[+] Let's talk about the World Cup!

[delericho]

it averages out to 5/8 for QF for UEFA teams, which means that UEFA really has too few representatives in the world cup.
now it's 16/48, but should probably be 24/48 if we look at the ranking and Ro16 and QF numbers.

I disagree. In fact, I tend to agree with @Celebrim that the 'real' competition starts once you get to the round of 16 - before that, you have a lot of teams with no real chance of winning, so they're making up the numbers. That being the case, I think I'd rather have those distributed more geographically.

(Bear in mind that going to 24ish teams from UEFA means adding a fair number of teams worse than Scotland. Is that really desirable?)

That said, there is one really big omission from Europe, in the form of Italy. But they did relatively poorly in qualifying - coming second to Norway in their group and then losing to Bosnia and Herzegovina in the playoffs. Unless you're going to start outright inviting favoured teams, I don't think you can legislate against upsets like that.

 

[Horwath]

I disagree. In fact, I tend to agree with @Celebrim that the 'real' competition starts once you get to the round of 16 - before that, you have a lot of teams with no real chance of winning, so they're making up the numbers. That being the case, I think I'd rather have those distributed more geographically.

(Bear in mind that going to 24ish teams from UEFA means adding a fair number of teams worse than Scotland. Is that really desirable?)

That said, there is one really big omission from Europe, in the form of Italy. But they did relatively poorly in qualifying - coming second to Norway in their group and then losing to Bosnia and Herzegovina in the playoffs. Unless you're going to start outright inviting favoured teams, I don't think you can legislate against upsets like that.

maybe better approach would be global qualifying groups.

make 24 groups, and best 2(minus the worst 2nd team for the host spot) goes to world cup.
and make ONLY ONE COUNTRY host the world cup.

that way many nations will have a chance to play other nation around the world, and travel around the world for qualifiers.

And yes, Scotland was terrible, but in no means they were the worst team in the competition.

 

[delericho]

maybe better approach would be global qualifying groups.

make 24 groups, and best 2(minus the worst 2nd team for the host spot) goes to world cup.

Not sure about that. I like the idea, but the travel involved could prove impossible.

and make ONLY ONE COUNTRY host the world cup.

As the competition expands, I think the number of nations even able to host the competition alone will shrink. I'd be inclined to actually switch to having a whole continent host, and get rid of auto-qualification for any individual nation.

And yes, Scotland was terrible, but in no means they were the worst team in the competition.

Scotland were really annoying. We won our qualifying group and absolutely deserved our spot at the competition, but once again we were utterly dire when we got there. Granted, we probably couldn't expect to qualify from a group containing Morocco and Brazil (since it turns out 4 points was all but required), but at least the team could have put on a performance.

 

[AnotherGuy]

crazy scores are for friendly matches and some fluke games that happen here and there, like Germany trashing Brazil in 2014.

I would rather watch tense 1-0 game or similar result than some 8-0 bashing of a weak team, where only worry is for winner to not humiliate the opponent, as usually coaches advise players to kick down a gear when you are 5 goals ahead.

And yet your post I replied to is wishing for more representation in the final 8. You can only achieve that if you pushing through weaker teams to reach a particular quota for this representation which is where you get the type of games you declare you do not like.

The larger issue is to fix the corruptness that exists to give every team a fair shot than focus on representation in the final 8.

 

[Scott Christian]

As the competition expands, I think the number of nations even able to host the competition alone will shrink. I'd be inclined to actually switch to having a whole continent host, and get rid of auto-qualification for any individual nation.

I actually really like the thought of a single country hosting.

 

[soviet]

I actually really like the thought of a single country hosting.

It gives each one its own identity in a way that using a whole continent would not. Mexico 86 and Italia 90 in particular are iconic tournaments from my childhood memory.

 

[MoonSong]

As the competition expands, I think the number of nations even able to host the competition alone will shrink. I'd be inclined to actually switch to having a whole continent host, and get rid of auto-qualification for any individual nation.

I think in the future, each team will have a home stadium (in their country with maybe some very poor teams playing on someone else's spare stadium), then the host only actually hosts games from the quarterfinals onwards.

 

[MoonSong]

make 24 groups, and best 2(minus the worst 2nd team for the host spot) goes to world cup.
and make ONLY ONE COUNTRY host the world cup.

As I was telli g my siblings, the knockout stage was were the true World Cup started. Yes, it was nice for the National team to do so well, but most of the other teams were filler.

 

[Horwath]

It gives each one its own identity in a way that using a whole continent would not. Mexico 86 and Italia 90 in particular are iconic tournaments from my childhood memory.

tried that with Euro 2020(1), didn't really liked it.

logistics are much easier for a single country.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

It gives each one its own identity in a way that using a whole continent would not. Mexico 86 and Italia 90 in particular are iconic tournaments from my childhood memory.

Multi-country has been rare, this year and next tournament notwithstanding. Only other time was in 2002 with the Japan-South Korea joint.