Search results

Okay, I take it back. There were TWO reasons. World Cup qualification and MONEY.

Not just Uruguay, but Chile, Colombia, Paraguay - all reasonable teams. I'm not arguing though - 4 places would be plenty adequate. I'd love CUBA to get there. that would be flair. I'll let them keep their third spot if they PROMISE to give it to CUBA. I think it was, to be honest.

I'd rather FIFA left Oceana separate tbh, and used some of their vast wealth and power to actively develop football in that part of the world. As for the qualifying, there are THIRTY TWO places at the World Cup. There should always be room for a minimum of ONE guaranteed place for a nation...

Well, obviously, yes. They should have worked with FIFA, and continued to petition for a change in the qualifying. Moving federations should not have been an option open to them. FIFA should have simply said no.

It wasn't their 'main' motivation. It was their ONLY (selfish) motivation, and it shouldn't have been allowed.

I fully understand their reasons for wanting to move. I just disagree that they should have been allowed to. FIFA's mandate is to develop football around the world. Allowing the only decent team from one federation to simply up and move to suit their own individual agenda, flies completely in...

None of these stemmed from fundamentally selfish, self-serving reasons like the Australia one though. And they didn't MOVE federations. Israel is a one off - a purely political issue, and unavoidable, if we are going to let them play at all. The others are former Soviet replublics. The USSR...

Would a better solution not have been to re-draw the boundaries of the Asia and Oceania groups, to move Indonesia, etc into Oceana? It would equalise them a bit both in terms of numbers, and (not so much) ability. Letting Australia choose their move, is to me, just as if we'd let Glasgow Rangers...

Of course, Tahiti are only there, because of the stupid decision to allow Australia to choose their own Confederation, irrespective of GEOGRAPHY.

1. NZ either didn't take New Caledonia seriously (didn't get all their Europe based players back, etc), or NZ didn't WANT to win it. 2. Of course they should. The question you are really asking (as per other recent threads about Australia) is 'should the separate Oceania Confederation exist at...

I think I agree with this. 9 or 10. Any more would make them look like BULLIES. Nigeria don't have it in them to do that. They are bang average. TAHITI created 4 or 5 presentable openings against them. (I think its immaterial anyway, as Uruguay will do them 2-0 tonight)

They weren't 'over-awed'. They were plain knackered. They'd played a WC qualifier in Iraq 3 days earlier, and had only arrived in Brazil at 3.00am the day before the match. They had absolutely no chance of getting a result in that match.

A draw will almost certainly see Uruguay through on GD. Suarez and Cavani will ruin Tahiti.

Haha

It's to test the facilities and infrastructure ahead of the World Cup.

"Gus, Hi. It's Rachel from human resources. I've a message from Mr Barber for you. Your disciplinary hearing has been re-scheduled for 8pm on Sunday"

Live across BBC platforms: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22843441 Guess who the expert Uruguayan pundit is...

The World Cup test event starts in Brazil tomorrow. Or more correctly, the FIFA CONFEDERATIONS CUP. Should be good. All the world's TOP nations are there - Brazil, Italy, Spain, Uruguay, Mexico, Japan, Nigeria, and umm, Tahiti... A few good games to look forward to though, on the BBC. Spain v...