My sure fire way to make the World Cup 100% better

[Weevil]

Expand it to 64 teams, make it single elimination.

Now, this will make 3 hugely important improvements

1) It will increase the meaning of an upset. Senegal beat France in what many consider to be the upset of the tournament, some would say the history of the World Cup. And yet Senegal could have still not made it through and France could have advanced. That's not an upset. A real upset is Belarus beating Sweden in hockey, sending them home or Hampton beating Iowa State. Single elimination creates real upsets.

2) No ties. Even more so than usual a tie in soccer at this level is kissing your sister.

3) Shorten the tournament by a few weeks. World Cup Fever! Catch It!(Otherwise known as the atmosphere in my house) has to run out sooner or later. It's a shame it'll happen when the good stuff begins.

Point three happened four years ago. I didn't even watch the final game because it'd been a month of nothing but Soccer. I watched the Jays play, I don't know, the Orioles i think. They need to snip it up quicker.

 

[Weevil]

Side benefit No. 1

No worthy team would be sitting at home. Sure expanding it to 64 would include all sorts of iffy countries but the majority of them would be dismissed early.

But, does it make sense for the Dutch to be sitting at home? No. This would fix that.

 

[Ask For More]

That's so American, especially no ties!

Sod that!

 

[Ask For More]

PS

The way the Dutch played in qualifying, they didn't deserve to get through. Ireland throughoughly deserve their place.

 

[Myrrdin]

Why include the second best 32 countries? ie, The second division of world football. All it would mean is just as many games but played by poorer sides and less watchable.

 

[Weevil]

Re: PS

The way the Dutch played in qualifying, they didn't deserve to get through. Ireland throughoughly deserve their place.

PShawww, does Saudi Arabia deserve to be there?

 

[Weevil]

Why include the second best 32 countries? ie, The second division of world football. All it would mean is just as many games but played by poorer sides and less watchable.

For two reasons.

First and foremost it would create a real Cinderella possibility. A team like Jamaica would only have to reel off 5 wins to win the world cup. Now, a team of varying quality has to be top shape in qualifying, preliminary and second, third and final round world cup games. Which is like 15 games. How many World Cup winners have there been in history? 7? 8? That's pointless.

Second, It would involve the world more. A side benefit but a definite one.

 

[kiwiwolf]

Why go to all the trouble. I can do it a lot quicker and with a minimum of fuss. Two words people...

Topless cheerleaders.

 

[Ask For More]

Re: Re: PS

PShawww, does Saudi Arabia deserve to be there?

A moot point! What you just said contradicts that. Of course Saudi deserve to be there because they got through qualifying.

 

[Weevil]

Re: Re: Re: PS

A moot point! What you just said contradicts that. Of course Saudi deserve to be there because they got through qualifying.

No, not at all. In my plan both teams are in it. In this plan they involve the world at the expense of other regions. Under my plan you would involve the world and let the best teams in it.

 

[Ask For More]

Why go to all the trouble. I can do it a lot quicker and with a minimum of fuss. Two words people...

Topless cheerleaders.

Only topless?

 

[sexy-girl]

we didn't allow you to change it when america had it in 94 ... we're happy with it ... you north americans need to stay out of it

the whole point of an upset is that its not meant to happen very often ... when a big team cant get through the first round now THAT'S an upset ... and when the last group games are happening and they are all being played at the same time that gets very high pressured and exciting

and after the group stages happen then there is no ties ... it gos to penalties and that is SUPER nerve wracking

and we dont need any more teams there

 

[Gord]

I agree it is criminal that a team like Holland are not there and teams like china and Saudi are.

It isnt really a world cup as some good teams messed up in qualifying - their group was infintley harder than say middle east , but I suppose Fifa have a mandate to grow the grame in developing coutries so they have to have representation - not sure about it all and how to do it

Maybe the top 30 ranking teams all get straight qualifications and the rest have to qualify ?

 

[jass1960]

I agree it is criminal that a team like Holland are not there and teams like china and Saudi are.

It isnt really a world cup as some good teams messed up in qualifying - their group was infintley harder than say middle east , but I suppose Fifa have a mandate to grow the grame in developing coutries so they have to have representation - not sure about it all and how to do it

Maybe the top 30 ranking teams all get straight qualifications and the rest have to qualify ?

oh so the rankings are okay now are they????????

 

[WriterDom]

Half naked cheerleaders. I hear those Saudi girls are hot.

 

[Gord]

oh so the rankings are okay now are they????????

Thats the thing I dont really know the answer - havent really thought hard about it to be honest. There is flaws in the rankings the qualifying stages etc etc -

But the point is how can you have a true WC without the Dutch. I know they didnt qualify - but they had toughish group whereas china etc had to play some nonentity

Woiuld have been great to See Van Nistilroy here

so I havent a fucking clue realy

 

[sexy-girl]

european groups are always going to be the hardest to qualify from compared to say north america ... that's because the idea is that its a world cup ... if the qualification was done on ranking then you'd have some areas of the globe not appearing in the world cup and then it couldn't exactly be called a world cup


its a correct system as it is ... if you dont qualify then tough ... dutch dont deserve to be in the world cup because they failed to qualify just like we didn't when we didn't qualify its that simple in my opinion


the ranking system is rubbish as well ... i mean how we can be not seeded and germany are seeded when we qualified above them i dont know

 

[WriterDom]

Golf has the Ryder cup and the President's cup. Why not a single elimination tournament hosted by the U.S. in 2004 and every 4 years after. But not 64 teams. That's too many. Expand it to 48 with the top 16 getting byes in the first round.

 

[Gord]

european groups are always going to be the hardest to qualify from compared to say north america ... that's because the idea is that its a world cup ... if the qualification was done on ranking then you'd have some areas of the globe not appearing in the world cup and then it couldn't exactly be called a world cup


its a correct system as it is ... if you dont qualify then tough ... dutch dont deserve to be in the world cup because they failed to qualify just like we didn't when we didn't qualify its that simple in my opinion


the ranking system is rubbish as well ... i mean how we can be not seeded and germany are seeded when we qualified above them i dont know

I agree but disagree - Ok I know the Dutch didnt qualify and is is tough etc - but still on the flip side same argument can be used how can you have a World Cup without Dutch.

I think maybe it needs a lot of thought - say start introducing exemptions maybe anyone who has ever won it gets exemption - but then I suppose you wont get any competitive matches ie as France didnt have to qualify they lost that match toughness

Ojay still dont know the answer so suppose leave it as is ??

 

[WriterDom]

european groups are always going to be the hardest to qualify from compared to say north america ... that's because the idea is that its a world cup ... if the qualification was done on ranking then you'd have some areas of the globe not appearing in the world cup and then it couldn't exactly be called a world cup

They'd have a fair chance to qualify. That's all any team deserves. If they don't qualify, then tough shit. Who wants to see Saudi Arabia get beat 8-0?

 

[jass1960]

They'd have a fair chance to qualify. That's all any team deserves. If they don't qualify, then tough shit. Who wants to see Saudi Arabia get beat 8-0?

Berliners

 

[sexy-girl]

football isn't meant to be fair the dutch didn't qualify because they weren't good enough ... what you are saying gord is that ireland shouldn't be in the world cup and holland should because they have a better history of being good


also WD ... on your basis of saying saudis shouldn't be there then american shouldn't either ... fifa setup the qualifying system so that american will be in every world cup ... you have the only qualification group where there is only 5 teams but 3 qualify ... and america came 3rd by way


the teams that played well in the qualifying groups are the teams that deserve to be there ... teams like ireland ... also if you do change any of the qualification systems to much or the make up of the world cup it makes it impossible to compare winners of the world cup to previous winners if they competition is completely change

 

[WriterDom]

also WD ... on your basis of saying saudis shouldn't be there then american shouldn't either ... fifa setup the qualifying system so that american will be in every world cup ... you have the only qualification group where there is only 5 teams but 3 qualify ... and america came 3rd by way

If America isn't one of the top 32 teams then they shouldn't be there. I don't want to see any sport governed by some kind of fucked up EU/UN affirmative action plan.

 

[Gord]

football isn't meant to be fair the dutch didn't qualify because they weren't good enough ... what you are saying gord is that ireland shouldn't be in the world cup and holland should because they have a better history of being good


also WD ... on your basis of saying saudis shouldn't be there then american shouldn't either ... fifa setup the qualifying system so that american will be in every world cup ... you have the only qualification group where there is only 5 teams but 3 qualify ... and america came 3rd by way


the teams that played well in the qualifying groups are the teams that deserve to be there ... teams like ireland ... also if you do change any of the qualification systems to much or the make up of the world cup it makes it impossible to compare winners of the world cup to previous winners if they competition is completely change

NO I never said that atall - I said that the World cup finals in theory should have the cream of world football talent there. The current World Cup does not.

I am not saying what is right or wrong because it is a complex issue - but at the moment the cup is being Gerrymandered too give emerging areas more representation. Now that is not a bad thing but you are still going to get crap, useless teams like Saudia getting hammered. I admit that there is less of a gap now than say 20yrs ago.

Ireland totaly deserve their place - but In think we are all loosers by not having teams like Holland in the finals.

It is like say having a world cup of tenns and giving the US only 50% of places and the rest of the worlD 50%. The good players then knock each other out. That is why we have seeding so the best players are spread out throughout the draw.

Again am sure there is no easy answer - maybe you could have world pre qualifying groups - not just in a certain area.

That way you would get the best teams playing each other , because lets face it even Scotland could beat the Saudis

 

[jass1960]

That way you would get the best teams playing each other , because lets face it even Scotland could beat the Saudis

You are being sarcastic again