With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Where Eagles dare! Discuss Nigerian related football (soccer) topics here.

Moderators: Moderator Team, phpBB2 - Administrators

User avatar
txj
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 37845
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:35 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by txj »

Enugu II wrote:
Coach wrote:
sayala wrote:I bet people said the same thing when Ilunga Mwepu and his band of jokers were spelled 9-1 by Yugoslavia in 1974. People asked what African teams are doing at the WC
44 years later, what have they done, fancy dances and swaggerific strips aside?
WE may just keep them out because they water down the World Cup. We should just keep the World Cup among Germany, Brazil, France, Argentina, Spain, and who ever else has shown the ability to win it. Ain't it a good suggestion for a helluva World Cup? :rotf:

Why stop at 48? Why not 64?
Form is temporary; Class is Permanent!
Liverpool, European Champions 2005.

We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp
folem
Egg
Egg
Posts: 4607
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by folem »

txj wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
Coach wrote:
sayala wrote:I bet people said the same thing when Ilunga Mwepu and his band of jokers were spelled 9-1 by Yugoslavia in 1974. People asked what African teams are doing at the WC
44 years later, what have they done, fancy dances and swaggerific strips aside?
WE may just keep them out because they water down the World Cup. We should just keep the World Cup among Germany, Brazil, France, Argentina, Spain, and who ever else has shown the ability to win it. Ain't it a good suggestion for a helluva World Cup? :rotf:

Why stop at 48? Why not 64?
Why stop at 64? Why not have a yearly World League Cup of Nations? or s something similar to Davis Cup.
Last edited by folem on Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Enugu II
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 23634
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:39 am
Location: Super Eagles Homeland
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Enugu II »

Synopsis wrote:You all are talking about the teams that will play... what you should be talking about is the format of the 48 team world cup. FIFA has said 16 groups of 3. No more draws in the group stage (draws after 90 mins will go straight to penalties). So if the winner of a group has to play New Zealand while the 2nd place team plays Brazil you would have teams purposely trying to lose. Imagine if the game goes into penalties - you’d have teams missing penalties on purpose.

I’d rather have 64 teams than 48.
Synopsis,

You have a point in terms of format but I think it can be worked out [The issue of watering down is just BS, going by experience over the previous tournaments, if you ask me]. Sure there are problems with Groups of three but note that two from three get in from that stage. Although if all three teams are matched, the teams that get to play in the final game have an advantage and that is why having a game end in a draw is a no-no. There must be a winner which discourages, to a larger extent, match fixing. However, the way I understand this, is that this format is strictly for the first phase of groups of three teams. It will not be part of the second phase of groups of four teams. Is that incorrect?
The difficulties of statistical thinking describes a puzzling limitation of our mind: our excessive confidence in what we believe we know, and our apparent inability to acknowledge the full extent of our ignorance and the uncertainty of the world we live in. We are prone to overestimate how much we understand about the world and to underestimate the role of chance in events -- Daniel Kahneman (2011), Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics
Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics
User avatar
Synopsis
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 6:57 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Synopsis »

Enugu II wrote:
Synopsis wrote:You all are talking about the teams that will play... what you should be talking about is the format of the 48 team world cup. FIFA has said 16 groups of 3. No more draws in the group stage (draws after 90 mins will go straight to penalties). So if the winner of a group has to play New Zealand while the 2nd place team plays Brazil you would have teams purposely trying to lose. Imagine if the game goes into penalties - you’d have teams missing penalties on purpose.

I’d rather have 64 teams than 48.
Synopsis,

You have a point in terms of format but I think it can be worked out [The issue of watering down is just BS, going by experience over the previous tournaments, if you ask me]. Sure there are problems with Groups of three but note that two from three get in from that stage. Although if all three teams are matched, the teams that get to play in the final game have an advantage and that is why having a game end in a draw is a no-no. There must be a winner which discourages, to a larger extent, match fixing. However, the way I understand this, is that this format is strictly for the first phase of groups of three teams. It will not be part of the second phase of groups of four teams. Is that incorrect?
There will not be a second phase. It will go straight to the knockout rounds.
User avatar
green4life
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 45361
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 4:49 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by green4life »

Synopsis wrote:
Bigpokey24 wrote:you people are funny, the worldcup started with 4 8, 16, 24, 32 and now 48... I support the 48 teams.. nothing wrong with it, when teams will only play 2 group matches. Right now your argument makes no sense. We currently have 32 teams and we just witnessed Saudi chopping 5 goals.. Saudi choped 8..When we had 24 teams in USA 94, Cameroon chopped 6 from this same Russia, no to talk of Zaire in 82..

