40 is the only next and logical solution for the World Cup. Even FIFA stated they would have much rather of preferred trying 40 teams. 36 is odd and going to make the tournament a bit confusing for the average fan. It can work and maybe should for the sake of keeping everyone happy but 40 would have made much more sense. In 2010, good chance it will be 40 irregardless if World Cup 2006 has 32 or 36 teams.
i would probably wet myself (from the excitement, of course) if the world cup expanded to 40 teams. can some math guru figure out how many games that would equate to?
Well I am about 40/60 on thinking they will decide on 2006 having 36 teams, for various reasons including FIFA (urghhh Blatter) likes to show it makes it's own mind up not being led around by others. This is what I think we will see in the future: 2006: 32 2010: 40 (8 groups of 5) 2022: 64 teams (complete knockout competiton)
we could see that trend but not too soon i give it another 10-15 years for the straight knockout format. Personally I like it the way it is because 32 is a "perfect" number and the next one is 64, 64 is too much.
From a report today, it doesn't look like they will expand to 36 teams (though I'll believe it when I see it). On the contrary, it does talk about giving that half of a spot back to CONMEBOL and maybe, though a big maybe, take away OFC's 1 full spot. We'll see, they are making the crucial decision tomorrow. Here is the link: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=270660&cc=5901
My Idea... Keep it at 32 teams for WC2006 and WC2010. Then go to 40 for Brasil 2014. Now that would be an interesting tournament.
After today I would say that pretty much makes it possible for the 40 team World Cup in 2014 like you said JJ. Good call.
Thank goodness Fifa did not expand the field. 32 teams is just fine. Where does it stop. 36, 40, 64 next?!!! Do you people realize how many matches that totals or do you want to make it something similar to College basketball's March madness. Enough. 32 teams, 64 matches in a one month period is JUST FINE. In another note..Fifa's lone huge mistake was ever giving Oceanea an entire slot in the first place. I get the feeling that that entire idea was somehow tied into Oceanea vote for abstaining so that Germany could get the 2006 WC in some back room deal... now they have retracted and pissed off NZ and Austrailia. It was never fair to give them an entire WC slot for basically just a two team competion. Expecially when noting that Australia missed the last 2 WC by less than an hair for simple undiciplined mistakes 1st against Iran and again against Uruguay.
Yeah, making it more than 32 teams would be too demanding on the players. Already it can be stretch for them, to add another round of matches would cut the intensity and quality of play.
I expect to see the WC stay at 32 for some time. Thats 64 games played during a month, four of the teams play 7 games. Elegant yet expansive, about 16 percent of all FIFA's members participating. A tournament of 40 increases the complexity exponentally. Organized as 8 groups of 5, there'd be 96 games. The group of 5 would eliminate the fairness of each team playing their final game simultaneously. Also, a team virtually eliminated after losing 2 games would still be required to play 2 instead of 1 more. Alternately, a tournament starting with 10 groups of 4 makes organizing the subsequent rounds tricky or eliminating 4 of the 2nd place finishers. In either case, a WC with 40 opens the door to some messy situations like West Germany and Austria's non-aggression pact in 1982, Argentina's goalfest against Peru in 1978 or England's exit also in 1982 not having lost a single game.