Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

World Cup Qualification Thread for 2026 - Socceroos/Asia

SR1968 said:
I'm not sure whether I should post this here, or in another section for the forum, but I was thinking about all the international football confederations and how strong they are, and how difficult it is to qualify for the World Cup for the nations in those respective confederations.

This is just my opinion, and I'm sure I'll cop some criticism, so here's my list in order from the most powerful confederation to the weakest.

1. CONMEBOL (South America): I know there's only ten nations, but this is the most brutal and tough federation, because even the weakest South American team can give the most powerful South American team a run for its money eg. In a previous qualification campaign, I recall Peru who was running dead last, held the top team Brazil to a draw in a qualifying match.

2.UEFA (Europe): Although UEFA has some of the best football nations in the world eg. Spain, France, Germany,Italy, England etc, there's obviously a massive gap between say Spain and The Faroe Islands or San Marino.

3, CAF: (Africa): Very tough confederation with some quality football nations like Nigeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Algeria.

4. AFC: (Asia): The only real powerful teams in Asia are Japan, South Korea, Iran, Australia, the rest make up the numbers although there are a few competitive Middle Eastern nations.

5. CONCACAF: (North and Central Americal, plus the Carribean): Aside from the USA and Mexico, and to a lesser degree Canada, the rest of this confederation basically make up the numbers, although Costa Rica have qualified for a few World Cups.

6. OFC (Oceania), Aside from New Zealand, the rest of Oceania mainly consists of small Rugby playing nations that have little interest in football.
Click to expand...
I think your posts sits well here SR1968 and welcome.
Summary makes sense to me.
 
SR1968 said:
I'm not sure whether I should post this here, or in another section for the forum, but I was thinking about all the international football confederations and how strong they are, and how difficult it is to qualify for the World Cup for the nations in those respective confederations.

This is just my opinion, and I'm sure I'll cop some criticism, so here's my list in order from the most powerful confederation to the weakest.

1. CONMEBOL (South America): I know there's only ten nations, but this is the most brutal and tough federation, because even the weakest South American team can give the most powerful South American team a run for its money eg. In a previous qualification campaign, I recall Peru who was running dead last, held the top team Brazil to a draw in a qualifying match.

2.UEFA (Europe): Although UEFA has some of the best football nations in the world eg. Spain, France, Germany,Italy, England etc, there's obviously a massive gap between say Spain and The Faroe Islands or San Marino.

3, CAF: (Africa): Very tough confederation with some quality football nations like Nigeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Algeria.

4. AFC: (Asia): The only real powerful teams in Asia are Japan, South Korea, Iran, Australia, the rest make up the numbers although there are a few competitive Middle Eastern nations.

5. CONCACAF: (North and Central Americal, plus the Carribean): Aside from the USA and Mexico, and to a lesser degree Canada, the rest of this confederation basically make up the numbers, although Costa Rica have qualified for a few World Cups.

6. OFC (Oceania), Aside from New Zealand, the rest of Oceania mainly consists of small Rugby playing nations that have little interest in football.
Click to expand...
Great post and belated welcome from me as well SR .... Its a toss up for 4th for AFC and CONCACAF for me (despite the actual number of qualifiers and participant nations) but otherwise agree.
 
Feel like Michael Moore at the end of the Trump prophecy

'and it will feel.... Good'
 
I'll put it here given the current topic of Confeds.

Some popular football blogger posed the question whether Copa or Nations League is bigger. Of course he knew the answer was Copa and just got people agro.
 
RIMB said:
I don't think our brand of football is pulchritudinous enough to be truly captivating moment by moment but the results we grind out are most rewarding.
Click to expand...
Oi, 😄
Drop the D phrasing bs Beautiful street talk is the standard haha
 
Just finished watching the replay.

Random thoughts.

We are a shit football team that somehow manages to scrape out results.

We cannot string 3 passes together in the oppositions half.

We never dominate any team we play.

The Saudis were gypped a penalty in around the 18th minute when our bloke completely blocked his run. Literally ran across him. Stone cold penalty. 2 nil at that point would have made that interesting.

Boyle is a wanker and should have been sent off for diving. What a tool. He was through on goal and decided to flop like a fish on a jetty. Not sure of VAR protocols and ref's decisions there and whether he could've received a YC retrospectively but if he could have he's lucky to have stayed on the pitch.

Popa is also wanker. They need to score 7 goals to win and we're making subs with 15 to go? For fucks sake.

Good goal by Duke and peach of a pass to Metcalfe for the first.

Did not think Ryan would save that penalty but well done Matty and, in his 100th game.
 
ashtongate said:
Stop showing off Decentric. Use everyday English.
Click to expand...

Utilising sesquipedalian verbiage and prolix syntactical constructions may engender an ostensible augmentation of intellectual gravitas, thereby obfuscating simplistic assertions beneath a veneer of erudition. Such lexical ostentation may also function as a rhetorical stratagem to preclude facile repudiation by less lexically fortified interlocutors.
 
LFC said:
I should have mentioned Duke in my first sentence for thats who I was typing about.
Took many many many games to get a NT assist https://www.fotmob.com/en-GB/players/245633/mitchell-duke
Though we know he run and runs, thats what he's meant to do considering we arn't a sound offensive team glad he delivered Finally.
Click to expand...

At the end of the last World Cup, I heard someone say, if come the next World Cup (in US/CA/MX) if we're still relying on Mitch Duke -- at his age, he'll be 35 at the next World Cup -- it'll mean we're in trouble in terms of firepower for scoring goals.

BTW, why wasn't Arzani selected even for the bench? My guess is, he wasn't among those who arrived a week earlier to receive conditioning for the high temperatures?
 
Muz said:
Utilising sesquipedalian verbiage and prolix syntactical constructions may engender an ostensible augmentation of intellectual gravitas, thereby obfuscating simplistic assertions beneath a veneer of erudition. Such lexical ostentation may also function as a rhetorical stratagem to preclude facile repudiation by less lexically fortified interlocutors.
Click to expand...
lol looks like somebody has a copy of Roget's Thesaurus with the page stuck together :)
 
Muz said:
Utilising sesquipedalian verbiage and prolix syntactical constructions may engender an ostensible augmentation of intellectual gravitas, thereby obfuscating simplistic assertions beneath a veneer of erudition. Such lexical ostentation may also function as a rhetorical stratagem to preclude facile repudiation by less lexically fortified interlocutors.
Click to expand...

A.I., please put this into simple language that a 6 year old can understand

"Sure! Here's a simple version for a 6-year-old: Using big, fancy words and long sentences can make someone sound very smart. It can hide simple ideas and make it hard for others to say they are wrong. Sometimes, people do this to show off or to make sure others don’t argue with them."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top