For everyone claiming that being in Asia would provide age group teams with more and more meaningful games, see above. 3 group games and top team in each group progresses to a quarter final. Our current U20's have lost 5-0 to Australia, 5-3 to Iraq and 3-0 to Uzbekistan meaning it would be unlikely we would progress from the group stage. So every two years we would have 3 group games at NZF's expense if we were in Asia or we could stay in OFC qualify for the WC and have 3 group games at FIFA's expense...
No brainer for me, stay in OFC use the money from senior World Cup qualification to provide the age group teams with some meaningful friendlies.
I think you're missing the qualification process for that tournament. To qualify for the u20 WC, Australia played 4 games to qualify for the AFC u19 champs, 3 group games at the u19 champs and a QF and SF. 9 games in total. Compared to NZs 4 games in total.
Yes but those pre qualifying games are against the weakest asian nations akin to the games against the islands but more expensive!! And the 9 games only happen if you make the semis and finals!
So 4 weak but expensive pre qualifying games then three group games at the Asian champs.... That is of course presuming NZ actually qualified....
.I think some are forgetting that flying around the pacific itself is not cheap, far cheaper to fly to Dubai to play Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia then to jet off to some parts of the OFC.
There will be more revenue gathered from NZ vs most Asian teams then anyone in OFC except maybe Fiji.
Asian businesses would be keen for the exposure here while NZ businesses would in Asia. Think about VW/Thai International jumping on in '09.
One question I do have: I was under the understanding that the final qualifaction matches for the WC were underwritten by FIFA to reduce the National teams from finacial exposure.