Switch Theme:

World Cup: Fifa to expand competition to 48 teams after vote  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in gb
[DCM]
Et In Arcadia Ego





Canterbury

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38565246?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_match_of_the_day&ns_source=facebook&ns_linkname=sport


The World Cup will be expanded to host 48 teams, up from 32, Fifa has decided.

An initial stage of 16 groups of three teams will precede a knockout stage for the remaining 32 when the change is made for the 2026 tournament.

The sport's world governing body voted through the change at a meeting in Zurich on Tuesday.

The number of tournament matches will rise to 80, from 64, but the eventual winners will still play only seven games.

The tournament will be completed within 32 days - a measure to appease powerful European clubs, who objected to reform because of a crowded international schedule.

The changes mark the first World Cup expansion since 1998.

Why expand?

Fifa president Gianni Infantino has been behind the move, saying the World Cup has to be "more inclusive".

Speaking at a sports conference in Dubai in December, Infantino said expansion will also benefit "the development of football all over the world".

He added: "There is nothing bigger in terms of boosting football in a country than participating in a World Cup."

Despite saying "the decision should not just be financially driven", Infantino did highlight the possible financial upsides.

According to Fifa's own research, revenue is predicted to increase to £5.29bn for a 48-team tournament, giving a potential profit rise of £521m.






oh good.







The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Well, does mean Scotland might see the inside of a Tournament for the first time since....erm.....I know I watched it, in Bannerman's in Edinburgh to be precise. We had to sofa.....

1998?

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

Hey look! It’s my 2025 Hobby Log/Blog/Project/Whatevs 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





Hey Finland might get pity spot one day then About only chance they have of getting to WC is by upping the size! And even then chances are slimmer than snowball has in hell.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in gb
Wrathful Warlord Titan Commander





Ramsden Heath, Essex

Oh look, the Chief Conductor wants the money train to get longer. Shock!

There are already too many dead rubbers in the competition why have more?

How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website " 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Et In Arcadia Ego





Canterbury

 notprop wrote:


There are already too many dead rubbers in the competition why have more?


yeah.


I'd rather they set up a different competition -- champions league/Europa Cup kind of thing, if they have to do this.



Hey Finland might get pity spot one day then


... you'd still probably knock England out

The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

I think we're witnessing the slow decline and eventual death of international football

This is a blatant power play by Infantino in order to shore up his base.

You'll remember that shortly before the FBI ended his reign of corruption, Blatter was in favour of something similar.

The reports I've read talk of an extra £700 million for FIFA in TV revenue, but I'm sure that's not their reason for bringing in this change.

The quality of the football will decline, top teams will coast along, and quality football will suffer if mediocrity is allowed free reign.

Look at England. They no longer have any challenge in qualifying or friendlies, so they're not tested, so the first decent team they play at a tournament, they go out.

You may think that as a Scotland supporter I'd be happy with this, but I'm not. We're basically saying we're not good enough anymore to qualify on merit like the old days...

It's a very sad day for me...


"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 reds8n wrote:
... you'd still probably knock England out


Think England won at least one game last year. That's more than what Finland can claim...

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut






I'm not that opposed to increasing number of participants in principle actually (don't worry tneva82, Finland won't get to a world cup even if it's expanded to 200 nations )

While in a way, it's interesting that the lineup can differ a lot between cups, there's also a bunch of nations missing every time that I wouldn't mind have included. The problem is that the group stages gets so weird whenever we increase the number of spots without doubling (and there isn't enough good teams for a 64 team tournament), which is a bit unsatisfying.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

tneva82 wrote:
 reds8n wrote:
... you'd still probably knock England out


Think England won at least one game last year. That's more than what Finland can claim...


Was last world cup the time we beat England, or was that the time before? Either way, it was fething awesome! Like tripping your brother and then mom seeing him retaliate so he's the one that gets in trouble!

Ha! Neener, neener!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/10 12:54:39


DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

A world cup with 48 teams is garbage, adding more teams from south and north america, asia, africa and oceania would certainly decrease the quality level of the tournament as the best squads for those continents manage to qualify anyway and the remaining national teams are too weak. With such a format if a weak team gets lucky it can avoid all the best squads and end in the final positions. We saw something like that in the past european cup, which was expanded too, with wales ended third and iceland in the quarter finals. Portugal won the competition having faced only france among the most competitive teams.

 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 kronk wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
 reds8n wrote:
... you'd still probably knock England out


Think England won at least one game last year. That's more than what Finland can claim...


Was last world cup the time we beat England, or was that the time before? Either way, it was fething awesome! Like tripping your brother and then mom seeing him retaliate so he's the one that gets in trouble!

Ha! Neener, neener!


The USA beat England at the world cup in 1950!

How old are you?

You're thinking of world cup 2010 when it was England 1 - 1 USA


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blackie wrote:
A world cup with 48 teams is garbage, adding more teams from south and north america, asia, africa and oceania would certainly decrease the quality level of the tournament as the best squads for those continents manage to qualify anyway and the remaining national teams are too weak. With such a format if a weak team gets lucky it can avoid all the best squads and end in the final positions. We saw something like that in the past european cup, which was expanded too, with wales ended third and iceland in the quarter finals. Portugal won the competition having faced only france among the most competitive teams.


Under the old system of 16 teams, Northern Ireland, Iceland, and Wales would have been there on merit.

Northern Ireland won their qualifying group, Wales were best 2nd place team, and Iceland would have gotten into the play-offs with their second place finish, and would probably have made it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/10 14:02:15


"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in gb
Wrathful Warlord Titan Commander





Ramsden Heath, Essex

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
 kronk wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
 reds8n wrote:
... you'd still probably knock England out


Think England won at least one game last year. That's more than what Finland can claim...


Was last world cup the time we beat England, or was that the time before? Either way, it was fething awesome! Like tripping your brother and then mom seeing him retaliate so he's the one that gets in trouble!

Ha! Neener, neener!


The USA beat England at the world cup in 1950!

How old are you?

You're thinking of world cup 2010 when it was England 1 - 1 USA


You didn't finish you post old chap so I will do it for you;

Ha! Neener, neener!

How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website " 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

Bah!

I'll limit myself to one neener, but it still stands!

Ha! Neener!

DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Under the old system of 16 teams, Northern Ireland, Iceland, and Wales would have been there on merit.

Northern Ireland won their qualifying group, Wales were best 2nd place team, and Iceland would have gotten into the play-offs with their second place finish, and would probably have made it.


They deserved to qualify the tournament, indeed, but with the previous format they wouldn't pass their group stage. In fact Northern ireland reached the knokout stage endind third in their group, wales had a ridiculous group stage but at least they defeated belgium later, iceland had a ridiculous group stage too.

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

The quality of the football will decline, top teams will coast along, and quality football will suffer if mediocrity is allowed free reign.

Look at England. They no longer have any challenge in qualifying or friendlies, so they're not tested, so the first decent team they play at a tournament, they go out.

You may think that as a Scotland supporter I'd be happy with this, but I'm not. We're basically saying we're not good enough anymore to qualify on merit like the old days...

It's a very sad day for me...




As a rugby supporter, I think that this isn't necessarily true... the weaker teams may see improvement with better competition.

I think what football needs to do, is look at what teams like the All Blacks and England are doing, and teams like Germany are doing in soccer, in that if you want to play for the national side, you play in the nation's clubs. I think it's obvious, at least to me, that a home nation's national team does not do well when the bulk of the top tier players are foreigners.
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

The quality of the football will decline, top teams will coast along, and quality football will suffer if mediocrity is allowed free reign.

Look at England. They no longer have any challenge in qualifying or friendlies, so they're not tested, so the first decent team they play at a tournament, they go out.

You may think that as a Scotland supporter I'd be happy with this, but I'm not. We're basically saying we're not good enough anymore to qualify on merit like the old days...

It's a very sad day for me...




As a rugby supporter, I think that this isn't necessarily true... the weaker teams may see improvement with better competition.

I think what football needs to do, is look at what teams like the All Blacks and England are doing, and teams like Germany are doing in soccer, in that if you want to play for the national side, you play in the nation's clubs. I think it's obvious, at least to me, that a home nation's national team does not do well when the bulk of the top tier players are foreigners.


Nah, for me, it's a blatant cash grab and a naked attempt by the FIFA president to consolidate his power base.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blackie wrote:
 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Under the old system of 16 teams, Northern Ireland, Iceland, and Wales would have been there on merit.

Northern Ireland won their qualifying group, Wales were best 2nd place team, and Iceland would have gotten into the play-offs with their second place finish, and would probably have made it.


They deserved to qualify the tournament, indeed, but with the previous format they wouldn't pass their group stage. In fact Northern ireland reached the knokout stage endind third in their group, wales had a ridiculous group stage but at least they defeated belgium later, iceland had a ridiculous group stage too.


I agree that Northern Ireland should not have escaped their group at Euro 2016 with a 3rd place finish, but they certainly merited their place at the tournament.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/11 10:33:29


"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in au
Lady of the Lake






Fifa president Gianni Infantino has been behind the move, saying the World's Cup has wallets have to be "more inclusive".


Much better.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Nah, for me, it's a blatant cash grab and a naked attempt by the FIFA president to consolidate his power base.



Ohh don't get me wrong, expanding the tournament is definitely a cash grab... I just think that over time, there may be an improvement in the lower tier teams due to facing better competition, provided national sides selection criteria is "fixed" as well.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I just think that over time, there may be an improvement in the lower tier teams due to facing better competition, provided national sides selection criteria is "fixed" as well.


Ever the optimist!

Let's hope so, because it sounds like this is real, and this is happening!

DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: