48 Team World Cup and Video Technology - latest from FIFA

[davieG]

Global football federations are "overwhelmingly in favour" of plans for a 48-team World Cup, Fifa president Gianni Infantino says.

The head of football's governing body outlined his vision for an expanded tournament comprising 16 groups of three teams earlier this month.

The top two teams in each group would progress to the knockout rounds.

A decision will be made in January but any change to the 32-team format is unlikely to come in before 2026.

Fifa's council will discuss the proposal at a meeting on 9 January but Infantino, 46, made expansion part of his election manifesto.

The number of competing teams at World Cups last changed in 1998, increasing from 24 to 32.

The European Club Association, which represents the region's leading clubs, has rejected calls for the World Cup to be expanded.

Infantino also said experiments around video technology in refereeing at the recent Club World Cup had been "very positive" and that he hoped the system would be used at the 2018 World Cup in Russia.

The video technology used at the Club World Cup

The system was first used to award a penalty in Kashima Antlers' semi-final win over Atletico Nacional, with the referee alerted by an assistant watching a monitor.

But there was confusion in the other semi-final between Real Madrid and Club America when the technology was used again.

After the referee asked for a consultation following a Cristiano Ronaldo goal, play briefly restarted from a free-kick for an infringement before the goal was eventually allowed to stand.

Analysis

Richard Conway, BBC Radio 5 live sports news correspondent

Gianni Infantino may well have "overwhelming" support for Fifa's 48-country World Cup plan - but it is not universal.

The European Clubs Association - which represents the biggest teams on the continent - is opposed. European teams provide 80% of the players to a World Cup so they are a significant stakeholder and will place pressure on Uefa.

Uefa is still to make its position clear but other confederations are likely to welcome an expanded tournament.

European nations take up a big proportion of the current 32 slots at the World Cup.

Given there's no chance of any redistribution taking place, Fifa see an expanded World Cup as a way to appease many of its 211 members who miss out on the party. It also fulfils one of Infantino's key presidential manifesto pledges.

Uefa may in the end go along with the 48-country plan given the likely support from the rest of the world. But it will likely want more of its countries to qualify too. Let the horse-trading begin.

[Father Ted]

3 team groups with 2 teams progressing - load of crap. Blatter wouldn't have stood for this.

[Dan LCFC]

Remember though, Blatter going saved football!!!!

 

It'll all go bang one day and if that means the sport can effectively start again then bring it on.

[Lionator]

I think people are against this purely because it's FIFA, it's actually not a bad idea once you read the in's and out's, plus the format is simple.

[purpleronnie]

6 minutes ago, Father Ted said:

3 team groups with 2 teams progressing - load of crap. Blatter wouldn't have stood for this.

we'll come 3rd.

[Father Ted]

2 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

we'll come 3rd.

No that'll be Spurs

[Dan LCFC]

16 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I think people are against this purely because it's FIFA, it's actually not a bad idea once you read the in's and out's, plus the format is simple.

No it's garbage. It's the same concept that made Euro 2016 the worst tournament I can remember. Quantity over quality.

[ealingfox]

If you thought going out to Iceland was bad wait until we get knocked out of a group containing Kuwait and Guatemala.

[Sharpe's Fox]

Euro 16 was a shite tournament. 2 out 3 games were just a team trying to nick a point and third place finishes. This even carried on to the knockout stages and meant Portugal could just shitarse themelves into winning the thing. This will just result in the same.

Edited 28 December 2016 by Sharpe's Fox

[Fox in the North]

The current format for the World Cup is fine as it is. If you invite any more teams and if it's just for 1 game it is utterly pointless.

[boots60]

48 different sets of fans from all corners of the globe in Russia or Qater could be interesting. 

[Fox42]

2 hours ago, boots60 said:

48 different sets of fans from all corners of the globe in Russia or Qater could be interesting. 

I'm up for having more countries in a World Cup, but let's have a format that actually works and doesn't affect how teams actually play like in Euro 2016. I personally like to see more Asian teams and one automatics place for an OFC team. Gets boring having the same teams every 4 years in the World Cup.

