How Australia can qualify for the 2026 World Cup examined
The Tony Popovic revolution has taken Australia to the cusp of sixth consecutive World Cup appearance.
Whether the path remains smooth or gets rocky will be determined by two decisive fixtures in June.
The Socceroos host the already-qualified Japan in Perth on June 5 before taking on their closest rival Saudi Arabia in what looms as a potential eliminator six days later in Jeddah.
Popovic has helped rescue a campaign which appeared destined to end in disappointment, remaining undefeated in six matches since succeeding Graham Arnold.
Popovic said after his side's 3-1 victory over China: 'Now the challenge is a great one. You've got Japan and Saudi and can we improve once more in June against the best team in Asia?
'We're in a good position. It's in our hands. But we have to get the job done.'
The World Cup's expansion to 48 teams has given Australia a better chance than ever of qualifying – and there will be no dreaded playoff against a South American foe.
Here are the scenarios the Socceroos need to qualify for the World Cup:
VS JAPAN, JUNE 5 – PERTH
What a win means (Australia moves to 16 points): Japan is yet to lose in qualifying, recording six wins and two draws (one was against Australia). If Australia can end Japan's unbeaten run, its spot in next year's World Cup is assured unless Saudi Arabia overturns what would be a minimum 10-goal difference in its final two matches (which it must win to finish equal with Australia in this scenario).
What a draw means (Australia 14 points): Australia's qualification will be secure if Bahrain defeats Saudi Arabia. If Saudi Arabia wins, it will close to within one point of the Socceroos. Indonesia would be two points behind with one group match remaining if it defeated China. It opens up the scenario that Australia could finish fourth in Group C.
What a loss means (Australia 13 points): Being equal on points with Saudi Arabia if it defeats Bahrain. A draw against Saudi Arabia would then still be enough to finish second unless Indonesia wins its final two games against China and Japan. Indonesia would finish one point ahead of Australia with 15 points under that scenario, which would send the Socceroos into the fourth round of qualifying.
LIKELY SCENARIO
Australia loses to Japan (13 points)
Saudi Arabia defeats Bahrain (13 points)
Indonesia defeats China (12 points)
VS SAUDI ARABIA, JUNE 11 – JEDDAH
What a win means: The Socceroos finish second behind Japan in Group C and qualify for the World Cup. Saudi Arabia's maximum points tally would then be 13 points.
What a draw means: The Socceroos will finish second on goal difference unless Saudi Arabia defeats Bahrain by 10+ goals in its penultimate match or Australia loses heavily to Japan. The current goal difference is +11 in Australia's favour. Indonesia could leapfrog the Socceroos into second with wins over China and Japan in its last two matches.
What a loss means: So much rests on Saudi Arabia's match against Bahrain prior to facing the Socceroos. If Saudi Arabia wins to draw level on 13 points and then defeats the Socceroos, the fourth round beckons for Australia. If Bahrain can take a point – or three – then Australia will almost certainly only need a draw to qualify from its final game.
LIKELY SCENARIO
Australia draws with Saudi Arabia (14 points, ahead on goal difference)
Saudi Arabia finishes third due to goal difference
Japan defeats Indonesia (fourth on 12 points)
WHAT IF AUSTRALIA DOESN'T FINISH TOP TWO?
It's not over yet. The extra 16 teams who will qualify for the World Cup has opened up another two avenues to reach the biggest tournament in world football.
The teams which finish third and fourth in the three third-stage groups will be broken into two groups of three and play a round-robin style tournament.
The winner of each fourth-round group makes the World Cup.
WHAT IF AUSTRALIA DOESN'T WIN THE FOURTH ROUND GROUP?
Then, it's still not over as long as the Socceroos avoid finishing third in their group of three. The two second-placed teams from the fourth round will meet in a two-legged playoff – al all-
too familiar scenario for Australian football fans.
WHO COULD AUSTRALIA FACE IN THE FOURTH OR FIFTH ROUND?
