Saudi Arabia and Qatar s qualification for the World Cup triggered a frenzy of criticism, with mainstream media questioning"the incredible preferential treatment"

In the 2026 CONCACAF World Cup Asian final qualifying play-offs held in October, Qatar in Group A and Saudi Arabia in Group B won the first place in the group and successfully advanced to the World Cup. The reason why criticism is pouring in this play-off is that the games are not held in neutral venues, but Group A is held in Qatar and Group B is held in Saudi Arabia. In addition, in terms of the schedule, the two host countries have 5 days of rest to prepare for the game, while the other four countries are forced to only have 2 days of rest. An interval of 2 days and an interval of 5 days will undoubtedly have a huge difference in the impact on the players' physical condition.

Saudi Arabia (above) and Qatar (below) won the right to qualify for the World Cup through the play-offs.

Under this circumstance, the mainstream American media "The Athletic" published an article titled "Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Controversy Surrounding the 2026 FIFA World Cup Qualifiers" on October 28, local time, which once again deeply discussed the "suspected preferential treatment" received by the two countries.

The media wrote: "The qualifying teams have gained home court advantage. Originally, this round of games should be played at neutral venues. Moreover, the two home teams also enjoy the benefit of three more days of rest than their opponents."

The media pointed out that although in the early stages of the qualifying process, each team was informed that this round of games would be played at neutral venues, Saudi Arabia and Qatar were awarded the right to host all three games of their respective groups under relatively opaque circumstances. According to FIFA rules, the media said: The competition venue should be determined by random drawing or allocated by the league with the consent of the relevant association. However, given the complaints from the relevant (four national) football federations, it does not appear that the venue was decided by random draw, nor that it was allocated based on an agreement. "(We) acknowledge that Saudi Arabia, the host country of the 2034 World Cup, and Qatar, the host country of the event three years ago, have far superior facilities, but coaches from rival countries have questioned why these two countries are allowed to play play-offs in their own countries."

The article also wrote that the AFC only unilaterally announced the venue for the play-offs through a brief statement. Indonesia, the United Arab Emirates, and Iraq have also submitted bids, and Oman has also expressed interest. Iraq and Indonesia had called for the bidding process to be neutral and transparent, but the AFC did not announce the selection criteria at the time of its announcement.

In addition, regarding the game schedule, the article also raised the question "Why are they a seeded team?" "The AFC and FIFA explained different reasons for this. The AFC explained at the draw ceremony that it was because the two countries were ranked higher in the world; while FIFA explained that it was because the two countries were the host countries."

According to the media report, they sent inquiries to the AFC and FIFA on the following points, but did not receive any reply: Can the AFC disclose the standards and bidding scores for the hosting rights of the qualifiers? What is the rationale for Saudi Arabia and Qatar being allowed to play games in their own countries rather than at neutral venues? How did Saudi Arabia and Qatar become seeded at the same time? How is the play-off match schedule determined?

It is understandable that the other four teams are dissatisfied with this "incredible preferential treatment".