Then they should have pushed for a merger of afc and oceania... this is a lame excuse... If this was a APAC(Asia-Pacific) Football confederation then i agree with the logic behind the presence of australia...
Asia could have got the 0.5 from oceania and we would have got 5 direct spots... everyone gain something there...
in current scenario only australia gains while one of asian team potentially lose a WC spot
Counties like Japan, Korea and Iran are consistently bettering the Aussies. They are the teams that are getting the benefits of competition, at the country level or at club level.
India is way down the ladder to think the pros and cons of it. At best we can think of Syria, Jordan, Tajikistan or Oman ...
@shankar They apparently did and so are New Zealand but FIFA apparently said no... something like that.
And Asia does benefit. Australia being here and doing well just means that other Asian nations need to do better. It is more competition and incentive to do better.
AFC makes money from Australia. TV Telecast and sponsorship money. Oceania survives on FIFA funding and it is basically vote bank only. Merger of OFC and AFC will be a financial disaster for AFC. That's why they took net contributor Australia only.
Comments
If this was a APAC(Asia-Pacific) Football confederation then i agree with the logic behind the presence of australia...
Asia could have got the 0.5 from oceania and we would have got 5 direct spots... everyone gain something there...
in current scenario only australia gains while one of asian team potentially lose a WC spot
India is way down the ladder to think the pros and cons of it. At best we can think of Syria, Jordan, Tajikistan or Oman ...
And Asia does benefit. Australia being here and doing well just means that other Asian nations need to do better. It is more competition and incentive to do better.