Olympic football: How I would change it
When I come to power, this is how the Olympic football tournament will look...
The Olympic Games are the pinnacle of almost every sport featured in them, but we can all agree that that is not the case for football.
You will never hearing a successful footballer listing Olympics participation as one of their top achievements - even for Micah Richards, it probably only just cracks his top five.
There is a reason why I gave my previous article this title…
…because the vast majority simply do not care. Despite my best efforts to try and generate interest, I know that an odd under-23 (apart from when it’s not under-23) tournament during preseason, engulfed by sports for whom Olympic glory is everything, is never going to cut through.
If you read that preview article, you will know I believe there is a lot to like about the Olympic football competition. However, if it were to be completely overhauled, these are the changes I would make to at least boost its profile, if not to put it among the top tier of football tournaments.
Full disclaimer: I know with “fixture congestion” and “overworked players” these changes are never going to be made, as we have to make sure the same overworked players have time to travel from England to the Far East for all-important post- and pre-season friendly fixtures.
Make it open age
A simple one to start us off - get rid of the under-23 plus three overage players rule.
Not only is it confusing, but it immediately suggests to the casual viewer that this is not a prestigious event. As every football fan knows, playing the kids = Mickey Mouse tournament, while throwing in a few token Ryan Giggs makes it all look a bit silly.
If you aren’t going to take your own tournament seriously, then why would you expect anyone else to?
The astute among you will be pointing out that it’s under-21 tournaments that act as qualification for the Olympics. Have no fears, that will be done away with, too.
Confederations Cup 2.0
As far as second-tier international tournaments went, the FIFA Confederations Cup was one of the very best.
Last played in 2017 and scrapped to make room for the expanded FIFA Club World Cup, it provided a great dress rehearsal for the following year’s World Cup in an otherwise quiet football summer.
Essentially, the tournament should be replicated, but in the Olympics. Eight teams - the six continental champions, the World champions and the host nation.
With no quarter-final round, the tournament could be played within the “Olympics proper”, rather than having to start two days before the opening ceremony.
The European champions probably would not select their strongest line-up a matter of days after winning their crown, though I could certainly see the Copa América organisers scheduling future tournaments outside Olympic years to keep their champions fresh.
There is no chance of it overtaking the World Cup as the pinnacle, but the chance to call yourself an Olympic champion would mean much more than Confederations Cup winner ever did.
Just do what the other team sports do
The eight-team idea would cut the current number of participating teams in half, which might not suit the organisers.
Olympic football tournaments have 16 teams, while the other team sports have 12. If eight is too few, then 16 is the next best option.
But where football should get in line with basketball, handball, volleyball et al is how the teams qualify. World and continental champions get their spot, while the other places are determined by a mixture of world rankings, qualification tournaments for those who narrowly missed out, or winning minor medals in the world and continental tournaments.
Adding in more qualifiers would not be palatable for anyone involved in football, and rankings are never a satisfactory determiner.
Therefore, for a 16-team tournament I propose that the host nation and the three medallists from the previous World Cup will qualify, leaving 12 places for the winners and runners-up of each continental championship, except for Africa and North America, where the two respective Cup of Nations and Gold Cup winners that would have been crowned since the last Olympics take the two spots.
Suddenly, the World Cup third-place play-off becomes pivotal for deciding who takes the Olympic place.
If any team qualifies through the World Cup or hosting and through their continental tournament, then the continental place is allocated to the next best team from that competition.
If that applied to Paris 2024, that would mean the 16 teams participating right now would be;
France, Argentina, Croatia, Morocco, Spain, Great Britain, Colombia, Uruguay, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Mexico, United States, Qatar, Jordan, New Zealand, Vanuatu
Vanuatu for the win!
The big eyebrow-raiser there is, of course, Great Britain. In my view, either the team could be made up entirely of English players who earned the place from reaching the Euros final, or if they refused to take part, then in come Euro 2024 semi-finalists the Netherlands.
If you were going to reduce the competition to 12 teams, then Africa, Asia, North America and Oceania get just one team each.
I reiterate, it would never happen, but just imagine the potential!
Anthony Tomas is a football writer and commentator, who writes for Flashscore and World Soccer Magazine.
You’re 100% right on the U23 rule. It just signals to the audience right off the bat that this isn’t a big deal.