Northern Ireland didn’t qualify, but yes. That sort of backs up my point. With more places given to the UEFA then you’d have the Netherlands and Italy through as well as teams such as Iceland.
But as you said (and I referred to) it isn’t designed to get the best teams through, it has been fixed so that a certain number of teams from each confederation gets through. That doesn’t seem reasonable to me but that’s how FIFA have decided it should be (probably under financial inducement).
If I were picking 32 teams to go head-to-head to find the best team in the world then Australia or Honduras wouldn’t be there ahead of Italy or the Netherlands.
UEFA should probably have 2 more slots, CONMEBOL 1 more, and CONCACAF, CAF, and AFC 1 less each, if you are going purely by talent. I do think there is something to be said for geographic diversity though. It’s more interesting to watch teams from different confederations than it is to watch a Euro or qualifying rematch.
I wouldn’t be upset if the shuffled things around a bit or if they stayed the same. Won’t matter in 2026 though when basically everyone gets in. 6 teams from CONCACAF is insane.
No different to the Olympics. If you wanted to have the best 100m Runners in the world competing, probably 20 of the top 30 would be Jamaican or American.
But we have qualifications, and so the 4th best from those countries miss out (and on their day, they could possibly beat everyone), while other countries entrants run in the heats significantly slower than a good High School sports day in the US.
Holland is vastly overrated. Iceland beat them home and away in Euro 16 qualifying. You are simply going by past reputation. And lets not confuse Euro national teams with their domestic leagues which are populated by large numbers of foreigners.
Italy has nothing at the striker position. Imobile? He couldnt crack the Dortmund starting lineup. They would be boredom personified in their current condition. Their qualifying group with the exception of Spain was a joke. They had two tough games. Lichtenstein? Albania? Israel?
Isn’t that true of most international national competitions, though? I know when I’ve watched international volleyball competitions the commentators have mentioned how tough it is to get out of the European qualifiers into the main tournament.
I had understood that FIFA wants more representation from the more footie-challenged parts of the world mainly to promote the game there, and that over the years it has made a difference, especially in Africa.
I’m not concerned about any individual European team and certainly don’t think reputation should have any influence. Merely that I would prefer to have a greater number of the better teams at the finals rather than restrict it by region.
Same with the Olympics, I’d be perfectly happy to set a hard minimum qualifying standard and allow the top 40 (say) or all that can meet the standard.
Wouldn’t bother me in the slightest if that meant an over-representation of one country in certain sports.
As others have said, most world sporting events (in any sport) have a dual purpose. The primary one is to crown the best team as champions. The secondary one is to help develop the sport worldwide. Provided you don’t give too much priority to the second (e.g. for a 32-team World Cup, splitting the places equally between regions without regard to size/strength would create a serious risk of a European team with a genuine chance of winning, missing out altogether), this can work well. I don’t think the current WC format is too out of kilter. If you’re not in the top 13 European teams, while you might be better than most of the African and Asian entrants, you haven’t got a realistic chance of lifting the trophy, so it’s no great injustice if you miss the event altogether. The current Italy side is a case in point - if they can’t even beat Sweden over 2 legs, it’s highly unlikely they’d scrape through to more than the QFs next year.
I agree a 48-team WC is really scraping the barrel in terms of exploiting revenue at the expense of a sensible, watchable tournament - much like the double group stage in the UEFA Champions League.
Yeah right. Your definition of “better team” seems to be “European +Brazil and Argentina”. Its as if you think everyone outside the traditional powerhouses have no right to compete.
In the last two WC, Italy, 4 time champions, have drawn against NZ and lost to Costa Rica. Last WC Costa Rica beat Italy and Greece and drew against England, came close to winning v Netherlands, who needed diving theatrics to get past Mexico. Algeria took Germany to extra time in 2014, Ghana came within a Suarez handball of the Semi-Final in 2010. Every WC has seen “inferior teams” get better.
Some people think thats a good thing. You might not, but thats not a majority opinion AFAICT.
Nonsense. That isn’t what I think at all and certainly not what I’ve said. If the world rankings and consistent tournament performance suggested that more African teams deserved a place at the expense of European teams then I’d back it 100%.
Individual games within such a tournament are irrelevant because the nature of the setup will necessarily lead to surprising results, plus…it’s football, a sport which inherently throws up surprises. Consistent representation at the sharp end of the tournament is the best measure of the strength of a confederation. 75% of the semi final teams from the last 40 years have been European.
I couldn’t care less. It remains my opinion. I like seeing the best teams in the world compete on merit more than I like to see a diverse mixture. Same reason why I couldn’t care less if the 100m final consists of 4 Americans and 4 Jamaicans
I personally think **Cumbrian’s **idea has merit. Mix up the qualifying play-offs in a global group. Seems like a
decent compromise
The World Cup is about much more than merely “having a chance to lift the trophy.” (Technically, each nation in the WC has only a slim chance of winning it all.)
Merely being in the World Cup can raise a nation’s psyche, provide all sorts of buzz and ratings, and there are many financial and economic considerations as well. Given the choice between “Would you rather be in the World Cup but have no chance of winning the trophy, or never qualify for the tournament altogether,” every footballing nation would pick the former over the latter.
The current system has allowed significant progress in especially African countries’ play. I’ve found that enjoyable to watch, and think it makes the system worthwhile. This time around Italy and especially Holland just didn’t deserve a spot. Time to rebuild, show better in Euro 2020.
It seems that the general worldwide standard of play is improving but I’ve not noticed it as significantly more so in Africa. It hasn’t yet been borne out by consistently better showings at the world cup.