Futbol Talk

[brewcity77]

Now Pulisic gets to play in at least one World Cup.

He'll play in 2022. With a 48 team field, CONCACAF will likely get 6-7 bids, even Klinsmann couldn't have screwed that up.

[Its DJOver]

He'll play in 2022. With a 48 team field, CONCACAF will likely get 6-7 bids, even Klinsmann couldn't have screwed that up.

2022, only has 32 teams.  2026 is the first with the jump to 48.  Qatar should be the last real qualification campaign until the competition gets watered down.  I'm concerned that 2026 will more be remembered for having too many bad games/bad groups than being a successful tournament economically wise.  3 team groups won't work, the math doesn't support it.

[brewcity77]

2022, only has 32 teams.  2026 is the first with the jump to 48.  Qatar should be the last real qualification campaign until the competition gets watered down.  I'm concerned that 2026 will more be remembered for having too many bad games/bad groups than being a successful tournament economically wise.  3 team groups won't work, the math doesn't support it.

There's been talk about expanding sooner (just like talk of 2017 being the last Confederations Cup even though planning is going on for 2021).

As far as 3 team groups, each group would have 3 matches. Team A vs Team B. Team A vs Team C. Team B vs Team C. Everyone gets a bye once. Most likely the top-2 advance in each group into 32 teams of single elimination. It works, but would probably make for a lot of lackluster group play, especially when the results are basically assured after two matches.

I'd much rather see groups of 4 where the top 2 all get into the last 32 automatically, the top-4 third place teams join them, and the bottom-8 third place teams have to play head to head. Would make for more content and more drama.

[Its DJOver]

There's been talk about expanding sooner (just like talk of 2017 being the last Confederations Cup even though planning is going on for 2021).

As far as 3 team groups, each group would have 3 matches. Team A vs Team B. Team A vs Team C. Team B vs Team C. Everyone gets a bye once. Most likely the top-2 advance in each group into 32 teams of single elimination. It works, but would probably make for a lot of lackluster group play, especially when the results are basically assured after two matches.

I'd much rather see groups of 4 where the top 2 all get into the last 32 automatically, the top-4 third place teams join them, and the bottom-8 third place teams have to play head to head. Would make for more content and more drama.

I would highly doubt early expansion as that would require more venues being built in Qatar and the problems surrounding the ones currently under construction are already big enough.

I understand how the three team groups would work, but it will immediately fail.  The reason that 4 team groups work is because every game matters.  For example after two fixtures in 2014 all four teams were mathematically still alive in the US's group.  We were tied with Germany at 4 points, and Ghana and Portugal each had one.  If the Ghana Portugal game had occurred a day earlier, then we would have known that we already advanced from the group before we even stepped onto the field against Germany (assuming we didn't lose by 4+ goals).  Therefore the US Germany game would have only decided who won the group (it still would have mattered, but you would have seen weaker teams fielded in order to rest/protect players).  You would also run into problems that (in your scenario) Team C would be fully rested playing against team A that had played only a few days prior.  Any team that plays in the first game of the group and fails to advance would blame it on the scheduling problems that occur with a 3 team group.  Throw in potential collusion by the two teams playing in the third game to screw over the other team and you can be sure that someone if not multiple countries will be calling foul.  These may seem like small problems, but they would be exploited to no end.  Even with 4 team groups it happens to some degree.  Japan got in a lot of trouble during the 2015 Women's World Cup, when their coach openly admitted that they were not playing to win their group, because the group winner had to travel to the other side of the country while the runner up had a significantly shorter commute. 

My fear is that the big story of the 2026 World Cup will be the failure of the 3 team groups, rather than the ability for three countries to co-host the event.  Every World Cup has one big story that it gets remembered by (2014 Brazil's semi final defeat, 2010 Vuvuzelas or Rob Green's mistake, 2006 Zidane's headbutt, 2002 alleged match fixing in favor of co-hosts South Korea) three team groups just won't work.       

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

News this week that FIFA is tabling the idea of expanding for Qatar.  Expansion looks unlikely until 2026.

How the expanded field works out will be interesting.  I'm thinking 8 pools of 6, top 2 advance.  A 16 team tournament is enough; 32 makes pool play a logistical nightmare.

