Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #26
    Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

    Incandenza wrote:
    Take away Germany and Italy, and the only European champions have been one-offs that won it in their own country. South Americans are also the only countries to have one it outside of their own continent.
    Outsude those that have won it, the only time a South American side has ever reached the semi final was in their own country - and that hasn't happened in almost 50 years.

    Comment


      #27
      Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

      Well yes, but only one tournament has actually been held in South America in that time, won by the hosts.

      Comment


        #28
        Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

        And that was down to a dodgy deal where a 6-0 win paid off a few debts.

        Comment


          #29
          Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

          And (apart from Brazil and Argentina) the South American sides have no recent pedigree. As Sean of the Shed mentioned on another thread recently, no South American side bar those two has reached the quarter-finals since 1978.
          True, but apart from "the big two", Ecuador, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay and Uruguay have all also made the last 16 in the last 5 finals, not a bad return for the CONMEBOL region.

          Even leaving Brazil and Argentina aside, that means 5 other South American teams have got that far since and including 1990, compared to 4 African sides in total (Cameroon, Nigeria, Senegal and Ghana).

          Comment


            #30
            Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

            Another WC, another praising of the 32 team setup. Look at how many dramatic last-day playing-at-the-same-time qualifiers there's been over the years. Holland v Mexico in '98, South Korea v Portugal and Costa Rica v Brasil in '02, and while the game sucked, Czech Rep v Italy in '06. The bottom line is a top 2 qualifying from the group is a majestic and perfect system. Perfect numbers, perfect equations, and close-to-perfect amount of teams from each part of the world.

            This only shows what a horrific farce the now-24 team system is in the Euro. No, we don't need anymore lame 3rd place v 3rd place goal differential tiebreakers, thank you. Even if that's how the USA qualified for the 2nd round in '94.

            Comment


              #31
              Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

              I hope Jason V, TeeRex and their colleagues in the CONCACAF/ OCEANIA possees will forgive me if I combine World football into four large blocs for simplicity. Here are the last 16 qulifiers summarised since the thing expanded to 32 teams in 1998, and assuming Portugal and Chile make it later today:

              Europe: 10---9---10---6

              Americas: 5---4---4---7

              Asia: 0---2---1---2

              Africa: 1---1---1---1

              Comment


                #32
                Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                Ranking for the bottom 16 also rans

                17, Ivory Coast 1-1-1-4-3-4
                18, Slovenia 1-1-1-3-3-4
                19, Switzerland 1-1-1-1-1-4
                20, South Africa 1-1-1-3-5-4
                21, Australia 1-1-1-3-6-4
                22, New Zealand 0-3-0-2-2-3
                23, Serbia 1-0-2-2-3-3
                24, Denmark 1-0-2-3-6-3
                25, Greece 1-0-2-2-5-3
                26, Italy 0-2-1-4-5-2
                27, Algeria 0-1-2-0-2-1
                28, France 0-1-2-1-4-1
                29, Honduras 0-1-2-0-3-1
                30, Nigeria 0-0-3-2-5-0
                30, Cameroon 0-0-3-2-5-0
                32, North Korea 0-0-3-1-12-0

                Comment


                  #33
                  Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                  Die Steyn, any chance of crunching those into a percentage ?

                  "I mean, I don't want to go back to 16 or 24 anyway, so it's a moot point, but with any number greater than 8 participants, Europe has a better claim to extra teams than South America"

                  You see, Etienne, this was translated into Spanish, passed out and used as BULLETIN BOARD MATERIAL

                  Comment


                    #34
                    Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                    four points = 44%
                    three points = 33%
                    two points = 22%
                    one point = 11%
                    nil points = er, 0%

                    Of course to make it interesting you can add subjective criteria. DPR Korea get another 10% for my goal of the tournament, France for knocking out the great Satan in qualifying. While Greece lose half theirs for pointless negativity and Cote Revoir for playacting that stood out even from a pretty base standard.

                    Comment


                      #35
                      Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                      RKK, hah. First time CONMEBOL has represented en bloc rather than just delegating Brazil and Argentina to do the hard work since 1950.

                      I'm not sure what point DG is really making here. That the teams who were eliminated weren't as good as the ones who qualified?

                      Comment


                        #36
                        Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                        (OK, maybe 78 at a push)

                        Comment


                          #37
                          Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                          Etienne wrote:
                          I'm not sure what point DG is really making here. That the teams who were eliminated weren't as good as the ones who qualified?
                          Try the teams with four points being better than the ones with zero, funny boy.

                          You must have seen similar tables of the also-rans before. I had no idea Taiwan was the fourth-ranking World power in Korf-ball, for example.

                          Comment


                            #38
                            Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                            Making the Euros more than 16 is ludicrous, cutting the World Cup back to 16 equally so.

                            The clue is in the title - 'World' Cup. Commerce will do what it will with a tournament however many or few teams compete. Just because Coca-Cola might want something doesn't mean automatically wanting the opposite is its own justification. Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.

                            Comment


                              #39
                              Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                              I'd say Taiwan are clearly the third best Korfball nation. The Czechs are in decline.

                              Comment


                                #40
                                Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                Agree with E10. The expansion of the competition was based on wholly corrupt and non-sporting motivations by Havelange and Blatter but there are still benefits to the world game in spite of FIFA.

                                I'm pretty evangelical about football, so where you have countries where it is not the most popular sport then I think it's great if the World Cup can throw up a story that pushes the sport to the fore. Slovakia and New Zealand are good examples, people will forget ice hockey and rugby for a few weeks or so as their success stories attract people to pay attention to a sport they might not normally care for.

                                It might mean little in the long term of course as the memories fade and football fades back to secondary importance, but if a World Cup glory story cannot help establish the sport more firmly in a place then nothing ever will.

                                Comment


                                  #41
                                  Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                  E10 Braifull wrote:
                                  Making the Euros more than 16 is ludicrous, cutting the World Cup back to 16 equally so
                                  Actually both are perfectly feasible and can be justified. Since 1998, we've seen both France and Germany run a pretty slick mega-tournament: there's no reason why England, Spain and at a pinch Italy couldn't do likewise. As I expect those five to be the only Europeans capable of ststaging a 24-team Euros, why not go the whole hog and make the UEFA tournament a 32 as well? At least NI and Wales would have a better than even chance of getting there.

                                  I'll admit to being one of the killjoys who thought South Africa would struggle to run the current tournament. Glad to be proved wrong thus far, but even with only 16 invites Poland and Ukraine are struggling to get their shit together. Only two Ukrainian sites appear to have both stadium, access and hotels all in place, while with all due respects to everyone in Katowice and Chorzow, it looks like a GAA ground in Tipperary.

                                  The clue is in the title - 'World' Cup
                                  Aye, so what? Not every part of the World is of equal strength. Six African teams this time, yet only one has progressed to the 16 in each of the last four tournaments.

                                  Commerce will do what it will with a tournament however many or few teams compete. Just because Coca-Cola might want something doesn't mean automatically wanting the opposite is its own justification
                                  OK, I probably deserve that for the jibe at TechVis. But really I'm less bothered about what Coke and McDonald think, or that Arshavin wasn't there and Ronaldo and Messi might not have been. One wasn't good enough, tough luck. The other two get saturation coverage in the CL and Nike adverts. We wouldn't be mising much. Best, Giggs and Litmanen were still great players even if their international sides never made it to play in three sterile nil-nils.

                                  Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day
                                  Ha ha. Left the cliche detector at the office again?

                                  Comment


                                    #42
                                    Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                    You can tell a tournament's too big when the group stage is a cakewalk, for the same old teams, year after year. I'm looking at you, Rugby Union.

                                    A tournament whose runners-up have to cheat to re-qualify, and then go on to go home bottom of their group, isn't in this position, I suggest.

                                    Comment


                                      #43
                                      Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                      Verehrung des Lahm Gottes wrote:
                                      Aye, so what? Not every part of the World is of equal strength. Six African teams this time, yet only one has progressed to the 16 in each of the last four tournaments.
                                      Indeed. New Zealand is no worse than Italy, and Japan and South Korea kicked some European ass.

                                      Comment


                                        #44
                                        Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                        The sooner the World Cup has fewer European teams, the better the tournament will be.

                                        Actually, that's not true, I find the current distribution just about right.

                                        Comment


                                          #45
                                          Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                          Europe ... CONCACAF ... CONMEBOL ... Africa ... Asia ... instead of having a massive tournament in just one country, just have two groups each in four of the continents, a week's break, then the knockout stages in the fifth one ... bonkers idea, but seems 'neat', and would open up World Cup hosting to many countries ...

                                          Comment


                                            #46
                                            Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                            I agree with everything up to "idea".

                                            Comment


                                              #47
                                              Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                              Yes, that's why I said bonkers. Wouldn't work for logistical reasons, but it's theoretically a good idea...What they really should do, though, is eliminate mid-season internationals, and just have qualifications for Euros/WC etc as a mini-tournament each June...

                                              Comment


                                                #48
                                                Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                                It's not theoretically a good idea. It would destroy the sense of the finals as an event.

                                                Comment


                                                  #49
                                                  Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                                  Maybe you're right, and maybe you're not. It would be logistically complicated, sure, but it would have other benefits. It was just an idea that occurred to me; it's not like I'm supporting it with my life or anything.

                                                  Comment


                                                    #50
                                                    Should the World Cup revert to 16 teams?

                                                    dalliance wrote:
                                                    there are still benefits to the world game in spite of FIFA
                                                    Of course, but I'm describing what I see as disadvantages- too many mediocre teams and dull matches. Plus the greater likelihood of the bloated tournament bankrupting its organisers.

                                                    I'm pretty evangelical about football
                                                    That must make me Catholic- Cardinal Newman to your John Knox, maybe. I enjoy the game as much as ever, and like the way you can watch it or find equally interested locals pretty much anywhere in the World. But if those locals in Kosice or Invercargill prefer ice hockey or rugby union, that's fine too. Realistically those fans probably won't be turned by finishing 18th or 21st in the World Cup, just like New Zealand or Ireland punching above their weight in cricket still won't make it a major spectator sport in those countries.

                                                    if a World Cup glory story cannot help establish the sport more firmly in a place then nothing ever will
                                                    Fine, maybe nothing ever will. That isn't a problem for me.

                                                    Braai on Earth... wrote:
                                                    You can tell a tournament's too big when the group stage is a cakewalk, for the same old teams, year after year. I'm looking at you, Rugby Union
                                                    Fine, but that's hardly the only test of whether it's too big.

                                                    A tournament whose runners-up have to cheat to re-qualify, and then go on to go home bottom of their group, isn't in this position, I suggest
                                                    Er, they didn't- they merely had to avoid the opposition scoring two goals on the night, then at worst win a shoot-out.

                                                    I agree that a wide range of teams making the finals is a good thing and reflects the overall strength of the game, but UEFA is a good example of both

                                                    a) a large group of teams capable of qualifying for at least occasional finals, without the need for greatly expanding them (since 1996, 25 of the current 53 member countries have been to the European championships)

                                                    b) the need for often newly-built, expensive infrastructure proving too much for aspiring hosts.

                                                    [Lodz's,] it's not theoretically a good idea. It would destroy the sense of the finals as an event
                                                    Big football tournmaents don't have to be a single event- look at the Champs' League, or even the Euros before 1980.

                                                    Lodzubelieveit wrote:
                                                    What they really should do, though, is eliminate mid-season internationals, and just have qualifications for Euros/WC etc as a mini-tournament each June...
                                                    Whoa. Yer mates in the Enniskillen NISC wouldn't like that, I imagine.

                                                    My own plan for having only six European teams qualifying is straightforward, I think. First, you have 12 groups of four or five teams playing the six or eight matches over one season. The winners progress to a second group stage the following season. I'll admit this would leave the likes of Norn Iron playing no competitive games at all one season in every four, but there are ways round that. Reviving the home internationals, say?

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X