Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: iwan
Date: 07-09-2005, 00:18

When 48 teams play at the WCT then there will be so many possiblities too!!! 16 Pools of 3 for each 2 plases in the play-offs!!

In every pool the highest ranked team must play in the 1st 2 matches and than it will be clear he reaches the nessissary 4 points, most times it will happen, but it must happen!!!

Inn the last poolmatch (of the 3) will be clear who goes in-too the play-offs too!

48 Teams Europe 18,Africa,CONCACAF and Asia/Oceania each 8,COMNEBOL 5 and a host, in Europe theyçe than 9 pools of 5 ore 6 for each 2 pots!!

Now in many pools there are so many possiblies itch 2 goes to the play-offs. One can have enough at a draw the otter not and mayb not becouse they're afhankelijk off the result in the otter poolmatch!!
By 48 om 16 pools of 3 there are 2 possiblities in each match by 8 pools of 4 there are 6 possiblities, people can become confused about all the possiblities!!! By 2 possiblities in every match fans has more overzich what can happen in every poolmatch!!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: spoonman Date: 07-09-2005, 00:59	iwan, please stop it. You've already posted this several times now (here, for example) and nobody wanted to hear it. 48 teams in 16 groups of 3 is just pure nonsense. And apart from that (no offence meant), your English is unfortunately almost unreadable.

Author: iwan
Date: 07-09-2005, 17:19
Edited by: iwan
at: 07-09-2005, 17:39

Many times the holder lost the 1st match.

In '50 Italy against Sweden.
In '66 Brazil agains Hungaria.
In '78 Germany agains Poland an Holland played draw agains Peru.
In '82 Atrgentina lost against Belgium and Germany against Algaria.
In '90 Argenitinia lost agains Camaroon.
In 2002 Franse lost against Senegal.

When the holder ore an otter strong teams lost his 1st match ore plays dwaw, it will be a must to win the 2nd match and that can make the 2nd match in every pool very exiting.

In the 1st poolmatch the 2 highest ranked teams will meet each-otter, when the highest ranked team don't win (exemples enough)then it can become very exiting!!!!

In the 2nd match the highest and lowest ranked team meet each-otter.
When the highest ranked didn't win the 1st match winning will be a must, exemple: In '98 Germany won the last match against Iran in the last quarter and reached the 2nd round that way!!!

In the 3rd poolmatch th 2 lowest ranked teams meet each-other, normaly spoken the highest ranked team would be qualified at yet in 14 off the 16 pools, than it will be clear who goes in too the 2nd round too!!!
One team has enough at a draw, the otter must win!!!

The group-stage can become very exiting with 48 teams!!!

And when it happens than in the last poolmatch (I think it will happen the most times) it will be exiting who goes too to the 2nd rount in the 3rd match.

When there are 8 pools off 4, there are 6 possiblities whitch teams reach the 2nd round in the last round, but by 16 ppools of 3 only too!! For the public it will be very less complicated!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: iwan Date: 08-09-2005, 01:03	And so many countries can make their debute at a WCT like Kazachstan,Honkong,Solomons-islands,Togo,Gahna!!! Many countries elsware never did!!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: MalcolmW Date: 08-09-2005, 19:05	I'm with spoonman on this. IF the 'top seed' takes part in the first two matches then, by definition, more times than not the group will be sealed before the final match. It simply does not work as suggested.

Author: iwan
Date: 08-09-2005, 20:54
Edited by: iwan
at: 09-09-2005, 12:48

In the Africacups of '63,'65+'92 and in 5 off the last 6 CONCACAFCUPS
the'd in the 1st round pools of 3 and the most times the highest ranked country qualified for the 2nd match for the 2nd rount! And in the 3rd match was desided who went too to the 2nd roud.
Look for that at the webpage: www.rdasilva.demon.co.uk/football.html

That system has good worked in the CONCACACAFCUP why not at the WCT?!?

Author: thomas
Date: 08-09-2005, 23:20

No!

Each qualified team should have 3 guaranteed matches!