[GGGG]

The problem with four-team groups is that it increases the overall number of games.  Right now there are 63 games.  (48 group and 15 knockout.)  Having four team groups and a 32 team knock out is 103 games - 40 more.  (72 group and 31 knockout.)  Three team groups is 48 group games and 31 knockout - so just 16 more.

And it doesn't add any extra games per team.  Teams in the championship will have still played six to get there.  Therefore the entire tournament doesn't take up any more time.  So the tradeoff will be, more teams participating but less games for most teams.  So I don't really mind that all that much.

Another way you could do it is have the top 16 teams have a bye to the group stage, and the rest of the 32 play "play-in" games to get into a group.  Then you play a "regular" World Cup schedule at that point.  That means 16 teams only have one World Cup game however.

Regardless that won't happen.  I heard one thing they may do in three team groups is have no draws.  So all games would have to come down to penalty shootouts.  That would cut down on collusion. 

[GGGG]

News this week that FIFA is tabling the idea of expanding for Qatar.  Expansion looks unlikely until 2026.

How the expanded field works out will be interesting.  I'm thinking 8 pools of 6, top 2 advance.  A 16 team tournament is enough; 32 makes pool play a logistical nightmare.

Way too many games.  120 group games plus 15 knockoff games = 135.  Plus the tournament would need to take 10-14 days longer due to teams in the championship now having to play 9 games versus the six they do now.

[Its DJOver]

News this week that FIFA is tabling the idea of expanding for Qatar.  Expansion looks unlikely until 2026.

How the expanded field works out will be interesting.  I'm thinking 8 pools of 6, top 2 advance.  A 16 team tournament is enough; 32 makes pool play a logistical nightmare.

I'm not sure this would work either.  One of the big concerns with expansion is that the players would be required to play in more games, coming off domestic season.  The concern is that the players would break down, that is why a group stage game is dropped under the most popular 48 team proposal.  You pick up a knockout game, but lose a group stage game so the max number of games you can play is still 7.  6 team groups would require the tournament to be stretched out significantly longer, which as a fan I would love, but could also understand why the players would hate it.  Until I see a proposal that works better than the current 4 team goups with 32 total teams I'm convinced that Infiantino is just changing things for the sake of changing them (Which I can also understand wanting to bring FIFA out of the Blatter corruption shadow you have to change something).   

[Its DJOver]

The problem with four-team groups is that it increases the overall number of games.  Right now there are 63 games.  (48 group and 15 knockout.)  Having four team groups and a 32 team knock out is 103 games - 40 more.  (72 group and 31 knockout.)  Three team groups is 48 group games and 31 knockout - so just 16 more.

And it doesn't add any extra games per team.  Teams in the championship will have still played six to get there.  Therefore the entire tournament doesn't take up any more time.  So the tradeoff will be, more teams participating but less games for most teams.  So I don't really mind that all that much.

Another way you could do it is have the top 16 teams have a bye to the group stage, and the rest of the 32 play "play-in" games to get into a group.  Then you play a "regular" World Cup schedule at that point.  That means 16 teams only have one World Cup game however.

Regardless that won't happen.  I heard one thing they may do in three team groups is have no draws.  So all games would have to come down to penalty shootouts.  That would cut down on collusion.

To be clear, I wasn't proposing 48 teams with 4 team groups.  I think the current 32 teams with 4 team groups is perfect, no expansion necessary.  48 team World Cup would likely see 6 CONCACAF teams, which would completely eliminate the HEX.  Nothing against T+T, they beat us when it mattered, but I don't think anyone could say that their inclusion in this years World Cup would make the competition better or stronger.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Some points brought up, so I guess my 8 pools of 6 idea won't work.

Lots of pitfalls with 3 team pools though.  Take this scenario:

Team A 1
Team B 0

Team B 1
Team C 0

Team C 1
Team A 0

We now have a perfect three way tie.  Who advances?  Sure this scenario is unlikely, but not impossible.  And given enough time, it is inevitable.

[brewcity77]

Some points brought up, so I guess my 8 pools of 6 idea won't work.

Lots of pitfalls with 3 team pools though.  Take this scenario:

Team A 1
Team B 0

Team B 1
Team C 0

Team C 1
Team A 0

We now have a perfect three way tie.  Who advances?  Sure this scenario is unlikely, but not impossible.  And given enough time, it is inevitable.

Drawing of lots. It's uncommon but has come up before. I don't like it, but that's the system already in place.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Drawing of lots. It's uncommon but has come up before. I don't like it, but that's the system already in place.

Ok.  Thanks for the info.

[brewcity77]

That Portugal/Spain match yesterday was phenomenal. Ronaldo's two goals in the first allowed the lead despite Spain playing pretty well in their possession style with a brilliant goal from Diego Costa (dubious foul decision aside). Watching Spain claw back to take a lead only to have Ronaldo equalize with a flawless free kick close to the death was excellent. That match was worthy of a semifinal or better. Rare that a group opener is that highly anticipated, even more rare that it exceeds the hype. That was the most thrilling match I've watched since the USA/Canada women's semifinal at the 2012 Olympics.

[tower912]

It was cool.

[tower912]

Ice, Ice, baby.  (yeah, I posted the same thing in two threads.    Didn't know which one was more appropriate.)

[Its DJOver]

Really poor management by Argentina. The only two things they tried were passing around the 18 before taking a long distance shot,  which Iceland blocked every time,  or try to work a series of intricate 1, 2s with Messi, which Iceland smothered. The only two times they went over the top were a pass by Messi when they drew the penalty and a pass to Messi when he almost scored. Should have brought Higuain about 10-15 minutes earlier.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Had to put the Peru vs. Denmark game on mute.

[HouWarrior]

That Portugal/Spain match yesterday was phenomenal. Ronaldo's two goals in the first allowed the lead despite Spain playing pretty well in their possession style with a brilliant goal from Diego Costa (dubious foul decision aside). Watching Spain claw back to take a lead only to have Ronaldo equalize with a flawless free kick close to the death was excellent. That match was worthy of a semifinal or better. Rare that a group opener is that highly anticipated, even more rare that it exceeds the hype. That was the most thrilling match I've watched since the USA/Canada women's semifinal at the 2012 Olympics.

Agreed.

Ronaldo had just settled his off field tax debt with Spain and repays the country with a huge hat trick against them....take that.

An epic battle of the Iberians

What a great match to get the world cup fans engaged and excited

[mu_hilltopper]

https://i.imgur.com/V7OU0Ne.gifv

[Cooby Snacks]

https://i.imgur.com/V7OU0Ne.gifv

Inspired by this true story:
https://youtu.be/g7Rnt5C2qaQ

[Henry Sugar]

hey everyone... There are World Cup stats on my website.

Write-up
https://www.lowedownstats.com/2018/06/19/world-cup-team-stats-are-here/

Direct Link
https://www.lowedownstats.com/league/fwc/

[tower912]

Japan over Columbia.  Holy Schmidt.  Columbia played nearly the whole game a man down.  Red card for stopping a sure goal with his arm.  Japan scored any way on the PK.   Very biased announcers.

[brewcity77]

Poland and Senegal 1-1, but the ref absolutely handed a goal to Senegal to gift them 3 points. Worst reffing decision I've ever seen at a World Cup. Worse than Koman Coulibaly. Poland played a ball back to the keeper and a Senegalese player was waved on by the ref from what would've been an offside position and allowed to run virtually unimpeded onto the ball. Ref should never step on another pitch as long as he lives.

[GGGG]

Poland and Senegal 1-1, but the ref absolutely handed a goal to Senegal to gift them 3 points. Worst reffing decision I've ever seen at a World Cup. Worse than Koman Coulibaly. Poland played a ball back to the keeper and a Senegalese player was waved on by the ref from what would've been an offside position and allowed to run virtually unimpeded onto the ball. Ref should never step on another pitch as long as he lives.

It was 1-0 at that point.  Poland didn't score until the end.

[Pakuni]

Poland and Senegal 1-1, but the ref absolutely handed a goal to Senegal to gift them 3 points. Worst reffing decision I've ever seen at a World Cup. Worse than Koman Coulibaly. Poland played a ball back to the keeper and a Senegalese player was waved on by the ref from what would've been an offside position and allowed to run virtually unimpeded onto the ball. Ref should never step on another pitch as long as he lives.

Actually, it was fine. Unlucky timing for Poland, but ultimately it was their sloppy play that allowed the goal to happen, not the official.
Also, some of my British friends would like a word with you.