Well, I think the idea is that they would be played at the same time as the existing inter-continental playoffs are played. Instead of having 8 UEFA teams involved in playoffs against each other, maybe 6 would have playoffs within UEFA while the other 3 second-place group finishers would be engaged in inter-regional playoffs. Would also solve the problem that the worst-2nd place group finisher in UEFA gets eliminated straight away.
I feel that Costa Rica has made the leap to a frequent contender in Concacaf, joining the big two as the usual favorites. If Concacaf only gets 3 or 3.5 spots, it's not difficult for things to go in such a way that Mexico ends up fourth place and either be eliminated or playing an intercontinental playoff. If Concacaf gets four direct spots however, it's very unlikely that Mexico could be eliminated from the WC.
My post was an answer to another post by another member , who simply took for granted that the likes of some of those eliminated Uefa teams would defeat "easy" those teams that actually lost the playoffs from other Confeds, when they actually never have been even close to even facing them. So I restricted myself to those teams that won the playoffs and how they actually did afterwards at WC, precisely against the Uefa teams that actually did qualify to the WC, over those he mentioned that couldn't. And they did pretty well (Uruguay in 2010, even reached 4th place, despite coming from an interconfed playoff). I didn't include info from the 2006 WC, but both Australia and Trinidad & Tobago, whom won their respective playoffs, also achieved 2 draws among 3 games against Uefa opposition (T & T, had a draw against Sweden and a defeat vs. England, while Australia had a draw against Croatia, eliminating them there at group phase, with that result and achieving their ticket to the next round after it) in that WC. So it gives me the point that interconfed playoff winners, afterwards don't do so bad at the WC, despite coming from AFC, Concacaf or OFC, as the OP pretended to say in his post. Actually, one of the second placed Uefa team, still must get eliminated from even participating at the playoffs, as with "your" solution you are really actually "increasing" Uefa's allotment in a half "extra" spot (from which Confed are you pretending to take that half spot from ? ). The right thing though, would be that 6 of the second placed teams have a playoff between themselves (as you originally posted), and have 2 of the other second placed teams to play an interconfed playoff.
Of the 9 inter continental playoff winners since we went to 32 teams more than half have made the round of 16. None of them have been pointless, and only one came last in their group. It seems you have to be a decent team to win an intercontinental playoff, regardless of where you come from.
There is a pretty reasonable way to make the world cup both have competition and world in its name. Divide the first 16 teams up by confederation members + host. FIFA has 209 members and thus UEFA 54 * 15 / 209 = 3.86 CONCACAF 41 = 2.94 AFRICA 54 = 3.86 ASIA = 3.37 CONMEBOL = .72 OCEANIA = .79 Then let's give incentive spots. Teams qualified for the final 16 in the past 2 world cups divided by 2. UEFA = 6 + 6 / 12 = 6 CONCACAF = 2 + 3 = 2.5 AFRICA = 1 + 2 = 1.5 ASIA = 2 + 0 = 1 CONMEBOL = 5 + 5 = 5 OCEANIA = 0 + 0 = 0 So you have UEFA 9.86 CONCACAF 5.44 AFRICA 5.36 ASIA 4.37 CONMEBOL 5.72 OCEANIA .79 HOST 1.00 29 guaranteed slots and the other 3 slots determined by playoffs based on the fractions. If a confederation wants more teams then just do better but keep representation for half the field so it is truly a WORLD Cup. After each world cup you can calculate new percentages.
I like CONCACAF, but if you took the last full spot in, partial spot, and first full spot out from CONCACAF (fourth through sixth) and UEFA (ninth through eleventh) and sent them to play a six team group in Brazil I think the three from UEFA would do much better. I could even see the fifteenth best in UEFA being favored over the best CONCACAF country other than USA, Mexico, and Costa Rica in a two leg playoff. United Arab Emirates, who are fifth in AFC and would get a partial spot with your method, are behind 33 UEFA countries in the FIFA Rankings. You gave CONCACAF too many spots by giving them credit for 41 members, but only 35 of them are members of FIFA, which is what the 209 is based on.