And a draw is much more likely in groups of 3 than in groups of 4. It only happened once in the many groups of 4 that heave been played in all the time (Ireland and Netherland in 1990, which was not even about qualifying for next round, only about opponent in next round). But among the few groups of 3 we find:

CONCACAF Gold Cup 2000:
Canada v Costa Rica 2:2
Canada v Korea 0:0
Costa Rica v Korea 2:2
Costa Rica wins group, Canada wins draw for second place, Korea out

CONCACAF Gold Cup 2002:
Canada v Haiti 2:0
Haiti v Ecuador 2:0
Ecuador v Canada 2:0
Draw between all teams: Canada first, Haiti second, Ecuador out

Do you really want this?

And by the way, I think we have discussed all aspects of larger WCT before!

Author: iwan
Date: 08-09-2005, 23:42
Edited by: iwan
at: 09-09-2005, 13:47

Yes,in 2000 Korea out with 2 draws, but it's normal a team don't reach the 2nd round when he plays in all hist matches draw. Ecuador in 2002 with 3 points that allways can happen!!
In '74 Scotland didn't reach the 2nd round with 4 points(Now that will be 5) and Algaria in '82 too with 4 points (now that will be 6 becouse the'd 2 points for winning instead 3 now) and last jear at the ECT Italy with 5. both times there ware roomers there was a schebung ore set-up between two otter teams.

By pools of 3 than 4 points allways be enough.
In 2002 when 8 of the 12 teams reched the 2nd round Ecuador didn't.
But in 1994 when 16 off the 24 did too norway didn't with 4 points!!
That allways be possible!!!

And playing with lots isn't an absolutely nessissary possiblity, they can take penalties after all the 3 matches and when all the teams ends equal than the penalties can be disidible. By the Dutch Amateur championship they've equal that ruwl!!!

Author: JPV
Date: 09-09-2005, 07:34

iwan:

1) try to improve your English (it's very hard to understand)
2) try to improve your way of thinking:

OFFCOURSE 4 points in a group of 3 would be enough, and 4 points in a group of 4 ain't enough... but that's merely due to the extra team... that's no argument pro 3 teams.

Test it, in a group of 3, you have 6/27 possibilities where nr 1 & 2 have the same amount of points. in a group of 4 this is reduced to 153/729, and in those combinations there will be a lot of teams who won in the game between those teams. This is impossible in your system

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: iwan Date: 09-09-2005, 12:59	A chance of 6/27 is 22% and a chance of 153/729 is 21% a very small difference!! Maybe it will be better to form 12 pools of 4, the best 2 of each and the 8 best nrs-3 goes in to the play-offs.

Author: spoonman
Date: 09-09-2005, 13:31

iwan, for the last time: A World Cup with 48 teams would be a ridiculously bloated event. You can't be serious when you suggest to send EIGHT teams from Concacaf and EIGHT teams from Asia/Oceania to the finals! Who wants to see Panama, Trinidad, Guatemala, Canada, Uzbekistan, Bahrain, Kuwaint and North Korea? And we wouldn't have just one of them - we'd have to see ALL of them! Imagine a group with Italy, USA, Angola, and Kuwait. And an endless tournament that lasts for 6 weeks. No, thanks. And fortunately, this will never become reality.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: ignjat63 Date: 09-09-2005, 13:38	I suppose we could have 6 groups of 8 playing 7 games each and then the football lovers throghout the world could choose the world champion through SMS and internet voting no matter what the results are.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: spoonman Date: 09-09-2005, 13:44

Author: iwan
Date: 09-09-2005, 13:53
Edited by: iwan
at: 10-09-2005, 03:20

Maybe 48 is to mutch!!!!
But 36 will be possible many countries can play 4 qalificationmatches less than they now must do!! At the proportion Europe 15,Asia/Oceania 6, Africa and COMNEBOL each 5, CONCACAF 4 and a host. In Europe they can play the same system they did by the ECT in 2004.

Ore maybe 40 when there are 2 host, than CONCACAF,Africa and Asia/Oceania and the 2nd host each receives one spot more!!

