Re: 40 country World Cup?

by RedOranje Mon Oct 28, 2013 10:51 pm

zizzle wrote:
RedOranje wrote:The plan is to have 8 groups of 5 though. So as I said, more meaningless group stage games.
This might not be a bad idea if you think about it. More scrub teams means more goals and less 0-0 or 1-0 games that have plagued the previous two world cups. With only 3 group games, teams tend to be more cautions as one negative result might ruin their chances of qualification, but with 1 extra game we can expect teams to take more risks since they'll have 1 more game to catch up.

No, it means a lot more 8-0s and teams playing for a 0-0 draw in the vain hopes of pulling a Greece... and it means a lot more meaningless matches late in group stages after the standings have basically been decided and there's nothing to really play for.

This suggestion is basically attempting to fix something that's not broken and will inevitably break it in the process.

by LeBéninois Tue Oct 29, 2013 3:44 am

sportsczy wrote:You guys know why this makes a whole lot of sense? The participating NTs in the world cup get massive monetary compensation. It allows for footy to develop there.

Not to mention the national pride involved in participating. What's the harm in bringing joy and happiness to more people?

The issue in countries in those regions is not talent. The ratio of talent to total players is as good as anywhere... it's training. Being able to bring that talent out.

Not surprised that the thinking of people here is so narrow though.

by Kamikaze692 Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:21 am

I am all for this, only if South America gets more slots in the Finals. Seriously, S. America has the greatest pool of top quality talent right now, and it would be a shame for them to miss out on the World Cup.

And shame on all you people bashing the minnows here... Where's the romance in football bruuv? I mean who wouldn't fancy a great underdog story, like Denmark '92 or Greece '04 or Iraq '07???

by Sponsored content