Instead of a confederation cup that really doesn't serve any purpose because you have the world cup, Fifa can set up a mini tournament for play off teams. Orrr even better you can do a less prestigious cup for teams that didn't qualify to the world cup.
http://www.foxsports.com/soccer/sto...-world-cup-051515?cmpid=tsmfb:fscom:foxsoccer Here is a link to an article about this. Honestly, I like it the way things are right now. CONCACAF, CAF, OFC, and AFC have all proven over the past few World Cups that they don't really deserve anymore spots than they already get. If they were going to change things then they would need to probably do something like this. Africa would have to turn its final stage into two groups of 6. The top 2 in each group would go to the World Cup and the two 3rd place teams would go to intercontinental playoffs vs OFC 1, CONCACAF 4, CONMEBOL 5, or a European team. It would probably result in UEFA having to redo its qualifying system somehow too. I don't see any of this happening though. CAF vs OFC CAF vs AFC/UEFA CONCACAF vs CONMEBOL
Lol, apparently you presume making up moronic statements about "supposed" average American from Phoenix confusing Austria with Australia somehow negates your moronic statements. This is a direct quote of you clearly using "Americas" interchangeably with Conmebol, that is strictly a South American confederation. The Americas does not have just 10 national teams but 51 teams with 7 direct spots and two playoffs. You clearly are an idiotic European that clearly refuses to own up to his own geographical ignorance. Its incredibly laughable that you complain about me mocking you for being ignorant. This is a direct quote where you try and belittle South American countries without realizing that greeks living in glass houses shouldn't be throwning rocks. The bolded part is amusing because its nothing but a pitiful attempt at slander; Yes, those savage Brazilian killing homeless people. Economic superpower Greece defaming South American commentators for not being economic success stories like his wonderful Greek self . Lol, this is truly a gem. I do feel bad for this poor Greek in how they are going to get shut off his internet because he doesn't believe in having to pay for things. Maybe some Germans or Dutch commentators can float him a loan so that he doesn't lose his internet access. b.t.w, Internet access is a "human right" and the rest of the Euros need to show some "solidarity" and prove that left wing economics can indeed provide you something for nothing .
Are you failing to miss the part about this not being a tournament for the best 32 teams in the world? If that was the case then there shouldn't be regional qualification at all but some sort of rating qualification format. But UEFA is sending way too many teams and the world cup is way too Eurocentric. There isn't that much that separates teams 6 - 40 in the world anymore. Your Euros and South American sides with a good generation still end up being the top 5-6 teams in the world by a large margin but the rest are all pretty close. Of course you pretty much always get a good generation if you are Germany, Holland, or Brasil.
Only with facts speaking, Greece did win and kick the best African & best Asian Nation outside the R16.And Greece is said to be one of our worst. And yeah, I will agree as a Greek. Our team is one of the Weakest European NT's that make it to World Cups, but we still hold our place. As for Conmebol, I'd like to believe you were joking. 50% of the teams are already participating with a play off against Asian teams. Putting another spot for you with another playoff this time vs UEFA,just seems to selfish. You have your Conmenbol Cup, do you want a 2nd one with guest teams from the other continents? And about that whole NZ thing, 2002 Turkey reached Semifinals. now they are nowhere to be found. Things happen once. Even Costa Rica, I am trully curious to see how long they ll be in the top. Their Roster lacks, and now that everyone knows what they are capable of, their opposition will not do the same mistakes agian. Moreover, I do not believe they can behave as elite, they were marvelous as underdogs, but thing's have changed and that's not in their favor. Another thing,You said that apart from 2-3 European teams who make it to the Quarter Finals(almost every time),the rest 10 do not shine, or come even close to their apperance. Can you remind me again when was the last time any African/Asian/Oceanian team made it to the Quarter Finals ? We all remember the whole Japan/Korea 2002 WC with the corrupt referees. And by the way, you are so fond of Brazil,but what did Brazil do after reaching the semis? They conceded 10 goals in 180 minutes. Does this not show that the ELITE of Europe are far more powerfull than the ELITE of the rest of the world at this moment? Funny how your poor intelligence does not allow you to understand sarcasm.Not to mention your only argument being that my country is poor. Like I care ? Go ahead and think Im poor, Go ahead and think that I have no money, seems your Media just show you only the worst occassions here in Greece. I bet it's gonna bring a smile on your face right? You re gonna be thinking "Yeeeah, I'm better than him." And then you will shut down your computer and go on to live your miserable life, like all latinos living in the USA do. Well, except the pornstar women. They are fully talented,your pride I presume. (ey at least you guys can do something well!-and it includes balls too )