And whot to do when the FIFA don't find a solution about the conditions of the replay of Uzbeckistan-Bahrein!?!?? Qualify them both?!?

Ore 32 at the proportion: Europe 15,Africa and Asia each 5, CONCACAF 4, Oceania 2 and a host and COMNEBOL ZERO!!!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: isidromv Date: 09-09-2005, 14:31	Please, ignat63 do not say this. Maybe FIFA can hear you and install this procedure in order to increase their income from the SMS. I would only allow votes through internet (so it is free of charge).

Author: JPV
Date: 09-09-2005, 16:15

A chance of 6/27 is 22% and a chance of 153/729 is 21% a very small difference!! Maybe it will be better to form 12 pools of 4, the best 2 of each and the 8 best nrs-3 goes in to the play-offs

you forgot "and in those combinations there will be a lot of teams who won in the game between those teams" try again, my dear...

Maybe 48 is to mutch!!!!
But 36 will be possible many countries can play 4 qalificationmatches less than they now must do!! At the proportion Europe 15,Asia/Oceania 6, Africa and COMNEBOL each 5, CONCACAF 4 and a host. In Europe they can play the same system they did by the ECT in 2004.
36 => 12 x 3? :s or 4x9 ? :s
And whot to do when the FIFA don't find a solution about the conditions of the replay of Uzbeckistan-Bahrein!?!?? Qualify them both?!?

Neither Uzbekistan or Bahrein will be qualified, since there is another playoff against probably Guatemala or Trinidad...

Author: iwan
Date: 09-09-2005, 17:41
Edited by: iwan
at: 09-09-2005, 23:33

Dear JPV,

You told me by your self in pools off 3 there's a chance of 6/27 what two ore more teams receive the same points!! In CONCACAFCUP that happened two times the last 6 years.

What are the chances in pools off 3 when the chance for winning team-A, winning team-B and a draw all are 33%!?!?
22% at 6-3-0
22% at 4-3-1
22% at 4-2-1
11% at 6-1-1
11% at 4-4-0
8% at 3-3-3
4% at 2-2-2

By 6-1-1 a team can loose by lottery,but with 1 draw in 2 matches, than he'd to play better!! And by 4-4-0 both teams reached the 2nd round and nothing to worry about that!!! But 12% chance of 3-3-3 ore 2-2-2, by the CONCACAFCUP that happend in 2 off the 20 pools of 3 they've had hte last 6 years what means in 10% off the cases!!

And at all the WCT's since 1930 when they'd pools off four, in 24 off the 71 cases the number-2 had equal points as the nr-3 but a better goaldifference!!! Allright!! In '30 and '50 only the winner reached the 2nd round and in '86,'90 and'94 the best 4 nrs-3, but when allways only the best 2 teams should reach the 2nd round.....

I give all the pools where it happend when the nr-2 had a better goal-difference than the nr-3 (ore head-to-head,ore made-goals).
'50: Pool-B
'54: Pool-B and -D.
'58: Pool-A,-C and -D
'62: Pool-D
'70: Pool-B
'74: Pool-B and-D
'78 Pool-D
'82: POOL-A,-B,-E and -F
'86 Pool-F
'90: Pool-B and -F
'94: Pool-A,D,E and -F
'02: Pool-B and -C.

By pools of 3 it happened 2 of the 20 teams a team didn't reach the
2nd round with the same points like the nr-2 what means only 10%!!

But in pools of 4 it happend 24 of the 71 times what means 34%!!!
And in '74,'78 and '82 Scotland didn't reach 3 times in a row the second round about a worser goal-difference!! Is that fair!??

You told by 36 teams, 12 pools of 3, the best 2of each will be put in 8 ppools of 3 fore each two places in the 1/8th-finals.

Can be, can be not!!!

What to do when the FIFA don't can find a solution about the match
Uzbeckistan-Bahrein,let qalify both, and Australia and the nr-5 of the COMNEBOL and the nr-4 off the CONCACAF too and an otter country at a way later to diside,maybe Belgium as the 2nd host to play the 6 matches of pool-i in it, the resting 64 matches can be played in Germany what still has been planned, than the're 36 countiries!!

