World Cup Expansion to 48 Teams (Update: FIFA Council Agrees 2026 Slot Allocation)

I agree with that.

Serbia is one of the next exemples coming.

People think about Serbia as the team that lost 6-1 to Argentina in 2006 that struggled against Ghana and Australia in 2010 and didn't make it to 2014.

But..since there is a generation of u19 that won euro.
And another generation of u20 that won world cup against Brazil in final.
Golden generation on its way.

Those players are in their early 20ies now and though win the real world cup is another story; they will soon bring Serbia to a better level. Reach 1/4 finals at least once in the next 10 years.

 

I know. But end result is the same: tournaments letting-in more teams from the weaker confederations that have no depth.

 

It's not having more teams in world cup that make europeans teams cycle faster.
Its just that the highest level of football in the world is played in european cups and leagues so even average players from all over europe take benefit from that more than others confederations.

UEFA won't need 20 teams in a 48 teams competitions...just the 15-16th team qualified from UEFA and 6th from COMMEBOL will control the 32-48 teams range easily most of the time.

 

Well, you are the one asuming the greatness of Uefa teams on regards to teams from elsewhere not being Uefa.

So, basicly, you only take in account on how they've done against teams from their own Confederation, with absolutely no results against teams from other places. With that info in mind, you have nothing of value on which to base your opinions, but your bias instead. Oh, and as I pointed out, some of these haven't even been preciselly worth of mentioning as being excellent in any way, like how they did vs. Andorra, whom basicly are among the worst teams of the whole world, where these results came from the qualifiers for last Euro, where Wales suposedly had a great campaign, when in reality, they mostly faced other average Uefa teams there, being their match vs. Belgium, their only big win there. Their match vs. Portugal, next, was completely out of their league and as logical, they got defeated there. Their current WC qualifier campaign, in an easy group, as the one they got (maybe the easiest group of all Uefa qualifiers), hasn't been that good neither.

A friendly match, may probably not be the best type of match for any kind of comparisson, but if there are no official matches on existence, they certainly are the only type of matches which can give you a clue on how they would be, if given the chance on having a future match between the parts involved, in any type of match.

And on regards to Russia, lets hope you are right on this one, as if they don't start showing some improvement to how they've been doing lately (in their case they do have official results vs. non-Uefa teams, and they haven't been good neither), they can perfectly become, only on reference to performance of their team, into the worst host team ever in WC history.
.
.
Spain in Euro 2004 : 1 win, 1 draw (vs. the team that at the end won the tournament, Greece), 1 defeat by one goal (vs. the host Portugal and eventual finalist of the tournament). In context, was not a bad performance.
Spain in 2006 WC : won their 3 matches at group stage, and only got defeated the next round to France, whom were finalists that tournament, being undefeated the whole tournament (only lost the final match after a pk definition), in context, also wasn't a bad campaign.

 

That only happens, because Uefa's best teams, are full of talent not only from Uefa, but more than half of their squads, are made up with talented players from a non-Uefa origin (most of their best players are from Conmebol).

Those very few teams or clubs whom use only local talent, are usually eliminated at the earlier stages of each of those tournaments, you mentioned.

 

But to me south americans squads are good i never said they are not.

I just said there are many teams in europe that can match chile and colombia wc2014 performance which i consider top 10 teams...belgium greece and swiss did it even in brazil and they are not the best teams in europe.

That's not bias but just a fact.

Do you think the european clubs that pay players a fortune want their players to be injured in bullshit friendlies?
Most of important players either don't play or play without really care when it comes to friendly games. Even when the substitutes come back injured from these games both NT and club are in mess.

The only 2 countries represented in the 4 champions league semi finalists are from brazil and croatia.

If you think the likes of Japan Costa Rica etc will beat Russia in front of their crowd in world cup well that makes me laugh you will see next year.

If a team like south korea could reach semi in their world cup after being routined time after time you don't know much about this sport if you think it will be easy to get rid of Russia there.

