ANC qualification

[Flex Swift]

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

[truetalk]

Nothing wrong with the qualifying format. Nigeria and Egypt simply dropped the ball in recent years.

For the 2012 tournament, Eguavoen lost to Guinea away, & a last minute equalizer (something that happens to Sia1's teams a lot) from Guinea made us miss the tournament, I think on GD.

For the 2015 tournament, we were beaten by Congo (not the big Congo O!) at home (thanks to a useless Breda ref), then lost to Sudan & could not beat an already qualified Bafana to qualify.

In 2017, Chad messed everything up. They pulled out & CAF decided that only one team would qualify from a group of 3, so it was us vs Egypt. Sia1's team coughed up a last minute equalizer again at home & then there was that curious line up in Alexandria.

Unless you want CAF to just pick the teams ahead of time. This was a really good AFCON.

All the teams in the QF were solid teams. Even teams like CIV and Mali that did not make the Quarters were not too bad.

[Tbite]

The World Cup format is the one that needs to be changed.

[Flex Swift]

Nothing wrong with the qualifying format. Nigeria and Egypt simply dropped the ball in recent years.

For the 2012 tournament, Eguavoen lost to Guinea away, & a last minute equalizer (something that happens to Sia1's teams a lot) from Guinea made us miss the tournament, I think on GD.

For the 2015 tournament, we were beaten by Congo (not the big Congo O!) at home (thanks to a useless Breda ref), then lost to Sudan & could not beat an already qualified Bafana to qualify.

In 2017, Chad messed everything up. They pulled out & CAF decided that only one team would qualify from a group of 3, so it was us vs Egypt. Sia1's team coughed up a last minute equalizer again at home & then there was that curious line up in Alexandria.

Unless you want CAF to just pick the teams ahead of time. This was a really good AFCON.

All the teams in the QF were solid teams. Even teams like CIV and Mali that did not make the Quarters were not too bad.

You make some interesting points concerning the Nigerian qualifying series for 2012 and 2015 however concerning the group of three teams (Through no fault of their own)they should merge with another group. In my opinion the qualifying series involving just three teams is too weak and a good qualifying series should contain 5 -6 teams.

[Enugu II]

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

Bros, I am not sure what you mean by "strongest teams"? The reality is that it appears that you are configuring who is strongest based on reputation and not actually what they produce on the field. As someone already pointed out, Nigeria's inability to qualify is not the fault of CAF's format but the fact that they were not good enough during those qualifiers. Any other format will still have those teams that you perceive to be the "strongest" losing here and there. That is just the facts of the game, format or not format except if CAF begins to use invitations to get teams to the finals. That will be a travesty. I like the fact that a team like Guinea Bissau was at this year's tournament because they deserved it over the likes of Zambia!

[Flex Swift]

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

Bros, I am not sure what you mean by "strongest teams"? The reality is that it appears that you are configuring who is strongest based on reputation and not actually what they produce on the field. As someone already pointed out, Nigeria's inability to qualify is not the fault of CAF's format but the fact that they were not good enough during those qualifiers. Any other format will still have those teams that you perceive to be the "strongest" losing here and there. That is just the facts of the game, format or not format except if CAF begins to use invitations to get teams to the finals. That will be a travesty. I like the fact that a team like Guinea Bissau was at this year's tournament because they deserved it over the likes of Zambia!

I agree with most of what you have said but had Chad not withdrawn from the competition would Nigeria have qualified?
Should the holder of the cup of nations have to go through the qualifying series? Does the European cup holder have to qualify? Does the holder of the cup de America have to qualify? I think Keshi should have been allowed to defend the title.

[ifect70]

The European Cup and Copa America defending champions do not have automatic qualifications. They are still required to play the qualifying series. Like previously said, poor leadership, inconsistent coaching and fraudulent selections completely jeopardized our chances of qualifying for the last two editions. Hope we have learned our lessons.

[Undertaker]

The European Cup and Copa America defending champions do not have automatic qualifications. They are still required to play the qualifying series. Like previously said, poor leadership, inconsistent coaching and fraudulent selections completely jeopardized our chances of qualifying for the last two editions. Hope we have learned our lessons.

There aren't any qualification matches for Copa America! All South American team play at the Copa America!

[Enugu II]

Flex Swift,

It is the greatest misconception that Nigeria would have qualified if Chad had not withdrawn. In fact, if Chad had stayed on, Nigeria WOULD NOT HAVE QUALIFIED.