Can be,can be not!!

But the FIFA desided 2 years agow to play with 36 countries in 9 pools of for, the 9 winners and the 5 best runners-up should be placed directly for the 1/8th final and the 4 worst runners up should play play-offs for the resting 2 places in the 1/8th final, laeter the FIFA changed his mind.

But 2 years agow the fifa realy desided to do that!!!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: keir Date: 09-09-2005, 18:46	It just sounds like a terrible idea- without going into any mathematics, which make my head hurt, as was said previously, 48 teams is way too much, and there just aren't 48 world- class teams around the World.

Author: iwan
Date: 09-09-2005, 22:04
Edited by: iwan
at: 10-09-2005, 03:18

Dear Keit,

Yes, 48 can be to mutch!! But 36 not!!!
The FIFA had 2 years agow real plans for a WCT with 36 countries!!
And at the proportion Europe 15,Africa,COMNEBOL and Asia each 5, CONCACAF 4, Oceania 1 and a host.
Many countries from all the 6 continents could aggree with that.
I'm not joking!!!

But later they've changed their plans.
I've never known why.

The system the FIFA would play was 9 pools of 4 the 9 winners and the 5 best runners-up should be placed directly for the 1/8th-final and the worst 4 runners-up musted play play-offs for the resting 2 spots!

Other systems could be 9 pools off 4, the 9 winners and the 7 best runners-up should go in to the 1/8th final. Ore the 4 runners-up who'ld finished first musted play play-offs.

When groups-A and -B earlier fisnish than groups-C and -D, C en D earlier than E and F etc than in the play-offs A2 meet B2 and C2-D2.
That should be better by the ristingdays off the teams.

From a group the nr-2 isn't sure from a spot in the 1/8th finals that will be compensated the members of that pools all off them will meet a runner-up in the 1/8th finals and 9 off the 10
teams from otter pools all off them a winner!!!

In the 1/8th final can be played:
A1-E2 (Match-1)
B1-F2 (M2)
C1-G2 (M3)
D1-H1 (M4)
E1-i1 (M5)
F1-G1 (M6)
H1-i1 (M7)
A2/B2-C2/D2 (M8)

And in the quarteral final:
M1-M2
M3-M4
M5-M6
M7-M8

And in the semiefinals:

M1/M2-M3/M4
M5/M6-M7/M8

I find it the best off the best systems there are by 36 countries!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: JPV Date: 09-09-2005, 23:47	Iwan, don't compare 2 different tournaments... Off course it happens only in rare occasions in Concacaf, and more often in WC... Check the balance of teams (stronger/weaker) in the concacaf groups vs the WC groups... oh, what the heck, keep on defending your system that no one likes and keep on posting weird arguments...

Author: iwan
Date: 10-09-2005, 01:57
Edited by: iwan
at: 10-09-2005, 04:20

Dear JPV,

I don't know the country you come from, when you're from Holland ore Belgium, I think we can understand each-otter better than now in Dutch!

What ever!!!
I never confuse the WCT with the CONCACAFCUP , when you don't want a WCT with 48 counrtries IT'S OKAYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!

You can be from Holland,Germany,England ore Italy, maybe from Brazil, Mexico ore USA!!! But not from Scotland, Belgium,Norway, Denmarck,Surinam,Cuba, Australia ore Uzbeckistan!!!

But with 36 countries the FIFA has REALLLLLYYYYYY presented that but later they've changed their mind, I don't know why.
By 32 countries I PREFAIR the proporsion Europe 15, Africa and Asia each 5, CONCACAF 4 , Oceania 2 and a host and COMNEBOL ZERO!!!
I'M SICK ABOUT THE COMNEBOL-ARROGANCE!!!!!!!!

There's a real chance australia don't qualify for the 4th time in a row after to became Oceanian champion!!!!!!! For a country like Australia it realy matters there are 32 ore 36 teams at the WCT!!!

