World Cup Qualification In Football

My name is Peter Samiotakis and I'm very interested in football. I will with this page make a proposal to how the world cup qualification in football should work.

I should prefer that all the countries (regardless to which continent they belong) were divided in 62 different qualification groups. Since the FIFA has 207 member countries we have 206 countries to fight for the 31 qualifying places (1 place is reserved for the host nation). This means that we should have 20 qualification groups with four teams and 42 qualification groups with three teams. Before the drawing of lots FIFA has to make seeding groups where they use the principle that countries that are in position 1 to 62 in FIFA: s world ranking belong to the same seeding group so they can't be drawn in the same qualification group. The teams from position 63 to 124 in the world ranking build the second seeding group, the teams from position 125 to 187 the third group and the rest teams the fourth seeding group.

After the preliminaries are done the 62 group-winners are divided in two seeding groups A and B. The 31 best countries of these 62 (according to FIFA:s world ranking) will belong to group A and the rest teams will belong to group B. In this system every team from group A should meet in two knockouts matches (home and away) one team from group B. To even the odds a bit we let the team from group B (the weak group) plays at home in the return match. The teams which win in the respective knockout matches advance to the world cup. This means that there will be 62 knockout matches with the 62 best national teams in the world and that will lead to great incomes from the TV-rights especially when the games are played on different times and days.

This will lead, for example to the fact that the Swedish group could be as follows (I made a software program that generates all the qualified groups at random. This program can also show you which teams will probably meet each other in the knockout matches): Sweden, Surinam, Laos and Samoa.

The reasons why I have come with this proposal are the following:

• The World Cup Qualification should be special and should not look like the European Cup Qualification. The fact that the teams play with teams from other continents give to the World Cup Qualification a more exotic and unusual character.
  
• You can avoid the continent mentality where each continent fights for having so many teams as possible in the world cup.
  
• Just now there are 14 European teams that can participate in the world cup. At the same time only 5 teams from Africa can participate in the World Cup. Since Africa has 53 member nations that means that purely mathematically the possibilities for an African team to qualify is 9.4%. Europe consists of 52 different nations which gives a European team a possibility purely mathematically 26.9% to qualify. As you can see from these figures the current system is very unfair for the African nations (a European team has an almost 3 times higher possibility to advance to the World Cup when you compare with an African team). The equivalent figures for Asia are 10%, North and Central America 10%, for South America 45% and a team from Oceania has only 4.2% possibility to advance to the World Cup. The current system as you can see is very unfair (I feel that the current system is still descending from the colonial time) and should be modified to a system which gives to every country almost the same mathematical possibility to qualify to the World Cup. The proposals I make here give all the teams who have been selected in a four team group a 25% possibility to qualify to the knockout matches. For teams who have been selected in a three team group the possibility to qualify to the knockout matches are 33.3%. Some people have the opinion that the current system which favors Europe and South America is fair because the football in these two continents is better and more developed. I think from my point of view that regardless how good these two continents are at football they should prove it in the football arena and not demand to have advantages at the cost of other countries.
  
• When countries from the western world visit different countries from the developing world to qualify for the World Cup the stability of these countries are put on trial. Journalists from the western world will report about the match but they will also report about the living conditions in the current country, which will make the local authorities more inclined to awareness of their country's reputation abroad. All this can also lead to an increased cultural exchange between the countries.
  
• The tourist industry of some developing countries can be developed when tourists from the western world visit the country during the qualifying game and will thereafter recommend this country as a good and cheap tourist country. With this help these countries can improve their economy which will lead to better living conditions in the current country.
  
• My proposal should be of use for the teams which are for the moment in good shape. I maintain this because my proposal is dynamical and give 10 good African teams the possibility to qualify or in another case only 2-3 teams can qualify from Africa when most African teams are in less good condition.
  
• This system respect the fact that many football clubs dislike to repeatedly release their players for national teams matches because the national teams have only to play few matches (4 or 6 matches in the preliminaries and after only 2 knockout matches if the team win the preliminary group).
  
• The travel costs for this system are not big because every team has only to play 2 or 3 away matches in the preliminaries.

1. Alla människor är födda fria och lika i värde och rättigheter.
2. Det är billigare att ha en president som väljs av riksdagen.
3. Företräder kungen alla?
4. Monarkins historia är inget att skryta om.
5. Som jag ser det så liknar monarki mer ett lotterispel.
6. Jag är mycket tveksam till om monarkin har någon större betydelse för den internationella Sverigebilden.
7. Jag skulle önska ha en statschef som ofta besöker "fronten".
8. Detta att kungafamiljen är så populärt ska man ta med en nypa salt.
9. Guadelouperäntan.
10. Det hör inte hemma i en demokrati att man ärver ett offentligt ämbete.
11. Valkonungadöme.
12. Monarkin innebär att medlemmarna av en viss familj från födseln fråntas sin självbestämmanderätt.
13. Det finns ingen anledning till att kungafamiljen ska vara Sveriges rikaste bidragstagare.
14. Hovleverantörsprodukter.
15. Den symboliska makten.
16. Hur många av Sveriges regenter har egentligen varit kvinnor?
17. Allt fler länder avskaffar monarkin till förmån för ett genuint och äkta demokratisystem.
18. Har kungen någon talan i den svenska politiken?
19. Våra kungliga slott.
20. Ambassadörsposter.
21. Alla ska vara lika inför lagen.
22. De tre försvarsgrenarnas högsta grader.
23. Som det är nu strider successionsordningen faktiskt mot regeringsformen.
24. Jean Baptiste Bernadotte.
25. All diskriminering är enligt svensk lag förbjuden.
26. Bra konkurrens ökar kvalitén på produkter och tjänster.
27. Monarkin kränker statschefens mänskliga rättigheter
28. Man skall inte särbehandla sina barn.
29. Opersonlig statschef.
30. Monarkin bryter mot FN: s Barnkonvention.
31. Vi kan inte ha en statschef som är diktaturanhängare.
32. Jävsituationen.
33. Opinionsundersökningar.
34. Man skall inte ha en statschef som inte står för det han säger.

Olika demokratiska frågor
Skolfrågor
VM-kval i fotboll
World cup qualification in football

Bibliografi

Tillbaka till startsidan