Day 13: Ghana vs Uruguay | South Korea vs Portugal | Cameroon vs Brazil | Serbia vs Switzerland

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
We have 10 teams, 4 (40%) qualify and 1 has a playoff.

In 2010 we had four in the quarters, that because Brazil eliminated Chile in R16
In 2014 we had four in the quarters, that because Brazil eliminated Chile and Colombia eliminated Uruguay in R16
In 2018 we only got two in the quarters because Argentina lost to France and Colombia lost to England in R16, Peru exited at group stage

We've been shite this time with only Brazil and Argentina going through. Ecuador and us let the region down not getting into R16 which is the standard par for the course. Australia stopped Peru making it, and delivered, no complaints there clearly.
Agreed that 4.5 or even 5 makes sense for Conmebol, but next time you get 6+1/3, that seems crazy.

With Bolivia being completely useless away, basically that's 9 teams fighting for 6 spots and a playoff spot.
 

antohan

gets aroused by tagline boobs
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
42,178
Location
Montevideo
Because good performance should be awarded and not penalized.

CAF are contributing 2/16 (12.5%) teams in the knockout stage.

They currently have 5/32 (15.6%) teams in the world cup, which seems reasonable, yet they're getting 9.33/48 teams (19.4%) next time.

Failure is being rewarded.
It's about developing the game worldwide, which part of that isn't obvious? Slowly but surely it is working.
 

TheLittleOne

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 5, 2018
Messages
355
Location
Zürich
Let's see in 4 years time if a team like Syria or El Savador (they'd have made the playoffs based on the qualifying this time with the 48 places in 2026) make it and lose all 3 games whilst conceeding 10+ goals. How interesting that'd be for everyone.

Qatar looked completely useless in this WC and they're miles better than the likes of Syria.
its called a world cup. and fights between two weaker teams are more often than not the best games. same with champions league its called that for a reason 5 clubs from england and 4 from other top nations is totally against the idea. I like more weaker teams
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
It’s be more interesting than watching Scotland vs Israel for the 700th time in the last 5 years
As mentioned, African, Asian, North American teams have their own regional tournament if you're very interested in those teams.
 

RedDevilRoshi

Full Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2017
Messages
13,271
Those group stages were fantastic!

Think this is the 1st time ever no nation has finished with maximum points in their group?
 

antohan

gets aroused by tagline boobs
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
42,178
Location
Montevideo
Agreed that 4.5 or even 5 makes sense for Conmebol, but next time you get 6+1/3, that seems crazy.

With Bolivia being completely useless away, basically that's 9 teams fighting for 6 spots and a playoff spot.
Oh yeah, the new format is bonkers. It's actually going to be dogshit as well because each group will have a team that is useless so you are getting shot of the rollercoaster that this GW3 has been and instead go straight into knockouts, which are going to be cagey affairs.

They will get rid of what has been a huge success here!
 

phelans shorts

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
27,217
Location
Gaz. Is a Mewling Quim.
As mentioned, African, Asian, North American teams have their own regional tournament if you're very interested in those teams.
Syria and El Salvador are under different continental bodies, by your very own examples.

At least get the geography right if you want to stick with your awful point.
 

Samid

He's no Bilal Ilyas Jhandir
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
49,548
Location
Oslo, Norway

Cameroon stealing Norway's only relevance to the World Cup. Bastards.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
It's about developing the game worldwide, which part of that isn't obvious? Slowly but surely it is working.
Has it really worked? UEFA are dominating the WC like never before in the last 2 decades or so.

CAF teams made the QF decades ago, and have yet to make a SF after all these decades.
 

FrankFoot

Full Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2022
Messages
1,377
Location
Chile / Czech Republic
Supports
Neutral
We have 10 teams, 4 (40%) qualify and 1 has a playoff.

In 2010 we had four in the quarters, that because Brazil eliminated Chile in R16
In 2014 we had four in the quarters, that because Brazil eliminated Chile and Colombia eliminated Uruguay in R16
In 2018 we only got two in the quarters because Argentina lost to France and Colombia lost to England in R16, Peru exited at group stage

We've been shite this time with only Brazil and Argentina going through. Ecuador and us let the region down not getting into R16 which is the standard par for the course. Australia stopped Peru making it, and delivered, no complaints there clearly.
We have been shit for quite a while though.

I think we are going back to the 70s,80s and 90s (but with way less individual quality) when it was only Brazil or Argentina from Conmebol going far, the rest getting knocked out in group stage or R16.

