What are people's thoughts on the Nations League that UEFA have proposed to replace friendlies (and act as Euro qualifiers to an extent) and would you like something introduced in Asia??

Consider that UEFA nations probably won't be available for friendlies as often in the future, and that CONCACAF is also discussing a Nations League.

I personally think it would be a great idea in Asia (the distance would be the biggest issue). This would especially be great for lower ranked nations and ensuring they get more games and against similar opposition with the potential of promotion (and threat of relegation) ... so not meaningless friendlies or games for stronger teams to simply play to build their confidence (and shatter the lowly ranked teams). I believe some of the smaller nations in Asia play very few games (especially competitive games) too.

I think it would benefit Australia too as we'd face stronger Asian nations mainly and more frequently.

I'd imagine it could double as Asian Cup qualifiers too, and could possibly reduce the length of the World Cup qualification process in the AFC.

As I said I'd imagine the travel would be the killer in Asia though, not sure groups would need to be split by AFC regions too or not (or if a group of 4 then two from west Asia and two from east Asia that way can play two away games not too far apart for the travelling teams).

Do you like the concept of a Nations League in Asia??

I don't like it BUT if UEFA implement it, it needs to be across the board

Why don't you like it?

Its a great idea - Conacaf  have approved this  and this will go global  - including Asia- the key is to be in the top 4  - the use of the Sep, Oct & Nov 18 dates is a great idea - this will get rid of friendlies

There is a story out there on Global Nations League  - this will include every nation 

Imagine getting into the top division of a FIFA League of Nations and having Brazil, England, Italy etc playing away games in Australia for points. Oh boy.

I just feel like the game is becoming too much about the rich nations rather than the region. It's starting to shun countries that typically arent wealthy. Or at least thats what it seems.

I thought the 8 teams playing off was going to be in a knockout in one of the 8 countries in each division .

Australia qualifying for the top division by winning the Asian section and hosting the top division knockout comp would basically be the same as hosting the Confeds Cup, so would be the next best thing to a World Cup.

Socialist

I think it would benefit the smaller nations more. Some nations in Asia play only a handful of matches each year (if there are no qualifying games some won't play friendlies or they are against club sides instead). Something like this would actually give them a chance to play more frequently and also to get promoted to a higher level (under the current system some of these nations will never get to the final round of qualifiers, but if they were in a group playing competitive games each year they would surely improve more so than current system).

i am totally for it. get new zealand to join us too so that we would have 48 teams in total. the nations league would be of great benefit for the afc nations

After seeing it implemented and working for UEFA, I'm on board with it now. Following a similar format to UEFA, we could end up with four divisions such as this:



I used rankings as of today, and used a 'seeding' system to initially populate the groups within the divisions (top 4 seeds in position 1 etc). Using this approach we then get these groups for each division to play home and away.

Division 1
>Top two teams from each group qualify for 'finals series' to crown overall AFC champion.
>Bottom team is relegated

Division 2
>Top team is promoted
>Bottom team is relegated

Division 3
>Top team is promoted
>Bottom team is relegated

Division 4
>Top team is promoted
>Two second best teams playoff in home and away legs for third and final promotion spot

It's a very quick mock up of what an AFC Nations League could look like - it would certainly provide a lot more meaningful games for countries. Using my grid above, the tastiest group in the entire competition in my opinion would be Group 2 in Division 2 - involves three up and coming teams, two of which (Uzbekistan and Thailand) featured in the final round of World Cup Qualifying last time around.

Agreed

Div 1 should be 4 groups of 3, same as Europe

The flip side to "we will play top sides more often" is if we get relegated were stuck in a back to Oceania days stuck with no meaningful opposition

To be fair, if we got relegated in a group containing Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, we don't deserve to be in the top division.

Gives the Socceroos and FFA plenty of incentive to ensure we have a strong national team that doesn't get relegated then. Really I think something like the Nations League gives a better indication of where teams are (rather than a good run at a cup comp).

If they do get relegated then perhaps it is a sign that they need to step up their game, and need to face competition that is closer to their level.

I think the groups of 3 are probably the only thing I don't like about UEFA's system. I think 4 is better. Not sure if they did 3 so high turn over of teams relegated ... as it stands it appears Croatia and Germany will be relegated, mainly because of two really tough groups. A fourth team in the groups may have seen a bit more competition for relegation (and over a longer period of time ... already Iceland are relegated, and most other groups in Div 1 look pretty set after 3 games ... pretty sure it is meant to run over a 2 year period).

Groups of 3 allow the elite teams to still play non NL friendlies against opponents of their choosing, including CONMEBOL teams if they are in Europe in the International break, like Peru last time playing Germany & the Netherlands. With groups of 4 there's no off days. 

Fair enough. Guess it gives teams in the top divisions even more impetus to ensure they are ready to perform for their nations league games then. Only got 4 games before relegation kicks in.

