Following England’s 10-0 demolition of San Marino over the international break, there have been questions asked over the value of these kinds of fixtures, and whether the micro-nations should have to pre-qualify in order to join the Qualification groups with the nations that stand a realistic chance of reaching the main event. I’m sure Harry Kane very much enjoyed his four goals, taking him past Jimmy Greaves in the England scoring charts, but really shouldn’t those goals be a thing of the footballing past?

The short answer, the TL:DR, is no.

Find us on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram

The arguments for pre-qualifying are essentially designed to stop scorelines like Monday night happening. San Marino are, by some distance, the least able side in Europe. They have scored just one goal in eight matches against England, stretching back to 1993; what was then the fastest goal in international history in 1993 by Davide Gaultieri, after a mistake by Stuart Pearce. It was a game that England won 7-1. They have lost both of their qualifiers against fellow minnows Andorra in this campaign, mustering just three shots across the two games. It would be churlish to point out that their best player, Filippo Berardi, has a long term injury, and claim that it would have materially changed anything.

But the same used to be true of Iceland, and of Luxembourg. Ten years ago, a pre-qualifying would have included both of those nations, making their success more recently significantly harder. On top of having to play more games, they would have had years of fixtures against teams who, without wanting to insult, very few people care about. Which would have a knock-on effect on interest in football in those countries. It takes a very dedicated kid to want to be Robby Langers, the Luxembourger who came fifth in the Ballon d’Or in 1989, or Mario Frick, Liechtenstein’s record goalscorer, or Andy Selva, the San Marino legend. But that same kid who watches his nation play against Cristiano Ronaldo, or Thomas Muller, or Paul Pogba, might just be inspired. A few years, a lot of talent and a lot of luck later, why couldn’t he lead his team into a major tournament?

Luxembourg were for many years a byword for minnow nations, but they are showing progress. They beat Ireland back in March, a major victory for them. In the qualifying group France topped on their way to becoming World Champions, Luxembourg picked up a draw against them. They have just this year reached the top 100 in the FIFA rankings. Playing against the giants isn’t a waste of time. It inspires improvement. Sometimes it can inspire great things.

The calls for a change to qualifying come from the big teams, who will never have to go through an insulting pre-qualifying campaign themselves. It’s not far removed from the attitudes that came up with the European Super League – remember that? – that we all rallied against. Those at the top should be protected at the top, and those at the bottom can fight it out amongst themselves for the privilege of breathing the same rarefied air as England or Germany or France. It’s elitist, and it goes against everything football claimed to value in the ESL debate. It’s the ultra-conservative value of a few at the bottom hauling themselves over the others to survive, while the rest die, and those at the top watch on with passing amusement before counting their own riches, footballing or otherwise. As Jacque Talbot said back in March – this debate does rear it’s head every time England play San Marino – it’s a Victorian attitude.

As for the argument that it is embarrassing for the minnow to get hammered like they did on Monday night, that’s puerile. That would be like saying lower division clubs don’t want to play Premier League opposition in the FA Cup because of the heavy defeat they will likely face. We all know that, for fans and players of those clubs, going away to an elite side is one of the biggest days of the season, regardless of the result. Anyone who has read Charlie Connelly’s excellent Stamping Grounds (which should, really, be required reading for anyone who wants to enter this debate) will know just how much the players that play for minnow nations look forward to their big days against big teams. To be on the same pitch as some of the best players in the world is validation, and it gives pride that you can wear your nations shirt against them, even if you fail to pick up a single point of score a single goal.

So why should we take that away from them? Because England need to play fewer games? Because England beat them so easily? Because England fans are bored of them? The defining factor of all these arguments are that it’s what England wants (or Spain, or Italy). UEFA and FIFA would make a lot more money from having more Germanys v Italys, which is why the Nations League now exists, but their stated mission, regardless of what we now think of corruption in those organisations, is to grow the game. Germany v Moldova doesn’t diminish the game in Germany, but it does grow it in Moldova. And that’s what matters.

So, when we sneer at San Marino, just remember how we used to sneer at Luxembourg, and how they upset Ireland. When we complain about having to play Andorra, remember how we used to complain about playing Iceland, and how they embarrassed England to reach the Quarter Final of a major tournament.

International qualifiers are a process where elite sides play tiny nations. The magic of football is that tiny sides get that opportunity.

We aim to keep this site ad-free. Please help us by donating below.