Football 54 has been placed on garden leave

[Ser Eric]

It's not really about helping San Marino (though they presumably get a lot more TV money from games against England or Germany than if they were confined to facing Andorra and Liechtenstein), they have the population of a small city. It's that they should be accorded respect and not simply pushed into the fourth or fifth rank.

No one wants to see San Marino getting thumped every time they play a bigger country. Not the fans, not the neutrals and least of all San Marino I should think. It does not make for good viewing.

[Top Notch Balanter]

What a weird game this Ireland-Germany match has been. Germans have just made it 3 in the 90th minute. Stokes had two glaring chances, as well. Lacked composure.

Forde's saves were the weirdest thing about it you wouldn't of expected top keepers in the world to pull some of them off

Glenn Whelan on the right wing says alot about the state of Irish football. Ah well we should be able to get a point against the Kazakhs

[Jon AS]

No one wants to see San Marino getting thumped every time they play a bigger country. Not the fans, not the neutrals and least of all San Marino I should think. It does not make for good viewing.

Sure, if San Marino don't want to play the big countries that would be a reason to talk about changing the system. I've never heard them complain about it, though. For these kinds of amateurs and semi-pros, qualifying games against the big names in world football are the biggest competitive games they're ever going to play.

National teams are not like clubs, they only ever compete in a single tournament at a time. Taking a team that can never hope to win, patronisingly reminding them of that, then sticking them in a worthless competition with other hopeless teams while simultaneously taking away their big events against the sport's greatest is an insulting way to treat them.

It would be like if you kept Macclesfield Town F.C. out of the FA Cup just because, in your opinion, they couldn't possibly enjoy participating since they are inevitably going to lose.

[Ser Eric]

Sure, if San Marino don't want to play the big countries that would be a reason to talk about changing the system. I've never heard them complain about it, though. For these kinds of amateurs and semi-pros, qualifying games against the big names in world football are the biggest competitive games they're ever going to play.

National teams are not like clubs, they only ever compete in a single tournament at a time. Taking a team that can never hope to win, patronisingly reminding them of that, then sticking them in a worthless competition with other hopeless teams while simultaneously taking away their big events against the sport's greatest is an insulting way to treat them.

It would be like if you kept Macclesfield Town F.C. out of the FA Cup just because, in your opinion, they couldn't possibly enjoy participating since they are inevitably going to lose.

If San Marino have no desire to improve or have no issues getting thrashed every game they play then I have to question their participation in the qualifying event.

Both the Asian and African qualifying rounds have multiple rounds and the bigger countries (based on rankings) get a bye to the later rounds and that works out much better than the current UEFA systems. No one's saying Sna Marino should be removed from the qualifying events altogether but they should be paired with the other lower ranked countries countries and earn their way to the main qualifying draw.

Again your FA cup comparison doesn't hold because I am not asking for San Marino to be thrown out. What I think would be a better would be for San Marino to start in a lower rounds and work their way up to face the bigger teams. And that's exactly what happens in the FA cup. Non league cluvs don't directly face Manchester United but they have to make their way through qualifying rounds and then the proper rounds to face them.

[Jon AS]

If San Marino have no desire to improve or have no issues getting thrashed every game they play then I have to question their participation in the qualifying event.

San Marino has about 30,000 citizens. You have to go pretty far down a bigger country's league structure before you can find a club team they could beat on a regular basis. They simply do not stand a chance of qualifying for the World Cup and they never will.

Which is why the Cup comparison is important, though the structure is completely different: San Marino can either play in a competition with the current structure (or one very similar) or they might as well not bother showing up.

Again: qualifying games against England, Italy and Germany are the reason San Marino plays competitive matches at all.

Both the Asian and African qualifying rounds have multiple rounds and the bigger countries (based on rankings) get a bye to the later rounds and that works out much better than the current UEFA systems.

How do you measure what works out? Because the simplest metric I can think of, success, is firmly on UEFA's side: at every World Cup in the last 30 years at least 3 out of 4 semifinalists have been UEFA teams.

[Ser Eric]

San Marino has about 30,000 citizens. You have to go pretty far down a bigger country's league structure before you can find a club team they could beat on a regular basis. They simply do not stand a chance of qualifying for the World Cup and they never will.

Which is why the Cup comparison is important, though the structure is completely different: San Marino can either play in a competition with the current structure (or one very similar) or they might as well not bother showing up.

Again: qualifying games against England, Italy and Germany are the reason San Marino plays competitive matches at all.

I am well aware that San Marino have no chance of ever qualifying for the WC and I am not suggesting they be thrown out of the qualifiers completely.