All you have to do is do the maths and even give Nigeria the benefit of the doubt that Nigeria would have won away which we had not done in places like Tanzania and Swaziland. In essence, assume Nigeria would have won in N'Djamena which is by no means a sure thing! The total points with winning away in Chad would still have put us at 11 points. Let us assume we win that game by 1-0 that will give us a goal differential of +3.

Okay, note that only two second-placed teams go through from the qualifiers. first second-placed team to go through, Uganda, had 13 points! That leaves just one second placed spot for four teams to finish at 11 points (incl. Nigeria). Here are their goal differentials: Togo = +7, Nigeria = +3, Benin Rep = +2, and Ethiopia = -3. So of course, Togo goes in ahead of us. I hope you now get the clear idea that Chad's withdrawal made no difference on our failure to qualify for the CAN 2017. Also, note that I am being generous believing the SE would have won away which was no sure thing, mind you. Bottomline = it ain't the format, it is the team.

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

Bros, I am not sure what you mean by "strongest teams"? The reality is that it appears that you are configuring who is strongest based on reputation and not actually what they produce on the field. As someone already pointed out, Nigeria's inability to qualify is not the fault of CAF's format but the fact that they were not good enough during those qualifiers. Any other format will still have those teams that you perceive to be the "strongest" losing here and there. That is just the facts of the game, format or not format except if CAF begins to use invitations to get teams to the finals. That will be a travesty. I like the fact that a team like Guinea Bissau was at this year's tournament because they deserved it over the likes of Zambia!

I agree with most of what you have said but had Chad not withdrawn from the competition would Nigeria have qualified?
Should the holder of the cup of nations have to go through the qualifying series? Does the European cup holder have to qualify? Does the holder of the cup de America have to qualify? I think Keshi should have been allowed to defend the title.

[Tbite]

Chad withdrew before our last couple of matches.

So to say we would not have qualified....is not something that can be established. In football, when one variable changes, your entire outlook, psyche and the way you approach the game changes.

If you will recall those games with Egypt were hardly cut and dry! They were very dicey! In fact I am highly surprised we didn't win at least one! The Chad situation may not be unconnected with those outcomes.

[FATHER TIKO]

The problem is not with the format of the qualification programme...

More to do with Playing Surfaces & Preparation Period for Games, which have become 'levellers'
Eliminate the impact of these 2 factors and the cream will always rise to the top...

Dissenters may argue that these 2 factors have always been there; and yet the frequency of "surprise qualifiers" seems to have risen in recent years...
Answer maybe that so-called minnows have over time acquired deeper understanding of how to apply "home advantage", with playing surfaces, and the nous to punish inadequate game preparation by the visiting opposition...

Playing away at say, Swaziland, today will cause more problems than 2 decades ago (and it has little to do with Swaziland having closed the gap on the big boys, because put Swaziland into the real tournament and the gulf remains clear as daylight)

Saw Nigeria struggle against Mozambique on the scorching astro-turf of Maputo in 2009; yet barely 3 months later at AFCON 2010 on the lush playing surface of the AFCON 2010 in Angola, it was men (Nigeria) against boys (Mozambique)

Is the gap really closing, if the gulf in quality still shows at tournaments?

Zimbabwe was touted as the dark horses of AFCON 2017 purely on the evidence of an "impressive qualification success" but their inferior quality was stark during the tournament proper. Why?

Expect increase in the frequency of "surprise qualifiers" as long as Playing Surfaces & Preparation Period for Games do not improve substantially...

[truetalk]

The problem is not with the format of the qualification programme...

More to do with Playing Surfaces & Preparation Period for Games, which have become 'levellers'
Eliminate the impact of these 2 factors and the cream will always rise to the top...

Dissenters may argue that these 2 factors have always been there; and yet the frequency of "surprise qualifiers" seems to have risen in recent years...
Answer maybe that so-called minnows have over time acquired deeper understanding of how to apply "home advantage", with playing surfaces, and the nous to punish inadequate game preparation by the visiting opposition...

Playing away at say, Swaziland, today will cause more problems than 2 decades ago (and it has little to do with Swaziland having closed the gap on the big boys, because put Swaziland into the real tournament and the gulf remains clear as daylight)

Saw Nigeria struggle against Mozambique on the scorching astro-turf of Maputo in 2009; yet barely 3 months later at AFCON 2010 on the lush playing surface of the AFCON 2010 in Angola, it was men (Nigeria) against boys (Mozambique)

Is the gap really closing, if the gulf in quality still shows at tournaments?

