March 23, 2017, 04:05:10 AM

Author Topic: New World Cup Format  (Read 747 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

January 11, 2017, 03:10:05 AM
Reply #15
Online

hill135


16 extra teams is probably another 180 stickers added to the already expensive to complete Panini album.

Won't someone think of the sticker collectors!

Saw this earlier


January 11, 2017, 03:25:01 AM
Reply #16
Offline

toffee_scot


I'm slowly warming to the idea even though for a while I thought a 32 team tournament should be the maximum. We already have quite a few qualifying spots for Europe although a few more wouldn't be a bad thing (increasing Scotland's odds of qualifying from 3,000/1 to 2,000/1) plus it would be good to see more representation from teams from Africa, Asia, North America plus I guess they could give New Zealand Oceania one guaranteed qualifying spot.

The 3 team group format seems very weird and I'm not sure I like the idea of certain teams only getting to play 2 games before getting knocked out, but then most will qualify for the knockout stages. We might see teams going more for it as they know one win could be enough for qualification and you might get a few surprise teams (a bit like Iceland and Wales in the Euros) going quite a distance.

It's a global competition and if it can be implemented properly then it could add more drama and excitement.


January 11, 2017, 03:32:22 AM
Reply #17
Offline

velimski


I quite like it.

The tournament will still take as long as the current format (32 days), and the winner will still need to play the same amount of games to lift the cup (7).

They're are also proposing to do away with draws in the group stage. Instead, any game ending in a draw will go to penalties, so there will be a definitive winner for every game.


January 11, 2017, 03:59:50 AM
Reply #18
Offline

irishtoffee


The only problem I have with it is that if there's only 3 teams in a group then you could end up with a lot of teams tied on points and goal difference and end up flicking a coin. More incidences of 2 teams knowing a draw will put them both through as well as there'll only be one group game at a time. I think that's why they're debating penalties in the event of drawn games

January 11, 2017, 04:38:44 AM
Reply #19
Online

Simon Paul

Administrator
maybe qualifying for one world cup automatically wasn't enough for Qatar so they bunged a few extra quid in the envelope to get into the 2026 one as well?

January 11, 2017, 05:03:13 AM
Reply #20
Offline

Shogun

Administrator
Can't wait for Uganda vs Romania.
I'm more trusting of fellas when they have my cock in their mouth


January 11, 2017, 05:40:35 AM
Reply #21
Online

Redartin


Can't wait for Uganda vs Romania.

Both teams to score?
Everything is always okay in the end, if it's not, then it's not the end.

January 11, 2017, 07:00:23 AM
Reply #22
Offline

Jamokachi


Yea, even though there's more of a chance seeing Wales qualify for future tournaments I can't help but feel this completely devalues the finals. All about the cash though, isn't it.

January 11, 2017, 03:34:48 PM
Reply #23
Offline

Eddie

NSNO Subscriber
Worth 1bn to FIFA. There you go.
I'll assume you have been drinking... I live in Monterrey Mexico numb nuts

January 11, 2017, 06:55:21 PM
Reply #24
Offline

TSGun

NSNO Subscriber
Soon enough there'll be all 196 countries with no qualifying.

Makes for a nice even 49 groups of 4.

January 11, 2017, 08:16:40 PM
Reply #25
Offline

bacon sarnie


It's awful.

Obviously this helps Canada potentially qualify but I still think it's a load of old shite. All about money, way too many teams now.

Its the men's world cup mate. Think they'll notice if we play the women?

Looking forward to England v Canada.

January 12, 2017, 01:52:33 PM
Reply #26
Offline

Ell Capitan

NSNO Subscriber
Just going to be more shit games. Of course there will be upsets, but only a handful. Unless it's a team you actively follow, the group stages will be far less interesting to watch, with even less heavyweight clashes. It'll only be at the business end of the competition that you see the big teams competing with each other, and probably less often than they used to.

I'm surprised there's even any debate on his thread as I thought there was near universal agreement that the Euros last year were shite, directly because of the increase in teams entering.

There's no good reason for why doing the same for the World Cup won't be equally damaging.

January 12, 2017, 06:18:46 PM
Reply #27
Online

Goaljira

NSNO Subscriber
Where's 2026 likely to be held, the USA?
Clear eyes.  Full hearts.  Can't lose.

January 12, 2017, 06:42:25 PM
Reply #28
Online

Major Clanger


Where's 2026 likely to be held, the USA?

Wherever radiation levels will be acceptable.
The Shadow Over Inasmuch - The Adventures of Bicoid, Hunchback and Kruppel

January 15, 2017, 07:25:57 PM
Reply #29
Online

ally2


With so many games I think its a real possibility that the games will end up being shared amongst broadcasters which would be a tragedy but so long as they make more money out it they won't give a shit.