I think that after the enormous enthusiasm of this WC ( to see the great audience TV in USA, for example ) and the good level of the play of the small nations ( Costa Rica, Algeria etc ) it is absolutely necessary to bring the WC in Russia to 40 teams and to give out other 3 seats to Asia ( 3.5 billion of inhabitants.... ), 2 to Africa and 1 to Europe, 1 to South America and another between Oceania and North-Central America. To have 8 groups of 5 teams instead than 4 would be also much useful to haven't great teams ( to see England and Spain in this WC ) already eliminated after only 2 games !!!! I hope that Blatter or Platini to do it !!
I'm pretty sure most aren't interested in seeing Goliaths like Panama and Scotland duke it out. Already too many minnows as it is, we don't need more
You're saying we should reward AFC's shit performance by giving 3 spots? Am I missing something here?
Eight groups of five teams would mean 80 group stage matches. We currently have 48 group stage matches under the current format. You are talking about adding 10 days or so to the group stage alone. It's completely untenable.
Why in Asia and Africa there is an enormou passion for soccer and for the WC in particular and these 2 continents have a combinated population of abou 5 billion of persons !!!!
CONCACAF has consistently been matching (beating by %) AFC's and CAF's performances in the World Cup for at least the last 8 World Cups. Why should they get less spots than them? Especially since in this current World Cup, they gave their best performance to date (3/4 teams made it to the R16, 1/3 teams to the QF's), while CAF only had (2/5 teams make it to the R16, 0/2 teams to the QF's) and AFC (0/4 teams made it to the R16).
Not happening for logistical reasons (as noted by KennyWoo is would increase the first round from 48 matches to 80 and increase the length of the tournament by a a week or two). Never mind that its not warranted based on the merits either.
I'm in favor of it. I just don't agree with giving the AFC an additional 3.5 spots. It's a weak confederation that is more deserving of a subtraction in qualifying spots than an addition. If any confederation deserves an increase in world cup spots it's CONMEBOL. If CONCACAF keeps improving then give them another one as well. You could always make the case that UEFA could earn another spot or two. CAF could get 1 more. They just need to change the final rounds of the qualification tournaments. There's no reason why good African teams like Ghana and Egypt should have to battle each other while a weak team like Cameroon sneaks into the World Cup by beating a weak opponent. UEFA: 16/17 CONMEBOL: 8/9 CONCACAF: 5 CAF: 6 AFC: 4
Scotland is a POT 4 team in Europe that extra spot for UEFA would be contested by teams like Sweden Denmark Ukraine or teams like Norway Slovakia of course teams like Serbia Romania Bulgaria Turkey would be wanting that spot as well but UEFA teams like: Poland Czech Republic Ireland shouldn't be ignored nor teams like Slovenia Hungary Austria Scotland Israel Montenegro
I am opposed to an expansion of the final tournament, but wholeheartedly favor having pre-group stage, intercontinental, qualifying groups each hosted in different regions bringing the excitement of the World Cup (and the privileges of hosting) to more countries, while making for a more rational system to qualify teams to the tournament, all without diluting (but in fact improving) the quality of the final competition. As I have illustrated previously, all this can be accomplished without adding much to the schedule and matches played.
Pfft, FIFA rankings are fickle. Scotland might not be anything like a pot 4 team. As things stand, and with a year to go until the draw for 2018: Pot 1: Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, France, Portugal, Greece, Italy Pot 2: Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ukraine, England, Denmark, Scotland, Romania, Serbia, Sweden Pot 3: Turkey, Czech Republic, Wales, Hungary, Austria, Armenia, Slovenia, Iceland, Slovakia Pot 4: Finland, Poland, Montenegro, Norway, Albania, FYR Macedonia, Republic of Ireland, Bulgaria, Azerbaijan Pot 5: Israel, Estonia, Latvia, Northern Ireland, Belarus, Moldova, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Georgia Pot 6: Kazakhstan, Cyprus, Malta, Liechtenstein, Faroe Islands, Andorra, San Marino We've got a year to hold onto a place in pot 2.
If FIFA expands to 40 (not betting on it happening) you have to go 10 groups of four instead of eight groups of five. If you go groups of five, you're setting up the possibility of another West Germany-Algeria-Austria fiasco because one team will always be on a bye. If you expand to 40, the format would have to be 10 groups of four. Group winners/runners-up advance plus four wild-card teams to make a 24-team bracket. Group winners get a bye to round of 16. And please ... no more Asia or Africa teams.