All these useless toreys of more teams would reduce the compettion is pure rubbish.. 4 years is a very long time in football
Saudi chopped 8 in 2002.
Progress then? :mrgreen:
User avatar
ohenhen1
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 69430
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:46 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by ohenhen1 »

Coach wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:Some people like money too much. Sold out their fellow Africans for money and are about to destroy the world cup by watering it down with 16 more countries.
The cordial has been watered down to 32 with the likes of Nigeria, Senegal, Egypt, Tunisa and Morocco, turning a glass of Ribena into Volvic touch of fruit.
NIGERIA MADE THE LAST 16

GHANA, CAMEROON AND SENEGAL QUARTERFINALS.
Winners do it the right way.

http://www.weareimpact.com/livebroadcast.aspx
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34433
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Coach »

Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, what are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
Last edited by Coach on Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
folem
Egg
Egg
Posts: 4607
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by folem »

Coach wrote:Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, was are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
'Dilution' is good for the growth and commercialisation of the sport in new places.
User avatar
Synopsis
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 6:57 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Synopsis »

folem wrote:
Coach wrote:Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, was are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
'Dilution' is good for the growth and commercialisation of the sport in new places.
That is what continental cups are for.
sayala
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1261
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 5:02 am
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by sayala »

Coach wrote:
sayala wrote:I bet people said the same thing when Ilunga Mwepu and his band of jokers were spelled 9-1 by Yugoslavia in 1974. People asked what African teams are doing at the WC
44 years later, what have they done, fancy dances and swaggerific strips aside?
When defending a free-kick, they no longer leave the defensive wall to blast the ball away. No more jokes.
User avatar
nanijoe
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 10606
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 5:02 pm
Location: Around the World
Contact:
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by nanijoe »

Ramadan people...Ramadan
User avatar
Rawlings
Egg
Egg
Posts: 9164
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:35 am
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Rawlings »

Brazil was thrashed 7-1 at home, but nobody asked this question
Cameroon went down 0-6 to Russia
Naija went down 1-4 to Denmark
All very disgraceful results

Leave the Saudi's alone. They were fasting :)
Last edited by Rawlings on Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nwabali -- Aina, Bassey, TroostEkong, Sanusi --- Chukwueze, Aribo, Ndidi, Iwobi --- Osimhem, Sadiq Umar
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34433
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Coach »

folem wrote:
Coach wrote:Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, was are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
'Dilution' is good for the growth and commercialisation of the sport in new places.
Absolutely. There is no difference between 32, 48 and 64 for that matter, when the stones are shaken out of the rice, it’ll the same ol’ usual suspects remaining. The rest were merely there to fill the calendar. Nigeria included.
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34433
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Coach »

nanijoe wrote:Ramadan people...Ramadan
Exactly. Average weight at the start of the game 74.2kgs went down to 73.8 by full time. Chai!
User avatar
Cellular
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 5:59 pm
Location: Nembe Creek...Oil Exploration. If you call am bunkering na you sabi.
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Cellular »

Goldleaf wrote:The utterly shambolic performance of Saudi Arabia in today's match is a very bad sign of things to come when FIFA goes to a 48-team format World Cup. Useless nations like Ghana, Kenya, Andorra, San Marino may be assured of outings in the World Cup when 16 new places are added to the current 32, which already feature weak qualifiers.

If a poor Russia can put 5 unreplied goals past a pitiful Saudi Arabia, then the likes of Kenya will get 14 or 16 from Germany!
But they weren't nominated or appointed into that slot. They earned it.

I still think FIFA should synchronize the calendar even further.
Give teams who qualify for their respective Confederation Semi-Final games automatic births, seed the remaining teams and put them in pool.

You are guaranteed at least 4 teams from each Confederation and the rest will be based on how you do home and away.

Travel has become easier. Teams that don't have a FIFA grade field should be made to play in a neutral field.
THERE WAS A COUNTRY...

...can't cry more than the bereaved!

Well done is better than well said!!!
User avatar
txj
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 37845
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:35 pm
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by txj »

nanijoe wrote:Ramadan people...Ramadan
Well, according to Cellular's theory of hunger in sports, this should be the Saudi's peak performance :taunt: :taunt:
Form is temporary; Class is Permanent!
Liverpool, European Champions 2005.

