The Guru: Israel Would Win More Trophies in Asia — But Europe Is the Smarter Pain

Israel’s long-running debate — swap UEFA for the AFC and enjoy easier qualification, or remain in Europe and endure a tougher road for greater gain — is less theoretical than it seems. Historically consigned to Europe for political reasons, Israel’s national team would likely notch more wins and regional silverware inside Asia, where depth and quality drop after a few top nations. That immediate success, however, would be a cosmetic cure, not structural progress.

Moving to the AFC would deliver more predictable qualification for World Cups and regional tournaments and reduce travel and diplomatic frictions in parts of the Middle East and Asia. But the costs are concrete: lower TV money, smaller club revenues, weaker club coefficients and the loss of UEFA infrastructure and solidarity payments that fuel Israeli club football. For Maccabi Tel Aviv, Hapoel Be'er Sheva and Israeli academies, the loss of regular heavyweight opposition would blunt long-term player development.

The real question is strategic: do you prefer frequent medals in a thinner pond or fewer lessons against the best that raise standards? Staying in UEFA keeps Israeli football exposed to elite tactics, transfers and scouting networks, which still produce sell-on fees and top-level experience for players like Eran Zahavi and others who move abroad. Politically and commercially, Europe remains the premium marketplace — tougher on results, richer in opportunity.

The Guru’s verdict: stay in Europe, but stop treating that choice as an excuse for stagnation. Invest in youth, expand bilateral Asian friendlies and youth tournaments, and demand smarter UEFA partnerships — not cosmetic nationalism. If Israel follows that hybrid strategy it will accept short-term pain for long-term gain and will edge toward regular major-tournament appearances within a decade.