 

Lol lol lol cr7 is from COMMEBOL?
Mbappe is from COMMEBOL?
Griezmann is from COMMEBOL?

2017 champions league semi finalists:

Real Madrid:
Navas carvajal varane ramos marcelo casemiro kroos modric bale cr7 benzema

8 UEFA players!

Juventus:
Buffon Dani Alves Bonnucci Chielini Sandro PJanic Khedira Cuadrado Higuain Dybala Mandzukic

6 UEFA players

Atletico:
Oblak vrsaljko savic godin luis filipe
Saul niguez koke gabi ferrera carrasco griezmann torres

9 UEFA players

Monaco:
Subasic Sidibe Glik Jemmerson Mendy
Fabinho Bakayoko Bernardo Silva Lemar Falcao Mbappe

8 UEFA players...

So sorry mate you are wrong.

 

I have never said that there isn't any quality in Uefa neither. What I do say, is that many uefa teams are highly over rated, which is something completely diferent.

On regards to what Colombia and Chile did, very few teams of Uefa equaled or did better than them (only 4 among the 13 Uefa teams present at the WC, did), and not only a few Uefa teams, but from the whole world. So making an attempt, to say that more of them, did is being highly biased and not facing the facts as how they were.

Among the teams you mentioned,
Greece, was raped vs. Colombia (with this "fact", there is no need of anything else, to diferentiate both of their campaigns) , and reached the same stage as Chile, but to get to the next stage they only did it by suffering till the last minute, facing very weak teams (below the top 20 teams of the world), against whom they still had to suffer, as they only tied against one of them (Japan), and got the tickets, thanks to a penalty kick when they were playing the over time of their last match vs. Ivory Coast (without that penalty kick goal, Ivory Coast would've gone through instead).
Switzerland, had a joke of a group (among the 2 easiest groups of the WC), where all they did was beat 2 opponents ranked about 20 places below them, and flopped from there on till their exit from the WC.
Belgium, had the other easiest group, and since they were the seeded team, they won it as it was suposed to be (they did the job they were suposed to do, with the minimum required to do so), but afterwards the next stage had a great deal facing the USA, against whom they could've perfectly lost, as they only were capable of scoring during the overtime. Their campaign was better than Chile's, but not even close to Colombia's, as Colombia reached the same stage, but won almost all their matches leaving no doubts (also won all 3 of their matches at group stage, together with beating Uruguay, with no doubt the next stage on normal time).

Colombia's campaign was even better than the one of France (whom was the other quarterfinalists), leaving only Germany and Netherlands, as Uefa's only 2 better teams, than them that WC.

I can give you this, but what's important is that both teams playing the friendly match are subject to the same issue, which at the end tends to balance out everything

So what, Brazil as a team, currently may be the best team around, while Croatia, as a team, still is a very big question mark (where even Mexico mauled them last WC, and Mexico is only Mexico, an average good team)

Japan ?, I don't think so

Costa Rica, though, already beated them there. Not at the WC, as 2018 will be the first WC played in Russia. During 2014, where they were suposed to be the weakest team at their group, they ridiculized everybody else, all of which happened to be former WC champions.
(honestly, do you believe current Russia is even close to Italy, Uruguay or England ?. In my case, I don't think so)

At the time, at least South Korea had things going on with them, and Guus Hiddink was making miracles with them at group stage. The other issue, not least important, was that at the time Blatter was around, whom almost literally put them in the semi's, as both of their 2 previous matches vs. Italy and Spain, were "daylight robbery" (specially against Spain).

While currently, as a team, Russia has almost nothing (even their own fans don't believe in their team, and I'm not inventing anything here). And Blattter is no longer around (where Infantino, apparently, is not much fond to them).

 

If you consider that Colombia has been sent home by the worst of semi finalists losing 7-1 and 3-0 in the semi and 3rd place match they didn't do as good as Belgium. No way!

I just needed few seconds to destroy your point of view.

Fact is that colombia reached 1/4 so did Belgium.

Chile and Uruguay reached round 16. So did Swiss and Greece that's all.


