New format to decide Asia’s Women’s Olympic qualifiers

The battle for the final two spots to join hosts and reigning Asian champions Japan, at the Women’s Football Tournament at the Tokyo Olympics 2020 will be decided in a new and innovative qualifying tournament.

The Continent’s remaining women’s sides will learn their fate in the Asian Qualifiers Final Round Draw at the AFC House in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The revamped qualifying format for the 2020 edition will see the eight remaining teams divided into two groups, with the top two sides advancing to the two-legged play-offs to decide the final two Asian qualifiers.

This will give the Continent’s elite teams the opportunity to play their most significant matches in front of their home fans.

After two qualifying rounds of captivating action, the initial cast of 18 was whittled down to three with Myanmar, Vietnam and Chinese Taipei joining Australia, China PR, DPR Korea, Korea Republic and Thailand who reached the final round automatically as the highest ranked teams during the first round of qualifiers.

Following the outcome of the latest FIFA Ranking released on September 27, 2019, the Continent’s top-ranked sides Australia and DPR Korea will be placed in Pot 1, joint hosts for the final round, China PR and Korea Republic are in Pot 2, followed by Vietnam and Thailand in Pot 3 and Chinese Taipei and Myanmar confirming their places in the final pot.

The Asian Qualifiers Final Round will take place from February 3 to 9, 2020 with the two-legged play-off scheduled to take place on March 6 and 11, 2020.

Football at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics will commence with the women’s matches on July 22 – two days before the Games’ official opening ceremony – with the men’s competition to begin on July 23. The 12-team women’s tournament will conclude on August 7, with the men’s tournament to conclude the following day.

Asian teams have established a long and proud tradition at the Olympic Games, with China PR (1996) and Japan (2012) winning silver in the women’s tournament, while Japan (1968) and Korea Republic (2012) clinched the bronze medals in the men’s competition.

Previous ArticleNext Article

Netflix’s Women’s World Cup deal puts IMG’s technology in the spotlight

Netflix’s first exclusive football deal will see the next year’s FIFA Women’s World Cup at the centre of it’s live-sport strategy. The US-streaming service company has appointed IMG as its production partner for all 64 matches in Brazil, as well as more than 100 hours of live studio programming. The deal includes English and Spanish coverage for viewers within the US, and English and French-language coverage for those in Canada. IMG will also support Netflix’s coverage of the tournament’s draw in December.

The 2027 Women’s World Cup runs from June 24 to July 25 across eight host cities, and will be the first edition to feature 32 teams. The scale of the tournament makes it an ambitious first foray into sports broadcasting for Netflix – which means IMG’s involvement will be of great significance.

IMG’s production engine

IMG has built its reputation on producing and distributing live sport at scale. It’s Stockley Park, London facility includes broadcast studios, production galleries, edit suites and facilities for radio, podcasting, dubbing and visual effects. The company has worked across major properties including the Premier League, Major League Soccer and other international sporting events.

For a World Cup, this infrastructure provides more than a place to make television; it creates a central point where production teams can manage feeds, graphics, replays, commentary, editing and distribution while events are taking place thousands of kilometres away.

Remote production is the key

The most important technology for a tournament spread across eight Brazilian cities is connectivity. IMG has invested in remote-production workflows that allow production teams to work across locations, rather than putting every specialist inside each stadium. Its wider production operation has used fibre, satellite, cloud and IP-based connectivity to move live signals between venues and production centres.

That model can reduce the amount of equipment and specialist staff required at every venue while allowing senior producers, directors, replay operators and graphics teams to work from centralised facilities. IMG has also demonstrated long-distance IP production, including a 20,000-kilometre link between Tokyo and London that carried uncompressed, low-latency video. For Netflix, those capabilities are particularly relevant. The platform is building a single viewing experience for audiences in two markets, but the raw ingredients will come from stadiums spread across Brazil. A resilient network becomes just as important as the cameras themselves.

From stadium to stream

The technology chain does not end when the pictures leave the venue. A modern sports production operation has to manage ingest, replay, media asset management, graphics, audio, quality control, archiving and transmission. IMG’s facilities have been built around those workflows, with master control and transmission capabilities alongside post-production and archive operations.

That infrastructure also gives IMG the ability to turn the live tournament into a wider stream of content. A goal can become a replay, a highlight, a social clip or part of a studio package without waiting for the match to finish. For Netflix, that fits a platform built around on-demand discovery as much as live viewing.

A new test for Netflix

Netflix has already made a significant investment in football through documentaries and other programming. The 2027 Women’s World Cup takes it up a level. FIFA describes the agreement as the first competition Netflix has acquired in full, making the tournament a major test of its live sports operation. IMG therefore has a job that goes beyond producing 64 matches; it must help Netflix build the technical backbone for a month-long, multi-venue broadcast, while maintaining consistent production standards across languages and locations.

