the qualifying technique suggested in the times

[Theatre of Trees]

I agree with your post, but I don't think anyone is calling for groups to be made up of several top-ranking European teams. They just need to be seeded (as they are now), but with less crap teams being included. A top seed and 2nd seed would suffice, with two other teams who have successfully pre-qualified making up a group of 4. So instead of rubbish groups like:

Portugal
Slovakia
Russia
Latvia
Estonia
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg

You could cut that down to 4 teams - the top seed (eg Portugal), 2nd seed (eg Russia) plus any other two from the rest, who have pre-qualified for the group. Dunno what the World Rankings are at the moment, but that should be the barometer to ascertain who is a top/second seed.

Simple innit ?

This is the group where Portugal drew 2-2 with Leichtenstein and thumped Russia 7-1. Latvia's rankings would have gone up due to their qualification for Euro 2004 and it seems Slovakia are making a decent fist of qualification at the moment.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Exactly Easy 10. Thats what the world rankings are for.

Dont forget not even the holders qualify now for the world cup (and technically the holders are the best team in the world even if they slip down the rankings). By beating other minnows and then maybe picking up the odd result or two from the 'bigger' nations means they will soon start to go up the rankings.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

But what about Lichenstein and Luxembourg or San Marino, or the Faroe Islands etc etc.

Dont forget Slovakia were the one half of the now Czech Republic, who themselves were always a decent team.

 

[Easy 10]

This is the group where Portugal drew 2-2 with Leichtenstein and thumped Russia 7-1. Latvia's rankings would have gone up due to their qualification for Euro 2004 and it seems Slovakia are making a decent fist of qualification at the moment.

Fine, as I say, there are always occasions where the minnows will give the big boys a run for their money, or one of the bigger teams will underperform.

But it still doesn't mean that we should have a procession of minor footballing nations knocking around in groups of 6 or 7 teams to qualify for the World Cup Finals. The groups are just too big, too unbalanced, and throw out too many meaningless fixtures. Less is more - quality over quantity and all that. I'm sure we could sit here all afternoon and come up with numerous shock defeats or surprising draws involving the likes of Moldova and Liechtenstein. But it doesn't alter the fact that, in the main, 9 times out of 10, those teams are cannon fodder.

Groups of 4 teams is perfect. 6 matches to qualify for the World Cup - it'd be tighter, more competative, and every game would be far more crucial in the scheme of things. Do we REALLY need Portugal to play 12 times in a league containing the likes of Liechtenstein, Estonia and Luxembourg ?

Its DULL and its UNNECESSARY.

 

[Scarface]

The qualifying technique suggested is a very good idea. Every other federation does it (apart from south america but they only have 10 teams). So why dont UEFA, less but more competitive games for the big clubs and a greater chance of winning for the smaller teams.

Exactly what I was thinking. Works pretty well too. From North America you usually get USA and Mexico but sometimes you will get Jamaica or Costa Rica. From Africa you usually get Nigeria and Cameroon, but sometimes you get Senegal, South Africa, Egypt, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Morocco, Tunisia.

 

[e77]

I think going to places like Luxembourg to get an easy result is part and parcel of World Cup qualifying. The Champions League has already squeezed out club teams from 'lesser' nations and I wouldn't want the same to happen at international level.

 

[ditchy]

Go for an FA cup style competition with knock out from round 1 .. lesser seeded teams play rounds 1&2 then the big boys from then .. ..would ruin the finals format but would get exciting knowing knockout from the off .. imagine wales or faroe islands going on a cup run !!