[Ted Maul]

I think it's a good idea. I like watching the underdogs at these tournaments- they're often more entertaining than the cagey affairs between the big nations.

 

Plus, people focusing on the 3 team groups creating boring games as teams are afraid to lose- on the other hand, it creates an extra knockout round, less chance of dead rubbers as you get in 4 team groups, etc. 

 

Euro 2016 wasn't a particularly boring tournament. A team who played defensive football won, but that's not what it should/will be remembered for. 2016 was the year of the underdog; Wales and Iceland were the real story. It was nowhere near as tedious as 2010 anyway, that's for sure.

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

26 minutes ago, Ted Maul said:

Euro 2016 wasn't a particularly boring tournament.

 

It really was, quite easily the worst in my lifetime.

[Footballwipe]

Come on, Euro 2016 was absolutely turgid. Also, please never let history forget that Portugal won one game in normal time during the whole tournament. ONE GAME. Don't go telling me "that's tournament football." It devalues the whole integrity of the tournament. (Yes, I'd love it if England had done the same  still doesn't make it any less awful.)

 

Picture this: Your last five tournaments have been in a perfect format. 32 teams, 64 games, eight groups of four. Fantastic. 1998 and 2006 were excellent tournaments, 2010 and 2014 less so, with 2002 being a good one with shocks. You could already argue that 32 teams has over saturation, there is some absolute tosh that qualifies, but it gives a good balance of teams from across the world (and makes it mathematically perfect.)

 

Unfortunately this is FIFA and Infantino knows that he doesn't have the unwavering support like Blatter did. He needs to firm up support with other confederations and 'smaller' and as such this is what we get. An extra 16 teams in a competition of madness.
 

The main problem is that the extra 16 teams won't be allocated properly. If you're being honest Europe should get about half of that extra space. Oceania after NZ is nothing, there's not much depth in the AFC, AFCON, CONCACAF or CONMEBOL. These are facts. One tournament every four years where the teams get smacked is not going to help the little teams get better. It's just not. 

 

Then there's the fan experience. One of the best things about the WC and Euros is that they are tournaments you can base your month around. You can plan and watch every single match. Growing up as a teenager in the 00's I loved being able to watch every match; so much football in such a short space of time. If you add another 16 teams that'll ruin any kind of experience.

 

I doubt the BBC and ITV would enjoy sharing a 48 team tournament, either. I bet a third broadcaster would come in and take a few away, their schedules wouldn't handle the extra capacity in this state, though by 2026 who knows the TV landscape. Part of me, however, would enjoy the soap brigade APOPLECTIC at Eastenders being moved to make way for China v El Salvador.

 

I did a mega post before the 2014 on here about hosting a World Cup. I said to enjoy 2014 as it'd be the last good tournament with the next two in Russia and Qatar. I'd like to retract that. Enjoy 2018 and 2022 because they're the last two tournaments before we head into a terrible World Cup format. Too many games, too many teams, too much politics. The spectacle in itself will be ruined.

 

To add, that megapost went on a big rant how I thought the hosting of a World Cup should be a closed shop for a certain number of nations. If 48 teams is introduced I stand by that argument even more. It's totally unfair to ask a country that would not be capable of hosting a World Cup at six months notice to build even more stadia and host 48 countries.

 

It's great to know that the Euros has been almost done to ruin, and the World Cup WILL go to ruin if it expands to 48 teams. There is such a thing as too much football, this would be it.

[Finnegan]

1 hour ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

It really was, quite easily the worst in my lifetime.

 

Don't think it was the quality of the teams though really, it was that they increased it to an illogical number so you had this ridiculous situation where third place was enough. That coupled with the current vogue for defending and occasionally counter attacking made it an awful affair.

 

A 32 team Euros would have seen some doggo teams qualify (probably even the Scotch) but at least there'd have been more fight in the group stages.

 

48 is ****ing silly, though, there's nothing wrong with the world cup, leave it alone. It's just some moronic beurocrat trying to carve out a legacy.

