Thread View: aus.games.bridge
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Nick Hughes
Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:46
Bridge and Football in Australia
Author: Nick Hughes
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:46
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:46
34 lines
3070 bytes
3070 bytes
Australia's Football (=Soccer) Federation were celebrating last week because FIFA - the world governing body - decided to disband our Oceania Zone (Australia, New Zealand and some Pacific Islands) and lump us in with Asia. This is seen as a boost for football in Oz. Our national & club teams will compete in large Asian tournaments. More importantly, our path to the World Cup will be through Asia, a fairer method and better chance. Previously, we would win our little zone then face a playoff against some team from another zone. Scotland, Argentina, Iran & Uruguay have all knocked us out. As a result, Australia has not qualified for a World Cup since 1974. What happens in bridge? We have our Oceania Zone (Australia, NZ & some Islands) and are likely to keep it. The quality of bridge at the top is not so great out here but we (OZ & NZ) have 50,000 registered players, much more than any Asian country (though China will catch upsome day soon). That's the raisin d'etre. As a result, our Zone gets a place in the Bermuda Bowl (always goes to OZ or NZ) and sometimes two places (depending on how well we both did in the previous Olympiad). Another zone is Pacific (Far East) Asia, who have their own B Bowl qualifying tournament, sending two teams to the finals. Australia and NZ attend this tournament as guests (the results the Asian teams get against our teams don't count for their purposes!). Australia has not won the Far East Open Teams since 1972. I think the WBF should follow the football example and disband our Zone, adding us to an expanded Pacific Asia zone that would presumably qualify 3 teams to the B Bowl. The PABF CHampionships would become more meaningful, etc. It's in our interest to seek greater involvement in Asia - bridge, business, politics, culture. Hmm. Starting to ramble a bit ... What do people think? Nick Hughes, Sydney
Re: Bridge and Football in Australia
Author: David Stevenson
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 15:39
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 15:39
48 lines
3856 bytes
3856 bytes
Nick Hughes wrote
>Australia's Football (=Soccer) Federation were celebrating last week because
>FIFA - the world governing body - decided to disband our Oceania Zone
>(Australia, New Zealand and some Pacific Islands) and lump us in with Asia.
>This is seen as a boost for football in Oz. Our national & club teams will
>compete in large Asian tournaments. More importantly, our path to the World
>Cup will be through Asia, a fairer method and better chance. Previously, we
>would win our little zone then face a playoff against some team from another
>zone. Scotland, Argentina, Iran & Uruguay have all knocked us out. As a
>result, Australia has not qualified for a World Cup since 1974.
>
>What happens in bridge? We have our Oceania Zone (Australia, NZ & some
>Islands) and are likely to keep it. The quality of bridge at the top is not
>so great out here but we (OZ & NZ) have 50,000 registered players, much more
>than any Asian country (though China will catch upsome day soon). That's the
>raisin d'etre.
>As a result, our Zone gets a place in the Bermuda Bowl (always goes to OZ or
>NZ) and sometimes two places (depending on how well we both did in the
>previous Olympiad).
>
>Another zone is Pacific (Far East) Asia, who have their own B Bowl
>qualifying tournament, sending two teams to the finals. Australia and NZ
>attend this tournament as guests (the results the Asian teams get against
>our teams don't count for their purposes!). Australia has not won the Far
>East Open Teams since 1972.
>
>I think the WBF should follow the football example and disband our Zone,
>adding us to an expanded Pacific Asia zone that would presumably qualify 3
>teams to the B Bowl. The PABF CHampionships would become more meaningful,
>etc. It's in our interest to seek greater involvement in Asia - bridge,
>business, politics, culture. Hmm. Starting to ramble a bit ...
>
>What do people think?
Most decisions of this sort are made piecemeal, ie they consider [for
example] Zones 6 and 7 and whether to combine them. I think a proper
overall look at the setup would be a good idea, asking such questions as
Is the Zone method correct for WCs?
What would be a good number of Zones?
What criterion should there be for which Zone a national organisation is
put in?
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways /\ /\
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 @ @
<bridge2@blakjak.com> ICQ 20039682 bluejak on OKB =( + )=
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.com/brg_menu.htm ~
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads