Nate Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 (edited) http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-10/fifa-to-expand-world-cup-to-48-teams-for-2026/8174044 Believed to be a 16 groups of 3 teams format. Personally I'm not against increasing the number of teams, (especially in Europe and Africa) but the quality is probably going to suffer and the 16 groups of 3 concept sounds like a horrible mess, how is only playing 2 games in the group stage fair or engaging? At the very least, I guess it should be easier for us to qualify for future World Cups now. Thoughts? Edited January 10, 2017 by Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesla Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 I agree that the WC should be expanded, but I also think there should be a higher minimum number of games for each team, not less. So a 40 team world cup with 8 groups of 5 teams would have been my preference. My understanding is that the clubs didn't want to see that because it would mean players from semi final teams would play too many games (1 more than currently). I understand the selected format is basically the best compromise given all the competing factors, but I think it's also clear this is just a way to make more money. The teams that now qualify aren't going to get any better by playing 2 games. Though it's worth noting, you still get 32 teams playing a minimum of 3 games, you just now add another 16 teams who play a minimum of 2 games. I suppose it's an improvement in some ways, but I don't think it's anyone's first preference (that's how compromise works though I suppose). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Doesnt this dilute the competition somewhat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCY HERO Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Fifa are corrupt and cant run a simple 2 week tournment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Posted January 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 53 minutes ago, Tesla said: I agree that the WC should be expanded, but I also think there should be a higher minimum number of games for each team, not less. So a 40 team world cup with 8 groups of 5 teams would have been my preference. My understanding is that the clubs didn't want to see that because it would mean players from semi final teams would play too many games (1 more than currently). I understand the selected format is basically the best compromise given all the competing factors, but I think it's also clear this is just a way to make more money. The teams that now qualify aren't going to get any better by playing 2 games. Though it's worth noting, you still get 32 teams playing a minimum of 3 games, you just now add another 16 teams who play a minimum of 2 games. I suppose it's an improvement in some ways, but I don't think it's anyone's first preference (that's how compromise works though I suppose). I wasn't aware that two teams would advance from each group, so that makes it a little better. tbh New Zealand are probably the biggest winners out of everyone, they should never not qualify for a World Cup ever again now that the OFC will have a guaranteed place. 39 minutes ago, n i k o said: Doesnt this dilute the competition somewhat? yeah probably, but I suppose at the same time it has the potential to bridge the gap between the good and the bad nations since qualifying for the World Cup should no longer be considered unfeasible for perennial underachievers such as Qatar, China or India. Also I'd argue there are a few really good sides from Africa who miss out every tournament due to their retarded qualifying system, plus extra Euro quality will be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jovan Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 If the extra 16 teams came from Europe and South America then it will be an improvement but obviously it won't be. Can see many more double figure scorelines which is not an improvement. Will be better for Australia, qualification will be a breeze. Don't like it and it's only been changed for commercial reasons not for soccer reasons which is fundamentally wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hakz7 Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Not sure what'd be better. 16 groups of 3 teams as announced or 12 groups of 4 teams with 8 3rd placed teams going through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bt50 Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) 9 minutes ago, hakz7 said: Not sure what'd be better. 16 groups of 3 teams as announced or 12 groups of 4 teams with 8 3rd placed teams going through. Tbh i'm not as against it as some. I think it will actually make for a better world cup, but what it will also do is make qualifying less of an event, so internationals outside of the Asian and World Cup will be a bit of a non-event. Time will tell what it does as an overall for the game, i'm on the fence at this stage. Edited January 11, 2017 by bt50 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raw10 Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Les Murray raised a few interesting points: http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/blog/2017/01/11/upsides-and-downsides-48-team-world-cup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahanga Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 13 hours ago, n i k o said: Doesnt this dilute the competition somewhat? absolutely. 2 teams in a 3 team group going through is a bit of a joke and after that, well its a straight knock out comp. Would prefer a tougher group stage that actually has a point to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Just money-making. IMO the World Cup Finals (which this is) should be scrapped. The competition should be a H&A knock-out all the way through, in confederations for the preliminary rounds (roughly like the FA Cup and FFA Cup) and then the luck of the draw from then on. That way there'd be no corruption on awarding the hosting rights etc, and I reckon the whole competition would be more glamorous if it's taken closer to the grass-roots fans. It could be held more often this way too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haz Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 1 hour ago, jw1739 said: Just money-making. IMO the World Cup Finals (which this is) should be scrapped. The competition should be a H&A knock-out all the way through, in confederations for the preliminary rounds (roughly like the FA Cup and FFA Cup) and then the luck of the draw from then on. That way there'd be no corruption on awarding the hosting rights etc, and I reckon the whole competition would be more glamorous if it's taken closer to the grass-roots fans. It could be held more often this way too. Agree, pretty much follow the continental champions leagues layout Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony999 Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Don't like this idea at all. But could this mean that the AFL "All Australian" team has a chance of qualifying rather than just getting a team photo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 The more I'm hearing and finding out about this the more I'm disliking the move to 48 teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.