|
||||||||
Alternative formats |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,683
|
Alternative formats
Just been looking at the previous World Cup formats. Just wondering if there is a case to increase the number of teams to say around 40 and have a different format for the finals. Anyone got any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Gateshead
Posts: 4,353
|
I would say leave it as is. The quality of the European Championships will inevitably be diluted when it expands to twenty-four teams next time, so the same thing would probably happen if the World Cup was expanded much more. There's already a fair share of mediocre teams as it is now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 8
|
If they go to 40:
8 groups of five -Hosts -15 teams from Europe -8 teams from Africa -8 teams from Asia and Oceania(Combine the two zones) -8 teams from the Americas(combine the two zones) Allow joint bidding, but no more than 2 countries, must be adjacent and in the same confederation, and if a joint bid is succesful then that confederation loses a space. Group stage would run like this: Day 1: Opening ceremony and first game Day 2: Three games Days 3-18: Four games per day(72 of the 80 group games would be played over the first 18 days) Days 19-22: Final 8 group games Days 23-26: Last 16 Days 27-30: Quarter finals Days 33-34: Semi finals Day 37: Third place playoff Day 38: Final So the tournament would take just over 5 weeks, and start on a Friday |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15,844
|
It's about as big as it needs to be now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 1984
Posts: 7,102
|
Might be better if it was genuinely the best 24 teams on the planet,I think we all know that 2nd tier European teams are better than a lot of the finalists from the lesser zones
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 5,258
|
The trend does seem to be to expand these competitions so I wouldn't be surprised if FIFA followed UEFA's lead within the next decade or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Herts
Posts: 17,003
|
Quote:
Just been looking at the previous World Cup formats. Just wondering if there is a case to increase the number of teams to say around 40 and have a different format for the finals. Anyone got any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: West Highlands
Posts: 8,009
|
Quote:
Might be better if it was genuinely the best 24 teams on the planet,I think we all know that 2nd tier European teams are better than a lot of the finalists from the lesser zones
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Gateshead
Posts: 4,353
|
Quote:
Yet the only two teams who have lost badly so far have been Spain and Portugal!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,283
|
I have wondered about changing qualifying - put all 197 or so countries into one big pot and draw them out into 30 groups, along with the holders and the hosts who will qualify automatically.
No seeding. No geographic restrictions. It could mean England get drawn against teams from Asia, Africa and the Americas, and would result in some hideous groups, but not probably one of my better ideas. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15,746
|
Quote:
I have wondered about changing qualifying - put all 197 or so countries into one big pot and draw them out into 30 groups, along with the holders and the hosts who will qualify automatically.
No seeding. No geographic restrictions. It could mean England get drawn against teams from Asia, Africa and the Americas, and would result in some hideous groups, but not probably one of my better ideas. ![]() As for a 40 team World Cup, this format could work. The top 24 highest ranked qualifiers (decided by the FIFA world rankings at the time of the draw) go straight through to the group stage. The remaining 16 teams would face each other in a preliminary round, played over 2 legs with the winners qualifying for the group stage. (There would be a 4 day gap before their first group game). The second legs would be played in the same venue as the first to avoid unnecessary travelling. To keep the scheduling simple, the group that each winner of the preliminary round would play in would be assigned when the main draw takes place. There would have to be no geographic restrictions in the main draw, instead there would be 3 seeded pots, plus the playoff teams in the 4th pot. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: BUDDIETOWN
Posts: 20,385
|
five team groups, but leave the NUMBER of groups the same
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15,746
|
Quote:
five team groups, but leave the NUMBER of groups the same
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
|
Quote:
Might be better if it was genuinely the best 24 teams on the planet,I think we all know that 2nd tier European teams are better than a lot of the finalists from the lesser zones
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: England
Posts: 722
|
No, the competition's fine as it is right now. Some weaker teams make it in now, but it works because teams are well represented on a geographical basis and the quality's still good enough to throw up some exciting clashes in the group stages. Any change would be for the worse imo.
That said, didn't stop UEFA ruining the Euros did it. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:21.