We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp
User avatar
Odas
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 26722
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Ukwuani
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Odas »

Goldleaf wrote:The utterly shambolic performance of Saudi Arabia in today's match is a very bad sign of things to come when FIFA goes to a 48-team format World Cup. Useless nations like Ghana, Kenya, Andorra, San Marino may be assured of outings in the World Cup when 16 new places are added to the current 32, which already feature weak qualifiers.

If a poor Russia can put 5 unreplied goals past a pitiful Saudi Arabia, then the likes of Kenya will get 14 or 16 from Germany!
Granted some of the goals scored by Russia are classic - especially the last goal (free kick) - Saudi Arabia didn't play well at all. Even being down, they still played as if nothing is at stake. At least, fight - win or lose - fight!
And the BIBLE says: The race is NOT for the swift, neither is the battle for the strong nor ... but time and chance makes them all.
Ecclesiastes 1:18: For in much wisdom is much grief and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow.
User avatar
Odas
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 26722
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Ukwuani
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Odas »

Mr. Piffington wrote:There’s also going to be a higher chance of having upsets and underdog stories.
Certainly so
And the BIBLE says: The race is NOT for the swift, neither is the battle for the strong nor ... but time and chance makes them all.
Ecclesiastes 1:18: For in much wisdom is much grief and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow.
User avatar
Cellular
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 5:59 pm
Location: Nembe Creek...Oil Exploration. If you call am bunkering na you sabi.
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by Cellular »

txj wrote:
nanijoe wrote:Ramadan people...Ramadan
Well, according to Cellular's theory of hunger in sports, this should be the Saudi's peak performance :taunt: :taunt:
You no well... :D

Have never been a fan of playing while one is fasting.

How can you compete against professional athletes while fasting?

But like you said on the game thread, watch them be a handful for other teams.
THERE WAS A COUNTRY...

...can't cry more than the bereaved!

Well done is better than well said!!!
folem
Egg
Egg
Posts: 4607
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by folem »

Synopsis wrote:
folem wrote:
Coach wrote:Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, was are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
'Dilution' is good for the growth and commercialisation of the sport in new places.
That is what continental cups are for.
Continental Cups apart from UEFA's don't have the financial rewards a World Cup brings.
User avatar
2drama
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 15738
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:18 pm
Location: To my Late Grand-Papa Pa onyemere(he left us oct-26-07) -i miss you -R-I-P
Contact:
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by 2drama »

i am all for it however Europe has too many spots at the moment which increase the odds of a European nation winning.

Africa: 5
Asia: 4.5
Europe: 13
North, Central America and Caribbean: 3.5
Oceania: 0.5
South America: 4.5
Host: 1

the 16 slots should divided among the non European nations
http://www.2dramasports.com is live ,Get SE downloads links or watch online links
Get Your Super Eagles Games on DvD Pm 2drama don't live history have a part of it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_national_football_team
folem
Egg
Egg
Posts: 4607
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by folem »

Coach wrote:
folem wrote:
Coach wrote:Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, was are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
'Dilution' is good for the growth and commercialisation of the sport in new places.
Absolutely. There is no difference between 32, 48 and 64 for that matter, when the stones are shaken out of the rice, it’ll the same ol’ usual suspects remaining. The rest were merely there to fill the calendar. Nigeria included.
Only about 10 teams can really win the world cup.
User avatar
nanijoe
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 10606
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 5:02 pm
Location: Around the World
Contact:
Re: With Saudi Arabia, why 48 teams in the World Cup?

Post by nanijoe »

Every Team can actually win the World Cup
folem wrote:
Coach wrote:
folem wrote:
Coach wrote:Fabulous, Turkey, South Korea have made semi-finals...the point is, if the likes of Saudi Arabia are watering down the contest, was are Nigeria and our African brethren doing, adding a shot of Wray and Nephew? Africa as a continent has failed at the Mundial and must be included in any discussion of dilution.
'Dilution' is good for the growth and commercialisation of the sport in new places.
Absolutely. There is no difference between 32, 48 and 64 for that matter, when the stones are shaken out of the rice, it’ll the same ol’ usual suspects remaining. The rest were merely there to fill the calendar. Nigeria included.
Only about 10 teams can really win the world cup.

Post Reply