Darlo Uncovered

That's the ridiculous idea of the current Fifa President.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37547545

I am sure similar was said when the World Cup was expanded to 32 teams.

Why do you believe it to be ridiculous?

Because loads of teams will qualify that don't deserve to be there. The World Cup should involve the best sides in the world, not every Tom, Dick & Harry.

Darlo_Pete wrote:Because loads of teams will qualify that don't deserve to be there. The World Cup should involve the best sides in the world, not every Tom, Dick & Harry.

Then let's reduce it to the top 8 teams. Forget qualifying. In fact let's forget about the tournament and just award it to the top ranked side every 4 years

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Although the 24 team Euro format was pretty s***. I can see a 48 team format being equally s***.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

lo36789 wrote:I am sure similar was said when the World Cup was expanded to 32 teams.

Why do you believe it to be ridiculous?

32 teams is already far too many. 48 teams would be stupidly big.

It increases the pressure on infrastructure - you need more hotels, training facilities, transport, venues. That reduces the likelihood of some nations being able to host the tournament.

48 teams would be highly wasteful. If you read the plans, 16 teams would be knocked out in a preliminary round.

So 16 teams have to go to all the expense, time and effort of preparing, then travelling maybe halfway around the world, only to be knocked out after 1 match.

The structure also protects the elite teams, who'd be seeded and therefore avoid the prelims, making that round of fixtures utterly tedious - Uzbekistan v New Zealand, no thanks.

And ultimately, it's all for one thing - money. More teams = more matches = more money. And that means more money for the corrupt cabal led by the odious Gianni Infantino.

I'd actually like to see the World Cup finals reduced back to 16 teams. You'd get competitive matches between teams who genuinely have a chance of winning.

Not all the faffing about and negative, defensive play from sides who stand no chance whatsoever.

An expanded Euro 2016 was beyond tedious. A World Cup that's double the size would be even more horrific.

Good points. I don't actually disagree it is way too easy to qualify for the WC as it is.

Just felt that some context was needed rather than just "this is different...ridiculous"

Oh dear they decide to expand the world cup to 48 teams. Unfortunately sides will qualify for the finals that haven't a snowflakes chance in hell of making it out of the group stages and some people will spend all their money to go and watch. Bad day for football.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38565246

Very poor decision. Surely the farcical 24 team Euros should have made a 'no' vote a formality.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Spyman wrote:Very poor decision. Surely the farcical 24 team Euros should have made a 'no' vote a formality.

Hummm I am not so sure. There is a big difference and that is the size of the groups. The problem at the Euros was the groups were too big and too many teams qualified.

By only having 3 teams in the group it should be pretty competitive in both the group games. Once you hit the knockouts then well it is what it says on the tin.

Basically I think the changes should mean there aren't any nothing games, which ought to make it more entertaining.

Obviously the motivators behind it seems to be entirely financial but actually in the end I don't really care. I will watch England get knocked out in the last 16 moan about how terrible we were and that will be it until the next Euros.

I think it's an awful idea. The 24 team euros was poor quality, and I think a 48 team world cup will be too. Even at 32 teams, you get some pretty poor teams qualifying, so the problem will be exacerbated by having an additional 16 teams.

The group stage format may make it better than the euros (although the 2011 Kirin cup served up a thriller in a 3 team group ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirin_Cup#2011_Kirin_Cup)

Everything changes at FIFA, yet everything stays the same. Money, money, money...

As per usual we'll not get through the group stages.

lo36789 wrote:

Spyman wrote:Very poor decision. Surely the farcical 24 team Euros should have made a 'no' vote a formality.

Hummm I am not so sure. There is a big difference and that is the size of the groups. The problem at the Euros was the groups were too big and too many teams qualified.

By only having 3 teams in the group it should be pretty competitive in both the group games. Once you hit the knockouts then well it is what it says on the tin.

Basically I think the changes should mean there aren't any nothing games, which ought to make it more entertaining.

It'll mean the opposite. With the top 2 going through, the emphasis will be on not losing, leading to more defensive games.

It'll be exacerbated if FIFA, as has been suggested decide to hold penalty shootouts after drawn group games, with the shootout winners taking a bonus point.

Weaker sides will be even more defensive, knowing they can take a 2nd point in a shootout.

And what about if the two sides playing in the final group game both need only a point? They can play for a point, making matches even duller.

32 teams was fine, if a little bloated. This is grotesque and will ruin the competition. Hopefully the farcical format will turn off viewers and sponsors, crippling the World Cup, which is the one reason FIFA is still going.

This is a financial and political decision. The majority of the 16 new places will go to Africa, Asia and the CONCACAF confederations. It just so happens these confederations hold the most votes at FIFA elections.

Darlo_Pete wrote:As per usual we'll not get through the group stages.

9 years time Pete, calm yourself down.

AndyPark wrote:

Darlo_Pete wrote:As per usual we'll not get through the group stages.

9 years time Pete, calm yourself down.

I don't see how 9 years will make any difference to our losing mentality.

Pete knows fine well we very rarely fail to get out the group stages. He also knows that
we will have a completely different team and manager in 9 years. At some point he will get bored I am sure.

Uefa want 16 places for European sides and they don't want any European teams to face each other in the group stages in the first round.