So in the Dutch league,Zwolle become between '96 and '01 six times in a row 2nd in the promosion-play-offs, for that team it realey matters the hoghest division has 18 ore 20 teams!! 2 Off the last 18 seasons they've played at the highest levill!!!!!
Protected lottery I doubt it!!!!!!!!!
In '99 they had could better Sprarta in the same pool as RKC and Dordregt in the same pool as Groningen in the competition-after!!!

I'm very reasenible!!!!!!!
In november'02 I've readed in a Dutch Newspaper the FIFA wanted changed the proportion with 32 countries, Europe 13,Africa 5,Asia 4,5
COMNEBOL 4,CONCACAF 3, Ociania 1 and a host.

In march'03 I've readed IN an Dutch newspaper the FIFA wanted to high-up the members to 36 at the proportion Europe 15, Africa, asia and COMNEBOL each 5, CONCACAF 4, Oceania 1 and a host, with the argument ''Europe ant COMNEBOL not receive les than in '02!!!'
But nothing about the sistem to play with 36 countries!!!
The best WCT-system THERE allways has beeeeeeeeen!!!!

In juni'03 I've readed in a newspaper the wanted 32 instead 36 teams but than in the proporsion Europe 13, Adfrika 5, Asia and COMBEBOL
each 4,5. concacaf 3,5, Oceania 0,5 and a host!!!
COMNEBOL-ARROGANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

More than 16 month
later in THIS FORUM I've read what should have been the system by 36 members, 9 ppools off 4 the 9 winners and 7 off the 9 runners-up should reatch the 1/8th final, and many ways to do that.

But I've never known what was the reason for that.

It will be very bad for the 4 countries who don't gonne qualify.
That can be Guwalamala,Australia,Scotland and greece.

But I've never known you wanted!!!!!!!!!!!
irst you said how unfair it was Korea and Ecuador lost after lottery with lost in the concacafcuup and later the CONCACAFCUOP is an very lesssssssss tournement than the WCT?!!!!!!!
In the referennum about the European constitution, in Holland the NO-voters said ''The dutch voting-power lows from 4 to 3% and in France the yes-voters said the french vortingpowers highes from 9 to 11%, what people wants, what's the best fore them!??!?

I've never known what's the rieson they don't wanted to go to 36!!
I find it has never been nesssissary!!!
And not funny for the 4 teams who don't qalify about that!!!
Dutchmen says:'Het middel is erger dan de quaal'' ore in English:
The anti-toxin is worser than the sickness!!!!!!!!!!
4 Teams don't reach the WCT and that's not nessissary!!!!!!!!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: iwan Date: 10-09-2005, 04:38	Dear JPV, What do you find abou what I've said???!??! I mean it all about!!!!!!! Iwan

Author: JPV
Date: 10-09-2005, 07:59

What ever!!!
I never confuse the WCT with the CONCACAFCUP , when you don't want a WCT with 48 counrtries IT'S OKAYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!

but you are comparing CONCACAF Cup (system with 3 teams in 1 group) with the WC (4 in 1 group) just to tell that 3 is better than 4... comparing these 2 completely different systems like this is nonsense, because in the WC the participating countries have a higher quality.

any other point you're making always leads to the fact that team X/Y should be in the WC... but if you're taking that to the extreme, just invite Western Samoa. Maybe they'll defeat Lesotho at the WC 2096 with 200 participants... that would be VERY annoying to see...

And yes, I'm from Belgium (but i prefer to use english, so everyone can read), but being from belgium doesn't imply i want to see Belgium qualifying no mather what. I want to see the best teams playing each other, i do not necessarily want to see my team playing...

Author: spoonman
Date: 10-09-2005, 13:26

The format with 36 teams was actually suggested by CONMEBOL. I think that FIFA had originally wanted to give Oceania a full WC berth - at the expense of South America who would've had only four.

Then CONMEBOL came up with their system of 36 which would have meant 5 slots for South America and one for Oceania.

I don't know exactly why FIFA turned this down at the end. But I think they probably didn't like the idea of playoffs between runners-up. This would have made the tournament even longer than it is now.

