Jump to content

48 Team World Cup


djchapsticks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply
12 hours ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

Maybe team B should have won one of their 2 games.

This can be solved with the points system used in the League Cup. A draw goes to penalties and the winner gets a bonus point.

--

The more likely issue is 3 teams finishing with exactly the same record. Although a shootout between the two teams competing in the final match would be a suitable on the pitch tie-breaker.

I know what you're saying, but suppose Scotland lose their opening game 1-0 against seeded opposition (such as Argentina)  then draw with a side such as Australia. I'd be pretty miffed knowing that only a win of 2-0 or greater to the seeded side will send us through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jordan, Qatar, Oman, Ethiopia, Panama, Jamaica, New Zealand, Greece, Venezuela, and winner of Lebanon v Guatemala?

Heady days.

If they ape the Scottish League Cup and introduce the bonus point shoot-out - is this just being floated by the Scottish/UK press or an actual idea btw? - is there not a risk that it'd just encourage defensive football. Top 2 out of 3 progressing and only playing 2 games, good chance you would get out of the section with 1 draw and a penalty win. At the Euros we saw a degree of negativity which got attributed to 3rd (i.e. 2nd bottom) progressing and that was only from 4 of 6 groups not guaranteed, plus the teams knew it'd probably require multiple draws or a single win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at FIFA rankings (I know, hardly the best indicator of a country standing in World Football) currently the breakdown of the top 48 is as follows

Africa (6)

Senegal 33 - Ivory Coast 34 - Tunisia 35 - Egpyt 36 - Algeria 38 - DR Congo 48

North America (3)

Costa Rica 17 - Mexico 18 - USA 28

South America (8)

Argentina 1 - Brazil 2 - Chile 4 - Colombia 6 - Uruguay 9 - Peru 19 - Ecuador 20 - Paraguay 40

Oceania (0) - NZ currently ranked 109

Asia (4)

Iran 29 - S Korea 37 - Japan 45 - Australia 47

Europe (27)

Germany 3 - Belgium 5 - France 7 - Portugal 8 - Spain 10 - Switzerland 11 - Wales 12 - England 13 - Croatia 14 - Poland 15 - Italy 16 - Iceland 21 - Holland 22 - Rep Ire - 23 - Turkey 24 - Slovakia 25 - Hungary 26 - Bosnia 27 - Ukraine 30 - Austria 31 - N Ireland 32 - Romania 39 - Sweden 41 - Greece 42 - Czech Republic 43 - Serbia 44 - Denmark 46

 

 

So based on the proposed breakdown of the confederations discussed above you'd lose the teams in bold and replace them with

Burkina Faso 50 - Nigeria 51 - Ghana 53

Panama 58 - Haiti 73 - Honduras 75 - Curacao 75 (playoff)

New Zealand 109

Saudi Arabia 54 - Uzbekistan 62 - UAE 64 - China 82 - Qatar 87 (playoff)

Host Nation

 

I know this is a crude method of looking at it but its essentially replacing half decent teams with complete mince.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure I read somewhere there was the possibility of the north and south America regions bring combined?

Its a farce that 6 out of 10 will make it from south America and most of the countries in the north America region are cannon fodder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Elementary Penguin said:

Absolutely no chance. Mexico have reputedly shown the odd interest in doing an Australia, to increase competition and revenues (it has two clubs in the Libertadores this year), but the rather convenient voting position of Concacaf in being the third most powerful confed won't be given up too easily. 

Mexico has no clubs in this years Copa Libertadores because Mexico have decided to withdraw their club teams from playing in it from now on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought that the two American confederations should merge.

The elite North Americans get the benefit of much stronger competition, which would lead to improved standards. The middle/lesser North American teams get a greater possibility of a match or two against glamorous opposition to make a few quid via the crowd/TV money and they all get the benefit of being given a chance to compete in Copa America/Libertadores.

South American nations get the benefit of loads of TV/sponsor cash coming into their game courtesy of US (and to an extent, Mexican/Canadian) interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

They've changed Copa Libertadores to a season-long competition.

Leaves insufficient space for Mexican domestic season + CONCACAF CL.

This. Copa Libertadores runs from Jan-Nov now and the Copa Sudamerica season long too from Feb-Dec. In the past teams could play in both competitions in the same year but now can't. I think this idea is for the best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think qualifying would change that much. Why do CONCACAF have 5 rounds of qualifying including 2 groupstages? Asia 4 rounds with 2 groupstages? It's about making cash.

International football is getting more and more bloated and sadly I can only see it coming to a serious crisis with the biggest clubs and leagues someday. You've now got 96 countries qualifying for the 6 continental finals - that's just short of half! - plus the Africans and CONCACAF are still holding theirs every 2 years (with another tournament in CONCACAF to find who qualifies for the Confederations Cup!). Euros gone up to 24 and WC gone up to 48. UEFA is replacing friendlies with the Nations League and forming a Finals Tournament in the empty June every 4yrs. There's the Olympic football too. It's getting excessive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the logical conclusion to an expanded Finals is World Qualifying Groups rather than arguing over qualifying spots?

 

Top 173 nations in the rankings go straight into the group stage.

 

Remaining 38 nations enter a two–legged play-off (or into mini groups) to find 19 nations to join the 173.

 

192 nations go into 48 groups of four, (OK, I know it would only be 47 plus host, but just for illustration, the numbers can be adjusted as can group sizes), winners qualify or you could have the top two in each group going into a straight two-legged knock out after the group stage.

 

As far as possible, groups not to contain two nations from same Confederation. So we could have a group of;

 

Mexico

Scotland

Botswana

Malaysia

 

6 qualifying games (or 8 if you have 5 team groups), less demand on the International calendar, more meaningful qualifying process, less mediocre nations in the Finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

UEFA announced today it wants 16 slots - up from current 13 - and suggesting 1 European team in each group. Interesting to see if that happens or if it gets beaten down to 15. Even 16 would mean European representation dropping from 41% to 33%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

UEFA announced today it wants 16 slots - up from current 13 - and suggesting 1 European team in each group. Interesting to see if that happens or if it gets beaten down to 15. Even 16 would mean European representation dropping from 41% to 33%.

I probably won't care by then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...