The viewer may simply press play and see a World Cup match appear instantly. Behind that button will be a complex network of cameras, connectivity, control rooms, production systems, people and data. That is the real significance of Netflix’s IMG deal: the streamer is bringing the tournament to its platform, but IMG is providing much of the machinery that can make a global football event feel seamless.

Manchester City must pay the ultimate price for financial cheating

Manchester City’s financial scandal has reached boiling point. On the 29th of September, an independent commission found City guilty of all charges relating to serious breaches of the league’s financial rules across nine seasons, from 2009/10 to 2017/18. The commission also upheld three of four charges concerning the club’s failure to cooperate with the Premier League investigation.

The Premier League says City used sham commercial arrangements and disguised owner funding to inflate revenue and reduce costs by more than $1.7 billion (£900 million). Abu Dhabi United Group funded $1.58 billion (£830.69 million) that appeared in City’s accounts as sponsorship money from Abu Dhabi companies. The commission concluded that City’s accounts concealed the true financial position from auditors and regulators.

The 115 charges cover inaccurate financial information, player and manager payments, financial rules and the investigation itself. City has lodged its appeal against the guilty verdict, but for such a serious sporting scandal, attention has already turned to the potential punishments. In a Premier League era where foreign investment is king and revenues have skyrocketed, we should be asking questions. How did Manchester City get away with this for so long, and how can the punishment act as a deterrent to keep the reputation of football’s biggest league intact?

The hack that exposed the story

The most uncomfortable part of this saga is how the authorities discovered it and how most likely City never would have been exposed. In 2018, German publication Der Spiegel published leaked internal City emails and documents obtained through Football Leaks. Rui Pinto, the Portuguese hacker behind Football Leaks, supplied material that alleged City had disguised owner investment as sponsorship revenue and manipulated arrangements to satisfy financial regulations.

The Premier League investigation began in December 2018. City were formally charged in February 2023, after a four-year investigation, and the hearing finally began in September 2024. That timeline is nothing short of extraordinary; eight years between the leaks being exposed and charges being brought to Manchester City does significant sporting damage.

Man City won eight major titles during the alleged period, including three Premier League titles. Recalling titles in any sport leaves a sour taste in any sports fan’s mouth. The fans of opposing sides given titles feel robbed of the special moment, and Manchester City fans could feel rightfully deceived. But it goes beyond even this as we look at who Manchester City signed during those seasons. Players such as Ilkay Gundogan and Kevin De Bruyne played vital roles in City’s later titles beyond the 2017/2018 season. Would they have joined if this had been uncovered earlier? It’s impossible to say, but it shows how City’s early investment from 2009/10 still contributed to their titles in the 2020’s.

The Premier League’s credibility

That delay is not just embarrassing for City; it damages the Premier League. The league is the most competitive and commercially powerful domestic competition in football. Its rules are supposed to create a framework in which clubs compete on sporting merit while remaining financially sustainable. If a club can allegedly distort its accounts by hundreds of millions of dollars and the process takes years to reach a verdict, despite City’s potential obstruction, every other club has a reason to question whether the system works.

The irony is obvious: if Football Leaks hadn’t shared what they found on Manchester City through its hack, the scheme never would have been uncovered. If financial rules were designed to stop clubs gaining an unfair competitive advantage, then the Premier League may need to change how it investigates how its clubs’ finances are being managed. If anything should be gained from this, it may be that financial regulation needs to be improved as the Premier League and its clubs spend billions.

As for Manchester City, punishment cannot simply be a fine that becomes another operating cost.

Relegation is the only serious answer

If the verdict survives the appeal, Manchester City should be removed from the Premier League and those three aforementioned league titles removed. A fine would be inadequate and, depending on what points deduction City got, would punish the club in one season while leaving the historical record largely intact. Nottingham Forest received a four point deduction for a charge of Profitability and Sustainability rules in 2023-2024. City’s 114 charges will see much greater punishment then that.

Even if City are relegated they would almost be guranteed to be promoted the next season so even that feels like a slap on the wrist. Despite their investment during the nine seasons being questioned their five titles subsequent to that period will be expected to remain in their hands. My solution is to relegate City to the Championship without the potential of promotion for three seasons, one for each title won during that time.

City fans will call that harsh but their is strong reason to come down hard and that’s because this is bigger than Manchester City. Foreign ownership has brought huge investment into English football, but investment cannot mean exemption from the rules. Owners, executives and clubs must know that the Premier League’s financial regulations carry consequences that cannot be negotiated away.

The league has a choice. It can impose a manageable punishment and move on, or it can demonstrate that competitive integrity matters more than the commercial power of its biggest clubs. If City’s appeal fails, the answer should be clear: relegation, a reckoning over the titles and a message to every owner that the Premier League’s rules are not optional.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend