48 team prediction for the 2026 World Cup

UEFA had already 1 leg play offs at earlier qualifier cycles, for example 1970 with France v Bulgaria oder 1974 with group playoffs between Sweden v Austria and Yugislavia v Spain respectively.

all were played on neutral grounds.

so why is what was deemed fair decades ago, no longer a point?

and strangely all other confeds see it samewise.

Playoffs are kind of finals.

to give single teams a benefit for a final over other teams just by the luck of draw and some rankings remains not be fair imho.

 

Because, as you pointed out, those single-leg affairs were played on neutral ground. Today a randomly selected team is given home advantage.

So, for e.g., in the 2022 qualifiers, Sweden was the 5th-ranked runner-up while Poland was 8th among runners-up. But when they met in the playoff final, Sweden had to travel to Poland to play in front of a partisan and ruckus atmosphere. How is that even remotely fair?

 

There was talk on another thread that Mason Greenwood might make the one-time switch to Jamaica at some point given that England are unlikely to want him back at this point. Whatever your feelings on Greenwood as a person, it is an intriguing prospect from a footballing standpoint wrt to the Jamaican national team's potential fortunes over the coming years including the 2026 WCQ cycle.

 

Both had home advantage in the semifinals by virtue of being seeded in the playoff draw. With only one MD available thereafter, a draw is the fairest way to decide the home team in the final.

 

The point is there's no reason to have a "home team" at all if you just play the game at a neutral site.

 

Playing games at neutral venues is the least attractive option of all.

Fan engagement is best secured and enhanced by home-and-away games.

 

Ofc I know made UEFA made the decision for money, doesn't mean I can't have my opinion on it. That said, with the right selection of venues I think neutral site games would also do perfectly fine. I think Sweden v Poland for example could have done just fine if it had been played in, say, Germany.

 

Possibly, but the semifinals are played in the same window as the finals, probably making logistical arrangements prohibitive.

If you look at the situation in context, each team has an opportunity to qualify automatically in the group stage, with a second chance for runners-up through the playoffs. Assuming it wins its semifinal, making a seeded team play its playoff final away from home doesn't seem an altogether unreasonable requirement.

 

If he can find form and become 85-90% of who he was, it would be a pretty big addition for Jamaica. He could own the main striker position for two World Cup cycles at least. Without Antonio (who is aging and not always reliable - he just pulled out of the September squad Jamaica recently called up), Jamaica really doesn't have a clear answer at that spot. Shamar Nicholson is entering his prime but has been in horrible form, Trivante Stewart just moved to Serie A but we have no idea if he will be able to manage that level, and the other young players we could call are all, similarly, "to be determined" as far as their ability to be reliable goalscorers at the fully professional level.

 

err, the champions league final is played on a neutral ground, almost each national cup final is played on a neutral ground.

less attractive?

 

National cup finals are played in the same country, so not really a good comparison while CL final is unique.

Neither of those decrease fan engagement the way playing EURO or WC playoff finals in neutral countries would.

 

Bahrain is a bold prediction, @Kamtedrejt . Not only are they currently outside the top 4 in their group, but they have the toughest remaining 4 matches.

 

My final prediction:

Host: CAN, MEX, USA
AFC: AUS, IRI, IRQ, KOR, JOR, JPN, UAE, UZB
CAF: ALG, ANG*, CMR, CIV, EGY, GHA, MAR, RSA, SEN, TUN
Concacaf: CRC, JAM, PAN
Conmebol: ARG, BRA, COL, ECU, PAR, URU, VEN*
OFC: NZL
UEFA: AUT, BEL, CRO, ENG, ESP, FRA, GER, GRE, ITA, NOR, NED, POR, SUI, SWE, TUR, UKR