berths. If that were the case, the traditional powers, Europe and South America, would gain at the expense of the other confederations. At the most recent World Cup, England was the only team from either Europe or South America to finish bottom of its group.

Nevertheless there is also a widely held view that there are worse things than sacrificing a bit of quality to ensure more representation from the “developing” world. Sepp Blatter has championed that position for a long time and it’s one of the reasons why, in the presidential ballot, he’ll receive most of the votes cast by the 54 associations in Africa, the 46 in Asia and the 35 in CONCACAF.

But the FIFA President can’t act alone. His is one vote of 25 on FIFA’s ExCo. And, despite his immense influence, he’s been rolled in the past.

Famously, Blatter wanted South Africa to stage the 2006 World Cup but the decision went Germany’s way. He hasn’t revealed how he voted when the 2022 hosting rights were decided but it’s believed he supported the United States’ bid, not Qatar’s.

Twelve of the ExCo members are European or South American. If they vote together when World Cup berths are decided, they’d be just one short of a majority. One of those Europeans, however, is Blatter and he may as well be counted as an anti-Europe vote.

The FIFA President was in CONCACAF recently (I know, it’s a strange placename) and told its congress that the confederation should have four berths. This alarmed Europeans who are concerned that they’d be the losers if CONCACAF went from 3.5 to 4 (or 4.5) places. In 2013 Blatter was talking about increasing Africa and Asia’s numbers too.

Some Europeans, by the way, think they ought to have more berths in 2018 and that’s on top of the bonus spot they’ll get with Russia hosting the tournament.

This sort of tension is normal every four years but despite that (or perhaps because of it), the allocation has been unchanged for a decade. The last adjustment occurred between the 2002 and 2006 World Cups.

If Asia drops to 4 or 3.5 berths, the odds of the Socceroos qualifying for 2018 will lengthen immediately and you’ll wake up to a media frenzy around Australia.

In practice, the most recent World Cup’s allocation is the starting point when this matter is thrashed out at the ExCo. In theory, its 25 members begin with a blank sheet. A radical shake up may be unlikely but it’s possible.

If CONCACAF members, emboldened by Blatter’s words, push for extra berths, a unity ticket with Europe and South America gives them a majority. They could then try to increase their berths at the expense of Africa and Asia.

This would hurt Blatter badly, especially if Africa and Asia, his powerbases, blame him for their loss. The ExCo meeting may be after the presidential ballot, but having more confederations off side would make him a lame duck.

That scenario is improbable but not impossible. And it wouldn’t be the first time that nations’ hopes were affected by one of FIFA’s political squabbles.

One thing is certain: after the decision is made, there will be at least one aggrieved confederation so the traditional sequel to the allocation announcement is a call to raise the number of teams in the World Cup finals.

Having more than 32 countries in the finals would be unwieldy. Fortunately, when FIFA has explored this option in the past, it has realised that any system for a tournament with, say, 36 teams is going to be deeply flawed.

Besides, whatever number you settle on, with 209 member countries, confederations will always want more.

But stop the press! This time we’re hearing the cries for a larger tournament before the ExCo meeting. Last week, Prince Ali Bin Al-Hussein of Jordan, now the sole challenger to Sepp Blatter in the presidential election, was already calling for expansion. And (you guessed) under his proposal, every confederation benefits.

It’s effectively an (awful) election promise. Given that Prince Ali is also supporting a yearly payment of $US1 million to each FIFA association, he seems to have concluded that the only way to beat Blatter is by trying to emulate him (though Blatter is in fact advocating the retention of a 32-team World Cup).

We should get an answer about the allocation of berths on Saturday or Sunday. The 32-team format will probably stay but if Asia’s allocation of 4.5 spots changes, it’s only likely to drop. While the decision is a political one, ExCo members seeking more for their respective confederations will no doubt point to the Asian nations’ failure to win a match at last year’s World Cup.

If Asia drops to 4 or 3.5 berths, the odds of the Socceroos qualifying for 2018 will lengthen immediately and you’ll wake up to a media frenzy around Australia.

At least now you’re prepared.

Paul Marcuccitti’s soccer column is published in InDaily on Mondays. He is a co-presenter of 5RTI’s Soccer on 531 program which can be heard from 11am on Saturdays.

Local News Matters
Advertisement
Copyright © 2024 InDaily.
All rights reserved.