A better solution would be to decrease the number of European teams and make a more balanced field of 32.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 33 seconds ago
A better solution would be to decrease the number of European teams and make a more balanced field of 32.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree , it would solve many of the positives I see from expanding number of teams while avoiding dead rubber teams involved. I am equally on a side that I don’t want to see rubbish teams in big tournaments, but also it should be recognised that there are strong teams that are well recognised with good players that do miss out on current 32 team format, and also there will definitely be further growth in quality for many nations if they have a more consistent qualification for World Cup.
In theory New Zealand will never miss out on a World Cup again as OFC are guarenteed a place.
They are a limited team, but might give more hope to football growing over there.
I don’t like the lack of jeopardy for the group stages either. 72 matches to eliminate 16 teams just takes away that edge. Would be better off increasing to 72 and having it as a straight knock out. That would give the qualifiers more importance as well. Not that FIFA would do that, they’d lose money as it would be fewer games in the tournament.
The Qatar World Cup is the best I’ve ever seen so it makes complete sense that FIFA will mix it up and make the next one as awful as possible
comment by Dave The Jackal (U22179)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not in favour of the expansion to 48, even though it gives my lot (Scotland) a better chance of qualifying. 32 is the perfect number, end of.
It’s happening anyway though, and at least they’ve finally cottoned on to the utter folly of groups of 3. Which eejit ever thought that was workable?! So 1 team in each group is sitting it out when the last game’s played … just how much rigging of results would that have produced in those final group games? Laughable that this was ever considered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haven’t looked into it but I doubt Europe will get many extra spots if any at all. This has more than likely been done for kick backs from countries in Africa, Asia, the Carribean etc
UEFA get three extra places. So Scotland still won’t qualify.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
A better solution would be to decrease the number of European teams and make a more balanced field of 32.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our schit government is reducing us to a banana republic, so we might be glad of the new format.
Won’t matter to us, one thing we are very good at is qualifying for the world cup.
Feel like they should have more inter-confederational play-offs, to allow for boom and bust cycles.
Would have a certain number qualify the old fashioned way, then a mini competition to create the rest (ie groups of 4 play off at a neutral venue the summer before the world cup).
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
I don’t like the lack of jeopardy for the group stages either. 72 matches to eliminate 16 teams just takes away that edge. Would be better off increasing to 72 and having it as a straight knock out. That would give the qualifiers more importance as well. Not that FIFA would do that, they’d lose money as it would be fewer games in the tournament.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you mean increasing to 64 teams
64 would be good.
2 World Cups of 32 teams. One in the Americas one in Europe/Asia.
The two winners meet to become World Champions.
Would basically be games 24 hours a day during the groups.
Yeah, my maths is terrible today.
Rubbish idea and blatant profiteering.
The early stages will be very dull but the organisers won’t care as they’ll be raking it in.
It was not untill 1990 thatta Eurooean team beat a S American team in a world Cup finale
In the 11 finales that have pittied Eurooe v S Ameruca, the S Americans have won 8 too Europes 3 thymes
comment by #4zA - Sto pazziann (U22472)
posted 6 minutes ago
It was not untill 1990 thatta Eurooean team beat a S American team in a world Cup finale
In the 11 finales that have pittied Eurooe v S Ameruca, the S Americans have won 8 too Europes 3 thymes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s nice to hear.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 20 minutes ago
64 would be good.
2 World Cups of 32 teams. One in the Americas one in Europe/Asia.
The two winners meet to become World Champions.
Would basically be games 24 hours a day during the groups.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That wouldn't work for me though as I need my eight hours sleep a night and want to watch all the games.
I did like the Qatar schedule though of 4 games a day starting late morning GMT.
The mosed dominant period was Europe provude 7 outta 8 finalist b-tween 2006-2010-2014-2018 n winnin all 4
looking at this from a scheduling perspective you have 12 groups and each group needs 6 games played to complete the groups which is 72 games.
Simple maths really, 12 days and 6 games a day
Then take into consideration US time zones which would be 5-8 hours behind us.
anyways fack all that, lets just hope England are on an East coast group location.
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 20 seconds ago
looking at this from a scheduling perspective you have 12 groups and each group needs 6 games played to complete the groups which is 72 games.
Simple maths really, 12 days and 6 games a day
Then take into consideration US time zones which would be 5-8 hours behind us.
anyways fack all that, lets just hope England are on an East coast group location.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hope ur in Alabammy
The "too many teams" argument is just b3cause the European teams don't want more competition. World Cup is like the modern FA Cup, while it's not likely that a minnow will win, there is a chance for a team to have a run and do some giant killing. This is great for the tournament. They should make sure the additional teams should come from Africa, Asia and Latin America, not Europe.
Daily Schedule
Game 1 - 9am EST- 2pm GMT
Game 2 - 11am EST- 4pm GMT
Game 3 - 12pm CT -6pm GMT
Game 4 - 2pm CT -8pm GMT
Game 5 - 2pm PST -10pm GMT
Game 6 - 4pm PST - 12am GMT
Simples
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 0 seconds ago
Daily Schedule
Game 1 - 9am EST- 2pm GMT
Game 2 - 11am EST- 4pm GMT
Game 3 - 12pm CT -6pm GMT
Game 4 - 2pm CT -8pm GMT
Game 5 - 2pm PST -10pm GMT
Game 6 - 4pm PST - 12am GMT
Simples
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously that's from my perspective no doubt they will start a little later in the day and finish a little later.
You ain't factored in the last group games played at same time.
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 0 seconds ago
Daily Schedule
Game 1 - 9am EST- 2pm GMT
Game 2 - 11am EST- 4pm GMT
Game 3 - 12pm CT -6pm GMT
Game 4 - 2pm CT -8pm GMT
Game 5 - 2pm PST -10pm GMT
Game 6 - 4pm PST - 12am GMT
Simples
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously that's from my perspective no doubt they will start a little later in the day and finish a little later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It maybe too hot to play at certain times
Sign in if you want to comment
New World Cup Format 2026
Page 2 of 4
posted on 14/3/23
A better solution would be to decrease the number of European teams and make a more balanced field of 32.
posted on 14/3/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 33 seconds ago
A better solution would be to decrease the number of European teams and make a more balanced field of 32.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree , it would solve many of the positives I see from expanding number of teams while avoiding dead rubber teams involved. I am equally on a side that I don’t want to see rubbish teams in big tournaments, but also it should be recognised that there are strong teams that are well recognised with good players that do miss out on current 32 team format, and also there will definitely be further growth in quality for many nations if they have a more consistent qualification for World Cup.
posted on 14/3/23
In theory New Zealand will never miss out on a World Cup again as OFC are guarenteed a place.
They are a limited team, but might give more hope to football growing over there.
posted on 14/3/23
I don’t like the lack of jeopardy for the group stages either. 72 matches to eliminate 16 teams just takes away that edge. Would be better off increasing to 72 and having it as a straight knock out. That would give the qualifiers more importance as well. Not that FIFA would do that, they’d lose money as it would be fewer games in the tournament.
posted on 14/3/23
The Qatar World Cup is the best I’ve ever seen so it makes complete sense that FIFA will mix it up and make the next one as awful as possible
posted on 14/3/23
comment by Dave The Jackal (U22179)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not in favour of the expansion to 48, even though it gives my lot (Scotland) a better chance of qualifying. 32 is the perfect number, end of.
It’s happening anyway though, and at least they’ve finally cottoned on to the utter folly of groups of 3. Which eejit ever thought that was workable?! So 1 team in each group is sitting it out when the last game’s played … just how much rigging of results would that have produced in those final group games? Laughable that this was ever considered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haven’t looked into it but I doubt Europe will get many extra spots if any at all. This has more than likely been done for kick backs from countries in Africa, Asia, the Carribean etc
posted on 14/3/23
UEFA get three extra places. So Scotland still won’t qualify.
posted on 14/3/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 17 minutes ago
A better solution would be to decrease the number of European teams and make a more balanced field of 32.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our schit government is reducing us to a banana republic, so we might be glad of the new format.
posted on 14/3/23
Won’t matter to us, one thing we are very good at is qualifying for the world cup.
posted on 14/3/23
Feel like they should have more inter-confederational play-offs, to allow for boom and bust cycles.
Would have a certain number qualify the old fashioned way, then a mini competition to create the rest (ie groups of 4 play off at a neutral venue the summer before the world cup).
posted on 14/3/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
I don’t like the lack of jeopardy for the group stages either. 72 matches to eliminate 16 teams just takes away that edge. Would be better off increasing to 72 and having it as a straight knock out. That would give the qualifiers more importance as well. Not that FIFA would do that, they’d lose money as it would be fewer games in the tournament.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you mean increasing to 64 teams
posted on 14/3/23
64 would be good.
2 World Cups of 32 teams. One in the Americas one in Europe/Asia.
The two winners meet to become World Champions.
Would basically be games 24 hours a day during the groups.
posted on 14/3/23
Yeah, my maths is terrible today.
posted on 14/3/23
Rubbish idea and blatant profiteering.
The early stages will be very dull but the organisers won’t care as they’ll be raking it in.
posted on 14/3/23
It was not untill 1990 thatta Eurooean team beat a S American team in a world Cup finale
In the 11 finales that have pittied Eurooe v S Ameruca, the S Americans have won 8 too Europes 3 thymes
posted on 14/3/23
comment by #4zA - Sto pazziann (U22472)
posted 6 minutes ago
It was not untill 1990 thatta Eurooean team beat a S American team in a world Cup finale
In the 11 finales that have pittied Eurooe v S Ameruca, the S Americans have won 8 too Europes 3 thymes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s nice to hear.
posted on 14/3/23
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 20 minutes ago
64 would be good.
2 World Cups of 32 teams. One in the Americas one in Europe/Asia.
The two winners meet to become World Champions.
Would basically be games 24 hours a day during the groups.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That wouldn't work for me though as I need my eight hours sleep a night and want to watch all the games.
I did like the Qatar schedule though of 4 games a day starting late morning GMT.
posted on 14/3/23
The mosed dominant period was Europe provude 7 outta 8 finalist b-tween 2006-2010-2014-2018 n winnin all 4
posted on 14/3/23
looking at this from a scheduling perspective you have 12 groups and each group needs 6 games played to complete the groups which is 72 games.
Simple maths really, 12 days and 6 games a day
Then take into consideration US time zones which would be 5-8 hours behind us.
anyways fack all that, lets just hope England are on an East coast group location.
posted on 14/3/23
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 20 seconds ago
looking at this from a scheduling perspective you have 12 groups and each group needs 6 games played to complete the groups which is 72 games.
Simple maths really, 12 days and 6 games a day
Then take into consideration US time zones which would be 5-8 hours behind us.
anyways fack all that, lets just hope England are on an East coast group location.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hope ur in Alabammy
posted on 14/3/23
The "too many teams" argument is just b3cause the European teams don't want more competition. World Cup is like the modern FA Cup, while it's not likely that a minnow will win, there is a chance for a team to have a run and do some giant killing. This is great for the tournament. They should make sure the additional teams should come from Africa, Asia and Latin America, not Europe.
posted on 14/3/23
Daily Schedule
Game 1 - 9am EST- 2pm GMT
Game 2 - 11am EST- 4pm GMT
Game 3 - 12pm CT -6pm GMT
Game 4 - 2pm CT -8pm GMT
Game 5 - 2pm PST -10pm GMT
Game 6 - 4pm PST - 12am GMT
Simples
posted on 14/3/23
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 0 seconds ago
Daily Schedule
Game 1 - 9am EST- 2pm GMT
Game 2 - 11am EST- 4pm GMT
Game 3 - 12pm CT -6pm GMT
Game 4 - 2pm CT -8pm GMT
Game 5 - 2pm PST -10pm GMT
Game 6 - 4pm PST - 12am GMT
Simples
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously that's from my perspective no doubt they will start a little later in the day and finish a little later.
posted on 14/3/23
You ain't factored in the last group games played at same time.
posted on 14/3/23
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by .Gaffer Pranks. (U22336)
posted 0 seconds ago
Daily Schedule
Game 1 - 9am EST- 2pm GMT
Game 2 - 11am EST- 4pm GMT
Game 3 - 12pm CT -6pm GMT
Game 4 - 2pm CT -8pm GMT
Game 5 - 2pm PST -10pm GMT
Game 6 - 4pm PST - 12am GMT
Simples
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously that's from my perspective no doubt they will start a little later in the day and finish a little later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It maybe too hot to play at certain times
Page 2 of 4