Most of the last 16 games have been cagey matches, decided on penalties or in extra time or a late goal. None of the matches have been convincing wins, unlike some of the first round games.

Should the last 16 teams be divided into four groups, ending with the top team in each group progressing to the semi finals. It should lead to more expansive games and a chance for teams to really show they have performed the best to win the cup.

Surely this would be a fairer way to decide the biggest trophy in world football, rather than an odd goal here, a vital sending off there, a dive in the area for a penalty, or worse still a crafty 'hand of God', and a team is out.

After all the build up of the Group matches, we have these random knock out matches involving the best teams, who do not have a chance to redeem themselves if they make one mistake.

These matches have been exciting in their own way, however I've not enjoyed them as much as the group matches.

This World Cup has been different. Normally, the group stages are where the cagey stuff happens.

would drag the tournament out far too long and you still end up having to have one-off knock-out matches after that second set of groups anyway

No there would be more meaningless matches with teams who can't qualify from the 2nd group stage, it's one of those few World Cups which all quarter finalists are group winners, so leave it as it is. The round of 16 in this WC was good with games being won late on or going to penalties, the only thing i'd change is scrap the 3rd-4th place game.

It would mean everyone playing an extra match I supose to get to semis

I agree. Why is this match needed? The European Championships doesn't have one, so the why should the World Cup have one? If this is scrapped, it would free up the Saturday, so I would say the final could played on the Saturday evening rather than the Sunday. You could make more of a night of it.

These are reasons in favour of the knockout stage for me, mistakes ought to be punished.

Bizarrely the FA Cup had a third place play off in the early seventies with the two losing semi finalists playing each other on a neutral ground. The early European Championships also had one, England finished 3rd in 1968.

The third place play off game can often be quite entertaning such as the Germany v Uruguay game four years ago, but there isn't really any need for it, I should imagine the players from the losing semi finalists would want to get back home as quickly as possible once they've been eliminated.

No, I'm a sucker for tournament knockout stages and working out who could face who, all very exciting.

If they did that, it would be change for the sake of change.

It would also mean there's more meaningless games if teams that can't qualify are due to meet each other - which is one of the reasons why they got rid of the second group stage of the Champions League.

They actually did have second group stages in the 1978 and 1982 World Cups. From what I gather, they weren't especially popular... although that could just be because England got knocked out of the second group stage at the latter tournament.

Both 1978 and 1982 produced some cracking 2nd phase of group matches. Especially the European only group in 1978. And you had Argentina, Brazil and Italy lumped together in 1982 which again had some cracking games.

Italy v Brazil 1982. The best World Cup match of all time? It must be one of them.

Yes for me it is. I must have been one of the few wanting Italy to win. Superb match.

1982 showed that the 2nd round group system was unfair. Brazil won their group yet ended up with Italy and Argentina, who were slow starters that year. Soviets came second in Brazil's group yet got the much more palatable pairing of Poland and Belgium - good sides at the time but not giants of the game. Likewise I don't think group winners England and W. Germany were amused to be paired together with Spain. The benefits though were that you couldn't get through to the semis by holding out for penalties and hoping for a bit of luck.