We've seen and read plenty about various World Cup bids over the past year or so, with FIFA abandoning its rotation policy with the upcoming host selections. While I'm sure there were some other intricacies involved in the plan, I think it's safe to say that a main desire of that policy in the first place was to spread the wealth, so to speak, giving all regions an opportunity to stage the quadrennial showcase. Though it's ultimately going by the wayside, the rotation policy did lead to the first World Cup ever being staged in Africa. Ultimately, though, even with the rotation policy in place, the number of countries capable of hosting any type of major international tournament (whether continental or global) is just a small portion of the 208 FIFA member associations. So FIFA's desire to spread the tournament hosting wealth across the globe is still severely limited by issues such as country size and a lack of suitable stadiums.
Across the globe, we see a number of one-off games between two champions, dubbed as community shields, super cups, or recopas, but all essentially serving the same purpose of allowing two top teams from separate competitions to square off. All of the aforementioned competitions that I alluded to take place at the club level, but there isn't really an equivalent at the international level. My question is: why not? What about a one match FIFA Super Cup between the Confederations Cup champion and the World Cup winner? Now, bear with me for a moment because I'm sure I'm already losing some of you. This is more of a passing fancy than a thorough proposal, and instead of trying to give an all-encompassing outline, I'll acknolwedge some issues and make a few suggestions as to how to handle them. The bottom line is, I spend far too much time thinking about all things international soccer, but now that I have a platform to share some of those thoughts, I might as well share them and see what you knowledgeable folks think.
To being, let me just say that the game wouldn't serve as a means by which to determine the "world champ"; that's the World Cup winner, and I don't think anyone would argue that, just like no one will argue that Zenit St. Petersburg were the club champions of Europe in 2008. Instead, it would be a way for FIFA to put on another footballing spectacle, engage in some philanthropy and spread it's presence across the globe, while also potentially stimulating a local economy (and, of course, lining their own pockets).
While most countries can't handle the financial burden of building a handful of new stadiums as well as new hotels and infrastructure to accommodate the throngs of visitors that attend a major international tournament, plenty could successfully host a single match. Qatar successfully hosted the high profile Brazil-England friendly back in November, needing just one serviceable stadium to do so. Countries even smaller or less capable of hosting a major tournament would suddenly be more than adequate candidates for hosting the proposed FIFA Super Cup. Heck, you could even implement the rotation policy with this game to ensure that it accomplishes the goal of expanding FIFA's reach. I don't think places like Hong Kong, New Zealand, Jamaica, Denmark, or Morocco will be hosting major tournaments any time soon, but they could certainly host one high profile match with what they already have in place. This match would give smaller nations the chance to host a FIFA competition without the potential for white elephant stadiums that can be the result of the extensive construction that accompanies a World Cup or continental tournament. Almost all teams across the globe already have a national stadium in place, most of which are decently modern, so nations wouldn't need to undergo massive facelifts to effectively play host.
Of course, there are loads of issues to be examined with this idea, and as I said, I intend this to be nothing more than a conversation starter, as opposed to a bona fide proposal. How do you get two teams to care about this competition enough to actually to participate? When do you play it? What do you do with the profits? What's the point? How can you ensure that bidding doesn't price out the smaller nations targeted from the beginning? All very valid questions for which I will attempt to provide suggestions.
As far as when this game would be played, I think the fall following the World Cup would be feasible. In the second half of 2010, Euro 2012 and Africa Cup of Nations qualification will begin, but CONMEBOL, AFC, and almost all CONCACAF teams (the final stage Caribbean Football Championship will be going on in November) will not have any competitive matches on the docket. Of course, considering a European team would almost certainly be involved in this match, that Euro qualifying seems to be a bit of an obstacle. But there are 12 match days set aside for 10 qualifying matches, meaning that there would be some flexibility to free up a fall match day for the proposed Super Cup, if necessary. As far as CAF teams go, with just six qualifying matches for the Africa Cup of Nations, there would also be some open dates available should an African team find themselves in a position to play in the match. So, in terms of availability, the fall following a World Cup would seem to work.
But why would the teams even want to play in this match? After all, the Confederations Cup hasn't always been able to bring in it's desired field (Germany declined to participate in 2003, for example). Well, money always helps, and the fact that this would just be one match rather than a multi-week commitment might make it much more palatable to the FAs involved. Ultimately, the money behind the whole situation would be the driving force. The profits accrued from ticket sales, merchandise sales, and television rights could be divided up in such a way to benefit all parties involved, as well as some that are not. The winner of the match could be allotted a certain percentage, with the loser getting a smaller amount. If we lived in a perfect footballing world without FIFA corruption, I would suggest that the remaining funds go toward philanthropic endeavors: supporting the Homeless World Cup, FIFA development grants for the minnows of the world, or donations to programs like Steve Nash's Football for Good being just a few football-focused possibilities. FIFA would gain some positive publicity and good will rather than dollars and cents. Unfortunately, though, it'd probably be necessary to give the folks a Zurich a cut of the bottom line, but I'd still hold out hope of that being limited (crazy, I know).
The appeal of a tough friendly might also entice two top teams to participate in the match. Let's consider the matchups that would have been in place were this idea implemented back in 1998:
'98: Brazil-France (World Cup final rematch)
'02: Brazil-France
'06: Italy-Brazil
'10: Brazil-???
(Newsflash: Brazil is pretty good.) All of those games would almost certainly sell out any stadium across the globe, as well as providing a star-studded match up that would appeal to television viewers. From the team perspective, however, it would provide teams either in the midst of continental qualification or preparing for their continental tournament with a tough test against a quality opponent. It probably isn't as much of an attractive factor as the aforementioned money, but hey, it can't hurt.
As far as host selection, FIFA could make a concerted effort to cater its choice towards the smaller nations (in terms of economy, population, or footballing stature) that would otherwise not be likely to host a major international competition. The match could provide a short term economic boost to a local economy thanks to visitors, entrepreneurial ventures, and some other stimulating measures that might accompany it. It might not be much, but say that of the 50,000 fans in attendance at one of these games, 5,000 are foreign visitors. That's most likely 5,000 tourists that otherwise wouldn't have made the jaunt, injecting some additional money into the local economy. Without serious stadium construction needed, costs would be significantly reduced and could be focused primarily on security or some hospitality and infrastructure improvements that would be useful beyond the life of the competition.
The question still remains: what's the point? At this point, I don't have much else to say to that other than: why not? FIFA has two major international competitions which are fairly different from one another, so why not line up the respective champs for just one more match at the end of a cycle? As a fan, I'd love it, and as a player, I'd love another opportunity to hoist a trophy. Of course, the meaningfulness of the competition would grow with time, initially beginning a comparatively lower level. But with international pride on the line, I would expect fans to inject some instant life into the proceedings.
I'm sure there are plenty of holes in what I've said, and I wouldn't be surprised if my suggestions are a little off-base or misguided. If you have any ideas you want to throw into the conversation, feel free; I'd like to see what everyone's opinion would be, and I don't by any means consider my opinions listed above to be of the expert variety. I'm just a guy who loves his international soccer and wants to stir up some chatter in this pre-World Cup lull.
Fire away, folks.
Click here to read more...