Groups of three is OK for top teams also because they are the ones who play more World Cup Qualifiers, Asian Cup etc

Plus having 4 group winner is a quick and easy Semi-Final/Final to decide Champ, instead of working through 6 contenders somehow

Fair call - so Division 1 would look like this then:



Keeps all the top seeds away from each other (which is not a bad thing imo - we play each other so regularly anyway) until the finals.

Then for promotion and relegation, you could have the 4 worst teams relegated into division 2 and then the division 2 winners get promoted (three teams) and either select the best performing 2nd place team (greater incentive to perform during the league) or just have a mini knockout comp between all the second placed teams to get the final promotion spot (perhaps more of a money spinner for the AFC).

The more I think about it, the more I love the idea of an AFC Nations League tbh

Easier, How about

Div 1  4 x 3                  = 12  (1 down)
Div 2  4 x 4                  = 16  (1 up 2 down)
Div 3  3 x 5  + 1 x 4    = 19   ( 2 up )
                                          47

Groups of 5 are to long and can not fit into Asia's WCQ/ACQ schedule. The other problem is what to do with all the regional tournaments in Asia, although a lot of these are not played in FIFA International breaks.
A lot of the small nations in Asia don't have the funds for that much travel either.
My plan would be for 5 Leagues:
League A = 2x3 (1 down)
League B = 1x4 + 1x3 (1 up 1 down)
League C =2x4 (1 up 2 down)
League D = 4x3 (1 up 1 down)
League E = 4x3 (1 up).

That makes League A very elite and reduces the travel costs for League E nations. If NMI didn't want to enter make League B 2x3.

I think given it would be an AFC competition that the AFC would fund (to an extent anyway) costs for all teams. 

We are already seeing countries wanting to pull out of the CONCACAF Nations League because they can't afford to continue. 
Caribbean Football‏ @caribbeanfootyFollowFollow @caribbeanfootyMoreFrom a fairly reliable source, as many as ten teams have expressed a desire to drop out of Nations League Qualifying due to the financial difficulties of participating. Seems Concacaf is doing what they can to avoid that scenario, not sure exactly what that entails.9:39 AM - 18 Oct 2018[/quote]
https://twitter.com/caribbeanfooty/status/1052979444669980672672

I must admit I was hesistant on the whole UEFA one but after seeing it in action I'm all for it especially after the friendly Australia just played which didn't really help us much due to the quality of the opposition, may as well play a competitive game. 

Yeah , maybe, I dunno

I would note however that the bottom 19 teams ( Div 3) are ranked 143 or lower, so do not play many other competitive games

Here is the recent history of the best current,  Hong Kong (#143), only 38 competitive games in 13 years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_national_football_team_%E2%80%93_record_in_qualifying_and_major_tournaments

That's why this Nations League concept is fantastic, as it gives all levels of football appropriate competition to improve their national sides. We saw it ourselves when we were in Oceania, you can't expect to improve if you're playing two games a year. You pretty much want to fill every international break with two games to maximize the national team benefit.

I think the basic reason this concepts works generally, is because, not only do you get more 'meaningful' matches, but it also generates more money because the larger (generally more successful) nations get to play each other more often. Smaller nations in UEFA accept this because
a. they are given the chance to reach the highest tier through promotion.
b. winners of lower leagues are given a place at Euro 2020.
(One of Belarus, Georgia, Kosovo and Macedonia will qualify for the Euro 2020 finals)

I think you would need similar carrots for an AFC Nations League to get off the ground (although, if you were to offer a place in the AFC Asian Cup to League D winners, then you would get a team like Nepal or Macau qualifying). Also, given the size of the AFC and the general wealth and football development of its constituent countries, you would probably want to split it East-West (East has 22 teams, West has 25).

As an example:
Leagues A, B and C: 4 division; 3 teams each, 2 West divisions and 2 East divisions
League D: 1 East division of 4 teams; 2 West divisions (1 of 3 teams, 1 of 4 teams)

League A; bottom team relegated (4 teams; 2 West, 2 East)
League B; top team promoted (4 teams; 2 West, 2 East), bottom team relegated (4 teams; 2 West, 2 East)
League C; top team promoted (4 teams; 2 West, 2 East), bottom team relegated (4 teams; 2 West, 2 East)
League D East division; top 2 teams promoted (2 teams)
League D West divisions; top team promoted (2 teams)

While the principle is to give every nation more meaningful matches, if you wanted to save on cost for lowest ranked teams, you could shift a West and East team from Div 4 to Div 3 or 2 (with appropriate adjustments in promotions/relegations). Alternatively, you could reduce cost by making Div 4 a knockout tournament rather than a league.

All that being said, there is probably less demand for this sort of competition across Asia because of the existing regional competitions (e.g. EAFF E-1 Football Championship.) So I don't think we will be seeing this style of competition in Asia soon.