Uzbekistan (world No. 57) only needs one win from its remaining games to join Iran at the World Cup. United Arab Emirates (65) are likely to finish third, while Qatar will reach the next round unless it loses its last two games and Kyrgyzstan wins both its fixtures.
The three Asian qualifying groups are very open. South Korea (world No. 23) have set the pace in Group B but are only three points clear of Jordan (62) with two matches to play. Iraq (59) and Oman (77) are also in the mix.
If Australia falls into the fourth round, it will be joined by either Saudi Arabia (world No. 58) or Indonesia (123).
WHO'S ALREADY QUALIFIED FROM ASIA?
Only Japan and Iran.
Uzbekistan, United Arab Emirates, South Korea, Jordan and Australia are guaranteed to reach the fourth round of qualifying.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
37 minutes ago
- SBS Australia
Europe, Indonesia or Japan? Can Australia find other allies to rely on if the US disappears?
Donald Trump's comments, in particular, that Canada should become America's 51st state and threatening to abandon European allies over defence spending have raised concerns about the US' reliability. Source: SBS, AAP For decades, the United States has been a reliable ally to Australia, whose protection has helped to ensure peace in the region. But US President Donald Trump's unpredictable and tough treatment of his nation's allies has raised questions about whether Australia can still afford to lean so heavily on America as a security partner. On Tuesday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told reporters the government will make decisions in Australia's national interest and fund the defence capability it needs . The comments came after US defence secretary Pete Hegseth requested Australia increase its defence budget to 3.5 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) in a conversation with Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore last weekend. Australia's defence budget makes up roughly 2 per cent of GDP, which the government plans to increase to 2.35 per cent by 2034. While most experts do not believe the US will withdraw from the Indo-Pacific, Trump's actions raise questions about whether Australia should be seeking to cooperate more with other nations. In May, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, raised the prospect of a formal defence agreement between the trading bloc and Australia. In response, Albanese said he would consider the proposal but noted a similar agreement was already in place with other European countries such as Germany. Without the US alliance, Peter Dean, director of foreign policy and defence at the United States Studies Centre at The University of Sydney, says Australia would need to massively increase its defence spending or accept it can't defend its own sovereignty. "If you look at the mismatch between the scale of our territory and the scale of our ability to defend it — it's one of the most glaring mismatches in the world," he says. "[You would] effectively be just hoping for the best." Dean says Australia needs to work hard to maintain its security and that a "community of nations" is necessary to support open and free trade, promote a rules-based international order, and counter the use of coercion, aggression, and military force to achieve political objectives. "If you don't have that community of nations, the example of what's happening in Ukraine is very poignant to everybody," he says. [Russia believes] in a 'might is right' world and they believe in a world where they get to shape those rules and that order, and that is not going to be favourable or in Australia's interests ... or for the majority of states in our region. Dean says Trump is more brutally transactional than previous presidents and an example of the adage in international relations that "you have no friends, you only have common interests". Although it's not always clear what Trump's interests are, Dean believes there's still a common alignment between Australia and the US, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, and in the overall aims and objectives of their security policies. "That simply boils down to — we don't want an Indo-Pacific that's dominated by one particular power — especially China," Dean says. "That is an Australian view clearly articulated in our strategy, and that is a US view, clearly articulated by the US — even under this president." One of the potential problems with a China-dominated region, Dean says, is its desire to "rule by law" and the way in which China would go about setting and enforcing laws. "China particularly wants a hierarchical order where it sits on top and everyone else sits underneath," he says. In contrast, Australia and other like-minded countries support a "rule of law" system in which a community of nations jointly sets the rules through treaties, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. But Sam Roggeveen, the director of the international security program at the Lowy Institute, says the US has done very little to address China's dramatic military modernisation since the end of the Cold War. No