Why do AFC and CAF have so little teams in the World Cup 2014?

I am new to soccer/football and the world cup is coming up in a year, but I don't get the qualification. Why does UEFA have 13 countries for final qualification yet AFC and CAF only has 4 or 5 countries for final qualification? Don't AFC/CAF have much bigger countries/more people than UEFA?

4 Answers

Relevance
  • Stars
    Lv 5
    7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The level of football. Say for example, theoretically if they took out countries like Russia or Sweden, and replaced them with teams like Lebannon and Saudi Arabia, the quality of football would be lower.

    Also not forgetting that UEFA has 53 members, AFC has 47 and CAF has 56. CONMEBOL only has 10 members, but 4 of the teams automatically qualify for the World Cup, with one going into a continental play-off. So that's 50% of the teams potentially qualifying for the World Cup. In 2014 it may be over 50%, with Brazil being hosts. Again that's because strength of the South American teams is high.

    It's a good point you make about people. But another point may be, how many of those participate in football in those countires? If more people participated in those big countries, their national teams would likely be stronger and FIFA would eventually have to award more places if it meant clearly strong footballing nations were missing out on the World Cup because there weren't enough qualifying places.

    The teams represent their national football associations and i don't think the size of the countries really comes into it, they're all equal before matches are played and won, plus their ranking which is calculated by their results.

    So in any case, i don't think any decisions will made by taking into account the size of countries or population. But more to do with how many members each governing body has and the strength of the teams, probably more so to do with the latter.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Stars pretty much got it.

    I just want to add something else though. It's not like FIFA just decides that UEFA gets 13 teams because they think they're better. If, for example, the 4/5 AFC and CAF teams do really well in world cups, that increases the number of spots they get in future world cups.

    For example, CONCACAF used to just get 3 spots. In the 2002 World Cup, USA made the quarterfinals, Mexico the round of 16, and Costa Rica was eliminated in the group stage but were very close with 4 points. FIFA then decided to award them a chance at an extra spot for their fourth placed team in a continental play-off (which Trinidad & Tobago took advantage of in 2006).

    So, theoretically, any continent has the potential to have as many teams as UEFA in the world cup. If UEFA has 13 spots, it's because they have proven to be strong in previous world cups.

  • 3 years ago

    An extraordinarily right choice. Football has 32 teams, why can't cricket hace sixteen? I believe all 16 should play qualifiers now not simplest 6. Who understand India might get overwhelmed by Bangaladesh or Pakistan won't enter WC after being defeated via eire. Or England get upset by means of Afganistan. NewZealand could no longer be qualified given that of Nepal. Anything can occur. Its unfair that some groups are certified naturally, while the rest have got to earn the rest spot.

  • 7 years ago

    UEFA is more competitive and contain higher ranked teams.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.