That just a projection based on data that's already in but lot of games to be played. Uefa should go back to using coefficients, IMO. Scotland was a pot 4 team in the most recent draw - for Euro 2016 - so I go by that. It would be nice to see the Tartan Army at a big stage once again.
For the record, CONCACAF #5 was Panama, #6 was Jamaica. Maybe this World Cup will force Europeans to care about CONCACAF.
Going to 40 makes bad sense logisticly. Also, Asia and africa do not deserve any more spots. If anyone, CONCACAF does. As I said in another thread. keep 32 teams. Take 1/2 a slot from Asia and Africa. Give half slot to CONCACAF and South America, and let the 5th place African Team play Oceania for the final spot. If the 5th place African Team can't beat New Zeeland or some small pacific island nation, then they don't deserve the 5th spot.
You guys do realize, do you not, that the only really fair way to determine the 'best team in the world' is a round-robin tournament, in which everyone plays everyone else at least twice......... How many countries do we have right now, about 200+ ? Host nation not required, stamina is.
It's also an indication of how fickle the seeding system is for WC qualifying, so I completely agree that the coefficients are a much better way to go. If the draw was made this month we'd be second seeds, next summer we might be fourth seeds, by the time qualification starts we might be second seeds again. There's nowhere near enough consistency to it. For example, In qualifying for WC 2014 we drew Wales as the bottom seeds in our group, if the draw had taken place in December after the end of euro 2012 qualifying we'd have both have been 3rd seeds. And by the time that qualification had begun Scotland, Serbia, and Wales all would have been 3rd seeds, and Belgium 4th seeds (just 9 places between all 4 in the FIFA rankings for UEFA)! Fast forward 14 months and Belgium are top seeds for the World Cup draw. You're right though, Scotland aren't near the debate of extra UEFA teams making the World Cup, we have the potential to be but we're a way off at the moment. Quick edit: the other problem with using the FIFA rankings is that it ends up skewing the UEFA coefficient. Scotland had a bad run and fell to 4th seeds for 2014 qualifying, which left us in a very difficult group in terms of progressing up a seeding pot. Despite beating the top seeds twice, we lost to the bottom seeds twice. If Wales hadn't been as low we'd have had a much better chance of not dropping to the 4th pot in the UEFA coefficient. That being said, our own mismanagment of the situation, largely through Craig Levein, is the main factor in our problems. Rather ironcially, it could be the FIFA rankings which helps boost us again if we have a good year.
You want some real controversy, use a selection committee like the NCAA does. There generally is not a lot of controversy for college basketball seeds, but given the conspiracy theories and corruption inherent to FIFA... Even if it would be the best way to do it, the outcry would be unbelievable.
God no. It's perfect the way it is now. If it's a necessary evil, it should be 12 groups of 4 with the top 8 passing directly into the round of 16. 40 not only creates collusion possibilities, but also makes it harder for a Cinderella run to get into the top 2 of a 5 team group, creates many meaningless matches on the final day of a group. As it stands, any team now with 1, 2 or 3 points almost always has chance to still progress on the final day, even if they are in 4th, not so if you're in a 5 team group. Of the 63 matches, there are only a tiny handful that end up being essentially meaningless exhibitions. This time we really only had Spain-Australia, and Costa Rica-England that didn't have implications on who would make it through or in what position. Under a 5 team group, you'd have a handful of matches between 1st and 2nd place teams that have already secured progress, or 4th and 5th places teams that are already eliminated.
You might feeling better about yourself making these kind of silly comments, but get a grip: what you are "open" to is quite irrelevant, to put it nicely.
An expanded, 40 team final tournament, is a terrible idea. I certainly hope it doesn't come to pass. But as I have mentioned, the idea of giving more sides (including certainly from regions who have very of their teams exposed to meaningful intercontinental matches) the opportunity to compete in such games is valuable and meritorious. The way you accomplish that is quite simple too. Take 8 teams that compete in UEFA playoffs and divide them across 4 intercontinental qualifying groups (the groups hosted by different countries from different regions) and put 1 team from each of the Conmebol, Concacaf, CAF, and AFC (4th AFC spot reserved for the OFC) in each group as well. The top teams in each group qualify to the World Cup to give its last 8 qualifying teams. You still have the hosts qualify directly, while the 23 guaranteed allocations would basically be divided more or less evenly across the major confederations. The stronger confederations, on the other hand, would get the chance to qualify more and the weaker ones fewer teams, while these intercontinental qualifying groups would still give a larger group of countries the opportunity and experience to participate in intercontinental matches in a World Cup setting.