Women’s World Cup to Expand: A Wise Move?
Lost in the flurry of news coming out of FIFA’s Executive Committee meeting in South Africa this week was an announcement that the FIFA Women’s World Cup will expand from 16 to 24 teams from 2015 onwards (there will be no change for the 2011 World Cup in Germany).
As I mentioned on Twitter, receiving a varied and interesting reaction, I’m unsure if this change is positive for the profile of the women’s game.
On the one hand, it obviously is: more participants means more exposure for the women’s game in more countries, and more opportunities for more players to shine. One commenter on Twitter pointed out that expanding the rugby World Cup had helped the ‘minnow’ nations grow enormously.
On the other hand, it’s hard not to notice that across nations and especially in certain positions (goalkeeper being the most obvious), the depth of talent simply isn’t consistent. How much does the women’s game suffer if there are a series of high profile blunders? How many lopsided games will there be in the tournament if Germany and the U.S. are picking on even lower ranked teams?
In the 2007 World Cup, Argentina were hammered 11-0 by Germany, 6-1 by England and also lost 1-0 to Japan. This was not an isolated incident: Ghana lost all three of their games with a -12 goal differential, and New Zealand all three at -9. If anyone knows about Argentinian or Ghanaian or New Zealand’s women’s football, it would be interesting to know how the sport has developed there since: were these painful appearances a boon or a hindrance?
I’m not sure of the answers to these questions, and would love some feedback for those who know more about the depth of the women’s game worldwide than I do. Is this a good development for the sport?
Email This Post
i think this is a good idea on paper. the issue i have is that i feel that the women’s game has gone back a few steps since 2003/2004. this is when a good class of players chose to retire and the game has not been the same since. it isn’t just the american players but a number of international footballers in the women’s game were no longer on the scene. Sissi of Brazil was getting less playing time as the years rolled by. Sun Wen of china virtually disappeared it seemed. Everybody remembers mia hamm and julie foudy but cindy parlow disappeared from the scene. tiffany milbrett wasn’t the same player she once was. these were great players in their prime.
I can watch just about any level of soccer and i have watched women’s soccer for quite some time and it is not at the same level it was from 98 to 2004. in fact, it is not even close. they do not possess the ball like they used to. now i am speaking specifically on the usa women because i rarely see a match that they are not playing. so other nations i am not sure of their progress. but the 2003 usa womens soccer team would demolish the current roster. so on paper expanding looks like a good idea, but if the quality of soccer isn’t there than this won’t bode well for women’s soccer.
On first read, I agree that expanding the tournament could be a bigger hindrance to the women’s game. Though, looking at what’s happened in the men’s game in ’smaller’ nations, expanding the world cup has no doubt benefited the smaller nations. Look at Zambia in the seventies – they had never seen a cross and didn’t know all the rules. Now Africa is hosting a world cup, and has leaped on in its football development.
I suppose the difference is that men’s football was already established as a sport, and it was just the minor nations that needed to catch up. Women’s football still needs to establish itself as a serious sport in most ‘major’ countries (except probably for the US?). In which case, even though expanding the world cup will benefit smaller countries, it certainly could harm the game overall – which won’t help the smaller nations in the long run anyway.
Expanding the women’s field only works if Europe gets around 8 or 9 slots. If Canada hosts 2015 then Europe should get 8, Africa 3, Asia 5, Oceania 1, South America 2 and North America 3 (plus Canada). That still leaves one slot for a playoff between two confederations likely South America 3 against an unnamed confederation probably Europe. Or it could be Europe 9, Africa 3, Asia 4, Oceania 1, South America 2 and North America 3 slots plus Canada leaving a playoff between South America 3 and Asia 5.
Nooooooooooooooooooooo.
I hate the fact that the euro cup is going to be bigger because I dont want to see the best competition be watered down like the world cup but the reason the women shouldnt do it is because there just arent that many good football nations that are in the US caliber.
You have about 3-4 teams far ahead of others then another 10 or so in another category and then the next drop is even more pronounced.
And Canada should NOT get any official FIFA competition until it puts on its pants and has at least ONE professional footbal league.
Its a country of 35 million and it has no mens pro or even less a women’s league.
The cold is not an excuse when Russia and Norway and Denmark have leagues and are as cold. The last two have populations of 5 million each on top of that.
If Canada wants to be a banana republic, that’s their own thing but the US got the first world cup on condition they get a pro league going which they did.
I think Canada and other countries should do the same (then again, how many countries in the world dont have a pro football league) if they want to get a FIFA event.
They have no intention of ever having a pro league (the country has only one professinoal league of their own) so I think they have to show they are serious before they jump ahead of other countries to organize marquee events.