Author: keir
Date: 14-09-2005, 18:47

"The system the FIFA would play was 9 pools of 4 the 9 winners and the 5 best runners-up should be placed directly for the 1/8th-final and the worst 4 runners-up musted play play-offs for the resting 2 spots!"
iwan, this format is too confusing for simple football fans who want their team to either come first or second. It's just so simple and easy to follow, why change a winning format? Nonetheless, I wouldn't disagree to a change of the proportions to which teams enter.

Author: iwan
Date: 16-09-2005, 02:55

By the qualifying for the WCT- and ECT-tournements about the
last 12 years, allways the winner was placed and the runner-up musted play a play-off, why can't that be possible at the final tournement!?!?

By 36 teams every continent can realy receive they want!!

It can be possible too to let play the 2 ronners-up who don't reach the 1/8th final let play a play-off against each-otter, the winner can be placed directly for the next WCT, in '14 the CONMEBOL can give-up one spot for that country, in '18 and later Europe, only when a comnebol team win that play-off the COMNEBOL does.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: keir Date: 16-09-2005, 18:13	Your system is just too complicated: give up on it!

Author: iwan
Date: 16-09-2005, 23:05

Not more complicated than by an otter tournement!!!!
Maybe by 48 members but not by 36!!!!

For the 4 teams who don't reach the final tournement
it gonne by a very big pitty and that's not nessissary!!!

By 36 countries 9 pools off 4.
Numbered from A to I, A has been finished 3 ore 4 days earlier than I.
The play-offs can be played at the same day as the last poolmatch in pool H and I.

And in tthe play-offs can be played:

2nd Round:
A2-B2
C2-D2

1/8th-finals:
A1-E2 (=Match-1)
B1-F2 (=M2)
C1-G2 (M3)
D1-H2 (M4)
E1-i2 (M5)
F1-G1 (M6)
H1-i1 (M7)
A2/B2-C2D2 (M)

Qarteralfinals:
M1-M2
M3-M4
M5-M6
M7-M8

Semiefinals:
M1/M2-M3/M4
M5/M6-M7/M8

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: spoonman Date: 16-09-2005, 23:22	You want runners-up from groups A-D to play an additional round just because their groups finish earlier than groups E-I? Can't you see that this is pure & utter nonsense? FIFA would never adopt something like this. It's complicated, it's unfair and nobody would understand why it has to be that way.

Author: iwan
Date: 16-09-2005, 23:30

Between march and june '03 the COMNEBOL had lanced an idee like that and the FIFA made serieus plans for that, later FIFA changed his mind!!

But in ppools-A to -D everybody has 38% to reach the 2nd round and in otter ppools 50% but that differense can be compensated to let play the 6 members of pool-A to -D all off them against runners op and 9 of the 10 members off pool-E to -I against winners!!!

The runners-up off pool-A to -D must winn 2 matches to reach the qarteralfinals but can play each 2 matches against otter runners-up!!

An otter compensation to give the runners-up of pool-A to -D can be
to let play the loosers off the play-offs a play-off against each-otter for one spot at the next WCT, it can be possible to let give Europe ore comnebol one spot less for it!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: spoonman Date: 16-09-2005, 23:57	It's no use - you just don't want to understand.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: helvete Date: 17-09-2005, 00:02	iwan Why change to something worse?? It makes no sense in my eyes.

Author: iwan
Date: 17-09-2005, 21:34

36 Was not my idea!!!!!
It was an idea from the COMNEBOL and the FIFA and many
assosiations in many otter countries could agree with that!!!
But I could very agree with that idea!!!
The best idea about the WCT I'd ever readed!!!

When they find the play-offs should take to mutch time instead they've thought about otter possiblities with 36 temas they went back to 32!!

In the system I've called the WTC don't take more time than 4 days than they now have, with the COMNEBOL-idea maybe 8.

At the last 5 WCT's in the poolmatches are played 4 matches a day, in the 2nd and 3rd round 2 and in the semiefinals and later 1.