So I guess this discussion is done until 2022. Even if Blatter falls reagrding 2018 the discussion is dead zahzah must be pretty bummed. HE was so sure of it
Poor guy fails to realize that people living in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks. You bashed Argentina, Brazil, and called all South Americans economic failures. ******************************************************************************* Its been obvious, that Uefa is not going to lose any spots due to the terrible world cup that Asia and Africa had. Its impossible to argue that those confederations deserve any spots at the expense of Uefa. Concacaf and Conmebol are happy with their allocation. Caribbean countries might want a guaranteed spot but that's not going to happen since it would require them to give up their strangle hold on Concacaf. In the future Uefa will probably lose spots to Africa and Asia but for the moment all 13 spots are safe. With Blatter resignation its doubtful that Africa and Asia will be able to successfully argue that they need more spots to "grow" the sport. Uefa just better hope that the best of their secondary members that make the world cup don't trip up because Asia and Africa are chomping at the bit for more spots. Uefa's problem is simply that they refuse to understand that change is inevitable and that sooner or later spots will be taken away if they refuse to acknowledge Africa and Asia's desire for more representation. Uefa is the confederation that thinks its a smart idea to bluster about wanting to keep the world cup "elite" and that giving other confederations increased voting share is somehow obscene. Its obvious that the best way to prevent Uefa losing spots is to expand the tournament to 40 teams with the extra spots given mostly to Asia and Africa. 8 groups of 5 is not going to ruin the tournament as long as only 16 make it to the knock out stage. Having more playoffs for everyone makes sense but its clear that Africa, Asia, and Oceania have to earn their spots against Uefa and the two American confederations. 40 teams: Host 1 spot Uefa 13 spots + 2 playoff vs Caf Caf 6 spots + 2 playoff vs Uefa Afc 6 direct + 3 playoffs vs Conmebol/Concacaf Ofc 0 direct + 1 playoff vs Conmebol/Concacaf rotates Conmebol 5 spots + 2 playoff vs Afc/Ofc rotates Concacaf 3 spots + 2 playoffs vs Afc/Ofc rotates Its obvious that Uefa, Conmebol, and Concacaf are the strongest confederations in that order with Caf, Afc, and Ofc being the weakest in that order. Africa and Asia like to bash Concacaf but its obvious that Mexico and the US are more consistent while Costa Rica is similar to Uruguay in that despite a small population they are quite competitive. Not going to happen because Africans and Asians want to play Oceania and each other instead of the stronger confederations. Uefa members are flat out elitist and think that they should get more direct spots and have half the playoffs against the rest of the world. Conmebol/Concacaf would be quite happy with what they have with more playoffs against Afc/ofc as gravy. I treated Concacaf/Conmebol as one confederation and Afc/Ofc as the other.
I see two issues about a 40 teams world cups: with 5 teams per group, that means one team not playing the last day, and the risk to live again Austria vs Germany 1982 is real, which means 2 teams agreeing on the score that would qualify both. 5 teams per group make two extra days in group games, which will make the world cup nearly 6-week long. Not only players reaching the final will be exhausted but that makes the final around the 20th of July at the earliest. I don't know how it is elsewhere but in Europe the regular season usually starts 1 week later, which would make almost no rest for footballers.
Good points both. Ultimately, the general level of soccer has not increased the past ten years to justify more than 32 team - the last WC was great but it still featured some terrible sides such as Honduras, Cameroon and England. There is no justification based on quality for more teams at the tournament, it would water it down and that would be an unfortunate thing for the greatest event in the world.
The proposal of 40 participants in a World Cup could be addressed by having ten groups of 4, with the ten winners automatically qualifying to the second round and the best six 2nd place teams qualifying as well. Think that could work.This could address the issue of extra allocations for regions such as Asia and Africa.
32 teams is perfect, instead of increasing to 40 why not (as I mention before) we do an alternative tournament for teams that didnt qualify to the world cup, that tournament can be done instead of the confedetation Cup which frankly dont serve any purpose because there is already a world cup taking place.
The Confederations Cup is played before World Cup qualifying ends, so it would have to be played at a different time if it were to be for teams that just missed the World Cup. One value of the Confederations Cup is that champions of confederations other than UEFA and CONMEBOL get to play hard games. Sometimes a country like Egypt, Iraq, or Tahiti qualifies for the Confederations Cup but not the World Cup. Let's say there was a 16 team tournament for the best countries that didn't qualify for the World Cup. How many teams from each conferation should there be? How about this: World Cup interconfederational playoff losers: 2 CONMEBOL 6th, 7th, and 8th: 3 UEFA second place teams that lost the playoff and the worst second place team that missed the playoff: 5 CONCACAF 5th: 1 CAF: 3 (their Group Stage has 5 groups and either the top three second place teams or the best second place team and two playoff winners from among the other four could qualify) AFC: 2 (the loser of the third place playoff and either the better of the two fourth place teams or they could have a playoff) OFC: 0 (would not be guaranteed a team but if the OFC team didn't qualify for the World Cup they would go here) UEFA might deserve more than 5 of the 16 teams, but then you would have to take the best 1 or 2 third place teams out of 9 groups. I also think CONCACAF 6th is more deserving than AFC 7th, but I took AFC 7th because I didn't want all 6 CONCACAF teams in the Hexagonal to be included. If CONCACAF had two final groups of 4 or 6 I would have taken CONCACAF 6th. I don't think a consolation World Cup or whatever you want to call it will be created.
There is almost always 1-2 countries that make it to the World Cup that are worse than Greece (from UEFA) and usually 2-3 that don't make it that are better. Greece is right on that line typically or at least it seems that way from here. Costa Rica has been solid for a long time just not great. 1990 they made the round of 16 at the WC (beating Scotland and Sweden) 2001 they won their group at the Copa America 2002 they went 1-1-1 in the World Cup drawing with semifinalist Turkey and losing out on goal differential 2006 they lost out in the group stage at the world cup 0-3, doh! 2014 they won their group at the World Cup and make it to the QF Those were 3 different generations of Costa Rican players. Their population isn't good enough to always be good, but they have held their own in international tournaments. Their all time WC record is 5-4-6 with 3 losses coming in the 2006 World Cup. I see no reason they won't continue to have a similar pattern, they continually develop solid players and more are moving abroad than in decades past. UEFA does need to advance more of their teams out of group play. I think the last 2 World Cups have been their worst in the 32 team format and traditionally strong sides have been pretty bad (Italy last 2, England and Spain in 14, France in 2010)
Great thread! Thanks for sharing your opinion. I'm still learning more about soccer, but it's a great sport!
3 years later .... What province can beat Iceland? PS are you enjoying this world cup? With so many European teams winning
Lol @waitforit reviving a thread that's been asleep for a full 25 months. As for the question that this thread was meant to address, it appears that FIFA has settled that debate by expanding the tournament and giving everyone extra spots. So, I guess this thread can end here.
Well it's an ongoing argument I had win Pipilo and Rickdog before you had an account here And it was based on the WC 2014 results. I then said wait for Russia and you will see Europe dominating again. Because WC 2014 was played in heat and odd hours and even then Europe was better To which they responded with the likes of Costa Rica who all of a sudden were great and will continue to be so and that it didn't matter where it was held. Pipiolo also thought Colombia is a future WC winner The teams they also mocked (Serbia Sweden Switzerland) are also the teams who beat the ones they praised Of course I was going to revive this I wanted to see how much value they put on their own arguments