World Cup Expansion to 40 no, 48 teams
Printed From: You Boys in Green
Category: International
Forum Name: Rest of The World
Forum Description: All football chat from around the globe
URL: https://forum.ybig.ie/forum_posts.asp?TID=53003
Printed Date: 23 Apr 2024 at 10:37am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.00 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: World Cup Expansion to 40 no, 48 teams
Posted By: Denis Irwin
Subject: World Cup Expansion to 40 no, 48 teams
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 10:44am
|
Being proposed at today's FIFA meeting. Would be more teams from Asia,Africa and Concacaf  If they're doing that though they'd surely have to give a full spot to Oceiana ------------- Eamonn Dunphy:"I'll tell you who wrote it, Rod Liddle, he's the guy who ran away and left his wife for a young one". Bill O'Herlihy: Ah ye can't be saying that now Eamonn |
Replies:
Posted By: FrankosHereNow
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:12am
|
It would be a disaster IMO. Perfect set up with 32 teams at the moment. Changing the split from 32-16-8-4-2 is ridiculous. ------------- YBIG Quiz Champion 2016, 2017 & 2018. As You Were Three in a row |
Posted By: AnCearrbhach
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:20am
|
I don't necessarily disagree with the expansion but Europe should get 3 additional places at least if they were to do that. Asia already have too many; CONCACAF 2 EUROPE 3 CAF 1 CONMEBOL 1 AFC 1/2 or 1 OFC 1/2 or 0 ------------- Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile. |
Posted By: Claret Murph
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:24am
 ------------- Lansdowne Road debut aged 52 and 201 days . |
Posted By: Devrozex
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:24am
|
Yeah, not a massive fan of this idea to be honest.
It will be interesting however to see how the Euros goes next summer with that expansion. If the play-offs are anything to go by the obvious worry would be that the standard is being diluted a fair bit.
|
Posted By: Devrozex
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:26am
| Also, this has come 16 years too late for us to be the 33rd team! |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:40am
|
Great idea and ive been saying for ages this is needed. A 32 team event is quite small really. What I dont agree with is reports of 32 extra matches. No need for that many. Instead: 10 groups of 4. The ten group winners and the 6 best 2nd places go through to the knock out. Thats just 24 extra matches, and expands the tournament by 6 days. Only comes round every 4 years, I'd gladly take an extra 6 days. And the extra week wont inconvenience ppl too much, given its not happening every season. Europe should be entitled to at least two of the extra places. Can see Europe getting maybe just one. Even still, increases our chance of qualifying. Very positive development, this, for a proper festival of football. Theres 24 teams in the Euros; 32 in the world cup from 206 nations is paltry. Theres even 20 teams in the rugby world cup. The football world cup should be dwarfing that event. Will easily find 8 extra teams who are competitive. ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: ConorMac77
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:47am
 Nonetheless, I think it's a ridiculous idea, it's grand the way it is. I'd imagine they'd still have 8 groups with the top 2 going through to the knockout stages but imagine the fixture headache that would be in store in the group stages, they're busy enough as it is with 3 games per day nearly every day until the last round of games (2 x day). That's another thing, by the way. If they set it up with 5 teams per group, you're going to be left with 1 team with no game on the last day having played their last game a few days earlier leaving the other teams with an advantage of knowing what's needed ahead of their final games. Another Anschluss on our hands possibly? As I said, it's a ridiculous idea, just asking for needless problems. If it ain't broke... Saddest thing though, is that money is probably not so much talking but roaring from the rooftops.  ------------- The nation holds it's breath...YES, WE'RE THERE!!! |
Devrozex wrote:Posted By: Gary McKay
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 11:59am
|
Stupid idea. Like a 24 team Euros. Stupid. Should be LESS teams from outside Europe/SA not more. What do they do there, apart from beat Scotland ? How many have made the Quarter Finals (without bribing referees) over the years ? ------------- "Smalling and Jones.... have the potential to be the PL’s best ever pairing in my opinion." - SlurAlex |
Posted By: seanyshuffler
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:01pm
|
Increasing the size of both the Euros and World Cup are terrible ideas in my opinion. Dilutes the prestige of the tournament. |
Posted By: FrankosHereNow
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:12pm
------------- YBIG Quiz Champion 2016, 2017 & 2018. As You Were Three in a row |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:17pm
|
People hate change. Thats all. Id say ppl were complaining when the world cup was expanded from 24 to 32 teams ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: AnCearrbhach
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:20pm
16 Team Euros was tougher than the WC though, 24 gives a good mix some big teams missed out and some smaller teams got in. I'm expecting a great tournament even if I would have structured it differently. ------------- Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile. |
Posted By: nvidic
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:33pm
| Split on this, it is a world cup after all and we have way more than our fair share of spots on most criteria, what harm is it really if the likes of afcon winners zambia get in? Does a 14th european deserve to get in over an 8th African Team? I would have thought not |
Posted By: Claret Murph
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:44pm
That's close to half even I think it's a bit daft so many teams are there . ------------- Lansdowne Road debut aged 52 and 201 days . |
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 12:46pm
I think the world cup is grand at 32. There is a lot of games already and I don't think more games will make it any better. I think 24 Euro teams is a good thing as it was nearly as hard to get to the Euro's (16 teams) as to get to the WC (13) and it should be easier to get to your continents football competition. Maybe it was too early to adopt it as the standard will be diluted but in 8/12 years the standard will be better. All the teams that qualified for the Euro's are in the top 40 in the world. ------------- |
Posted By: gspain
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 2:04pm
|
We wouldn't be going to France only for the expanded Euros. We are definitely one of the countries that will continue to benefit from the 8 extra places. We won't qualify every time but our chances will be significantly higher whereas the likes of Germany, Spain etc will qualify almost every time anyway. A World Cup is much harder to get to. Even 1 or 2 extra places for UEFA will help. |
Posted By: Trap junior
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 2:23pm
|
I dunno. It cheapens the achievement of qualifying. Leave it at 32 and should have left it as 16 for the Euros. ------------- Pied Piper to: Baldrick, Brendan 88, 9Fingers, Borussia and more... 97.6% chance this post will be replied to by Baldrick (source: PWC) |
Posted By: SuperDave84
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 2:27pm
|
People complained when the World Cup was expanded from 16 teams to 24. They complained when it was expanded to 32. In both cases, it was to give more representation to the other confederations, not Europe and South America. Now they are proposing further expansion. Will Europe get any extra places? I'd be surprised if there was more than one extra European place. It will result in more dross from Asia, Africa and CONCACAF. Let's have a look at the worst team from every confederation last time round: Honduras: 0 points, 1 goal scored, 8 conceded. Cameroon: 0 points, 1 goal scored, 9 conceded. Australia: 0 points, 3 goals scored, 9 conceded. England: 1 point, 2 goals scored, 4 conceded. Ecuador: 4 points, 3 goals scored, 3 conceded. More teams will result in a less competitive tournament overall. The group stage already includes a degree of dross; with an expansion to 40 teams, there'll be even more dross. Last time round, of Africa's five teams, 2/5 made the second round. Of Asia's four teams, 0/4 teams made it. Of CONCACAF's four teams, 3/4 made the second round. In the tournament before, 2/3 CONCACAF teams made it through. 1/6 from Africa and 2/4 from Asia. Only CONCACAF can have any real claim of under-representation. Europe and South America always have well over 50% of teams making it out of the group stages and never make up the whipping boys in the groups. An expansion of 8 teams will likely result in something like a guaranteed place for Oceania (an extra half a place), seven places for Asia (an extra two and a half places), seven places for Africa (an extra two places), five places for CONCACAF (an extra place and a half), six places for South America (an extra half a place) and fourteen places for Europe (one extra place). That'll be about the height of it. Europe was screwed on the expansion from 24 to 32 and will be screwed again if they expand it again. If they are going to expand, however, I think it should be 32 extra matches: 8 groups of 5 teams. It makes qualification for the second round open to the top two only and doesn't have all this "best six runners up" stuff. It's much easier to figure out for players, fans, managers and nations, and makes hosting easier too. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Denis Irwin
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 2:46pm
|
8 groups of 5 would allow a repeat of the infamous 1982 game between Germany and Austria as there would be a team not playing on the last day ------------- Eamonn Dunphy:"I'll tell you who wrote it, Rod Liddle, he's the guy who ran away and left his wife for a young one". Bill O'Herlihy: Ah ye can't be saying that now Eamonn |
Posted By: SuperDave84
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 3:10pm
|
True..... but it's preferable to a ten group system. You'd also still have the teams who are playing on the last day kicking off at the same time. I know it's a different sport with less chance of draws, but the format doesn't seem to hurt the rugby world cup. It can be partially avoided by having either the top seed or the bottom seed as the team not playing on the last day. The top seed should already have qualified and the bottom seed should already be out, although of course neither can be guaranteed, and a mutually convenient draw could be enough to knock out any team. Also, the current system doesn't avoid mutually convenient results either, as the Sweden Denmark 2-2 in Euro 2004 demonstrated (although I don't think that was deliberate, just convenient). Incidentally, it doesn't look like there would be any extra places for Europe at all: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/dec/03/world-cup-expand-40-teams-fifa-reform" rel="nofollow - http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/dec/03/world-cup-expand-40-teams-fifa-reform "The change is being seen as an attempt to appeal to the majority of the 209 Fifa members who feel Uefa currently has too many spots at the 32-team tournament. The World Cup was expanded from 24 teams to 32 in 1994 and the further expansion would allow Fifa to increase the number of slots available to those outside Europe." The reason Europe has the most places is because it's the most competitive confederation. If there is an issue with the number of places each confederation has, then the solution does not have to be expansion: you can have a system that assesses the performance of the various confederations (be it by "average performance at a world cup", or otherwise), and use that to tinker with the allocations. Of course, we all know, on that system, Europe would only get *more* places. The expansion has absolutely nothing to do with increasing the quality of the tournament or the quality of the teams who get there: it's grubby politics. The idea is awful. -------------
|
Posted By: Drumcondra 69er
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 3:51pm
|
Awful idea. There really needs to be pre qualification tournaments to deal with the increased number of members, not an expansion of the finals themselves. ------------- Blog: http://afalsefirstxi.blogspot.ie/" rel="nofollow - A False First XI Twitter: @afalsefirstxi Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/afalsefirstxi/" rel="nofollow - A False First XI |
Posted By: lassassinblanc
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 5:20pm
| Africa has the most countries attempting to qualify ifirc and lowest ratio per teams qualifying Europe and South America have the most. |
Posted By: SuperDave84
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 5:42pm
|
Perhaps, but why does that mean we should have more African teams? Is the World Cup about the best teams in the world, or a rigid selection of teams from around the world? Yes, the best teams from the poorer confederations should get in, but that doesn't mean each confederation should get a number of places proportionate to their number of members. You can't throw history out the window and keep good teams out just to let poorer ones in, with some misguided sense of "balance", when you'll actually harm competitive balance in the tournament. Let's look at the teams who came closest to qualifying without actually doing so, at the last World Cup: Oceania: New Zealand (lost to Mexico 9-3 in the playoff), current FIFA ranking: 151st Africa: Burkina Faso (missed out on away goals), current FIFA ranking: 89th Asia: Jordan (lost to Uruguay 5-0 in the playoff), current FIFA ranking: 87th South America: Venezuela (sixth in the nine team group), current FIFA ranking: 83rd CONCACAF: Panama (fifth in the Hexagonal), current FIFA ranking:64th Europe: Ukraine (lost by the least of the defeated playoff teams), current FIFA ranking: 29th Again, it's clear Europe are the ones screwed over by the current system. South America didn't fare too badly, but when you look at how the six South American teams actually got on the last world cup (5 out of 6 made the last sixteen, 3 made the quarters, the "worst" team actually finished third in their group), you can't say they were poor or that the continent was over-represented. This proposal is a disgrace. If FIFA are not careful, they will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. -------------
|
Posted By: RogerMilla
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 6:16pm
|
Anything that increases our chances is to be welcomed. Who cares if the groups are sh*te, the classic games all come in the knock outs anyway ------------- The first time the Devil made me do it. The second time I did it on my own. |
Posted By: irishmufc
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 6:22pm
|
Obviously Id be delighted if it increases our chances of getting there but last year was the best world cup I've ever watched in regards to the group games. I thought the football was brilliant and feck all bad ones imo. It's probably better not to change it. ------------- Wings? They're only the band The Beatles could have been. |
Posted By: SuperDave84
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 6:45pm
But it straight up doesn't: there'll likely be the same number of places of Europe and more for the other confederations. -------------
|
Posted By: RogerMilla
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 6:52pm
Indeed. so if europes places increase then i am for it. Otherwise , down with that sort of thing . With 8 extra places then Europe should get 3 IMO ------------- The first time the Devil made me do it. The second time I did it on my own. |
Posted By: FrankosHereNow
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 7:16pm
|
If they want to increase the World Cup to 40, why not abolish the confederation qualifiers completely? ------------- YBIG Quiz Champion 2016, 2017 & 2018. As You Were Three in a row |
Posted By: Gary McKay
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 8:26pm
Exactly, its a joke. ------------- "Smalling and Jones.... have the potential to be the PL’s best ever pairing in my opinion." - SlurAlex |
Posted By: savo01
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 9:30pm
|
Great idea and people need to open their eyes. Europe are only going to lose places if it is not expanded and countries like us would be the losers. Africa and Asia are only getting stronger in football and for all their countries their 5 places each is not going to satisfy them. Compare the number of African and Asian players in the CL to the number of Irish, Scottish or Welsh. We need this as if Asia and Africa get an extra 1 place each only Europe will lose places. ------------- Jackie Charlton, Eoin Hand Johnny Giles. Ireland Mick McCarthy, Stephen Staunton Cascarino Tony Galvin, Niall Quinn Packie doesn't let em in North of Ireland South of Ireland Only one can go |
Posted By: Gary McKay
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 10:09pm
Have you ever watched the African Cup of Nations. Fcuking woeful stuff !!! ------------- "Smalling and Jones.... have the potential to be the PL’s best ever pairing in my opinion." - SlurAlex |
Posted By: Landon Donovan
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 10:20pm
|
Africa have the power because they vote as one in the FIFA President elections. If you win Africa, you win the Presidency. Considering we in Europe are financial powerhouse/lifeblood of the game, we have been severly let down by the powers that be. We should have at least 20 teams are a 32 team WC. We should be able to bully the rest into submission. |
Posted By: KING-CON
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 10:27pm
The clubs wouldn't have it and it would be a disaster for travelling fans. Imagine a double away trip to Fiji and Brazil. Friday, Tuesday job.
|
Posted By: irishmufc
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2015 at 10:28pm
Spot on. Indiscriminate airstrikes would be my suggestion along with a constant napalm barrage combined with delusions of grandeur leaflets being airdropped onto FIFA's HQ. ------------- Wings? They're only the band The Beatles could have been. |
Posted By: savo01
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 12:45am
|
With so many non European players filling the European leagues it is getting harder to justify such a big number of European teams getting places. Europe is shooting itself in the foot. ------------- Jackie Charlton, Eoin Hand Johnny Giles. Ireland Mick McCarthy, Stephen Staunton Cascarino Tony Galvin, Niall Quinn Packie doesn't let em in North of Ireland South of Ireland Only one can go |
Posted By: FrankosHereNow
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 8:57am
------------- YBIG Quiz Champion 2016, 2017 & 2018. As You Were Three in a row |
Posted By: savo01
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 9:32am
|
48 countries in Asia, 54 in Africa with another couple in dispute. There is no way they will stand for only 4 places going forward. If Europe went down to 10 for example the chances of us ever making the tournament would be almost nil unless we had a super generation coming through. ------------- Jackie Charlton, Eoin Hand Johnny Giles. Ireland Mick McCarthy, Stephen Staunton Cascarino Tony Galvin, Niall Quinn Packie doesn't let em in North of Ireland South of Ireland Only one can go |
Posted By: t_rAndy
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 9:35am
| Would only be good if it improved the quality of the teams. Not just to give the weaker associations all the places |
Posted By: FrankosHereNow
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 9:39am
------------- YBIG Quiz Champion 2016, 2017 & 2018. As You Were Three in a row |
Posted By: Gary McKay
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 10:04am
I'll say it again ..... Have you ever watched the African Cup of Nations ? Its so bad its funny. ------------- "Smalling and Jones.... have the potential to be the PL’s best ever pairing in my opinion." - SlurAlex |
Posted By: AnCearrbhach
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 10:21am
|
Aside from UEFA only Concacaf deserve more places. AFC is over represented, CAF about right and there no way OFC should get a full place. Nab a half place off AFC and give it to Concacaf problem solved. ------------- Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile. |
Posted By: Stoked Up
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 10:28am
|
After Italy 1990, when Cameroon made the QF's it was said that it was only a matter of time before an African side would win the world cup. We're still waiting. Likewise, Asia. Save for a dubious South Korean S/F in 2002, a couple more QF appearances for African sides (Ghana 2010, Senegal 2002) they've respectively achieved fcuk all at World Cups to merit substantially more places. Europe should get an additional 2 places out of the 8 new ones. South America +1 Oceania. None, still a play off. NZ are the highest ranked at 151. Concacaf +1 Asia +2 Africa +2 |
Posted By: Devrozex
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 10:47am
And even on the above only Europe and South America would be worthy of those additional places. There's a lot of muck in Concacaf so not sure about giving them an extra place at all. Asia and Africa plainly don't deserve any more slots.
Just shows really that there is no real need to change the existing format, bar political reasons.
|
Posted By: Shedite
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 12:48pm
6 groups of 4 teams, 6 group winners and playoffs for the runners up would get ya to the 9 teams they currently have.
|
Posted By: Gary McKay
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 1:01pm
Apart from USA and Mexico none of them would have a hope in hell's chance of qualifying if lumped in with SA. ------------- "Smalling and Jones.... have the potential to be the PL’s best ever pairing in my opinion." - SlurAlex |
Posted By: Stoked Up
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 8:36pm
Costa Rica are ranked 37th and they got to the QF's in 2014 in Brazil and were only a penalty kick away from the semi's! The thing about the lesser federations, is that they have plenty of scope to improve. But I agree that the federations overall strength is relatively weak compared to South America.
|
Posted By: Bob Hoskins
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2015 at 9:00pm
|
If it goes to 40 teams. It also decreases the number of countries that can host it dye to costs infrastructure and stadiums. ------------- Romario 2016: And the ticket mafia gets caught! Well, four years ago I had already told the government. |
Posted By: HelloBarry
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2015 at 6:40am
| Hoping they would also expand in Concacaf, Asia and Africa, a limited slot prevent those teams to showcase what they have. It feels like playing for Hunger Games. LOL |
Posted By: newrynyuk
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 10:27am
|
I'm surprised this thread hasn't been updated. Mods, can you please change the name of this thread to "World Cup expansion to 48 teams":- http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/03/world-cup-expand-48-teams-fifa-gianni-infantino-suggests" rel="nofollow - http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/03/world-cup-expand-48-teams-fifa-gianni-infantino-suggests Just when you thought World Cup expansion plans couldn't get any dumber. So there's now plans for a World Cup where 16 teams will fly home after just one match?!?
|
Posted By: lassassinblanc
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 10:56am
|
I don't think it's too bad an idea tbh, I wonder how the teams will be seeded will it be by straight up on the rankings or will it be x amount from one region x from another eg. 6 from Europe, 3 from SA, 3 from Africa, 1 from NA, 2 from Asia and the Host? if it was straight from rankings there could be a danger of hosts missing out on seeding fro example Russia who will host 2018 were 18th in the rankings at time of 2014 draw they're currently 38th  |
Posted By: Claret Murph
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 11:24am
|
Lets make it 202 teams then we can all go to it ------------- Lansdowne Road debut aged 52 and 201 days . |
Posted By: pre Madonna
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 11:26am
|
I reckon by 2026 I won't be watching football at all and I doubt I will be the only former fan. ------------- Greed has won, big finance has won. Whatever small role elite clubs still play in the local communities from which they grew is dwarfed now by their position as global brands. |
Posted By: Gary McKay
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 12:16pm
A post Madonna. ------------- "Smalling and Jones.... have the potential to be the PL’s best ever pairing in my opinion." - SlurAlex |
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 12:18pm
plus one..... being ruined by the corporate folk. ------------- |
Posted By: pre Madonna
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 12:26pm
It is already ruined, outside of live football and teams I support I no longer watch football. I don't know how people watch the likes of the EPL or champions league outside of teams they already have an attachment to and even then............. ------------- Greed has won, big finance has won. Whatever small role elite clubs still play in the local communities from which they grew is dwarfed now by their position as global brands. |
Posted By: ConorMac77
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 1:46pm
Hmm, give it another 20 years or so and it probably will end up like that at this rate! ------------- The nation holds it's breath...YES, WE'RE THERE!!! |
Posted By: Steve Amsterdam
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 3:06pm
Same here. Getting less and less interested in it. ------------- Molly Malone's pub- The home of YBIG in Amsterdam! |
Posted By: Sham157
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 3:19pm
|
Posted By: SuperDave84
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 3:39pm
|
Absolute nonsense proposal. There is no feasible way to extend the World Cup beyond 32 teams without it either being unwieldy or lasting more than a month. Neither is a good idea. -------------
|
Posted By: ConorMac77
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 3:48pm
It is if you're getting brown envelopes stuffed with cash, among with various other (very expensive) privileges...  After all, staging the world cup in Qatar was seen by everyone outside FIFA as the stuff of fantasy... ------------- The nation holds it's breath...YES, WE'RE THERE!!! |
Posted By: HelloBarry
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 4:52pm
See what you did there  ------------- Quit while you are ahead. All the best gamblers do. http://blog.sbobet.com/tips |
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 5:10pm
Keep the World Cup at 32 and every 4 years. The other continents need to sort out some sort of competitive tournament between them. I think they need to expand the Copa America and / or African nations. The Euro's are very popular and competitive and should be kept as is. I like the 24 team format but no more expansion is needed. ------------- |
Posted By: Hans Moleman
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 5:39pm
|
For me the 24 team format with 16 going through to knockouts is an awful format. As would be a 48 team format with 32 going through to knockouts. Ridiculous amount of matches being played to knock out so few teams. Now I know that they are proposing 48 teams becoming 32 after 16 knockout matches but that is also totally shambolic for different reasons - mostly players and fans not being able to plan for actually being at a tournament for more than a couple of days. So 32 teams would go there not knowing whether they will play more than 1 game - absolute nonsense! For me the only numbers being used at all these tournaments should be 16/32/64. Where you have groups of 4 and 2 teams in each group qualify for the knockout stages. It's by far the fairest and most logical format all round. It also totally devalues drawn results and promotes much more positive football, as it will take at least 1 or 2 ins from 3 games to qualify from groups. As it is and was in Euro 2016 draws were priceless and kept you right in the mix for knockout qualification. If there were to expand the World Cup I would much prefer to see 64 teams in 16 groups of 4, with 32 teams in the knockouts then than anything they are currently proposing. As it is though the 32 team World Cup is a perfect format. As was the 16 team Euros format, even if the bigger numbers gives teams like Ireland a way better chance of getting there.
|
Posted By: newrynyuk
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 5:57pm
|
The World Cup is being expanded in order to appease African and Asian votes that put Infantino into office, it's ridiculous alright. I've mentioned this on another thread before, but the solution would be to keep the World Cup at 32 teams, but with more spots available to the Africans an Asian throught play-offs with Europe. It makes sense, Africa currently has 5 teams in the World Cup at the moment, Asia has 4, and Europe normally has 9 qualifying groups. So why not have just the group winners from Europe qualify and the 9 runners up face the the second placed teams from Africa and Asia? Surely China or Egypt would not be overawed at the prospect of facing, say, Austria or Norway in a play-off? Conversely, Denmark or Czech Republic would fancy theitr chances against, for instance, South Africa or Uzbekistan. And as I said previously, you wouldn't say no to the idea of going to see Ireland in a World Cup play-off at Soccer City or the Bird's Nest stadium. |
Posted By: Steve Amsterdam
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2016 at 7:28pm
That would definitely make it more appealing yes. Fully agree. ------------- Molly Malone's pub- The home of YBIG in Amsterdam! |
Posted By: Saint Tom
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2016 at 8:31am
------------- My destination inchicore my next stop being kilmainham Where patriots and super saints are the topics of conversation |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2016 at 8:05pm
|
So some of ye would prefer to go to mexico or africa for a play-off game than go to the world cup for a game (or two, if it was two legs there). Youre knocking the idea and yet replacing it with something very similar. ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: Bitored
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2016 at 9:20pm
|
Inside the next 15 to 20 years international football will be dead. What player is going to sign up to this nonsense? I vaguely scanned through the proposal and it seems that there`d be 16 teams going home after one game. Why would a professional player go into a month long training camp to get knocked out after one game? ------------- I won the Player of the Century award thanks to the people.Pele was second.He also came second behind Aryton Senna as Brazil's greatest sportsman.The award FIFA gave Pele isn't worth sh*t - Maradona |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 6:36pm
|
Fifa president Gianni Infantino backed the expansion of the World Cup to include 48 teams, featuring 16 groups of three. Infantino, who replaced disgraced predecessor Sepp Blatter earlier this year, had proposed the expanded competition but had originally suggested that although the event would feature 48 countries, only the traditional 32 would advance to the finals. However, he appears to have changed his stance and will submit his latest proposal at a Fifa council meeting at their headquarters in Zurich on January 9th and 10th with view of making the changes for the 2026 World Cup. His new proposition would divide the 48 teams into 16 groups, with one side from each group being eliminated to whittle the competition back down to 32, with the tournament turning into a straight knock-out format from then on. Initially brought up in October, Infantino rejected suggestions that expanding the event would not necessarily make it a weaker tournament. “Whether it will be 40 or 48, it was a positive discussion. I don't agree it will dilute the quality,” Infantino said at the time.“I would like to remind you that in the last World Cup, England and Italy were eliminated by Costa Rica. The level of football is increasing all over the world. “In a 48-team format, the quality would be higher because the 32 teams would have a play off. The quality would improve and not decrease in any way.” If the expansion did occur, it would follow the lead of the European Championships which saw traditionally smaller nations benefit with the likes of Wales, Northern Ireland and Iceland all reaching the knockout stages. The last expansion of the World Cup was for the 1998 showpiece in France, when it increased to 32 teams from the 24 that was introduced in 1982. ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 6:40pm
|
I'd be in favour of a 48-team world cup. The idea of only two group games and then knockout matches for the rest of the tournament is a plus, when it comes to this proposal. As is the involvement of more teams. People don't like change and there are flaws in this proposal (not least avoiding issues with the two teams in the last group game settling on a result) but a 32 team tournament, despite working well, is too small when you consider how many countries there are in the world. ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 6:48pm
FIFA president suggests 16 groups in 48-team World CupBy ROB HARRIS38 minutes agoLONDON (AP) — FIFA President Gianni Infantino has suggested having 16 three-team groups if the World Cup expands to 48 countries. Members of the FIFA Council received a recommendation from world soccer's governing body setting out five proposed formats for its showpiece event from 2026 — two 48-team team options, two 40-team options and sticking at 32. ___ 48 TEAMS Infantino first advocated a new, opening playoff round for 32 of the 48 finalists. The 16 winners would then join 16 seeded teams to begin a 32-team group stage that follows the current World Cup format. But with 16 teams going home after only one game, that idea met with opposition at a meeting of 20 FIFA member nations in Paris last month. Ahead of a meeting of Asian soccer nations in Singapore this week, Infantino drew up a new configuration for a 48-team World Cup that FIFA hopes is easier to understand. All qualifying nations would start out in 16 groups of three teams. The top two teams advance to a new round of 32, with the bottom-place team going home after two matches. The finalists would still play a total of seven games, limiting potential opposition from clubs who send their players on international duty. But only having three games in each group raises the possibility of teams being hard to separate on points, goals scored or goal difference. FIFA is exploring how to determine which teams advance in that scenario, with administrators mulling if penalty shootouts could be used for bonus points. ___ 40 TEAMS Infantino championed a mathematically-clunky 40-team World Cup before being elected in February. Although Sepp Blatter's successor no longer backs this plan, two options will still be on the table when the FIFA Council meets in January. There could be eight groups of five teams or 10 groups of four. ___ 32 TEAMS For the World Cup in Russia in 2018 and Qatar in 2022, there will be no change to the 32-team format that has existed since 1998. However, with Infantino's term ending in 2019, giving more countries a chance to play on world soccer's biggest stage would be a popular move among many federations. "Everyone sees that the increase of the participation for the World Cup is really a tool to promote football in more countries," Infantino said last month. ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: Shoco
