Guest chopey Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I think its a cracking Idea, under current rules Asia get 4 places, Africa get 5 and Europe get 13, that's not fair. I'm all for more games to watch during the world cup and although I didn't initially like the idea of penalty shootouts settling group games this is probably the best way to keep things fair. It's perfectly fair. Europe tend to send 13 genuine football teams, bar 2002 when Ireland qualified. The same can not be said of Asia. You haven't convinced me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I think its a cracking Idea, under current rules Asia get 4 places, Africa get 5 and Europe get 13, that's not fair. I'm all for more games to watch during the world cup and although I didn't initially like the idea of penalty shootouts settling group games this is probably the best way to keep things fair. It's perfectly fair. Europe tend to send 13 genuine football teams, bar 2002 when Ireland qualified. The same can not be said of Asia. I've said this before, but if the purpose of the World Cup was about just having the 32 best teams, then you wouldn't invite anyone from Asia at all. It's not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I think its a cracking Idea, under current rules Asia get 4 places, Africa get 5 and Europe get 13, that's not fair. I'm all for more games to watch during the world cup and although I didn't initially like the idea of penalty shootouts settling group games this is probably the best way to keep things fair. It's perfectly fair. Europe tend to send 13 genuine football teams, bar 2002 when Ireland qualified. The same can not be said of Asia. I've said this before, but if the purpose of the World Cup was about just having the 32 best teams, then you wouldn't invite anyone from Asia at all. It's not. Japan & S. Korea would probably scrape in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I think its a cracking Idea, under current rules Asia get 4 places, Africa get 5 and Europe get 13, that's not fair. I'm all for more games to watch during the world cup and although I didn't initially like the idea of penalty shootouts settling group games this is probably the best way to keep things fair. It's perfectly fair. Europe tend to send 13 genuine football teams, bar 2002 when Ireland qualified. The same can not be said of Asia. I've said this before, but if the purpose of the World Cup was about just having the 32 best teams, then you wouldn't invite anyone from Asia at all. It's not. Japan & S. Korea would probably scrape in. As currently constituted I have my doubts, but that's not the point. You have larger quotas in the non-Europe federations precisely because it allows you to bring in somebody like Uzbekistan or China or New Zealand to the big stage from time to time. You get people in that country invested in football, the game grows, and eventually they get to the point where they deserve to be in on their own merits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 And I'm all for that, but this can already happen with the current format. There was absolutely no need to completely devalue the first round of the competition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjb Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Asians shouldn't get a place in the World Cup? I'd be embarrassed with England who couldn't get out of a group that had Iceland in it tbf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Think they should have just gone for 64 tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Asians shouldn't get a place in the World Cup? I'd be embarrassed with England who couldn't get out of a group that had Iceland in it tbf. whatever m8, no asian teams even made it out of the groups so youve got nowt to be proud of Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 And technically we weren't even in a group with Iceland, therefore the tournament was a glorious success for English patriots everywhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 And I'm all for that, but this can already happen with the current format. There was absolutely no need to completely devalue the first round of the competition. Yes, but it solves the problem of those slots coming at the expense of deserving European teams though. You get to have your cake and eat it too now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mag_in_NZ Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 16 x 3 is mental, so much crap will get thru, could go with it if it was 8 x 6, NZ regularly qualifying will do f-all for the game domestically or internationally.....money move ASAT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Think they should have just gone for 64 tbh. I suspect the scale of the tournament may have become prohibitive for a lot of countries *cough* Qatar *cough* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 To be fair, one of the best things about international football is seeing minnows do well. The format is shit though and 64 would work so much better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilikenewcastle Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 The 16 team Euros and 32 team world cups were perfect. Goodbye groups of death, hello Tahiti v Libya. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Wait, CONCACAF are going to get more places than South America? Gets funnier by the minute. Odds that this decision isn't bent as owt are absolutely non-existent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 What was wrong with it the way it was? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 What was wrong with it the way it was? Politics basically. Asia/Africa wanted more places and to keep the current format you'd have to take them off Europe which would not have gone down well and that's Infantino's political home base. This way everyones happy as they all get more world cup money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 How many places extra do each association (or whatever it is) get now? I can't find it anywhere Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 How many places extra do each association (or whatever it is) get now? I can't find it anywhere nowt confirmed but this is doing the rounds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Cheers, so looking at the qualifying for Brazil 2014, the extra teams if this were the case would be: Iceland Ukraine Romania Uzbekistan Jordan Qatar Oman Iraq Senegal Tunisia Egypt Burkina Faso Panama Jamaica Guatemala New Zealand ehmm.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Using the current highest ranking teams as a qualifier the WC assuming no change aside from UEFA would be made up of: AFC: Iran, Korea, Japan, Saudi, Oz, Uzbekistan, UAE, China, CAF: Senegal, Ivory Coast, Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, Dr. Congo, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Ghana CONCACAF: Costa Rica, Mexico, US, Panama, Haiti, Honduras, Curaçao (better ranked .5 AFC team) CONMEBOL: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay, Peru OFC: NZ Curaçao and NZ being the lowest ranked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 If that is correct, the Concacaf increase is obscene and it's ridiculous that there'll still be any playoffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steggy Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Cheers, so looking at the qualifying for Brazil 2014, the extra teams if this were the case would be: Iceland Ukraine Romania Uzbekistan Jordan Qatar Oman Iraq Senegal Tunisia Egypt Burkina Faso Panama Jamaica Guatemala New Zealand ehmm.. No more South Americans? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Dunno, they had 6 there including hosts Brazil An extra would have been Venezuela, though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 South America is the most competitive one and gets no increase ffs Link to post 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