I can agree people don't need a situation when a team reaches the qarteralfinal (ore more) one player of that team must play intertotomatches for his clubteam.

But that'sn't nessissary, there's time enough for that!!

One exemple:
In '98 Hans Vonk(Heereveen that year) could play his 1st IC-match twelve days after the WCT-final (Sout-Africa didn't reach teh qarteralfinal) there allways can be enough time for that!!

Author: Kananga
Date: 19-09-2005, 16:32

32 is the perfect number - I think the main preocupation of FIFA should be how to make qualification fairer, and get teams into the WC based on their merits and not geography.

In the Rugby & Cricket WC's they tried expanding the tournaments or meddling with the structures and it didn't make it a greater spectacle. In both sports, they incorporated lesser nations and ended up with a few weeks of trashings at the beginning. In the Rugby WC 99 they also introduced special play-off rounds for a few teams between groups and QF and they confused people, before ending up with more trashings

I think expanding the FIFA WC to 36 or 48 would produce similar things. No one wants to see results like Germany 8-0 Saudi Arabia in a WC Finals and expanding it would throw it open to further mediocrety. It should be a showcase for the best of football - not getting in as many teams as possible.

Author: iwan
Date: 19-09-2005, 20:48

So many times people said:
This is the perfect number!!!
Not only by the WCT, but too with Continential Championships for country- and club-teams!!!

In the CONCACAFCUP, in the 60's there ware 6 members, they called that ''the perfect-number'', later it became 8 and later 12, allways 'the perfect number'', and now there are serieus plans for 16. By the Africacup ant Asiancup they've found, 6,8 later 12 'the perfectnumber' and now they've allreddy 16 teams, for how long?!?

In the Copa America they found earlier 8,10 and 12 teams the perfect number and now there are serieus plans for 16 teams!!!For how long!?!?

At the ECT they've found earlier 4 ore 8 teams the perfectnumber and now they've 16 many years. For how long?!??

In the poolmatches off the champions league, they found 14 jears agow 8 the perfect number, later it became 16,24 and 32.
For how long!?!?
In the UC they've found in the 70's 64 the perfect number, later it became 100,115 and now 176. For how long?!?!?

At the WCT, earlier they've fount 16 countries the perfect number, later they found the same about 24, but in '82 Algaria didn't reach the 2nd round with two winnings and England and Belgium didn't reach the 3rd round with-out loosing!!! They'de changge the system to play and in '86 Uruguay reached with 2 draws and a goal-diffence of -5 the 2nd round!!!

So many teams everybody thought; ''We've the perfect number now!!''
But it wasn't!!!

Author: spoonman
Date: 19-09-2005, 22:29
Edited by: spoonman
at: 19-09-2005, 22:31

In the 60s and 70s, 16 was the perfect number because there weren't as many competitive teams in the world as we have now. Nowadays there are enough top-class teams to stage a 32-team-tournament. It's debatable whether Europe should have more berths at the expense of Asia, North America etc. But on the whole, 32 is a very good number. 40 or 48 would definiteley be too many because there's not enough competitive teams AND the tournament would be too long, too tedious, and there would be too many mediocre matches.

You COULD say that 36 teams would be okay - "hey, it's only four more than 32, no problem!" But the big problem is the fact that there's simply no decent format to play a tournament with 36 teams. Everything you suggested is way too complicated and/or unfair. The fans wouldn't like it, TV stations wouldn't like it, sponsors wouldn't like it.

It might not stay like this forever. Who knows - maybe in 12 years they'll say: "40 is the perfect number". We can't rule that out. There might be enough top-class teams in 12 years. But you've always got to keep the format simple (8 groups of five?). Nobody liked the formats with 24 teams because they were too complicated. That's why 32 is a much better number.

Author: Kananga
Date: 19-09-2005, 22:40

But in the 60s & 70s you had different factors to deal with ie;

-Fewer countries (USSR, Yugoslavia)

-Fewer members of FIFA

And, perhaps it can be argued the playing standard wasn't as high and enjoyed such depth throughout the world as it does now.

There's no problem changing the tournament structures for sporting or commercial reasons. Right now though the WC is OK for 32 - it fits in enough good countries and isn't bloated or weakened by mediocrety too much. 48 will end up doing exactly that and take two months!

Author: iwan
Date: 19-09-2005, 23:01

In the 60's and 70's 70 to 80 countries in the entire world ware interested and 16 WCT-teams was 20 to 23% off all the interested teams.
Later 100 to 120 teams ware interested and 24 WCT-teams was still 20 to 25% and now there are 200 to 205 teams interested, 40 to 48 will be
20 to 25% too!!!

And when there ware 24 WCT-members a system to play and was called as a surieus possiblity: Four pools of 6 for each 2 spots in the quateralfinals. Maybe that system was better to play than the systems they did with 24 countries!!

Fans don't want a tournement with 36 ore 40 teams?!?!
The fans of the 4 ore 8 countries who don't qualify (to loose in the play-offs) want it sure!!!

Sponsors and TV-stadiums don't want?!!?
It can give 8 to 32 matches more!!!
They think:
More matches = more commercials = more money!!

Maybe not now, but after 10 years, the most people find 36 ore 40
teams the perfect number!!!!

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: keir Date: 22-09-2005, 17:49	iwan, you are one scary fanatic. Kananga, "in the Rugby WC 99 they also introduced special play-off rounds for a few teams between groups and QF and they confused people..." The very fact that it will confuse simple football fans is the main objection to your crazy system.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: iwan Date: 30-10-2005, 20:56	Home sweet home!!!!! Why so difficult contruxions with worldwide qalification and/ore 36 teams and/ore a B-tournement, than it's better to have 48 teams at the tournement!!!! Countries like Jamaica,Uzbeckistan, Ireland and New-Zealand have so much better chances than!!!! 48 Countries,my original idea, the best idea!!! Home sweet home!!

Author: gidm
Date: 30-10-2005, 21:49

Iwan, please, could you for once and for all stop posting about this ridiculous idea...It's been discussed for a very long time now and I think it is pretty clear that no-one is with you on this.
Oh and could you cut down on the exclamation marks a bit? It would make reading your posts a bit easier.
Thank you.

I'll do this in Dutch as well, just to make sure he gets the point.

Iwan, kun je alsjeblieft ophouden over dit belachelijke idee van 48 teams op het WK...De discussie heeft denk ik lang genoeg geduurd om aan te tonen dat niemand zich laat overtuigen.
En zou je misschien wat minder uitroeptekens kunnen gebruiken? Leest iets prettiger.
Bedankt.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: spoonman Date: 30-10-2005, 22:38	Thanks, gidm.

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: iwan Date: 30-10-2005, 22:46 Edited by: iwan at: 30-10-2005, 23:00	Many countries like Scotland,Ireland,Senegal,Israel,Morocco,RSA,Belgium Uzbeckistan,Guatamala,Colombia,Panama,Canada,Jamaica,Solomonsislands, Newzealand,Columbia,Greece,Russia and Latvia could have very mutch more fun when there ware 48 countries for the next 8 month!!!!!! Ore not?!?!?

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: gidm Date: 30-10-2005, 22:54 Edited by: gidm at: 30-10-2005, 22:55	Please Iwan! You don't even read other people's posts before posting more of the same drivel? Toe nou Iwan! Lees je niet eens wat anderen schrijven voordat nog meer onzin post?

Re: Very more possiblities with 48!!!!
Author: Tower Date: 30-10-2005, 23:04	Are you actually suggesting that having Solomon Island in the world cup is a good thing?

Author: ignjat63
Date: 31-10-2005, 14:03

iwan, you are really making it easy for yourself, don't you? Anyone can make a number of format constructions with such a convenient number as 48. Where is the challenge in it?

Why don't you take a prime number instead? Like 31 or 43? We are sure you could invent a format that would more-less make sense with such numbers. Maybe even make a universal mathematical model that UEFA will fall in love with. Do go on with this, please! We all have faith in you!