You're cup comparison doesn't hold up because it doesn't support your argument. In fact if anything it's supports my argument. In the FA cup all the clubs in England (Amateur or professional) do not all go into the same pot at the same time. The lower clubs have to earn their way to a game with the giants of English football and earliest it can happen is Round 3. That's what I am proposing with San Marino and this might actually improve their football.

How do you measure what works out? Because the simplest metric I can think of, success, is firmly on UEFA's side: at every World Cup in the last 30 years at least 3 out of 4 semifinalists have been UEFA teams.

How is that even relevant?

You think UEFA having San Marino directly in the group stages of qualifying has anything to do with European countries doing well in the World Cups?

The African and Asian countries are only now working up to the quality of their European counterparts and it's not going to happen overnight. Besides you seem to have forgotten only a maximum of 5 can qualify from Europe/Africa which is a significant disadvantage when compared to Europe.

[Jon AS]

You're cup comparison doesn't hold up because it doesn't support your argument. In fact if anything it's supports my argument. In the FA cup all the clubs in England (Amateur or professional) do not all go into the same pot at the same time. The lower clubs have to earn their way to a game with the giants of English football and earliest it can happen is Round 3. That's what I am proposing with San Marino and this might actually improve their football.

If national football teams played as many games and participated in as many different competitions as club teams do, then changing the rules for their competitions to be closer to club football would make sense. As it is, a national team plays about a dozen games per year, not even all of them competitive.

I also doubt that these 6-8 competitive games a team plays every year are the decisive factor in improving a team. Youth programs are much more useful for that, for which you need money, for which the smaller countries need games against the big dogs.

How is that even relevant?

I dunno. You mentioned that other qualifying tournaments "worked out" better. I don't really know how to measure it except by looking at how the teams that qualify actually do perform in the finals.

[The Iceman of the North]

Both the Asian and African qualifying rounds have multiple rounds and the bigger countries (based on rankings) get a bye to the later rounds and that works out much better than the current UEFA systems. No one's saying Sna Marino should be removed from the qualifying events altogether but they should be paired with the other lower ranked countries countries and earn their way to the main qualifying draw.

That's ignoring the reason for the Asian and African system, disproportionation high travel expenses, combined with associations with poor economics. It's cheaper for San Marino to travel to Kazakhstan, than Gambia to travel to the Ivory Coast.

[polishgenius]

I dunno. You mentioned that other qualifying tournaments "worked out" better. I don't really know how to measure it except by looking at how the teams that qualify actually do perform in the finals.

Well, that's part of it, but when nearly half the teams in a tournament are from that one confederation, it's not quite that simple. European teams dominate because Europe is the historic heartland of football, not because their qualification system is better.

[Ser Eric]

If national football teams played as many games and participated in as many different competitions as club teams do, then changing the rules for their competitions to be closer to club football would make sense. As it is, a national team plays about a dozen games per year, not even all of them competitive.

I also doubt that these 6-8 competitive games a team plays every year are the decisive factor in improving a team. Youth programs are much more useful for that, for which you need money, for which the smaller countries need games against the big dogs.

They are still going to play plenty of games, maybe even as much as they usually play just that they will not be against the big guns where they get thrashed left, right and centre.

It's not the games itself but the incentive that might improve them. The incentive of playing against the likes of Spain, Germany etc... To use your Cup analogy, the FA cup is quite bothersome to many of the smaller non league yet they go through with it because of the slight hance that they might draw a bog club and make bucket load of money.

I dunno. You mentioned that other qualifying tournaments "worked out" better. I don't really know how to measure it except by looking at how the teams that qualify actually do perform in the finals.

Worked out better as in less thrashings ala San Marino.

[Jon AS]

Worked out better as in less thrashings ala San Marino.

You just need to look at the current African and Asian qualifying campaigns to see that this is not true. Quite a few games with scorelines of more than five goals difference.

Well, that's part of it, but when nearly half the teams in a tournament are from that one confederation, it's not quite that simple. European teams dominate because Europe is the historic heartland of football, not because their qualification system is better.

True, but as other systems were explicitly claimed to be superior we have to find some way to compare them.

Since it's apparently about avoiding big goal differences it appears that neither system can claim superiority.

[Ser Eric]

You just need to look at the current African and Asian qualifying campaigns to see that this is not true. Quite a few games with scorelines of more than five goals difference.

True, but as other systems were explicitly claimed to be superior we have to find some way to compare them.

Since it's apparently about avoiding big goal differences it appears that neither system can claim superiority.

Not really true. A quick look at the CAF qualifying is enough to see that a lot of the weak African teams were eleminated early on and the ones that did make it through are a lot more competitive than the likes of Liechtenstein, Faroe Islands, Andorra etc..

