Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jdoyle87 t1_ixq0ttf wrote

Reply to comment by almightygarlicdoggo in TIL the 2026 World Cup will be the first Cup to host 48 teams instead of the usual 32. by hcbaron

I take it you were against the increase from 24 to 32 back in 1998?

and the increase from 16 to 24 in 1982?

My view is: there are more confederations able to compete and put forward good teams. Expansion makes sense.

In previous eras teams like Saudi Arabia and Japan would never have had a route to the finals because their confederation didn't get the spots, yet they've proven they can be there on merit.

As it stands, Oceania (11 countries, 0 qualified), AFC (46 countries, 6 qualified), CONCACAF (35 countries, 4 qualified) and CAF (54 countries, 5 qualified) are under-represented in a 32 team World Cup when you compare with Europe's slots (55 countries, 13 qualified). It's reasonable to think that the more teams that can participate, the more likely it is for football to improve in those countries.

20

almightygarlicdoggo t1_ixq1h3w wrote

You're right, this World Cup is proving to be great for the underdogs, and I wish them the best. As I said, I hope I'm wrong but I see it as a cash grab from FIFA to get more games crammed together. And as you said, I would change the representations from each continental division.

However, football is more than just some goals, and even though it's great to see underdogs winning, usually the bigger teams provide a better game style which is more beautiful to watch, and in my opinion that's what the World Cup is about, to provide the best spectacle possible.

9

Cold_Ice7 t1_iy9ialk wrote

If you're talking about best spectable, you can't act like Cameroon - Serbia, Ghana - South Korea weren't the 2 absolute bangers of this cup.

2

almightygarlicdoggo t1_iyak513 wrote

You're right, this world cup is proving me wrong. I feel like the level of smaller teams has increased over the last few years and I'm all for it.

1

bimbles_ap t1_ixq2qcn wrote

Reading this I thought you were wrong about Oceania because I believed I saw Australia playing in the World Cup.

Looked it up and they're part of the AFC, how does Australia qualify as part of the Asian federation? I get they switched to it, but I don't get why that's just allowed.

4

Zolba t1_ixq8o2o wrote

>Reading this I thought you were wrong about Oceania because I believed I saw Australia playing in the World Cup.

Just to point out, Oceania have 0.5 qualifying spots. The winner of the Oceania (OFC) World Cup Qualifiers meets the 4th placed CONCACAF(North&Central America and Caribbean). New Zealand lost against Costa Rica in that match.

6

-TheRightTree- t1_ixqojvv wrote

Aren't the World Cup qualifiers also part of the World Cup, and almost all countries precipitate in it? And representation shouldn't matter imo. You qualify if you win, don't if you lose. I'm not sure how the new slots will be divided, but of the top 50 countries that didn't qualify, most of them are European (Italy, Sweden, Austria, Hungary, Ukraine, etc).

48 countries just seem to to a bit too much, considering that there's only like 50~60 countries with a semi-decent football team and culture. Qatar, which is around 50th in the world ranking, is struggling in the current World Cup. Imagine similar ranking countries participating without the host nation advantage - it's going to be boring AF.

1