World Cup 2022 Qatar FIFA World Cup (Quarter Finals) - On SBS

Remove this Banner Ad

And_ROOS

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 11, 2005
13,164
15,689
On the Road to A.G
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Geelong
Why 16 groups of 3 will be a bad idea. Firstly, teams only play 2 group games is very thin. Secondly, a lot of mediocre teams will make it spread out over 16 groups, so the finals will have more thrashings like this.

4 per division or even 5 per division would filter thru only rhe quality teams.
100%.
From Asia how many more spots do we get? Could see the UAE, Iraq and Oman get through and then get absolutely pumped.

So many teams this WC drop their 1st game (Argentina, Australia, Iran, Costa Rica, Germany, Serbia, Senegal, Cameroon) and then either recover to get out of their group (Australia/Argentina/Senegal) or push it til the last match day before they were eliminated (Iran/Costa Rica/Germany/Serbia/Cameroon).

We would have missed out on massive games in all groups besides Groups A (Qatar) and F (Canada) where combinations of ALL 4 teams could progress out of the group.

Instead we likely end up with dead rubber games. Take Group A for instance if its Aus/Fra/Den.
France beats Denmark. Australia beats Denmark. Denmark are now out but that makes Australia v France a dead rubber. FIFA will bill it as "excitement for a team to try and finish top" but instead teams will just rest and rotate players as teams did this WC.

Although I have seen articles this morning saying FIFA are considering going back on the 3 team group idea.
 

GG.exe

Kylo was here
Sep 6, 2005
138,889
89,028
AFL Club
Fremantle
Although I have seen articles this morning saying FIFA are considering going back on the 3 team group idea.
Can only hope and pray that common sense prevails. Why spoil a good thing? As you outlined above, another example of how stupid that would be.
 

sorted

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
13,522
19,661
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oldham, West Ham
Brazil have a relatively easy route to the final. Croatia followed by the winners of Holland/Argentina.

The bottom half of the draw has England v France and probably Spain v Portugal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

And_ROOS

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 11, 2005
13,164
15,689
On the Road to A.G
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Geelong
Can only hope and pray that common sense prevails. Why spoil a good thing? As you outlined above, another example of how stupid that would be.
I've seen the same a week or so ago. Here's hoping.

Saw this from Wenger today (from a day or 2 ago);
FIFA's Director of Global Football, Arsene Wenger, has revealed that it could be 12 groups of four or even a 'Wimbledon' style system of two concurrent tournaments of six groups of four, where teams would know who they will avoid until the final.
"This is not decided, but it will be 16 groups of three, 12 groups of four, or two sides of six groups of four, like you organise two 24-team [tournaments]," the former Arsenal manager said.
"I will not be able to decide that, it will be decided by the FIFA Council, and I think it will be done in the next year."
 

peetoo

Club Legend
Nov 10, 2022
1,120
975
AFL Club
Hawthorn
There’s always a couple of unlucky and by association other lucky teams at every cut.

There has to be a group stage but ffs try to structure it so teams don’t get incentivised to play negative
 

Magruder

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2012
11,693
18,211
AFL Club
Carlton
Mbappe v Walker is a key battle and I'm not convinced Walker is back to full speed. France also have the option to switch Mbappe to the right like PSG sometimes do. That would put him up against Shaw and Maguire. Then again, Dembele is no slouch. He was MoM against Denmark.

England also have a lot of offensive fire power. Kane, Saka, Rashford, Foden are all looking really sharp with Bellingham and Henderson chipping in with goals. We might be looking at a 2-2 draw or 3-2.

Yep, reckon England need 3 to win because they won’t contain the French for a whole game.

Would have been a worthy final.

It’s another argument for two deeper mids in Rice and Henderson and Bellingham released.
 
Last edited:

RossFC

Moderator
May 23, 2012
72,522
120,941
Alberton Oval
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #36
Remaining teams via rank. (2 more teams to be removed)

1. Brazil
3. Argentina
4. France
5. England
7. Spain
8. Netherlands
9. Portugal
12. Croatia
15. Switzerland
22. Morocco
 

Magruder

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2012
11,693
18,211
AFL Club
Carlton
Quarters is often the best round of a WC:

Brazil vs a slightly cynical but solid Croatia, studded with ageing quality.
England and France - imperfect sides with defensive frailties but worthy of a final
Netherlands vs Argentina. Both loom large in each other’s footballing consciousness from Bergkamps wonder goal in 98 to the somewhat tainted 1978 WC. Argentinas first triumph and the Dutch 2nd final loss on the bounce signalling the end of the Total Football generation.

and maybe… a derby of sorts… Spain vs Portugal.

wow.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TommyD13

Premiership Player
Jul 31, 2016
3,064
2,304
Adelaide
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Adelaide United Southampton
Could do 12 groups of 4, with top 2 going throiugh and best 8 thirds. Or top goes through and best 8 seconds. Would only work if round of 16/32 is then a random draw and not tied to finish position on the group. Teams would then just need to focus on getting out.
 

Magruder

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2012
11,693
18,211
AFL Club
Carlton
Could do 12 groups of 4, with top 2 going throiugh and best 8 thirds. Or top goes through and best 8 seconds. Would only work if round of 16/32 is then a random draw and not tied to finish position on the group. Teams would then just need to focus on getting out.

like your first option.

but it means 103 games.

personally don’t think it’s an issue but the tournament would probs have to be 7 weeis.

clubland would not be thrilled.
 

Zidane98

TheBrownDog
Dec 22, 2009
54,101
28,772
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, LFC, MVFC, RC Strasbourg
like your first option.

but it means 103 games.

personally don’t think it’s an issue but the tournament would probs have to be 7 weeis.

clubland would not be thrilled.

Normal program for a WC is 32 days. With 12 groups of 4 than a Round of 32 you would need to add another 5 days only bringing the tournament to 38 days. Fine with the normal June / July scheduling.

Would need a min of 12 stadiums by my calculations. Not a problem with joint hosting.
 

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
13,509
20,576
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
Saw this from Wenger today (from a day or 2 ago);
Yep, reckon England need 3 to win because they won’t contain the French for a whole game.

Would have been a worthy final.

It’s another argument for two deeper mids in Rice and Henderson and Bellingham released.

You know the best way to solve this is for FIFA to bite the bullet and stay at 32 teams. Seriously who in their right mind at FIFA thought 48 teams was a good idea? Didn't these idiots do the maths that any format used for a 48 team competition is flawed? It also makes a mockery of the qualifying process, the whole idea is just utterly ridiculous and for what? Just so India and China have an easier chance to qualifier and boost the already billions of TV audiences in that market? Can't be because FIFA would like New Zealand to qualifier for every World Cup which is also unfair and laughable.

like your first option.

but it means 103 games.

personally don’t think it’s an issue but the tournament would probs have to be 7 weeis.

clubland would not be thrilled.

The leagues will just have to adjust just like they had to for this Tournament in the middle of their seasons. 7 weeks is probably to much, you'll be able to squeeze it in 5 or 6 weeks imo
 
Last edited:

kickazz

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 12, 2010
12,139
18,429
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
You know the best way to solve this is for FIFA to bite the bullet and stay at 32 teams. Seriously who in their right mind at FIFA thought 48 teams was a good idea? Didn't these idiots do the maths that any format used for a 48 team competition is flawed? It also makers a mockery of the qualifying process, the whole idea is just utterly ridiculous and for what? Just so India and China have an easier chance to qualifier and boot the already billions of TV audiences in that market? Can't be because FIFA would like New Zealand to qualifier for every World Cup which is also unfair and laughable.



The leagues will just have to adjust just like they had to for this Tournament in the middle of their seasons. 7 weeks is probably to much, you'll be able to squeeze it in 5 or 6 weeks imo

I tend to agree.

Even 32 teams is a lot compared to other sports' world cup finals stage.

You could maybe add a phase between the confederation qualifications and the final tournament (a bit like T20 World cup this year, but larger in scale and perhaps not right before the tournament). This would allow for more countries to play competitive games against teams from other continents. Basically extend the inter confederation playoff from one or two games.
 

giggler99

Moderator
Jul 5, 2011
13,509
20,576
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Victory,Napoli,Liverpool,Penguins
I tend to agree.

Even 32 teams is a lot compared to other sports' world cup finals stage.

You could maybe add a phase between the confederation qualifications and the final tournament (a bit like T20 World cup this year, but larger in scale and perhaps not right before the tournament). This would allow for more countries to play competitive games against teams from other continents. Basically extend the inter confederation playoff from one or two games.

32 teams is perfect in my opinion there where some concerns at the beginning that it was to much but from the first in 98 its worked flawlessly. It also solved the many flaws the 24 teams World Cup had. Now FIFA have decide to undo all that and go back to a flawed system all so its more inclusive to weaker football countries. It dilutes the product and spectacle especially the qualifying campaigns.
 
Last edited:

Magruder

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2012
11,693
18,211
AFL Club
Carlton
You know the best way to solve this is for FIFA to bite the bullet and stay at 32 teams. Seriously who in their right mind at FIFA thought 48 teams was a good idea? Didn't these idiots do the maths that any format used for a 48 team competition is flawed? It also makes a mockery of the qualifying process, the whole idea is just utterly ridiculous and for what? Just so India and China have an easier chance to qualifier and boost the already billions of TV audiences in that market? Can't be because FIFA would like New Zealand to qualifier for every World Cup which is also unfair and laughable.



The leagues will just have to adjust just like they had to for this Tournament in the middle of their seasons. 7 weeks is probably to much, you'll be able to squeeze it in 5 or 6 weeks imo
Infantino looking to get elected. Lotsa votes in expanding concacaf anf caf spots.
 

Zidane98

TheBrownDog
Dec 22, 2009
54,101
28,772
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, LFC, MVFC, RC Strasbourg
You know the best way to solve this is for FIFA to bite the bullet and stay at 32 teams. Seriously who in their right mind at FIFA thought 48 teams was a good idea? Didn't these idiots do the maths that any format used for a 48 team competition is flawed? It also makes a mockery of the qualifying process, the whole idea is just utterly ridiculous and for what? Just so India and China have an easier chance to qualifier and boost the already billions of TV audiences in that market? Can't be because FIFA would like New Zealand to qualifier for every World Cup which is also unfair and laughable.



The leagues will just have to adjust just like they had to for this Tournament in the middle of their seasons. 7 weeks is probably to much, you'll be able to squeeze it in 5 or 6 weeks imo

India even with 8.5 AFC nations are little to no chance of qualifying. The average Indian kid plays either cricket or hockey. Unlike the Chinese the Indian government don't have the money to splash out on a football program for kids. That cultural shift will take generations if at all.

China have also regressed recently and President Xi now isn't as keen on promoting football as he used to be (see China Super League collapse).


I would rate China only a 10-15% chance of qualifying for 2026. They are clearly behind all ME nations apart from Lebanon / Palestine. Iran/Saudi Arabia are certainties for qualification every WC now plus Kuwait/Bahrain/Oman/Qatar/Iraq/UAE all have better teams than China.

I reckon 2026 will see Australia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iraq, Japan, South Korea, Qatar all qualifying automatically with the playoff spot between the likes of China, Kuwait, Oman & Bahrain.
 

Magruder

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2012
11,693
18,211
AFL Club
Carlton
You know the best way to solve this is for FIFA to bite the bullet and stay at 32 teams. Seriously who in their right mind at FIFA thought 48 teams was a good idea? Didn't these idiots do the maths that any format used for a 48 team competition is flawed? It also makes a mockery of the qualifying process, the whole idea is just utterly ridiculous and for what? Just so India and China have an easier chance to qualifier and boost the already billions of TV audiences in that market? Can't be because FIFA would like New Zealand to qualifier for every World Cup which is also unfair and laughable.



The leagues will just have to adjust just like they had to for this Tournament in the middle of their seasons. 7 weeks is probably to much, you'll be able to squeeze it in 5 or 6 weeks imo
I reckon 32 is optimal personally

But if you’re going to squeeze 103 games into say 6 weeks cohosting is the way to ensure stadium infrastructure is adequate.

Theres probs only England, Spain, Germany, Italy and maybe the US that could host on their own And the logistics would have to absolutely perfect.

but even then I reckon cohosting is the way forward (Eng/Scot or Spain/Por).

Anyway you look at it expanding the size of the groups from 4 to 5 or even 6 potentially means more dead rubbers or semi-meaningless group games. Reducing to three has the same effect but increases the chances of collusion etc.
 

Magruder

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2012
11,693
18,211
AFL Club
Carlton
India even with 8.5 AFC nations are little to no chance of qualifying. The average Indian kid plays either cricket or hockey. Unlike the Chinese the Indian government don't have the money to splash out on a football program for kids. That cultural shift will take generations if at all.

China have also regressed recently and President Xi now isn't as keen on promoting football as he used to be (see China Super League collapse).


I would rate China only a 10-15% chance of qualifying for 2026. They are clearly behind all ME nations apart from Lebanon / Palestine. Iran/Saudi Arabia are certainties for qualification every WC now plus Kuwait/Bahrain/Oman/Qatar/Iraq/UAE all have better teams than China.

I reckon 2026 will see Australia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iraq, Japan, South Korea, Qatar all qualifying automatically with the playoff spot between the likes of China, Kuwait, Oman & Bahrain.
Could streamline qualification- as long as it’s not based on the stupid FIFA rankings points.
 

RPCB

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 21, 2007
23,862
28,127
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
Yep, don’t expect this 48 team World Cup thing to make it any easier for an India or Malta or Latvia etc to make the World Cup. From Europe, it will be nations like Turkey, Finland, Slovakia, Romania and countries of that tier with much more of chance to make the World Cup moving forward.

New Zealand will always be in the World Cup now. So from this region, no one else will make it. Making it a 48 team World Cup won’t suddenly improve most countries chances.
 

Elmer_Judd

🎷🦍 🍀🏆
Jul 25, 2019
38,096
59,233
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Leeds United
32 teams is perfect in my opinion there where some concerns at the beginning that it was to much but from the first in 98 its worked flawlessly. It also solved the many flaws the 24 teams World Cup had. Now FIFA have decide to undo all that and go back to a flawed system all so its more inclusive to weaker football countries. It will dilutes the product and spectacle especially the qualifying campaigns.

Spot on, remember when they expanded the Cricket World Cup (One Dayers) with a lot more teams and games, and it just dragged on way too long ?

Also would Euro Clubs (especially the big ones involved in the Champions league) support an extended world cup which puts more miles and less rest in the non domestic season for their star players/multi million dollar assets ?

There is too many logistical reasons not to expand it to 48 teams.
 

Remove this Banner Ad