You said that the best teams in europe were dominated by players from non UEFA origins. I just showed you that 32/44 players in the champions league semi finalists starting 11 this year are from UEFA. Only 11 from COMMEBOL that's 25% 7 brazilians among them!

Instead admitting you were wrong you keep adding non sense stuffs....

A team like Croatia will arrive with a higher level next year than they arrived in 2014. It's now that they got players involved in the 4 champions league semi finalists it was not the case in 2014. I am talking about 2017! Not about 2013!

You just don't get that just like Colombia found the players that made them go from no world cup for a while to 1/4 final few european squads just found the international players that will take them further as well?

If i follow your logic Belgium is above the likes of Poland and Croatia by their results since 5 years but i told you aready that the likes of Poland Croatia and Serbia will be as competitive as Belgium is even if their last results did not show it.

Seems you are not aware about the coming strenghts.

 

i did not say that belgium did better than brazil i said they did as well as colombia and they did.

Colombia reached 1/4 so did Belgium.

That's it.

 

Now, now we did give finalists Argentina a good game and nearly took them to penalties. I agree it was a favorable draw but you can only beat who is put in front of you.

 

You are basing all your point on how their opponents did after.
And not taking in account anything they did by their own merit, before.

That's probably the worst form of comparing 2 teams, ever, as it is about the same thing as saying that Belgium was equally as bad as Iran was, as they both lost to Argentina by the same score.

true, but Colombia scored exactly the double of goals than those that Belgium scored in the same amount of matches. Haven't you heard what goal diferentiate means in Football ?

Yes, but Chile won 2 matches at group stage and had a draw at the next stage (afterwards, we lost on the pk definition that came after, which means that we got eliminated after wining 7 points during our whole WC campaign.

Among all other teams whom reached the round of 16, the only team that also reached 7 points, was Mexico, but we scored more goals than them.
Switzerland's and Uruguay's whole campaign only reported them, 6 points.
Greece, only got 5 points, while all the rest (Argelia, Nigeria and USA, only got 4 points each)

Yup,
I may have got carried away in that quote (I've never been afraid to recognize to be wrong on anything, when proven wrong).
I admit that I was wrong with it, but the point remains the same, as without those players of a non-Uefa origin, none of those teams would be where they are at, at present times, as in many of those teams, their non-Uefa origin players, is what really makes the diference.

And btw, I didn't restrict myself to "only" Conmebol players. I always talked about non-Uefa players, where only most of them were from Conmebol (never said exclusively from Conmebol). Btw, Brazil is in Conmebol (to believe it as being diferent, is being completely wrong), so not by the fact that most of them are from Brazil, makes them not be from Conmebol.

well 2017 to the WC which will be played the next year (2018), in context, is exactly the same thing as 2013 to the WC that was played the next year to it (2014). For both periods of time, there is a one year gap.

As you don't know much about south american football, their players for the WC before were almost the same players after. What really made the diference for them, was their new coach. Pekerman, made the diference (pretty much, similar to Chile, when we decided to have our teams get coached by foreign coaches, instead of coaches of our own nationality. As it is really is, a mental problem which affects most of us, round here. Not our lack of skills.

Not because you say so, it happens.

If it were so, you wouldn't be posting anything here, and instead you would be wining huge amounts of money, dedicating almost your entire time to bets instead.

Fact is, I don't have that power neither.....

 

I didn't refer to Argentina, as an opponent, as at the time, they were without doubt, one of the most serious candidates to win it all.

I restrict myself to the opponents Switzerland got at group phase. The draw, seemed even as it was hand picked, so that both Blatter and Valque (FIFA's top officials of the time, and both corrupt up to the core), could get both of their teams an easy path through. While at the same time, lots of top teams got placed together in the same group (the fact the 2 finalists of the previous WC finished in the same group, really should have never happened).

Switzerland, not only got seeded through a change in the criterion usually used to select seeds, which allowed them avoiding lots of potential dangerous opponents, but also that invention of drawing all the Uefa teams in the same pot, allowed your team to get one of the weakest Uefa teams of the moment of time when the draw took place (afterwards they proved everyone wrong about their potential, but at the time of the draw, no one really gave a cent, over whatever France can do).

But, the rules were there from long before it actually happened, so no one really can complaint much about what afterwards happened there, but it really gave people lots to think about it. Fact is, that by being seeded, Switzerland in the draw, got the worst Conmebol team, got the worst Concacaf team, and also got one of the worst Uefa teams of the moment. Also avoided african teams, which among them, there is always high expectation about a few of them to surprise everyone.

In my very humble opinion, seeds for the WC, should be picked not only by rankings, but also consider other succesful performances during the last 5 years before the draw takes place, as well.

 

It's the only way possible. To just judge the steps reached and not lose several hours discussing about the for and against.

By example You don't take in count that Mexico needed only a tie against Croatia after the shame brazil croatia was in opening and that it changes the whole configuration of the game when it starts.
When a team is under pressure to win and to open the game when the other is not.

If Croatia-Mexico had to play in different situation maybe the game would not be the same..so? Fact is Mexico won and reached round 16

Fact is Belgium reached 1/4 as Colombia did.

Fact is Swiss and Greece reached round 16 as Chile did.

That s what will remain!

Uefa team of the year 2016:

Buffon boateng pique ramos bonnucci modric kroos iniesta c ronaldo griezmann messi

10 players from UEFA.

Fifa11 of the year 2016:

Neuer dani alves pique ramos marcelo kroos modric iniesta c ronaldo suarez messi

7 uefa players.

Of course there are south americans players in the best players in the world but they are far to dominate UEFA.

Without remember you that commebol did not bring a world cup since 2002?

Of course 2017 counts. now you see already most of the faces of the international players that will have influence in their team. And few teams have weapons they did not have before when others are declining so 2014 is not a serious reference at all anymore about what is happening now.

I wont bet on a single team but i can already say that from uefa among all teams qualified beside germany france italia spain! there will be 4 teams in round16, 2-3 in 1/4 and 1 in semis.

You will see.

 

Hmmm, despite your preachiness you didn't even contribute once ... that's quite the beam compared to the splinter in my eye ... shitposts are only a small fraction of my posts and usually even those are at least partly on-topic ... unlike e.g. Pipiolo who stayed off-topic for 10-20 pages or more.

Know your place, pipi ... boreball, eating from a bucket, World Rivalries ... that last one is the place for, what did you call it again, oh yea, your "soccer smackdown" ... no more warnings, next time you feel the need to shitpost go to WR.

 

Let's see that in writing...

 

Up to 8 out of 10 Conmebol teams, in case of SA hosts, after the expansion ... i.e. SA relegation fodder will "qualify" ... sides like Bolivia, that participated in 3 (three) WCs and still were one of the worst teams in the history of the World Cup ... Bolivia, Peru, Paraguay, Ecuador, Venezuela ... in no particular order, garbage teams ... it's laughable to compare Conmelol's numbers 6-10 to Uefa's 6-10 ... plus in Uefa they wouldn't qualify as one of the best 16 ... FYI Greece, Serbia, etc. are now ranked around 30th place ... Holland, Wales, etc. around 16th ... top 30 would be a struggle for those overrated SA teams, let alone top 16.

Rickdog, it doesn't really matter if Chile reach Russia2018 or not ... as Chile will regress to their usual sub-par level ... very soon you'll have to kiss Vidal goodbye, kiss Alexis goodbye, kiss ...well, I want to add Bravo, yet what a horrorshow he has been, he very much looks past it ... already declining, even as we speak, in 2026 Chile will be yet another mediocre side ... the current one, now on its last legs, only managed to survive the group, that doesn't bode well at all ... again, no surprise as it has been established that 9 overrated SA sides combined < Brazil.

PS you're talking shit about Wales while they have Bale ... his market value alone is many times higher than complete 23 "man" squads of SA fodder like Bolivia or Peru.