The Conmebol qualifiers for 2018 and 2022 quality have been dire in terms of quality, and it's gonna be worse once we get the 6.5 slots.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
Syria and El Salvador are under different continental bodies, by your very own examples.

At least get the geography right if you want to stick with your awful point.
When did I say they were in the same confederation?

Syria would have been 9th in AFC qualifying, El Salvador 7th in Concacaf.

They'd have made the playoffs according to the 2026 allocation, which was exactly what I said.
 

Reditus

Lineup Prediction League Winner 2021-22
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
5,565
As mentioned, African, Asian, North American teams have their own regional tournament if you're very interested in those teams.
It’s a world cup and good diversity of countries from all corners who take part in the tournament is a good thing. If it was too top heavy with European sides it wouldn’t feel much like a World Cup at all

This is coming from someone from Ireland and I’d dearly love to be involved every 4 years but fully accept this it’s the way it’s meant to be

The World Cup is unique.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
Oh yeah, the new format is bonkers. It's actually going to be dogshit as well because each group will have a team that is useless so you are getting shot of the rollercoaster that this GW3 has been and instead go straight into knockouts, which are going to be cagey affairs.

They will get rid of what has been a huge success here!
Agreed, 3 teams groups will result in lots of collusion in the final matchday with many teams knowing exactly what is the required result for both to qualify.
 

phelans shorts

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
27,217
Location
Gaz. Is a Mewling Quim.
When did I say they were in the same confederation?

Syria would have been 9th in AFC qualifying, El Salvador 7th in Concacaf.

They'd have made the playoffs according to the 2026 allocation, which was exactly what I said.
and I said watching them is more interesting that Scotland vs Israel again (I swear that match happens every international break). Because when else would they play each other outside of a World Cup?
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
It’s a world cup and good diversity of countries from all corners who take part in the tournament is a good thing. If it was too top heavy with European sides it wouldn’t feel much like a World Cup at all

This is coming from someone from Ireland and I’d dearly love to be involved every 4 years but fully accept this it’s the way it’s meant to be

The World Cup is unique.
I get the point about diversity, but there has to be a balance with quality as well.

The current balance is about right, awarding non-UEFA confederations with many extra spots next time will just result in a drop in standard.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
39,954
No chance that's a red card. It happens all the time. Remember Cheillini against Saka in the eutros?
Also debated to be a red so yeah... perhaps that needs reevaluating?
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
and I said watching them is more interesting that Scotland vs Israel again (I swear that match happens every international break). Because when else would they play each other outside of a World Cup?
Seriously? You want to watch Syria v El Salvador? :confused:

Each to their own I guess.
 

TheLittleOne

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 5, 2018
Messages
355
Location
Zürich
I get the point about diversity, but there has to be a balance with quality as well.

The current balance is about right, awarding non-UEFA confederations with many extra spots next time will just result in a drop in standard.
and most of the times when two teams out of the top ten play they are so good they neutralize each other and the game is shit.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,635
Location
London
I tend to site with Cal here. On meritocracy alone, Europe is already getting less than it should, and in 4 years it would be worse.

It is the World Cup, so there should be the best teams in the World. Not diversity for the sake of diversity, there is no fun on seeing shit teams in the World Cup. Imagine Costa Rica vs Spain but much worse than that. There are gonna be teams who will concede over 10 goals in the next World Cup IMO.

Increasing the number of teams in the World Cup was a bad idea. Increasing the number so it means more awful teams is a horrible idea.
 

BorisManUtd

Full Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2013
Messages
3,861
Well done to Switzerland, they never looked like conceding after going 3-2 up, while we were much more shaky with 2-1 lead, just like we were shaky being 3-1 up against Cameroon. Shocking defending gets you nowhere, so 1 point out of 9 possible is about right. At least we were fun to watch unlike on previous World Cups, that's a positive.

You'd expect Portugal to beat Switzerland but it could be very difficult game for them. Portugal going out would mean laughing at Cristiano (yeah I'm petty) + Bruno and Dalot getting some rest.
 

antohan

gets aroused by tagline boobs
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
42,178
Location
Montevideo
Has it really worked? UEFA are dominating the WC like never before in the last 2 decades or so.

CAF teams made the QF decades ago, and have yet to make a SF after all these decades.
UEFA isn't dominating more than they did. As I showed earlier, in 2010 and 2014 out of 8 quarter-finalists four were CONMEBOL and all the eliminated CONMEBOL teams had been knocked out by CONMEBOL teams. UEFA has never managed such a record with their qualifying teams.

Furthermore, you used to get 10 teams into R16 and now get 7, so others have been chipping away.

What UEFA has dominated is the winning, which isn't surprising seeing as you have 4-5 World Cup winning level sides, and usually 2-3 other challengers that are good enough to reach a semi or final. The rest of the world has two, one has been grossly mismanaged (Argentina) and the other hasn't had a great generation since the 2002 vintage (Brazil). This is the closest, and it's not a match for that one.
 

phelans shorts

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
27,217
Location
Gaz. Is a Mewling Quim.
I tend to site with Cal here. On meritocracy alone, Europe is already getting less than it should, and in 4 years it would be worse.

It is the World Cup, so there should be the best teams in the World. Not diversity for the sake of diversity, there is no fun on seeing shit teams in the World Cup. Imagine Costa Rica vs Spain but much worse than that. There are gonna be teams who will concede over 10 goals in the next World Cup IMO.

Increasing the number of teams in the World Cup was a bad idea. Increasing the number so it means more awful teams is a horrible idea.
The only thing I agree with is that increasing the number of teams is an awful idea. Just like it is with the Euros, just like it is with the Champions League.
 

Massive Spanner

Give Mason Mount a chance!
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
28,187
Location
Tool shed
So Brazil, Argentina, France, Spain, Portugal have all lost to teams ranked under the USA in the world rankings but England are terrible and having an awful cup because of a 0-0 draw vs. a team in the second round? It’s sometimes tough finding reason.
Inglend are going to win the whole thing. It’s coming home to the 7 point lions.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
and most of the times when two teams out of the top ten play they are so good they neutralize each other and the game is shit.
By that logic you don't watch the CL but watch the League trophy?
If the option is that or a dull game between second or third rate European sides facing each other over and over and over then yes, absolutely.
I prefer games where the outcome is not obvious before the match even kicked off, imagine France v Syria (with no resting).
I tend to site with Cal here. On meritocracy alone, Europe is already getting less than it should, and in 4 years it would be worse.

It is the World Cup, so there should be the best teams in the World. Not diversity for the sake of diversity, there is no fun on seeing shit teams in the World Cup. Imagine Costa Rica vs Spain but much worse than that. There are gonna be teams who will concede over 10 goals in the next World Cup IMO.

Increasing the number of teams in the World Cup was a bad idea. Increasing the number so it means more awful teams is a horrible idea.
Good point about the bolded part, it's nothing more than a Fifa cash grab and it's a ridiculous format next time.

UEFA isn't dominating more than they did. As I showed earlier, in 2010 and 2014 out of 8 quarter-finalists four were CONMEBOL and all the eliminated CONMEBOL teams had been knocked out by CONMEBOL teams. UEFA has never managed such a record with their qualifying teams.

Furthermore, you used to get 10 teams into R16 and now get 7, so others have been chipping away.

What UEFA has dominated is the winning, which isn't surprising seeing as you have 4-5 World Cup winning level sides, and usually 2-3 other challengers that are good enough to reach a semi or final. The rest of the world has two, one has been grossly mismanaged (Argentina) and the other hasn't had a great generation since the 2002 vintage (Brazil). This is the closest, and it's not a match for that one.
8! But overall I agree with your point.

However, it remains that Concacaf and CAF are being rewarded for not improving after decades. With AFC you can at least argue they have improved a lot this time.
 

Hulme91

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
383
We were hearing a lot of talk about the 'incredible' strength in depth of Brazil over the past week or so.... :lol:
 

TheLittleOne

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 5, 2018
Messages
355
Location
Zürich
Inglend are going to win the whole thing. It’s coming home to the 7 point lions.
ingeland ingeland ingeland
By that logic you don't watch the CL but watch the League trophy?

I prefer games where the outcome is not obvious before the match even kicked off, imagine France v Syria (with no resting).

Good point about the bolded part, it's nothing more than a Fifa cash grab and it's a ridiculous format next time.



8! But overall I agree with your point.

However, it remains that Concacaf and CAF are being rewarded for not improving after decades. With AFC you can at least argue they have improved a lot this time.
yeah i dont watch cl when united isnt involved and i have travelled through europe to support my local team :) and they never gonna win anything
 

fallengt

Full Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
5,599
Just seen Aboubakar 's red card. What a legend :lol:
Imagine gettings red card and be super happy about it.