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 7:47pm
|
Will be a farce -------------  YOUR 3 IN A ROW LEAGUE CHAMPIONS |
Posted By: Trap junior
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 7:58pm
|
If I met Gianni Infantino I'd shake his hand and say ''Well done on everything. I admire that you a pioneer for bald headed men and you are from the land that makes the best chocolate in the world'' but if he came at me and said he wants a 48 team World Cup I should say ''Oi Infantino!! Nooooooo!!!!!!!! You can take your bungs, and you can eat all the chocolate you want with your over inflated wages and sense of self importance but if you think you are going to change the world cup you can fook off you stupid bald headed twat!!!!''  ------------- Pied Piper to: Baldrick, Brendan 88, 9Fingers, Borussia and more... 97.6% chance this post will be replied to by Baldrick (source: PWC) |
Posted By: Claret Murph
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 8:52pm
|
It's all about the money nothing else matters to these people ------------- Lansdowne Road debut aged 52 and 201 days . |
Posted By: Denis Irwin
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 9:00pm
------------- Eamonn Dunphy:"I'll tell you who wrote it, Rod Liddle, he's the guy who ran away and left his wife for a young one". Bill O'Herlihy: Ah ye can't be saying that now Eamonn |
Posted By: corkery
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 10:01pm
|
It's all about buying votes from the countries that would have a corrupt political system. ------------- 'The younger generation as in 17 -25 are certainly gayer than their predecessors. I think they may cause the extinction of the human race with their activities.'- Baldrick |
Posted By: pre Madonna
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2016 at 10:19pm
So just about ever country? ------------- Greed has won, big finance has won. Whatever small role elite clubs still play in the local communities from which they grew is dwarfed now by their position as global brands. |
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 9:52am
|
Would be a terrible idea...... 100% related to money and nothing to do with football. It would be like adding more teams to the champions league but just look at the points acquired by the teams bottom of the group 2/8 got zero points 7/8 scored 3 points or less ------------- |
Posted By: lassassinblanc
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 9:57am
|
His ideal format of groups of 3 also opens the door for teams setting up each other for favours come last group game. Remember 82 West Germany v Austria. |
Posted By: AnCearrbhach
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 10:10am
What they did to the Champions League is worse than expanding it in my opinion. ------------- Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile. |
Posted By: Roberto Baggio
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 10:37am
| May as well just do away with qualifying campaigns the way this is going, and let every national team into these competitions. |
Posted By: pre Madonna
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 11:36am
|
Meanwhile.......... http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/dec/08/legal-action-filed-against--fifa-over-treatment-of-qatar-migrant-workers-world-cup-2022" rel="nofollow - http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/dec/08/legal-action-filed-against--fifa-over-treatment-of-qatar-migrant-workers-world-cup-2022 ------------- Greed has won, big finance has won. Whatever small role elite clubs still play in the local communities from which they grew is dwarfed now by their position as global brands. |
Posted By: Cabra Hoop
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 12:24pm
|
"Gianni, why can't Ireland be country no. 49" ------------- " BFC always gives me a laugh........ " |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 12:57pm
|
"What I can say already now just to be very clear is that all these formats can be played in the same number of days as currently, 32 days, with the same number of stadiums then currently, 12 stadiums, and that the team qualifying or the two teams qualifying for the final of the tournament will play seven games," he told reporters."This means that there is no additional burden for the players because if you play the final, you play seven games in 32 days exactly as it is the case now so there is no downside for the player. "There is no downside for the clubs because the calendar is not impacted but there is a big upside for football, because it allows eight or 16 more teams, more countries and more regions in the world, to participate in the top competition of the world which is the World Cup." ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: Shoco
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 1:09pm
|
still a farce ------------- YOUR 3 IN A ROW LEAGUE CHAMPIONS |
Posted By: zizu Kilbane
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 1:37pm
|
It would be a disaster. The maths just don't work. There will be way too many dead rubber games regardless of if they decide on groups of 3/4/6. ------------- "Sometimes, sh*t happens, someone's gotta deal with it, and who ya gonna call?" |
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2016 at 2:00pm
|
Really hope this doesn't happen. I was all for the Euro's going to 24 as I believe the quality was there - you just have to look at some of the teams that didnt make it. I think one of the solution could be expanding the Copa America / Gold cup etc. ------------- |
Posted By: Bitored
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 2:32am
To be fair I don't know what this would solve. CONMEBOL only has 10 countries meaning they have to do a whip around to get to 12 or 16 teams as it is. The number one reason they want to expand is to consolidate votes on continents with a lot of countries. As FIFA president if you can get Africa (54 members) and Asia (46 members) on board you`re basically president for life and it doesn't matter a fcuk what European members think. ------------- I won the Player of the Century award thanks to the people.Pele was second.He also came second behind Aryton Senna as Brazil's greatest sportsman.The award FIFA gave Pele isn't worth sh*t - Maradona |
Posted By: the_walls
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 8:19am
I still think they have to be careful not to overly piss off UEFA. All the money is in Europe and UEFA could very easily tell FIFA where to go and leave FIFA. They could even organise a tournament with CONMEBOL. Imagine a World Cup without European teams and most importantly (from a FIFA perspective) European TV markets.
|
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 10:52am
Its pretty obvious they are doing it for votes and non footballing reasons. But I was thinking if they wanted to change things up to give the non Europeans teams more meaningful competitions they could create a new tournament. The Euro's are huge and get a global audience so can survive on their own. Maybe a rest of the world competition (non Europe) and get the best 32 teams. Get rid of the Confederations cup. Neither the African cup of nations, Copa america or gold cup get a global audience. But I think a rest of the world competition could gain some interest. They could keep their copa america, African cup of nations etc but have then every 4 years instead of 2. ------------- |
Posted By: SuperDave84
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 12:25pm
|
South Americans would never go for that. UEFA and CONMEBOL need to grow some balls and threaten to leave FIFA en masse unless some balance is restored to the World Cup. There's no point being responsible for over 80% of the income and settling for less than 50% of the places (UEFA I mean). 32 teams. 6 from South America, 15 for Europe, 1 for the hosts, and the rest can scrap it out among themselves (3 places each for Asia, Africa and North America, with one more from a four way playoff with New Zealand / Oceania). It's not a school sports day, there shouldn't be the equivalent of a f**king participation medal. Why do we need to expand the World Cup? So the likes of Togo, Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica can get in? Away to f**k with that. If they mess with the World Cup any more they'll turn off viewers and it'll cost them more than it makes them (I mean expanding it won't increase FIFA's income, not that the World Cup will make them a loss. That'll not happen).
-------------
|
Posted By: FrankosHereNow
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 12:50pm
|
32 teams is perfect and keeps it to an elite competition. there'll always be some Asian dross but generally there are strong teams. If it's being expanded, the qualifiers should no longer be regionalised. ------------- YBIG Quiz Champion 2016, 2017 & 2018. As You Were Three in a row |
Posted By: lassassinblanc
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 1:38pm
|
I think there are some African teams out there who could well compete with European teams. Their qualifying is very tough only 13 African countries have ever qualified. Egypt who have won the most African Cup of Nations have only ever qualified twice |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 1:57pm
And u still havent said why ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: rolo
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 2:09pm
Ah, elitism. First one to admit to it, but its behind nearly every dissenting post here. If Germany had their way, thered be only 8 teams in it. The level below the top 8 is not as strong. Teams like Germany openly look down at teams below that level. And teams in and around the top 32 look down on the level below them. 32 suits people now, despite complaints everytime then tournament has been expanded. Imagine the olympics decided to do away with heats. Just 8 athletes in the final. Cutting down on numbers, the standard in the heats is too low. There'd be uproar at the blatant elitism. Imagine a 32 team world Cup being cut to 8, there'd be serious opposition. And some day in the future, there'll be uproar if ppl suggest cutting the 48 team world cup to 32. People dont like change. Thats been the case everytime the world cup has expanded. In time, people realise, actually, this is quite good! ------------- "I'm off to see the Queen tomorrow too, don't forget that" |
Posted By: AnCearrbhach
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 2:20pm
My only problem with the expansion is the groups of 3, I welcome the expansion outside of that. ------------- Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile. |
Posted By: Zinedine Kilbane 110
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 2:27pm
I don't think its that simple. I wanted the Euro to go to 24 but I don't want the WC to go above 32. More games doesn't necessarily mean a better competition. I actually think the champions league needs to be reduced. The group games this year showed that. After 6 games, 7 out of the bottom 8 teams picked up 3 points or less. Do we really need them in the competition? A few on here were complaining about the Rugby world cup format - the group stages really only decide who comes 1st and 2nd - the other games are meaningless as the difference between the top and bottom was so big. You have to look at what value extra teams will add? I dont think extra teams will make the world cup better - ------------- |
Posted By: lassassinblanc
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 2:35pm
|
I agree with more teams for Africa. When you think of countries from Africa who have produced great players over last few years but they haven't qualified due to finishing 2nd in group or lost a playoff. For example for 2018 World cup only 1 of Nigeria,Cameroon,Algeria will qualify as they are in the same group |
Posted By: pre Madonna
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2016 at 2:47pm
Who is going to want to host it? Look at the state of Brazil and South Africa! Add in another ten or eighteen teams and it makes it even more of a mess for them to clean up. ------------- Greed has won, big finance has won. Whatever small role elite clubs still play in the local communities from which they grew is dwarfed now by their position as global brands. |