 

Hint for all FIFA and UEFA directors: want the right sort of legacy? Be invisible. Football fans don't want to hear from you or see you unless you're putting the boot to someone cheating. Stop ****ing about with the things that work and fix some of the stuff that's wrong, eg retrospective action for diving which basically every ****ing fan on the planet wants.

[Manwell Pablo]

16 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Don't think it was the quality of the teams though really, it was that they increased it to an illogical number so you had this ridiculous situation where third place was enough. That coupled with the current vogue for defending and occasionally counter attacking made it an awful affair.

 

A 32 team Euros would have seen some doggo teams qualify (probably even the Scotch) but at least there'd have been more fight in the group stages.

 

48 is ****ing silly, though, there's nothing wrong with the world cup, leave it alone. It's just some moronic beurocrat trying to carve out a legacy.

 

Hint for all FIFA and UEFA directors: want the right sort of legacy? Be invisible. Football fans don't want to hear from you or see you unless you're putting the boot to someone cheating. Stop ****ing about with the things that work and fix some of the stuff that's wrong, eg retrospective action for diving which basically every ****ing fan on the planet wants.

 

YES.

 

They will  of course make it 48 teams though and it will be shit. 

[Finnegan]

3 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

YES.

 

They will  of course make it 48 teams though and it will be shit. 

 

Yeah they do what they want.

 

I'm pretty sure the thought process is something like: "give Asia enough places that China and some oil rich Arab nations can qualify and give the Europeans a few more so they don't moan."

[Manwell Pablo]

Just now, Finnegan said:

 

Yeah they do what they want.

 

I'm pretty sure the thought process is something like: "give Asia enough places that China and some oil rich Arab nations can qualify and give the Europeans a few more so they don't moan."

 

Now now, there's no room for politics in football, remember the poppy's, REMEMBER THE POPPYS, SPORT ONLY.

[Nalis]

What a misleading line from FIFA re: overwhelming support from federations. Of course there is as there is more exposure for the nations that qualify which means potential for more revenue from sponsers/shirt sales, etc for the particular federation in question. Funny how they don't mention what the fans think...

[lgfualol]

Announced on Tuesday apparently.

 

16 groups of 3 teams, top 2 advance. Why are they always finding ways to **** everything up? 

[Jattdogg]

1 hour ago, lgfualol said:

Announced on Tuesday apparently.

 

16 groups of 3 teams, top 2 advance. Why are they always finding ways to **** everything up? 

If thats the case then its a complete joke. Groups of 3? Thats almost but obviously not a pair , why bother? 

 

 

[stripeyfox]

On the one hand, three team groups reduce the amount of dead rubbers, and mean that a team cannot really afford to slip up. In theory that should make for exciting games. But because one team will not be playing whilst the other two are, this can lead to "contrived" results - like a mutually convenient draw to send both teams through. Apparently FIFA's proposals include the possibility of no draws in the group stage - games will be decided on penalties if tied so there will always be a "winner".

 

It is crazy. 32 is the perfect number as it dovetails nicely into the required last 16 > QF > SF > F. Euro 2014 and World Cups from 1986 to 1998 (I think) had the same problem of having 24 teams which does not divide up so easily, so you have 3rd place teams going through. 

 

Unless they can expand to 64 teams, then I'd say 32 is perfect.

 

Edited 10 January 2017 by stripeyfox

[MC Prussian]

The thing with FIFA changes to the tournament format are that they seem to be happening so quickly or so fast in succession - I think the majority of us have been rather fortunate that we've been able to witness relatively few changes in the 80ies, 90ies and Noughties - so we take that for granted, I suppose.

If we had a new format for a prolonged period of time we could determine whether it's worth it or not and it's worked out fine with 32 before.

But it's safe to say FIFA would probably go ahead and alter it straightaway and open up the competition to 64 nations in the foreseeable future.

 

I guess it's because they want to push in a direction where smaller nations can participate in a World Cup and get that "feeling", too. Whether that's for the good of the sport or simply a publicity or marketing stunt remains open for debate.

[Kitchandro]

On ‎28‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 12:27, Lionator said:

I think people are against this purely because it's FIFA, it's actually not a bad idea once you read the in's and out's, plus the format is simple.

You're wrong.