[Järv]

Jon As, did you, as a fellow German, really enjoy the qualifications? A series of mostly one-sided games such as yesterday against Ireland?

(And if so, how do you explain that? When you were a kid, did you enjoy beating up other kids half your size? B)

it is a good tradition in most sports to pit competitors of a comparable skill level against each other. In club football this is done, too. Only when it comes to nation al teams, heavyweight is pitted against light flyweight (in Europe).

[Top Notch Balanter]

To an extent club football is much like the international level just look at the weaker teams in any of the top divisions they would lose by about 3-4 goals when up against the top teams but can also pull off results against them. This happens on the International level as well look at world cup 2002 South Korea and Turkey making it to the semi-finals, Ireland just a kick of the ball away from knocking out Spain. Later examples include North Korea in the world cup or Portugal drawing with Northern Ireland. In a few cases like San Marino things like that may never happen but many of the smaller teams can pull off big results

[Järv]

To an extent club football is much like the international level just look at the weaker teams in any of the top divisions they would lose by about 3-4 goals when up against the top teams but can also pull off results against them. This happens on the International level as well look at world cup 2002 South Korea and Turkey making it to the semi-finals, Ireland just a kick of the ball away from knocking out Spain. Later examples include North Korea in the world cup or Portugal drawing with Northern Ireland. In a few cases like San Marino things like that may never happen but many of the smaller teams can pull off big results

If you have managed to take part in a big tournament, you are not really a light flyweight anymore, are you?

But I agree that surprises can happen, such as Estonia - Netherlands 2:2 last month.

But for my taste these real surprises are too seldom to make qualifications really interesting. Particularly when in the future three out of six teams per group will qualify. This will make things possibly more interesting for "middle-class"-teams, but for the top teams things will get utterly boring. There will not be a chance of 1 in 1000 that, for example, Italy could not qualify in this system.

But okay, if a majority of countries wants to stick to the old qualifiactions system, why not compromise by adding the league systems to the old system? This was what UEFA was planning anyway, If I understood them correctly...

[Alex.]

Middle class teams like Arsenal? :)

[Jon AS]

Not really true. A quick look at the CAF qualifying is enough to see that a lot of the weak African teams were eleminated early on and the ones that did make it through are a lot more competitive than the likes of Liechtenstein, Faroe Islands, Andorra etc..

So when Namibia beats Djibouti 8-0 on aggregate that's better than if Nigeria were to beat them 10-0 in a later round? Despite that they'd get more money out of playing Nigeria?

Jon As, did you, as a fellow German, really enjoy the qualifications? A series of mostly one-sided games such as yesterday against Ireland?

Qualifying games aren't the big spectacle of football, no. But are you really comfortable telling Ireland that Germany are too good for them and in the future don't want to sully themselves playing against them?

Plus qualifying tournaments don't always go smoothly for the favourites in the current format. Tinkering with it is almost certainly going to be to the advantage of the big countries (just look at the Champions League as comparison), do you really want to give up the opportunity for the occasional good laugh at England's or the Netherland's expense?:P

When you were a kid, did you enjoy beating up other kids half your size? B)

No. When you were a kid, did you enjoy keeping smaller kids out of the playground because they couldn't take full advantage of everything there anyway?

it is a good tradition in most sports to pit competitors of a comparable skill level against each other. In club football this is done, too. Only when it comes to nation al teams, heavyweight is pitted against light flyweight (in Europe).

And yet the complaints usually come from the bigger countries (and usually not from the players but more often club officials or fans), not from the flyweights who should be considered the real victims.

[Ser Eric]

So when Namibia beats Djibouti 8-0 on aggregate that's better than if Nigeria were to beat them 10-0 in a later round? Despite that they'd get more money out of playing Nigeria?

Except it wouldn't be just Nigeria who'll thrash them but most of the others in the group as well which is the point. That's the whole point of the first round, to get rid of the uber-rubbish teams and not to make the qualifying a little bit better.

In Europe, I think the best way would be to get the likes of Andorra, San Marino, Faore islands etc.. to play their own mini league with the winner advancing to the main round. There will still be hammerings but at least it won't be as high spread

[The Iceman of the North]

I'd like to remind everyone of a match that took place in Sweden back in September 1990, Faroe Islands in their very first competitive match beat Austria 1:0. But I'm sure the Faroes would prefer to have played against Malta or Albania in an attempt to reach the proper Euro qualifiers.

[Winterfell is Burning]

I'm hoping they qualify, but Burkina Faso just had one of the most shameless penalties of all time against Algeria.