I'd like to see Bale at the World Cup, give the boy some love @Rickdog ... xoxo

 

I thought the thread was to be about extension to 48 teams, but turned into heated discussion of UEFA v. COMNEBOL, and about quality of various international teams. Well, I think you guys are missing the point all together here. FIFA doesn't care as much about increasing "quality" of football at WC, but they care about 1. Profit 2. Expanding market share. As such, they are trying to make WC into "make everyone happy around the world" (expands the market share), and "make even more people around the world to be emotionally involved and watch it" (watching it increases TV profits). It is all.

I have no doubts, that we may see some unthinkable matches during 2028 (Uzbekistan v NZ for ex without offence to Uzbekistan and NZ), but who knows...

In general, I would not expect any surprises in Russia. It will be won by UEFA team, or maybe Brazil. I do not expect to see any new champion: and personally think it most likely will be one of France, Italy, Spain, Germany group. If Brazil keeps their current form, they may be dangerous. Although, Russia is not like playing in Europe in classical sense - travelling will be extensive, climate will vary from place to place etc. Argentina's federation has plenty of issues especially financial, so I expect this to take a tall on them, and I cannot see them winning this time, yet Messi may just pull them even up to semis, especially if Dybala helps. Teams which may do quite well are as mentioned before: Poland (they could be counted as Russia's neighbour and have players who used to play at some time in Russian league and will be familiar with conditions, as well as other very good players with huge potential, Croatia (great bunch of players and talent), Serbia (similarities with Russia, rising bunch of new players), Belgium (as mentioned before). Russia will be dragged by refs, not doubt. They have little talent currently, and little quality, but as they say, "the walls will help the host".

2022 I have no idea what is going to happen, it will be wild east here, almost anybody could win it by sheer coincidence because of climate, conditions, odd season at which it will be played - nothing will surprise me, even titles for Algeria, Cameroon, Chile, Poland, or hell even USA. We do not even know who will make this, and if they will even take place...

2028 will be "fun for all around the world event", biggest televised event in history, with highest profits from sponsors all around the world. It will help to establish football as worlds most popular sport for all the time, and make everybody care for it, even if the matches won't be great by quality (similarly expanding Euro did bring some joy to the ones in NI, Hungary or Albania, so now the ones in Ethiopia may get it as well on the WC, why not). It will be some fun for sure and some peeps in Africa and Asia may see their team play Brazil or Germany for the first time in history.

 

Meant 2026 not 2028

 

Fact is, that Mexico in less than 10 minutes, raped Croatia, and they could've perfectly scored more goals as they were lots closer in increasing their advantage than Croatia reducing the distance instead. All that Croatia needed at the time was win by one goal there, an issue they were never even close in getting, as before they realized the position they were in, Mexico had already scored on them 3 times.

sure, but Colombia did it almost without sweating a single drop, wining with clear scores almost all their matches, till their last match,. While Belgium, barely defeated its opponents by one goal, only being capable of scoring late into its matches, needing an overtime once (vs. USA at R-16), and even were facing defeat in front of their noses for over 40 minutes with less than 20 minutes to go in their match vs. Argelia, before finally being capable of turning the match around, to their favour.

Colombia, only started seeing defeat at quarters. Besides as posted before, Colombia scored the double of the amount of goals that Belgium did, also facing tougher opponents than them.

sure, but Chile had qualified to the round of 16 after only 2 matches, while all the others which only reached the R-16, needed to go to their 3rd match at group stage, to reach the same stage.

Not less important, but we also did it by eliminating, clearly, the team that before the WC started, was suposed to be among the top candidates to win the whole thing, and at the R-16 took another one of them, to a pk definition, after a draw. All others, once confronted to a really top team, all they were capable of doing, was to bent over and pray to their gods, it would be over soon.

I don't think so.

I believe Uefa's numbers will not be higher than 8 teams (out of 14 Uefa teams present at the WC), from knock-out phase till the end. And this includes all 4 of those teams, you are leaving behind. Still better than the past 2 WC's, though.