matter who's in charge in the US, I don't think that will rescue Australia from having to think much more independently about its security. "The harsh truth for Australia and for other allies in the region is that the Americans aren't going to do the heavy lifting for us, and want us to do it ourselves." Dean says the alliance with the US is critical for national security, and forming an agreement with other countries would be very difficult. A strategic alliance involves countries committing to help each other out during a crisis, or to act in accord to address a common threat. This would preferably be set out in a treaty. Australia has an alliance with the US and New Zealand, but despite being part of the British Commonwealth, it does not have a formal agreement with the United Kingdom. Given the geographical distance, Dean believes military support from the UK would likely depend on what other conflicts are happening in its part of the world. When it comes to international alliances, arguably the most important is NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), which commits Europe and North America to protecting each other from any threat. Rory Medcalf, head of the National Security College at The Australian National University, says there are three crucial elements to establish in alliances. Firstly, there must be clear interests in common. Secondly, the parties must articulate some shared values or political will to provide a foundation for trust. "If their security is threatened, then you have interests engaged," he says. And there must also be mutual capability. "There's not much point being an ally of someone if you bring nothing to the table and they bring everything," he says. Dean says no other state can replace the size, power and influence of the US, which is the world's number one military power. Dean says the US — by partnering with South Korea, Australia, Japan and other states — can aggregate enough power to balance China's influence and there is no "ready-made state" that could easily replace it. Without the US, Medcalf says China would likely seek to dominate countries one by one and break any alliance-like relationships. Even if Australia did more for its own defence, there would still be a good argument for maintaining a close relationship with the US because its military technology is among, if not the best in the world. But Roggeveen says Australia has to accept the US alliance is going to become less important over time. "With that in mind, we have to look geographically much closer to home," he says. While forming a new alliance may prove difficult, Medcalf says it would be possible for Australia to build coalitions with other nations to discourage things like coercive behaviour if there was some degree of confidence the US would still back them up. "It's really about using strategic partnership to make ourselves stronger, rather than building a kind of alliance where we expect to be standing shoulder to shoulder in war," he says. Australia is already part of several small groupings of nations with common interests in the Indo-Pacific, such as The Quad (a diplomatic partnership among the US, India, Japan and Australia) and AJUS (a trilateral partnership among Australia, Japan and the US). Defence cooperation has deepened via AJUS, while the security partnership AUKUS, which exists between Australia, the UK and the US, has laid the groundwork for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines and other advanced capabilities. Australia has also entered into limited bilateral agreements with Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea, Singapore and others. Medcalf, who is undertaking nationwide consultations to understand Australian attitudes to security, says most of these countries have no prospect of being treaty allies of Australia. But partnerships with countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and Vietnam may be possible. All of these countries, apart from Vietnam, are already American allies. "They have different levels of capability that they would bring to the table," he says. "But the ultimate question is how much risk are we all going to take for each other?" Due to the number of member states that would need to agree to it, Medcalf suspects an agreement with the EU would likely be quite vague in its language and commitment. It may focus on increased technology sharing, access to defence industry resources and possibly some intelligence sharing. There could also be some aspirational statements about the rules-based order, or the intent to discourage and oppose aggressive action. "But it would fall far short of anything resembling a treaty commitment," Medcalf says. Dean agrees it's more likely Australia and the EU would support each other diplomatically to uphold rules and standards both in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. Medcalf points out Australia and many northern European countries share common values, including freedom of expression, the rule of law and secularism in politics. "[Australia's political values] are much closer to countries like Denmark, Sweden and