Fifa are going to expand the World Cup from 2026 to have 48 teams instead of 32....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38565246" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If they extended it to 64 qualifying teams it might allow minnows like Scotland to take part.

Utter ********. I would quite gladly walk away from the world cup.
So many extra games to accommodate means an extra long programme. Which means they'll be moaning about how many matches we play in the Premier League.
Just as UEFA have tried to build up there own importance by expanding the Champions League, now FIFA are following suit. As much as I like to see English clubs do well, and would love to see a successful England team, nothing should be allowed to impinge on the domestic game. That after all is the life blood of the majority of teams in world football.

Ridiculous. More teams = less quality

Sadly was always going to happen. Once again, just like Blatter did, Infantino has got the African nations onside because they'll benefit more from this than any other continent.

time to quit this pathetic charade

Tbh the Euros were an absolute shambles, dull and boring. Full of sides knowing they would 100% qualify for the knockout stages with 3 boring 0-0 draws it made the whole competition unwatchable. From the top of my head I don't recall Portugal winning a single group game, I'm sure they got 3 draws. Nobody wants to watch minnows stick 11 men behind the ball and defend for the entire game, it's boring for neutral fans.

Portugal won 1 game in 90 minutes and won the tournament

I'll look forward to Kazakhstan vs Nicaragua to see who might sneak the best 3nd place spot and get to play Finland.

Football overkill due to being global cash cow.

Another 16 countries for FIFA to rip off and feather their deep pockets

Why don't the top 20 international teams just break away from FIFA.

If England and Spain do it I am sure the rest would follow.

FIFA is a joke

Inchy wrote:Why don't the top 20 international teams just break away from FIFA.

If England and Spain do it I am sure the rest would follow.

FIFA is a joke

On what basis do you rate England as top 20?
Something other than ability I guess

Nafff I must say so we are talking about a quarter of the nations who play football in the world will be at the world cup , naff I say naff it's all about money and it stinks as we all know .

Down_Rover wrote:On what basis do you rate England as top 20?
Something other than ability I guess

This is as good a place to look as any:

http://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/ ... index.html

Its going to cost me a fortune in Panini stickers!

"Infantino has previously suggested FIFA could introduce penalty shoot-outs after group matches that end in a draw in order to stop teams playing for a result that favours them both."

That would be interesting, but not a bad idea really.

It's less about money (well, it's FIFA, it's still a lot about money) and more courting favour from the smaller FAs. If you want to expand your powerbase then you need to get as many as the FAs as possible onside and Benin's vote is worth the same as Spain's.

Expanding the World Cup to 48 will find favour with a whole host of countries who would have a better chance of qualifying, irrespective of how it will damage the tournament as a whole.

Sidney1st wrote:"Infantino has previously suggested FIFA could introduce penalty shoot-outs after group matches that end in a draw in order to stop teams playing for a result that favours them both."

That would be interesting, but not a bad idea really.

If nothing else, we might get better at penalties through greater exposure

Just a further dumbing down of a once great football tournament to appease those countries that otherwise would have very little chance of reaching the finals.

As with the Champions League that was designed to feature the CHAMPIONS in each country but has now been expanded to include the runners up and also-rans so that the tournament can be run on a mini league basis to garner extra TV revenue over a period of several months.

Colburn_Claret wrote:Utter ********. I would quite gladly walk away from the world cup.
So many extra games to accommodate means an extra long programme. Which means they'll be moaning about how many matches we play in the Premier League.
Just as UEFA have tried to build up there own importance by expanding the Champions League, now FIFA are following suit. As much as I like to see English clubs do well, and would love to see a successful England team, nothing should be allowed to impinge on the domestic game. That after all is the life blood of the majority of teams in world football.

Actually, it's no more matches per team (and probably less matches for most teams) than the current set-up, and is scheduled to take no more than 30 days (same as current set-up)

Currently: 3 group games, up to 4 knock out games
New: 2 group games, up to 5 knock out games

Whilst I don't think the expansion a good idea, the fixture congestion argument is not the one to use.

They may as well do away with the qualifying rounds...everyone head straight to the finals, yippee!

Re: 48 team World Cup approved
Home Like
Postby Down_Rover » Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:19 am

Inchy wrote:
Why don't the top 20 international teams just break away from FIFA.

If England and Spain do it I am sure the rest would follow.

FIFA is a joke


On what basis do you rate England as top 20?
Something other than ability I guess

It's not so much to do with England's rank, If we left we would take a big chunk of the global TV audience out of the equation and with it, a lot of money.

Speak FIFA's language!

starting_11 wrote:It's not so much to do with England's rank, If we left we would take a big chunk of the global TV audience out of the equation and with it, a lot of money.

Speak FIFA's language!

What exactly would we gain from that?

DiegoPennysFordFocus wrote:Its going to cost me a fortune in Panini stickers!

Aye they never think of us fans.

I'm going have to build a wall just for the wall chart now.

Bin Ont Turf wrote:Aye they never think of us fans.