Zimbabwe was touted as the dark horses of AFCON 2017 purely on the evidence of an "impressive qualification success" but their inferior quality was stark during the tournament proper. Why?

Expect increase in the frequency of "surprise qualifiers" as long as Playing Surfaces & Preparation Period for Games do not improve substantially...

I'm not sure I fully agree.

A lot of countries (Tanzania, Zimbabwe, etc) can boast of at least one really good surface. Usually in their national tournament.

I think what happens is that in some of the smaller countries, you have a cycle of talented players that have become a cohesive unit over the years. The may have developed together from the U-17s, or in the local strong side (can't use TP Mazembe as an example, but I think St. Georges or something in Ethiopia might be more apt). These teams are good enough to take on the bigger boys who are hurriedly assembled pros during the qualifiers.

In the last decade, teams like Cape Verde and Ethiopia have had 2-4 year stretches where these factors pushed them into continental reckoning.

However, these factors can only push you to a certain level. In the main tournament, when everyone has 2 weeks to prepare & another 2 weeks to gel during the competition, class starts to show, and the men get separated from the boys.

The pitch may be a factor, but in my opinion, not as much as what I described above, which aligns more with the 'preparation for games' that you alluded to.

[Enugu II]

Tbite,

It cuts both ways i.e. Nigeria can not claim that it would have qualified if Chad had stayed on! Far from it. Our problems can be pointedly located in not winning in Tanzania while Chad was still playing and then not overcoming Egypt in two games. Nothing more top add.

Furthermore, a point that can be made is that Nigeria did not suffer the most because of Chad's withdrawal. We forget that Chad's withdrawal took away a clear advantage that Egypt already had in the group -- winning away in N'djamena by 5-1. We had not yet played Chad away from a home, usually a more difficult fixture than playing home. Then remember, we had already notched a poor result in Tanzania while Chad was still in the group! Any which way this stuff is cut, Chad was not the downfall of Nigeria. That is the bottom line.

It is just a myth created by the Nigerian media but the reality indicates vastly different picture.

Chad withdrew before our last couple of matches.

So to say we would not have qualified....is not something that can be established. In football, when one variable changes, your entire outlook, psyche and the way you approach the game changes.

If you will recall those games with Egypt were hardly cut and dry! They were very dicey! In fact I am highly surprised we didn't win at least one! The Chad situation may not be unconnected with those outcomes.

[Tbite]

Point taken E2

[Flex Swift]

Tbite,

It cuts both ways i.e. Nigeria can not claim that it would have qualified if Chad had stayed on! Far from it. Our problems can be pointedly located in not winning in Tanzania while Chad was still playing and then not overcoming Egypt in two games. Nothing more top add.

Furthermore, a point that can be made is that Nigeria did not suffer the most because of Chad's withdrawal. We forget that Chad's withdrawal took away a clear advantage that Egypt already had in the group -- winning away in N'djamena by 5-1. We had not yet played Chad away from a home, usually a more difficult fixture than playing home. Then remember, we had already notched a poor result in Tanzania while Chad was still in the group! Any which way this stuff is cut, Chad was not the downfall of Nigeria. That is the bottom line.

It is just a myth created by the Nigerian media but the reality indicates vastly different picture.

Chad withdrew before our last couple of matches.

So to say we would not have qualified....is not something that can be established. In football, when one variable changes, your entire outlook, psyche and the way you approach the game changes.

If you will recall those games with Egypt were hardly cut and dry! They were very dicey! In fact I am highly surprised we didn't win at least one! The Chad situation may not be unconnected with those outcomes.

Do you think this was the real reason why Oliseh resigned? Should we hold him responsible for our failure to qualify? Why couldn't Nigeria overcome Tanzania away? I didn't watch the match but I suspect we prosecuted the match with Ighalo

[folem]

It could have gone down to the wire if Chad was in it to the end.

Togo beat Djibouti 5-0 to get to +7 GD on the last day. It is possible for Nigeria to beat Tanzania 6-0 to pip Togo to the last slot for the 2nd placed teams.

It is not entirely the "greatest" misconception.

CAF could have made the 2nd place finishers table fairer by equalizing the groups for the purpose of the best losers table as was done in some previous qualification series.

