cyderspaceman Posted June 13, 2018 Share Posted June 13, 2018 I'll be too auld anyway but I wouldn't fancy traipsing after my team over an entire continent . Too much travelling. Cost a fortune, take forever. Wouldn't be a lot of fun. Could just go to Canada for the dope, though. eta the travel in Russia is almost as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Ferguson's Hat Posted June 13, 2018 Share Posted June 13, 2018 Doing weed is morally wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted June 13, 2018 Share Posted June 13, 2018 Just now, Barry Ferguson's Hat said: Doing weed is morally wrong. Shlubalub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donathan Posted June 13, 2018 Share Posted June 13, 2018 Assuming the groups will be regionally organised? Even still, it's a bit shite that the 48 team format means you're only guaranteed 2 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted June 15, 2018 Author Share Posted June 15, 2018 On 13/06/2018 at 17:32, Barry Ferguson's Hat said: Doing weed is morally wrong. Your morals. That's fine. (Now if you had said it was physically damaging, I wouldn't argue, as drawing smoke into your lungs is bad for your health. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted June 15, 2018 Author Share Posted June 15, 2018 On 13/06/2018 at 17:36, Donathan said: Assuming the groups will be regionally organised? Even still, it's a bit shite that the 48 team format means you're only guaranteed 2 games. They could make it worldwide and give every country in it 2 or 3 games, then no-one would have to travel except players and officials. Just like the qualifiers only further to travel. (I'm not seriously suggesting this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Girth Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 I'll be fucking 44 when this b*****d is on. Still might go though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estragon Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 I just think this is utterly ridiculous. A World Cup in any of these countries (including Canada despite a footballing history) would have been excellent, but this is just a bloated monster. It's bad enough having a quarter of eligible nations contesting a world cup, but to then have it cast over three of the biggest countries on earth is f**k off material. The travel, as has been mentioned, is ludicrous. As are the climate changes you might find between venues - and remember how much of a fuss was made about that in Brazil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 2 minutes ago, Estragon said: I just think this is utterly ridiculous. A World Cup in any of these countries (including Canada despite a footballing history) would have been excellent, but this is just a bloated monster. It's bad enough having a quarter of eligible nations contesting a world cup, but to then have it cast over three of the biggest countries on earth is f**k off material. The travel, as has been mentioned, is ludicrous. As are the climate changes you might find between venues - and remember how much of a fuss was made about that in Brazil. I think it should be a 64 team world cup same format as now with twice as many groups and one extra knock out round. I don't see the problem with the arbitrary number you picked of a quarter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estragon Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 minute ago, Peppino Impastato said: I think it should be a 64 team world cup same format as now with twice as many groups and one extra knock out round. I don't see the problem with the arbitrary number you picked of a quarter. How do you mean arbitrary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 3 minutes ago, Estragon said: How do you mean arbitrary? Cause you plucked it out of thin air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estragon Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 10 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: Cause you plucked it out of thin air. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/13/three-hosts-48-teams-how-the-2026-world-cup-will-work-united 48 teams qualify 210 took part in the most recent qualification. 23%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 8 hours ago, Estragon said: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/13/three-hosts-48-teams-how-the-2026-world-cup-will-work-united 48 teams qualify 210 took part in the most recent qualification. 23%. I'm aware the figure is correct, you deciding it's objectionable is entirely arbitrary. If it was a third you'd say a third is too much if it was a seventh you'd say a seventh is too much. Why is a quarter too many? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 There comes a point when the quality and format desirability are very badly affected. We saw the quality of Saudi Arabia yesterday. On paper they'd be up for reaching the knockout stages of the expanded format. Also the format is deeply undesirable. Top 2 out of 3 progressing will encourage defensive play. Teams 2 & 3 will know what results they need to progress. Some teams will be also be effectively eliminated after their opening game... 16 teams and their fans will go home after 2 games... some will be eliminated and going home only a few days in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 Let's look at who would be added to make up the 48 qualifiers, based on the qualification for the current competition. AFC goes up from 4.5 to 8 places. The 3 teams in the top 4 of each of the two final qualifying groups who didn't make it were: Syria Uzbekistan UAE CAF goes up from 5 to 9 places. They have 5 final groups, and the 4 best second-placed teams were: DR Congo Ivory Coast Burkina Faso Uganda Concacaf goes up from 3.5 places to 6. Assuming they give 3 of those places to Canada, USA and Mexico, the next 3 would be: Costa Rica Panama Honduras Conmebol goes up from 4.5 to 6, giving us: Chile OFC goes up from 0.5 to 1 place, meaning we get: New Zealand Finally, the money pot, UEFA. It gains 3 places, from 13 to 16. The three losing teams in the play-offs who had the best record in qualifying (excluding 6th-placed teams) were: Italy Northern Ireland Greece Finally, there will be a place open via a global play-off. The best of the countries who didn't make my list above are Ireland, Paraguay, Zambia, China and Trinidad & Tobago, so add one of them. So to see what the groups would look like, take one of the top two seeds in the current World Cup, then take one of the third or fourth seeds, and then one of those above. No Portugal v Spain, no England v Belgium. The highest ranked team in the current Pot 3 was Denmark. I think I'll wait till the knock-out round, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 Actually, I just read how the global play-off will work. There will be one from each association except UEFA, plus another from Concacaf as they're hosts, playing a mini-tournament in the "host" country. So those six could have been Paraguay, Zambia, Solomon Islands, Iraq, Trinidad & Tobago and Guatemala. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted June 30, 2018 Share Posted June 30, 2018 I'll be 36 when this is on so I probably won't be in the Scotland squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JTS98 Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 There should only be 16 teams in the World Cup. It would be an amazing tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 58 minutes ago, JTS98 said: There should only be 16 teams in the World Cup. It would be an amazing tournament. The same number brain cells you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JTS98 Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 28 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: The same number brain cells you have. What an attack! No idea who you are or what prompted that. Anyway, back on topic. Don't you think a 16-team World Cup would be a great watch? Easy to add in another qualification stage to whittle down the bloated, political 32-team waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.