Finland than to any of our neighbours except New Zealand," he says. Australia has previously manufactured a Norwegian-designed naval strike missile and German-designed armoured fighting vehicles. The EU could offer access to other sophisticated capabilities such as warships, drones and sensors. "The risk is obviously an expectation that Australia becomes more involved in Europe security problems ... obviously that's about confronting Russia," he says. While Medcalf believes Australia should be helping countries like Ukraine to defend themselves, there are limitations. What we shouldn't be doing is ever raising the expectation that we could be a frontline military actor on the other side of the world. Medcalf says Europe is in a different region to Australia, and it would be difficult to deploy troops or aircraft to each other's front lines. But Europe is highly trade-dependent and large countries like Germany and France, in particular, have an interest in maintaining the security of shipping in the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, he says, adding that a significant number of shipping companies are also European. Roggeveen says countries in Europe and other parts of Asia are so far away they are never going to share the same vital interests as Australia. But Indonesia's interests are largely the same as Australia's, given they are neighbours. He says Indonesia is also predicted to be a great power by the middle of the century and likely the fourth or fifth biggest economy in the world. "We've never had a great power on our doorstep before, and we want Indonesia to be on our side when that happens," he says. "We have no more important relationship than Indonesia just to our north," he told ABC's 7.30 show. Other experts are sceptical about the potential for a quasi-alliance with Indonesia. While Medcalf agrees Australia should do more with Indonesia — including to help strengthen its navy and air force, and its ability to monitor what's happening in its waters — he notes its policy is to be "friends to all, enemies to none". "Which sounds great but in practice means that Indonesia is working very hard to be as neutral as it can be in future crisis situations." He says Indonesia has not been willing to speak out about China's behaviour in the South China Sea and doesn't have the capability to help Australia build its own defence technology base. Australia also has to accept that China already has a strong influence in Indonesia, he says. "If you're looking for a country that can partly fill the gap that the US may leave — I'd be looking to Japan before Indonesia. But if Indonesia ends up getting closer to our point of view, that would be wonderful," he says. Medcalf says some experts already characterise Japan's relationship with Australia as a quasi-alliance, and it is the most likely country to form an actual alliance with Australia, although the chances of this happening in the short term remain unlikely. He says both Japan and Australia share a strong belief in a rules-based system, and have different strengths they could bring to the table. They need the resources that we have. We need their technology, we need their investment. Medcalf doesn't think Japan's peace constitution — put in place at the end of World War Two to maintain its military for defensive purposes only — would be an impediment because politicians have been reinterpreting it over the last 20 years or so. "Japan is already moving away from 1 per cent, to 2 per cent of GDP, as its military budget," he says, adding that Japanese forces are increasingly training in Australia. However, Dean believes legal and cultural barriers still make it unlikely Japan will form an alliance with Australia. "But I think if the region was to have some type of strategic shock, or it was to really start to deteriorate, that would drive that alignment even closer together," he says. Medcalf says Vietnam is very good at maintaining a balanced relationship with China because it knows how to stand up to China, while also keeping the peace. "They've been doing both for about 1,000 years," he says. "[Vietnam] can defend itself, but it can also do diplomacy well." However, Medcalf says the Southeast Asian country would be very reluctant to enter into a treaty-like commitment with Australia, although there is potential for more cooperation in areas such as military training. Singapore has long been a valuable diplomatic partner for Australia and already cooperates on military training and exchanging information, Medcalf says. "But Singapore is ultimately a very self-interested and neutral country and I think we would work with them as much as we could without the expectation that either would actually take a risk on the other's behalf." He says he would put Malaysia in a similar camp. South Korea is a militarily significant country because it has a lot of capability, Medcalf says. "They now export defence equipment to Europe," he says. "South Korea is one of the few countries in the world that is genuinely able to do rapid military manufacturing at scale." But the problem is it's overwhelmingly focused on defending