I'm going have to build a wall just for the wall chart now.

Get the Mexicans to pay for it.

Rileybobs wrote:Get the Mexicans to pay for it.

Are you suggesting that I've got a mouth that resembles an arse after 12 pints and a curry?

Infantino is no different from Blatter or Platini. What saddens me is that two of my favourite all-time players, Marco Van Basten and Zvonimir Boban, are working for FIFA. I don't know much about van Basten as a man but I do know that Boban is a very intelligent individual who has steered well clear of taking up the position of Chairman of the Croatian FA because, unfortunately, it is a corrupt organisation.

32 countries is already a joke but 48 is beyond belief. I wonder what will be the higher number: the countries involved or the building workers killed before the competition begins.

Please, please, please, don't let Scotland qualify for this format either..........

With the new expected intake I would guess Scotland would still struggle as it stands now due to only 3 more European places becoming available. The majority going to Africa, Asia, and CONACAF members. Expected there places will double.

The only people who will benefit from this are:

1. FIFA
2. Off-shore banks
3. Offices with more than 32 people in their sweepstake
4. Scotland

I doubt extending it will change the outcome. Expect a Germany Argentina final.

Qualifying campaigns are going to be even more interesting than they are already. Hold on to your hats.

Would it be possible to have a breakaway football federation similar to how the darts players left the bdo years ago

Cleveleys_claret wrote:Would it be possible to have a breakaway football federation similar to how the darts players left the bdo years ago

Can get darts style nicknames as well

Current Champions of Europe 'The Power' Portugal take on Joachim Löw's 'Jackpot' Germany in a best-of-3-legs match. Here they come, walking down with the bikini clad dollies.

Looks like it's going into extra time, as the announcer announces the minutes will stretch to ONE HUNDRED AND TWEEEEENNNTEEEEEEE

Interesting to hear how those touting a international breakaway by England, Spain etc would feel about Manu U, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool joining up with Bayern, PSG, Juventus to form a closed European Super League. Or a new Premier League removing the unfashionable teams and replacing them with big city teams who get 30,000 plus attendances and have larger TV audiences. Same principle really.

a 48 team tournament does seem more bloated & quality will definitely suffer. I'm quite happy to see more/different teams from the other continents though.
It's more the format (16 groups of 3 teams apparently where the top 2 go through) which I think poses the most risk to ruining the tournament. The group stages become almost pointless. Saying that, if after those group stages it goes into straight knock out format then a 32 team knock out has the potential to be very exciting. They'll probably have some ridiculous second group stage though because this is FIFA..

So 2 games instead of 3 before England head home each summer?

Current breakdown is:
13 from Europe
3.5 from North America
4.5 from South America
4.5 from Asia
5 from Africa
0.5 from Oceania
1 host


My completely unscientific prediction could see say:
16 from Europe
5 from North America
7.5 from South America
7.5 from Asia
10 from Africa
1 from Oceania
1 host

I must be the only person who likes this idea.

I quite like watching some of the obscure teams play in major competitions, it will hopefully set up some thumpings.

People complaining about the watering down in the quality of the football – how many dire games have there been in recent World Cups and Euros between ‘big’ sides in recent years? Or, how many great games can you remember from recent tournaments? (Brazil v Germany aside).

Nothing sets up a game of 90 minute defending like 2 big teams desperate not to lose to each other.

Bring on Tonga v Guatemala !

So which country has 48 team Hotels and training facilities? Will the WC be in 2 or 3 countries to accommodate it? Where the devil will 48 sets of fans be accommodated and transported between venues? If we bid for this WC we would need Wales, Scotland and probably France to accommodate it. On the face of it this new Competition appears bonkers to me.

vinrogue wrote:So which country has 48 team Hotels and training facilities? Will the WC be in 2 or 3 countries to accommodate it? Where the devil will 48 sets of fans be accommodated and transported between venues? If we bid for this WC we would need Wales, Scotland and probably France to accommodate it. On the face of it this new Competition appears bonkers to me.

Just read this in the Daily Mail, written by Martin Samuel.

GRASPING FA'S SIGHTS ON WORLD CUP CENTENARY
We know the advantages of a 48-team World Cup for FIFA and the various grasping Confederations — and now we know what is in it for our own Football Association, too. The FA are being encouraged to bid for the centenary World Cup in 2030.
Of course they are. Now that 48 teams are involved, with all the additional pressure on stadiums, training camps, hotels and infrastructure, only a handful of nations will be able to host the festival without ruin.
That is why the United States is being touted for the first expanded event in 2026, and why England — or maybe Great Britain, if it still exists — holds more appeal than a return to the tournament's first location 100 years ago, in South America.
There is no chance of Uruguay, the original hosts, getting it and even a partnership with Argentina seems increasingly far-fetched. Meaning the FA could be early beneficiaries of FIFA's greed: having voted through their wallets, like the rest of them.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/articl ... z4VvbAUdoY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook