World cup draw

[Matt]

Originally Posted by AJ

What part of the phrase "world cup" don't you understand ??

How far would you take that though? equal numbers by continent?

A team from antartica? 4 or 5 qualifiers from Oceania?

I know its has to be a diverse set from round the world but for me it should be the best 32 in the world....Thats the idea of it for me, I think the tournament is so devalued with some of the goood sides sitting at home.

[AJ]

how many nations do you have Jonne ??

[aliando]

Originally Posted by Matt

How far would you take that though? equal numbers by continent?

A team from antartica? 4 or 5 qualifiers from Oceania?

I know its has to be a diverse set from round the world but for me it should be the best 32 in the world....Thats the idea of it for me, I think the tournament is so devalued with some of the goood sides sitting at home.

i can see the argument but have to agree with AJ - this is the world cup and invloves teams from around the globe. Cut out the smaller countries and the not-so-good continents and you have a devalued tournement imo. Sure there are shite games but there are classics too - without the 'smaller teams' you wouldnt have senegal beating france or cameroon beating argentina.

remember, to millions upon millions of other people, croatia v sweden is a boring game consisting of nobodies.

[AJ]

Originally Posted by Matt

How far would you take that though? equal numbers by continent?

A team from antartica? 4 or 5 qualifiers from Oceania?

I know its has to be a diverse set from round the world but for me it should be the best 32 in the world....Thats the idea of it for me, I think the tournament is so devalued with some of the goood sides sitting at home.

I'd look for some form of formula that weights population and average fifa rankings on a confederation basis.

Not sure exactly how it'd work but it'd deliver something pretty close to what we have now. no more than 1 or 2 places different for each confederation. An extra one for south america perhaps one less from africa ? But no major changes.

I can't grasp why people are bleating about the poor poor 14th or 15th placed teams in Europe not making it. They'd do bugger all if they got there anyway, they'd be in the third pot of the draw and go out anyway playing dull football.

The world cup is a show piece for the game, it's part of Fifas mission to promote the game globaly for the the future. There are also money concerns, there must be a level of asian / african teams there for sponsership / viewing figures and the good of the global game. South Korea and Japan have both had good results.

I love the unexpected nature of the WC, Irans win over the US a few years back is a classic example for me.

[Jonne]

Originally Posted by AJ

how many nations do you have Jonne ??

2, Israeli mother and Danish father.

On topic though, a World cup simply wouldn't be a world cup with the 32 best sides in their, then we'd have 2 African sides 2 Americans sides and then 28 European. Maybe not entirely correct, but the world cup would lose it's charm. It's the fun of seeing the way the African nations play, the American nations, the Asian nations and then the European nations that makes world cup what it is. To me at least. If that means my nation isn't going, then so be it, we weren't good enough.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by AJ

What part of the phrase "world cup" don't you understand ??

World Cup = the biggest football competition on the planet. If your going to give CONCACAF 3 or 4 places why not throw in a couple for Oceania as well,give Europe a few less places alsol. Could just give every continent the same number of places then it'd be a true WC. And no one would watch it. The best nations on the planet should be there, not something they are getting atm.

[AJ]

read my last post, think it's very fair

[aliando]

what about increasing the tournement from 32 - 40 teams?

Give oceana a berth of their own right, save the aussies wandering north to get in the back door, allow all the second-in-the-group finishers in europe a place in the final rather than play offs and a further s. american place amongst the additions. Keep the finals format to 8 groups but have 5 teams in each group rather than 4 and continue with top 2 teams progress to knockout stages?

[Tulenos]

Just try and watch an ice-hockey WC next time, ali - it's enhanced to the maximum (I think) and there is ONE watchable game in each group before you reach the elimination stages and even in the quarters half of the matches are simply dull. By further enhancing the footy WC, the same would happen - some of the matches now are watchable only from a punter's point of view. And the whole thing already takes one month as it is. But then again, I quite understand why Asia gets more places as the interest is enormous there and with their own teams even more so. Africa and the rest are a bit more debatable, but it's a WC after all. Would be nice to have more Euro teams, but it won't happen any more, I'm afraid.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by AJ

read my last post, think it's very fair

You don't know exactly how you think it would work, I hardly see the relvance either. Would the population bit make USA and China autyomatic qualifiers?

The last World Cup was very poor, and apart from the Asian hosts and cra desicions the one before it wasn't very good either. The World Cup needs to be a show piece, it does need a representitive from each continent but the way its done atm is wrong imo.

[aliando]

Originally Posted by Tulenos

Just try and watch an ice-hockey WC next time, ali - it's enhanced to the maximum (I think) and there is ONE watchable game in each group before you reach the elimination stages and even in the quarters half of the matches are simply dull. By further enhancing the footy WC, the same would happen - some of the matches now are watchable only from a punter's point of view. And the whole thing already takes one month as it is. But then again, I quite understand why Asia gets more places as the interest is enormous there and with their own teams even more so. Africa and the rest are a bit more debatable, but it's a WC after all. Would be nice to have more Euro teams, but it won't happen any more, I'm afraid.

yeah, i see your point - it was the same for me with the recent rugby world cup. unlike the welsh team, i only started to take interest once the knockout stages had started.

but on a personal level, i love football and will watch any level from local park level right up to the WC final. i can understand it would be dull for many, but i like watching the togo v bahrain games - i'm in the minority (for a change!) me thinks

[AJ]

Originally Posted by Darren

You don't know exactly how you think it would work, I hardly see the relvance either. Would the population bit make USA and China autyomatic qualifiers?

That's not what I said, I said population on a confederation basis. In these cases on the basis of the total population Concaf and Asia federations. With a multiplier based in fifa rankings, kinda of like they do with the golden boot in europe. Goals scored in Italy and England are worth more than those scored in weaker leagues like Scotland or Belgium.

You could have a situation where you take the population of the Uefa area lets say 500m, and divide it by 40m, to give you 13 places.

If you think South American football is 50% weaker than Europe, divide it's population of 370m by 60m to give you 6 places.

If you decide the standard of football in Asia is 5 times worse than SA, take it's population of 2bn and divide by 300m and get 6 places. Etc etc.....

You can base the division factor on the average of the fifa rankings within the area. No one qualifies on an automatic basis, US would still have to play Mexico etc etc....

In fact, I'm pretty sure this is how the system works just now.

[Mr Intensity]

Would anyone give a shit about this if England/Scotland had qualified for the Euro's and people weren't thinking about not qualifying for the World Cup?

[aliando]

Originally Posted by Mr Intensity

Would anyone give a shit about this if England/Scotland had qualified for the Euro's and people weren't thinking about not qualifying for the World Cup?

i'm welsh - i'm already looking at this group as a chance to make qualifying for 2014 a little easier

[A-Team]

I don't have a problem with 5 African teams. Poor showing in 2006 but that was due to some freak qualifying results with Angola and Togo making it. but overall the quality from Africa has been pretty good in recent years.
Ghana were probably the best team to watch at the last World Cup, Senegal were very good in 2002, Morrocco and Nigeria in 1998 etc.
There's plenty of dross from Europe and South America at every tournament as well. Paraguy and Poland at the last one spring to mind.

One American group would be fairer than the current system that basically guarantees Mexico and the US a spot.

[A-Team]

As for the groups, Ireland's isn't too bad. I'd rather have the sort of tough group that contains 5 decent teams than have the sort of tough group where the top 2 looks cut and dried with 3 whipping boys making up the numbers. Although interestingly enough Ireland have tended to perform at their best in the latter type of group when nobody gave them a prayer. (Spain and European Champions Denmark for 1994, Holland and Portugal for 2002)
You can say San Marino for instance is an easy draw but it's 6 free points for all your rivals as well.

[meatman]

Originally Posted by A-Team

I don't have a problem with 5 African teams. Poor showing in 2006 but that was due to some freak qualifying results with Angola and Togo making it. but overall the quality from Africa has been pretty good in recent years.

yeh I agree, African football is actually very strong. The CAN is coming up at the start of 2008 and I bet there will be loads of decent quality games. Anyone who watches it will see that Africa has plenty to offer. The problem in 2006 was that there was a freak set of qualifying results and a lot of the 'better' teams failed to make it to Germany. It's unlikely for that to happen again and at least 3-4 of the 5 nations should be of decent quality, capable of progressing from the group stages. I think it's prefectly fair that Africa gets 5 WC places

However I do have doubts about North / Central American & Asian and Oceanic. I do beleive too many places are given to those nations.

Also South America should be given 5 or 6 instead of 4 + play off IMO.