itself against North Korea. "Yes, they're slightly concerned about ensuring that China doesn't dominate the region. Yes, they're a US ally but they would probably be reluctant to project much further beyond the peninsula," he says. Medcalf says South Korea also has quite deep-seated political problems domestically, and its politics can be unpredictable. Medcalf says Australia's relationship with India has advanced significantly over the past decade — with each country's navy training together frequently and sharing information. Both countries' air forces jointly monitor the Indian Ocean. "[India] will probably be — within the next few decades — one of the three biggest powers in the world militarily, alongside the US and China." However, Medcalf says India is diplomatically very neutral and greatly values its autonomy. They're not going to be forming permanent alliance-like relationships with anyone. While India does not want to witness China dominate the Indian Ocean and would likely align with other countries in the region to balance against China, Medcalf says if it came to war, there would be only very limited circumstances under which it would get involved. "I guess they would certainly contribute to patrolling the Indian Ocean and potentially limiting China's ability to operate there, but I don't think India is going to be taking a lot of risk on behalf of others," he says. India may also expect other countries to come to its aid if there were a conflict with China on its border. "And that would be something that I think would be difficult for other countries to think about." The Philippines is one of the countries that claim parts of the South China Sea, which has led to clashes with China over issues such as fishing rights, islands and territories, Medcalf says. "The Philippines has traditionally been quite a weak military power but they're beginning to modernise their forces and their location is strategically very important — they're right at the heart of the sea lanes of Asia." While the Philippines is an American treaty ally, under former president Rodrigo Duterte, it became closer to China. Medcalf says it would make sense for Australia to have the Philippines as a partner, but caution is needed when considering the limits of its power and whether another change in government could alter dynamics. It's yet another example of how it's a nice idea to try and stitch all of these relationships together into something larger but without the Americans involved somewhere along the line, it still becomes quite flimsy. Like Australia, Canada is a middle-sized power but in some ways, it is militarily weaker. It's also a long way away. But Medcalf points out Canada is technically part of the broader Pacific region as its western coastline borders the Pacific Ocean. It's also surprisingly active in the region — supporting the UN efforts in East Asia to prevent illegal trade with North Korea and the smuggling of parts or precursors for weapons of mass destruction. "There's something to work with there but all of this stuff is only going to work if it's more than simply putting all your reliance on one country — they would be a small part of a much bigger puzzle."
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Queensland Derby delay to benefit Statuario but not so much Femminile
A week can be a long time in horse racing – just ask Femminile 's trainer Phillip Stokes. He wanted his talented filly to run on a heavy track in the Group 1 Queensland Derby (2400m) at Eagle Farm last weekend but unfortunately for him, persistent rain and poor visibility for jockeys meant the feature race was rescheduled to this Saturday. In stark contrast, fellow Pakenham trainers Emma-Lee and David Browne are delighted that Derby favourite Statuario will race on a good surface on Saturday in the $1m contest. And the husband-and-wife team has another ace up its sleeve in 'Derby King' John Allen, who is again booked to ride the grey gelding at Eagle Farm. The Irish jockey flew to Brisbane for just the one ride in the Derby last week but he didn't even get to jump on Statuario as the rain kept falling and the jockeys voted to call it a day after five races. He will be back in the River City on Saturday, hoping that his grey wizard can turn the tables on Femminile, who narrowly beat a late-charging Statuario in last month's South Australian Derby (2500m). Allen has won 20 Group 1s in Australia and, remarkably, nine of those have been in Derbies, including the 2019 Queensland edition for the Stokes-trained Mr Quickie. 'Yes, that definitely gives me a lot more confidence,' Emma-Lee Browne said of Allen's superb record in Derbies. 'He's a very patient rider and that comes from having a background as a jumps jockey with experience over the further distances. 'But the horses seem to settle really well for him which I think is crucial in these kind of races.' • It's in the blood: Front Page up for the fight in Moreton Cup Stokes, who organised the travel to the Gold Coast for both Statuario and rival Femminile, said the rescheduling of the Derby was 'not ideal'. 'We went up there hoping for a wet track but the races were called off,' he said. 'We would've loved to have run on a Heavy 10 because I know she likes it. 'Look, I still think she can run well (on Saturday) but is she on the up? No. 'Hopefully she can dig deep and pull one more out.' Statuario is the $6 favourite for the Queensland Derby ahead of three others in single-figures in the market – Belle Detelle ($7), King Of Thunder ($8) and Femminile ($9.50). Allen said it was 'frustrating' not getting to ride last Saturday but 'not too disappointing' given that Statuario had a far superior record (8: 3-2-0) on dry tracks. 'It's a very even race with no real standout,' Allen said of the Queensland Derby. 'I'm fairly confident Statuario is in as good form as anything in the race and he's trending the right way. 'I feel like he's the horse with the most upside at this stage.' Allen will be hoping to recapture his 2019 form in Queensland when he won Group 2 races The Roses (Etana) and The Q22 (Kenedna), which were the cherries on top of Group 1 victories in the Derby (Mr Quickie) and Doomben Cup (Kenedna). As for the nickname 'Derby King', Allen would love to win on Saturday to cement that reputation as the middle-distance magician. 'I haven't won a Derby in three years (2022 Australian Derby on Hitotsu) so it'll be good to top up the tally on Saturday,' he said.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Grilling season demand for Aussie beef outweighs Trump tariffs
It has been more than two months since Donald Trump's "liberation day" tariffs were announced, which included a 10 per cent tariff on imported Australian beef. But US demand for lean beef has far outweighed the tariff and exports have been surging. "In terms of volume, I don't think Trump's tariffs have had an impact at all," Rabobank analyst Angus Gidley-Baird said. "Year to date, beef exports are up over 30 per cent and if we continue at this pace, we'll go very close to pushing our quota limit for the first time (which is about 450,000 tonnes)." According to Meat and Livestock Australia, 167,722 tonnes of beef have been shipped to the US so far this year, which is up 32 per cent. Beef exports to China are also rising, with 117,341 tonnes exported, up 30 per cent on last year. General manager of meat processing company, The Midfield Group, Dean McKenna, said Donald Trump's tariffs were "one of the best things" that had happened to his business. "I wish he went 50 per cent [tariff]," he told Queensland Country Life. The United States cattle herd is at its lowest point since the 1950s because of drought. The supply of lean beef for America's famous hamburgers is tight. Going into its summer "grilling season" the United States has been relying on beef imports, which has coincided with Australia producing record amounts. "The US needs a lot [of lean beef] and Australia has a lot to sell, especially the way the prices are at the moment," Mr Gidley-Baird said. US cattle and beef prices are at record highs and are expected to rise further in 2026, making imported Australian beef very competitive — despite the 10 per cent tariff. According to Rabobank the average finished cattle price in the US is over $US4.50 a kilogram live-weight ($A6.92/kg), compared to about $US2.25 a kilogram for Australian cattle ($A3.46/kg). Beef made headlines on Friday, when it was suggested Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was willing to "loosen or compromise biosecurity rules" for US beef imports. A claim the PM quickly denied. As previously explained by ABC Landline, Australia does not have a ban on United States beef, as long as it comes from cattle born, raised and slaughtered in the US. The Australian government has been assessing a request from the US to expand its access, to include beef from cattle that it has imported from Mexico and Canada and then slaughtered in the US. Yet at the moment, the US has a ban on importing Mexican cattle because of an exotic pest called new world screwworm. Cattle Australia chief executive, Chris Parker, said the US would need to prove it can be like Australian beef exporters, which adhere to strict traceability standards. "Our position is that the US needs to be able to demonstrate it can either trace cattle born in Mexico and Canada, or has systems that are equivalent to Australia's traceability, before imports of meat could occur from non-US cattle," he said. Australia has not imported any beef from the US since 2005 for a few reasons including price. Australia also has plenty of its own beef. In 2024, Australia produced more beef than ever before, turning off 2.57 million tonnes of beef, of which a record 1.34 million tonnes was exported around the world. So imagine if Australia exported iron ore for $100 a tonne and was then criticised for not importing American iron ore for $200 a tonne. As meat analyst Simon Quilty recently told Landline, importing US beef is not viable. "I don't see us being swamped by American beef, in fact I'd say for the next five years, even if the US had open access, we'd see next to nothing coming out of America." Watch ABC TV's Landline at 12:30pm on Sunday or on ABC iview.
