Wade Garrett Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 (edited) Going to have 16 groups of 3, with the top 2 going into the knockouts. What a load of sh*t. Edited 10 January, 2017 by Wade Garrett i'm a numpty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Going to have 3 groups of 16, with the top 2 going into the knockouts. What a load of sh*t. It's 16 groups of 3! Still **** but not quite as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 State of the national side has been so dire recently that it has killed off any interest, and I am not really too fussed about other countries. Increasing it so that there are a lot more average sides joining the competition is I'm sure very nice, but it will make it even more boring and bloat the competition even more. I tend to go on merit rather than inclusivity, as otherwise it devalues the competition. We have suffered 2 excruciatingly boring round of qualifying for Brazil14 and Euro16, and I guess we have even more boringness to look forward to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shroppie Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Will just generate more pointless games with obvious outcomes, like England v Iceland Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW5 SAINT Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 and this is Saints related how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 3 groups are utter sh*te. I still remember Spain-England-W. Germany in Spain '82. Two 0-0s and W. Germany went through because they beat Spain by 1 goal. Keegan missed a sitter - tw*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 and this is Saints related how? Because we'll probably have even more players involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Albert Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 This kind of nonsense is what happens when politics becomes the main driving force in decision making. Infantino knows he requires votes from the tiny countries, each with the same voting power as Germany or Brazil, to get re-elected. To accomplish this, he swells up the World Cup like a giant throbbing gangrenous appendage. The same thing has happened in UEFA as well with the Euros. I am really starting to lose interest in international football. It admittedly does not help that England are awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 This kind of nonsense is what happens when politics becomes the main driving force in decision making. Infantino knows he requires votes from the tiny countries, each with the same voting power as Germany or Brazil, to get re-elected. To accomplish this, he swells up the World Cup like a giant throbbing gangrenous appendage. The same thing has happened in UEFA as well with the Euros. I am really starting to lose interest in international football. It admittedly does not help that England are awful. T'is true. There are already some pretty boring games at the WC. Now if you're going to add 16 teams not good enough to qualify for a 32 team final round it's not going to get better. The only major compensation might be less qualifying games, like the play-off round or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secret Site Agent Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 And judging by the shenanigans that have gone on with the National Team, I bet Rooney will still be playing. .....but in Goal this time. He is the team captain after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 So two draws means a great chance to go through. Get ready for defence minded games with low scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird of the land Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 I'm not necessarily against improving opportunities for nations to get to world cup. Would have preferred it to go up to 40 personally. I do fear this is political backhanders decision where too many places are to be added to overly weak zones. They should be addressing nonsense that is oceania having its own qualification zone and viability of combining nth and sth american qualifying to increase depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikec Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 So two draws means a great chance to go through. Get ready for defence minded games with low scores. And I wonder what they'll do if all teams end up with the same points and goals - something that's more likely to happen with groups of just 3 matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 And I wonder what they'll do if all teams end up with the same points and goals - something that's more likely to happen with groups of just 3 matches. Penalty shoot outs in the last round of games is mooted. I notice that the really big beneficiaries of this increase in teams is the Concaf (US and Central America) who are predicted to go from 3.5 qualifiers to 6.5 qualifiers, an increase of almost 100% whereas Europe will only go from 13 to 16, that being only about 23%. I mean take away the USA, Mexico and Costa Rica and what have you left in the Concaf really? Perhaps they're planning for California's eventual secession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris27687 Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38565246 "Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan welcomed the expansion, saying it was a a "positive step"." I suppose they have to try to get involved some how! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38565246 "Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan welcomed the expansion, saying it was a a "positive step"." I suppose they have to try to get involved some how! Won't make any difference to crap like Scotland though, Europe will probably go from 13 to 16 places, meaning that those who lost in the play-offs would be the sort of team to benefit from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Penalty shoot outs in the last round of games is mooted. I notice that the really big beneficiaries of this increase in teams is the Concaf (US and Central America) who are predicted to go from 3.5 qualifiers to 6.5 qualifiers, an increase of almost 100% whereas Europe will only go from 13 to 16, that being only about 23%. I mean take away the USA, Mexico and Costa Rica and what have you left in the Concaf really? Perhaps they're planning for California's eventual secession. CONCAF, call it 7 teams as opposed 6.5, and you have Costa Rica (17), Mexico (18], USA (28], Panama (58], Haiti (73), Honduras (75) and Curacao (75) filling the top 7, just ahead of Jamaica (77), Trinidad and Tobago (78], Guatemala (79) and St Kitts & Nevis (80). If you look at UEFA, the Netherland are 13th highest ranked (22 in the world) with 16th being Slovakia (25th in the world). Someone sarcastically mentioned silly games like England vs Iceland. That would currently be, according to world rankings, 13 vs 21. I know that some world rankings are completely mad, but even so, bringing in such lowly teams from CONCAF is just ridiculous. It will reinforce the fact that the Euros are by far the best standard of football competition in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris27687 Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 CONCAF, call it 7 teams as opposed 6.5, and you have Costa Rica (17), Mexico (18], USA (28], Panama (58], Haiti (73), Honduras (75) and Curacao (75) filling the top 7, just ahead of Jamaica (77), Trinidad and Tobago (78], Guatemala (79) and St Kitts & Nevis (80). If you look at UEFA, the Netherland are 13th highest ranked (22 in the world) with 16th being Slovakia (25th in the world). Someone sarcastically mentioned silly games like England vs Iceland. That would currently be, according to world rankings, 13 vs 21. I know that some world rankings are completely mad, but even so, bringing in such lowly teams from CONCAF is just ridiculous. It will reinforce the fact that the Euros are by far the best standard of football competition in the world. Cuco will probably be playing for Curacao in 10 years - bet he'd love a WC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 How many countries are going to have world-class training facilities to host 48 teams? FIFA is a corrupt (very rich) waste of space. The European and South American countries should withdraw and have their own tournament. I see that our proactive FA didn't even send their representative to the meeting because "he had another engagement". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 (edited) How many countries are going to have world-class training facilities to host 48 teams? FIFA is a corrupt (very rich) waste of space. The European and South American countries should withdraw and have their own tournament. I see that our proactive FA didn't even send their representative to the meeting because "he had another engagement". Well as the 2026 WC seems to be a certainty for the old US of A I'd guess they'll put that forward as one of the reasons for giving the competion to them. That makes it even worse because if the plan goes ahead as foreseen the Concaf will have 8 or 9 teams in those finals. They're obviously trying to assure that current footballing non-entities like China and Canada are present solely for the TV and advertising revenues that would be generated. South America would also go to 7 teams under the proposed scheme, meaning that their qualifiers would be about as meaningful as a series of friendlies. It's all about the money and nothing else. Edited 10 January, 2017 by Window Cleaner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Window, I believe it is actually to get China and INDIA there (rather than Canada). That's 2.5bn people they want to come to the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony F Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Another problem with 3 team (3 game) groups is that a small country without great wealth - say Haiti, just to give a name - will have to somehow fund a 2-3 week trip to somewhere expensive (say Japan just as a random possible location) for a squad of 23 plus numerous hangers on, just for two games of football. I wonder how, realistically, very small nations would fund their attendance without sponsorship of some kind. At least 4 team groups guaranteed 3 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 10 January, 2017 Author Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Is there anyone out there who thinks FIFA isn't bent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Another problem with 3 team (3 game) groups is that a small country without great wealth - say Haiti, just to give a name - will have to somehow fund a 2-3 week trip to somewhere expensive (say Japan just as a random possible location) for a squad of 23 plus numerous hangers on, just for two games of football. I wonder how, realistically, very small nations would fund their attendance without sponsorship of some kind. At least 4 team groups guaranteed 3 games. Don't FIFA give them money for participating then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Is there anyone out there who thinks FIFA isn't bent? Probably a few people in Africa and Asia, plus the odd Banana Republic... places where being bent as a nine bob note is pretty standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Window, I believe it is actually to get China and INDIA there (rather than Canada). That's 2.5bn people they want to come to the party. India isn't a football nation as would testify their 135 th ranking on the FIFA scale. Plus in their zone the concurrence is far greater than it is in the CONCAF where Canada ply their trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Bloody ridiculous. Unless California secedes of course, in which case I'm 100% on board. If they are going to do this, at least avoid groups with an odd number of teams, otherwise we'll get a load of Austria vs. Germanys. FFS, with even numbers they still make sure all teams in a group play their final matches simultaneously. That's rather difficult with 3 teams in a group, unless they plan to have all 3 on the same pitch in the final match. 12 groups of 4, with the top 2 from each going through. The 8 best first-placed finishers get a bye into round two of the knockout stage, with the remaining 16 playing each other in round one of the knockout stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Albert Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Well as the 2026 WC seems to be a certainty for the old US of A I'd guess they'll put that forward as one of the reasons for giving the competion to them. That makes it even worse because if the plan goes ahead as foreseen the Concaf will have 8 or 9 teams in those finals. They're obviously trying to assure that current footballing non-entities like China and Canada are present solely for the TV and advertising revenues that would be generated. South America would also go to 7 teams under the proposed scheme, meaning that their qualifiers would be about as meaningful as a series of friendlies. It's all about the money and nothing else. I should protest about your characterization of Cananda as a footballing non-entity, but it is probably a fair assessment. Still, there's always hockey... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 Canada is inconsequential with only 35m people, when China and India are the real prizes. http://www.fullmatchesandshows.com/2016/10/08/could-the-idea-of-expanding-the-world-cup-be-mainly-to-give-china-and-india-a-chance-to-participate-bbc-podcast/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrian lord Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 We haven't had a decent World Cup for years and there's little prospect of one for years either with the crap venues coming up and now this, not to mention that International football ceased to be the highest level of the game too about 15 years back (Barca/Real/Bayern would beat Brazil or Spain). Used to love following England but it's been downhill steeply since Euro '96. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 and this is Saints related how? JWP will be the Captain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 10 January, 2017 Share Posted 10 January, 2017 3 team groups is stupid. Means you have to have a skewed schedule without simultaneous matches. I'm not against more teams per se but they've got to think about the format more carefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted 11 January, 2017 Share Posted 11 January, 2017 3 groups are utter sh*te. I still remember Spain-England-W. Germany in Spain '82. Two 0-0s and W. Germany went through because they beat Spain by 1 goal. Keegan missed a sitter - tw*t. So two draws means a great chance to go through. Get ready for defence minded games with low scores. It's not going to provide an exciting spectacle of attacking football is it ? On the plus side, it might mean less games for our English players, as they'll probably be coming home after two matches rather than three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1885 Posted 11 January, 2017 Share Posted 11 January, 2017 Love it. Looking forward to see Malta play The Vatican there... Scotland + Netherlands probably still won't qualify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted 12 January, 2017 Share Posted 12 January, 2017 Love it. Looking forward to see Malta play The Vatican there... Scotland + Netherlands probably still won't qualify... They'll still be drawn in the hardest group even if they do.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now