Flex Swift,

It is the greatest misconception that Nigeria would have qualified if Chad had not withdrawn. In fact, if Chad had stayed on, Nigeria WOULD NOT HAVE QUALIFIED.

All you have to do is do the maths and even give Nigeria the benefit of the doubt that Nigeria would have won away which we had not done in places like Tanzania and Swaziland. In essence, assume Nigeria would have won in N'Djamena which is by no means a sure thing! The total points with winning away in Chad would still have put us at 11 points. Let us assume we win that game by 1-0 that will give us a goal differential of +3.

Okay, note that only two second-placed teams go through from the qualifiers. first second-placed team to go through, Uganda, had 13 points! That leaves just one second placed spot for four teams to finish at 11 points (incl. Nigeria). Here are their goal differentials: Togo = +7, Nigeria = +3, Benin Rep = +2, and Ethiopia = -3. So of course, Togo goes in ahead of us. I hope you now get the clear idea that Chad's withdrawal made no difference on our failure to qualify for the CAN 2017. Also, note that I am being generous believing the SE would have won away which was no sure thing, mind you. Bottomline = it ain't the format, it is the team.

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

Bros, I am not sure what you mean by "strongest teams"? The reality is that it appears that you are configuring who is strongest based on reputation and not actually what they produce on the field. As someone already pointed out, Nigeria's inability to qualify is not the fault of CAF's format but the fact that they were not good enough during those qualifiers. Any other format will still have those teams that you perceive to be the "strongest" losing here and there. That is just the facts of the game, format or not format except if CAF begins to use invitations to get teams to the finals. That will be a travesty. I like the fact that a team like Guinea Bissau was at this year's tournament because they deserved it over the likes of Zambia!

I agree with most of what you have said but had Chad not withdrawn from the competition would Nigeria have qualified?
Should the holder of the cup of nations have to go through the qualifying series? Does the European cup holder have to qualify? Does the holder of the cup de America have to qualify? I think Keshi should have been allowed to defend the title.

[Enugu II]

fooled,

Beating Tanzania 6-0 is certainly "miracle of the highest level" with very low possibility whereas beating Djibouti 5-0 by Togo was not entirely unexpected. Big difference. You may also have argued that Nigeria could well have beaten Egypt 3-0 in Cairo or even 7-0 in Nigeria. The question is: are those results reasonable?

Fact is that a more reasonable permutation could not have seen Nigeria get into that Can after the draw in Tanzania and then the home draw against Egypt. Those were the games that eliminated us and not the withdrawal by Chad.

It could have gone down to the wire if Chad was in it to the end.

Togo beat Djibouti 5-0 to get to +7 GD on the last day. It is possible for Nigeria to beat Tanzania 6-0 to pip Togo to the last slot for the 2nd placed teams.

It is not entirely the "greatest" misconception.

CAF could have made the 2nd place finishers table fairer by equalizing the groups for the purpose of the best losers table as was done in some previous qualification series.

Flex Swift,

It is the greatest misconception that Nigeria would have qualified if Chad had not withdrawn. In fact, if Chad had stayed on, Nigeria WOULD NOT HAVE QUALIFIED.

All you have to do is do the maths and even give Nigeria the benefit of the doubt that Nigeria would have won away which we had not done in places like Tanzania and Swaziland. In essence, assume Nigeria would have won in N'Djamena which is by no means a sure thing! The total points with winning away in Chad would still have put us at 11 points. Let us assume we win that game by 1-0 that will give us a goal differential of +3.

Okay, note that only two second-placed teams go through from the qualifiers. first second-placed team to go through, Uganda, had 13 points! That leaves just one second placed spot for four teams to finish at 11 points (incl. Nigeria). Here are their goal differentials: Togo = +7, Nigeria = +3, Benin Rep = +2, and Ethiopia = -3. So of course, Togo goes in ahead of us. I hope you now get the clear idea that Chad's withdrawal made no difference on our failure to qualify for the CAN 2017. Also, note that I am being generous believing the SE would have won away which was no sure thing, mind you. Bottomline = it ain't the format, it is the team.

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

Bros, I am not sure what you mean by "strongest teams"? The reality is that it appears that you are configuring who is strongest based on reputation and not actually what they produce on the field. As someone already pointed out, Nigeria's inability to qualify is not the fault of CAF's format but the fact that they were not good enough during those qualifiers. Any other format will still have those teams that you perceive to be the "strongest" losing here and there. That is just the facts of the game, format or not format except if CAF begins to use invitations to get teams to the finals. That will be a travesty. I like the fact that a team like Guinea Bissau was at this year's tournament because they deserved it over the likes of Zambia!

I agree with most of what you have said but had Chad not withdrawn from the competition would Nigeria have qualified?
Should the holder of the cup of nations have to go through the qualifying series? Does the European cup holder have to qualify? Does the holder of the cup de America have to qualify? I think Keshi should have been allowed to defend the title.

[folem]

If, the result needed on the last day was a 6-0 win against Tanzania, it is possible. Forget all the permutations for other games before that. Nigeria beat Sudan away 4-0 when it needed to get the win. You call it whatever, it is possible & doable. Nigeria and football miracles are twins.

Togo's results are similar, away loss to Tunisia, draw with Liberia.

folem,

Beating Tanzania 6-0 is certainly "miracle of the highest level" with very low possibility whereas beating Djibouti 5-0 by Togo was not entirely unexpected. Big difference. You may also have argued that Nigeria could well have beaten Egypt 3-0 in Cairo or even 7-0 in Nigeria. The question is: are those results reasonable?

Fact is that a more reasonable permutation could not have seen Nigeria get into that Can after the draw in Tanzania and then the home draw against Egypt. Those were the games that eliminated us and not the withdrawal by Chad.

It could have gone down to the wire if Chad was in it to the end.

Togo beat Djibouti 5-0 to get to +7 GD on the last day. It is possible for Nigeria to beat Tanzania 6-0 to pip Togo to the last slot for the 2nd placed teams.

It is not entirely the "greatest" misconception.

CAF could have made the 2nd place finishers table fairer by equalizing the groups for the purpose of the best losers table as was done in some previous qualification series.

Flex Swift,

It is the greatest misconception that Nigeria would have qualified if Chad had not withdrawn. In fact, if Chad had stayed on, Nigeria WOULD NOT HAVE QUALIFIED.

All you have to do is do the maths and even give Nigeria the benefit of the doubt that Nigeria would have won away which we had not done in places like Tanzania and Swaziland. In essence, assume Nigeria would have won in N'Djamena which is by no means a sure thing! The total points with winning away in Chad would still have put us at 11 points. Let us assume we win that game by 1-0 that will give us a goal differential of +3.

Okay, note that only two second-placed teams go through from the qualifiers. first second-placed team to go through, Uganda, had 13 points! That leaves just one second placed spot for four teams to finish at 11 points (incl. Nigeria). Here are their goal differentials: Togo = +7, Nigeria = +3, Benin Rep = +2, and Ethiopia = -3. So of course, Togo goes in ahead of us. I hope you now get the clear idea that Chad's withdrawal made no difference on our failure to qualify for the CAN 2017. Also, note that I am being generous believing the SE would have won away which was no sure thing, mind you. Bottomline = it ain't the format, it is the team.

I think it's about time CAF reviews the qualification process to ensure that the strongest teams qualify for its major completion the ANC. The competition should be producing competitive and entertaining games.

The last quAlification series had groups of 4 teams whereby the top team automatically qualified from the group. Then the second best team with highest amount of points amongst other second placed teams qualified.

Now in the case where a team drops out of a particular group this action puts the second best team in such a group at a disadvantage .therefore maybe a better format would be for second placed teams to play off against each other.

Another issue CAF need to look at is in the group stages of the ANC when all the teams finish with the same points same goal different they draw straws . This is very unsatisfactory and CAF may want to consider the introduction of penalty shoot outs. What you guys think and how to we put pressure on CAF to make improvements?

Bros, I am not sure what you mean by "strongest teams"? The reality is that it appears that you are configuring who is strongest based on reputation and not actually what they produce on the field. As someone already pointed out, Nigeria's inability to qualify is not the fault of CAF's format but the fact that they were not good enough during those qualifiers. Any other format will still have those teams that you perceive to be the "strongest" losing here and there. That is just the facts of the game, format or not format except if CAF begins to use invitations to get teams to the finals. That will be a travesty. I like the fact that a team like Guinea Bissau was at this year's tournament because they deserved it over the likes of Zambia!

I agree with most of what you have said but had Chad not withdrawn from the competition would Nigeria have qualified?
Should the holder of the cup of nations have to go through the qualifying series? Does the European cup holder have to qualify? Does the holder of the cup de America have to qualify? I think Keshi should have been allowed to defend the title.