Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 59
Like Tree2Likes

Thread: Design your own World Cup

  1. #16
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    22,240
    With 5 groups of 8 and 3 progressing in my 40 team Cup, I don't think you'd have more dead games in the first round. Actually, there could be a case of having less dead games as one of the teams playing will likely be either trying to win the group or ensuring they don't lose or they'll miss out. I guess with just the top team progressing in the 4x4 groups, it could be a bit ordinary having dead games so late in the tournament.

  2. #17
    Hall of Fame Member social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    15,475
    I've been to 3 WCs - Japan/SK, Germany and SA

    Germany and SA were crap whilst the Asian WC was brilliant

    Having spent time in Russia and Qatar, I confidently predict that one will be great whilst the other will be a complete farce

    As for participants, seems they have got it about right

    You need underdogs (e.g. arguably most memorable game in WC history is US beating England in 1950) to make it interesting and a truly world-wide event
    Last edited by social; 28-06-2014 at 06:04 AM.

  3. #18
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,630
    What did you like about the Asian WC?

  4. #19
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    27,387
    Like Pothas I think the finals structure is fine as it is.

    I would do all of the qualifying in the June/July of non-tournament years, though.


  5. #20
    Hall of Fame Member social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    15,475
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    What did you like about the Asian WC?
    People were just so excited to have the event in their countries and were incredibly welcoming

  6. #21
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,630
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Like Pothas I think the finals structure is fine as it is.

    I would do all of the qualifying in the June/July of non-tournament years, though.
    Clubs would hate that. Fans would love it.

  7. #22
    Evil Scotsman Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    514
    Posts
    29,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabinet96 View Post
    I'd consider a second group stage instead of the knockout round of 16. So the same 16 go into four groups where the top two qualify again. Probably not a popular option though. Would almost kill any chance of an unfenced side making the quarters/semis.
    Where are you magicking up the time you'd need for a 2nd group stage?

  8. #23
    Evil Scotsman Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    514
    Posts
    29,341
    I'd keep the format as it is but **** off a couple of the African teams and Asian teams in favour of more European sides* (ok they've hardly done themselves any favours this tournament but I don't care), maybe one more from the Americas and one from Oceania. I don't care that Oceania is basically New Zealand and a bunch of Pacific islands, it's a farce that one of FIFA's regions has zero guaranteed participation at a World Cup.

    Every 2nd World Cup would have to be in Europe as well.

    *I'd do this via intercontinental qualifiers so the **** African sides still have the opportunity to progress and prove they really deserve it.

  9. #24
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    Haven't FIFA basically confirmed that it'll go to 40 teams at some stage? I mean I know these sorts of ideas get floated a lot, but I'd be really surprised if it didn't happen. It'd just go to 8 groups of 5, same tournament structure, with slightly more games per day and I think the plan was it would extend the duration of the tournament by two days or something.

    If that happens, I'd keep everything as it is and add one guaranteed spot to the holders again, I think four to Europe, one each to Asia and South America (so they go up to 5.5 each), and half a spot each to Oceania (bringing them to 1) and Africa (bringing them to 5.5 so they have an intercontinental playoff as well).

    So it'd be:
    Holders - 1
    Hosts - 1
    Europe - 17
    South America - 5.5
    Asia - 5.5
    Africa - 5.5
    North/Central America - 3.5
    Oceania - 1

    Only problem I can really see with that is if there was a World Cup hosted in South America and they were also the holders they'd end up with 8 teams in it which is a bit much for a confederation with only 10 nations, but you could easily make small adjustments between tournaments for that sort of thing. 17 spots might be too many for Europe, could maybe take one from there and split it into another intercontinental playoff, maybe between North/Central America and Africa.

    edit: Actually on second thought, 17 for Europe is definitely too many. I think 16 for them and a spot between CONCACAF and CAF.
    Last edited by FaaipDeOiad; 28-06-2014 at 02:25 PM.
    It's cold on the outside they say
    But the cold leaves you clear while the heat leaves a haze

  10. #25
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,630
    Couldn't have groups with an odd number of teams in, lest we get an Austria-Germany situation

  11. #26
    Evil Scotsman Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    514
    Posts
    29,341
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Couldn't have groups with an odd number of teams in, lest we get an Austria-Germany situation
    Or an Argentina v Peru situation.

  12. #27
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    Yeah that's a potential issue, but I still think it's going to happen at some stage in the next few cups.

  13. #28
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,630
    Quote Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad View Post
    Yeah that's a potential issue, but I still think it's going to happen at some stage in the next few cups.
    If they are raising it to 40 then it is the most logical group allocation aside from the integrity issues. Not sure what else they could go with as 10 groups would either mean 4 runners-up going home or some bizarre format, in keeping with the past tbf

    Honestly the only formats that haven't been a tad contrived have had either 16 or 32 teams. I wouldn't add any more teams unless they went ahead and doubled it

    Quote Originally Posted by Axl Rose
    The internet is a big garbage can


    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  14. #29
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    22,240
    I like your idea Faiip but I think North/Central America are unlucky to only get 3.5 from 40. I mean all 4 of their teams are in the second round of this World Cup. I know you're building your own World Cup, but I think bring that 3.5 up to either 4 or 4.5 and take a spot away from Europe. We already have Euros

  15. #30
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    Yeah to be fair I don't know how many more places should go to Europe. My main hesitation with giving more spots to North/Central America is that I think the quality of the remaining teams there would be poor, Honduras didn't offer much to this tournament and the next team would be Panama I guess? Hard to see them improving the Cup much. At least you know that Europe has more competitive teams. But those spots could go to Africa or Asia too.

    Either way I don't think it's a big deal. I think it'll still be a while before we see a tournament winner that isn't from South America or Europe but the gap in quality between the rest of the world and the second tier nations from those regions has clearly shrunk significantly. Last two World Cups have had less than 50% representation from European teams in the last 16, and this tournament hasn't really had any teams that just look horribly out of their depth. Worst performers were probably Honduras, maybe Cameroon or South Korea, and aside from Cameroon's effort against Croatia they were all consistently competitive. If it's a close enough thing I think getting more representation from other parts of the world would add more to the tournament than having Serbia qualify or whatever. Maybe 13-15 is enough.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. New Design!
    By James in forum Cricket Web Forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18-09-2003, 10:22 PM
  2. New Design
    By Rik in forum Site Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 23-12-2002, 08:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •