HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Soccer (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=166)
-   -   Would you be in favor of expanding the world cup to have more teams compete? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1327605)

GarretJoseph* 01-19-2013 05:42 PM

Would you be in favor of expanding the world cup to have more teams compete?
 
With a lot of African nations wanting more spots in future World Cups, would you be in favor of expanding future World Cup's to hold more teams? If so, what kind of format?

vsk92 01-19-2013 05:47 PM

Not really there's nothing wrong with the current format

But I wouldn't complain if Finland go through due to this :laugh:

Schalkenullvier* 01-19-2013 05:55 PM

i would keep it as is

For the big teams, it's already not really a problem going through, so more teams would water it down even more. Same goes for more weak from other regions than europe.

ProPAIN 01-19-2013 06:14 PM

As much as I would love Belgium to have a better shot at making the WC, I think the current format is just fine.

HajdukSplit 01-19-2013 06:19 PM

Africa doesn't deserve any more WC spots in all honesty, the only arguement they have is only 5 of 50+ something countries qualify (a small proportion of their countries) but their results at World Cups haven't warrented an extra spot. If anything South America can probably qualify all teams with the exception of Bolivia and be competitive

I would keep it at 32, no reason to expand

Live in the Now 01-19-2013 06:24 PM

No. When Africa gets better results they will get more spots.

cgf 01-19-2013 06:48 PM

If anything Europe should get more spots, not less, as there's always a couple good european teams who don't get in because of the depth. But no I don't think they should mess with teh WC, it's pretty perfect the way it is now.

Brad Tolliver 01-19-2013 07:09 PM

They aren't going to expand it until the next time England misses out.

chasespace 01-19-2013 08:12 PM

Don't really know how you could expand it without having a logistics nightmare. The tournament itself is already massive, no need to make it bigger.

Captain Saku 01-19-2013 09:51 PM

Please no. 32 teams is a perfect format.

Cin 01-19-2013 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad Tolliver (Post 57881669)
They aren't going to expand it until the next time England misses out.

Truth.

CRSeven 01-20-2013 01:44 AM

Leave it.

ck26 01-20-2013 03:54 AM

Leave well enough alone.

I don't like the idea of taking spots from Europe; Europe plays the best soccer ... they've won 3 of the last 4, had 6/8 of the 2006 quarterfinalists and 3/4 2010 semifinalists.

The VEGASKING 01-20-2013 05:13 AM

No. No again so theres enough characters.

Stray Wasp 01-20-2013 05:32 AM

Don't expand the World Cup, just bribe the African officials to shut up and go away. A few hundred thousand more euros in their private Swiss bank accounts and they wouldn't care if you cut the finals down to twenty-four teams.

villevalo 01-20-2013 06:24 AM

I'd like to see a removal of the crap teams and an addition of better teams, mainly European teams that missed out. At the moment the hardest international trophy to win is the Euro's and apart from Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and a couple African nations, the World Cup misses a lot of international talent because it limits the amount of Euro team spaces.

mmk786 01-20-2013 07:01 AM

Do you want the best teams to play in the world cup or do you want a true representative of the world at the world cup? Thats basically the argument.

Right now its an amalgamation of the two. Personally I am okay with that though I do think Concacaf should only have 2 spots + 1 playoff.

Chimaera 01-20-2013 07:14 AM

I'm fine with one more team in each group.

But I think they should come from anywhere, and have to play to get in.

Take the next 16 highest ranked sides (based on a coefficient) and have them do a home and home qualifier knockout to get in.

It's good where it is, but I do think there are enough top level sides now where 8 more would improve the matches.

Chimaera 01-20-2013 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad Tolliver (Post 57881669)
They aren't going to expand it until the next time England misses out.

Except, if the English FA ran things, they would of stopped the assignments of both rigged WCs.

England has no power.

villevalo 01-20-2013 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mmk786 (Post 57926789)
Do you want the best teams to play in the world cup or do you want a true representative of the world at the world cup? Thats basically the argument.

Right now its an amalgamation of the two. Personally I am okay with that though I do think Concacaf should only have 2 spots + 1 playoff.

The true representation comes in qualification, all teams from all parts of the world have a chance of qualification, but because of the rules it means some teams from areas must get a spot, it leads to a reduction in quality overall.

There should be a system in which all countries from all parts of the globe get their chance for qualification, but the system should not prevent good teams getting through just because teams like New Zealand have managed to beat the Pacific Islands.

Chimaera 01-20-2013 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by villevalo (Post 57927059)
The true representation comes in qualification, all teams from all parts of the world have a chance of qualification, but because of the rules it means some teams from areas must get a spot, it leads to a reduction in quality overall.

There should be a system in which all countries from all parts of the globe get their chance for qualification, but the system should not prevent good teams getting through just because teams like New Zealand have managed to beat the Pacific Islands.

It's the "WORLD CUP". While I do think the quality is reduced a bit, New Zealand's not a good representative of scorn. They drew with all three teams who were considered better than them, and did admirably.

Since it's the World Cup, the World should be represented in some fashion. Even if that means some minnows get put in the tournament. While most often they get bounced, you never quite know. That's part of what makes tournament style events interesting. It's why March Madness here in the States is such must watch TV. You never know when a cinderella can pull off something. Usually they don't, but it's fun to watch.

villevalo 01-20-2013 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimaera (Post 57927307)
It's the "WORLD CUP". While I do think the quality is reduced a bit, New Zealand's not a good representative of scorn. They drew with all three teams who were considered better than them, and did admirably.

Since it's the World Cup, the World should be represented in some fashion. Even if that means some minnows get put in the tournament. While most often they get bounced, you never quite know. That's part of what makes tournament style events interesting. It's why March Madness here in the States is such must watch TV. You never know when a cinderella can pull off something. Usually they don't, but it's fun to watch.

Like I said that representation comes from the qualification. Teams should earn their place in the competition, not be given it purely based on the fact that they are the best of an awful bunch in some barren area of the planet. The World Cup should be the best tournament in the world, showcasing the best talent in the planet. That doesn't happen at the moment. The Euro's showcases better football then the World Cup has done these days.

Chimaera 01-20-2013 07:51 AM

Then how do you explain New Zealand doing well at the last WC?

Part of their ranking does involve who they play.

I think the whole "Europe" is the best and should have X more members is silly. In the knockout stages, the true quality is shown, and that's what matters.

I've no problem with one or two minnows of the world getting in, because like I said, who knows how they will do. I had a good time rooting for NZ to do well, and they did.

villevalo 01-20-2013 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimaera (Post 57927503)
Then how do you explain New Zealand doing well at the last WC?

Part of their ranking does involve who they play.

I think the whole "Europe" is the best and should have X more members is silly. In the knockout stages, the true quality is shown, and that's what matters.

I've no problem with one or two minnows of the world getting in, because like I said, who knows how they will do. I had a good time rooting for NZ to do well, and they did.

As I remember correctly NZ parked the bus and managed to scrape two goals in a group which the other three teams, especially Italy played some pretty awful football. NZ managing to scrape 3 draws because of the ineptness of the other 3 teams proves, unfortunately nothing.

I'm not saying European teams should get in just because they are better. If you listen, my argument is that the system should allow the best teams to qualify, i.e. no regimented numbers of 'this amount of this federation in the WC'. If teams like NZ manage to qualify because they beat teams along the way then they should enter. If they qualify because they beat Fiji and Samoa, and ya know we need someone from OFC to qualify, then it's not advocating the best of the best. It becomes the best, and the rest made up of the best of the poor.

There should be no places guaranteed to teams from any federation, apart of course the host/hosts. As I've said many times so far, qualification should be allowed to any team, from any federation, but it should mean that the best teams in the qualification qualify, not regimented, predetermined lines of 5 teams from here, 4 teams from here etc.

Shrimper 01-20-2013 08:02 AM

Keep it as it is. The Euro's are being ruined with more teams and 32 teams is fine for the World Cup.

If the Africans want more spots that have to earn it with their rankings. They have close groups as the best teams have to beat the best of the rest to get through, that's why sometimes nations like South Africa miss out.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.