A few weeks ago, I wrote an article on this site with regards to whether the FIFA World Cup should expand to 40 teams. Football fans who responded to that article in the main favoured the World Cup to remain as a 32-team tournament.
This author also believes that 32 is the right number.
UEFA President Michel Platini came up with the idea of having a 40-team World Cup which would have eight groups of five, with the top two going to the round of 16.
However, as I explained in my previous article, the problem with Platini’s system, is that the group matches would increase significantly from 48 to 80.
There would need to be a couple more venues to be built to avoid the wear and tear of the pitches thanks to increased traffic.
And of course the possibility of collusion where one team has already finished their group matches while the remaining four teams could be in a position where in one game, for example, both teams could settle for a draw on purpose, so that another team gets knocked out.
Well, here is an idea or system that I have come up with to cater for 40 teams.
There will be ten groups of four teams.
Each group winner will progress directly to the round of 16, along with the two best runners up from the ten groups.
While the remaining eight runners up teams will progress to a round called “the knockout eights” (lame name, I know) where it would comprise of four matches.
The winners of those four matches go through to the round of 16 and join the other 12 teams.
From there the familiarity of knock-out stages commences.
The positives
It rewards teams that finish as group winners and the two best runners up teams. It gives those countries a few more days off to recover from the group matches, while the other eight runners up teams have to fight it out.
There would only be an extra 12 group matches to be played, plus the four matches from “the knockout eights”, which overall, would be an extra 16 matches to the World Cup schedule, instead of 32 matches which Platini is proposing.
I would add another three or four days to the event schedule to accommodate the extra match day, and there wouldn’t be the need to build more stadiums. And there is no threat of collusion.
The negatives
Fans worldwide might find it difficult following who are the two best ranked runners up teams.
Extending the event by another four days, could make the tournament less watchable, while teams involved in the “the knockout eights”, have to win five knockout matches to win the event, an increase from the current four.
As for the extra eight spots, the distribution should be, two UEFA , two CAF, one Concacaf, one Conmebol, and two AFC spots, provided that AFC and Oceania merge to create one confederation, AFC Pacific.
However, here is the real benefit of a 40 team World Cup.
With eight extra spots, there is enough leverage to have two countries joint host a World Cup, and for those two countries to automatically qualify.
Instead of having one country hosting the World Cup, where they have to provide 12 stadiums, with joint hosting, countries may only provide a 50/50 ratio or 6:6 (six stadiums each).
Or maybe a ratio of 7:5, 8:4 or 9:3 in terms of stadiums from two countries. That way you cut down costs, and you avoid building stadiums which may end up been white elephants after the World Cup.
Over a 40-year period, rather then seeing 10 countries host the event, you could see 20.
Football fans might actually see a World Cup in their own country in their lifetime.
When you look at the recent bids for 2018/22, a country like Australia struggled to scrap together 12 stadiums with 40,000 minimum capacity in their bid book.
A football powerhouse like Spain opted not be a sole host. Instead they had a joint bid with neighbours Portugal. In their bid, it was the assumption that Spain would provide nine stadiums, while Portugal would provide the remaining three.
Netherlands and Belgium also had a joint bid for 2018.
In 2002, Korea/Japan staged a successful World Cup as joint hosts. Thus far, it is the only World Cup that as had joint hosts.
Countries like USA, England and Germany as proven in ’06, can host World Cups on their own. But few other countries can do this.
In 2010, South Africa held the tournament.
While the World Cup brought smiles to the African continent, the real problems for South Africa are emerging after the event. There have been many stadiums that have become white elephants as they are not being continually used after the event.
An example of this is Cape Town’s Green Point Stadium.
It is home to a small South African Premier League team, and hosts a handful of concerts.
With high operational costs and low income streams, there have been calls for the stadium to be demolished, and in it’s place have affordable housing.
Similar issues could arise for Brazil post World Cup.
Arena da Amazonia, a stadium which is located in the city of Manaus, will host four group stage matches.
The likely tenants for the stadium after the event could be minor third or fourth division sides, which is far from ideal.
There have been suggestions for the stadium to be turned into a prison after the event.
The question I pose is, why did they build a stadium in that location in the first place?
The argument for having a 40-team World Cup, is that we may see countries joint bidding and hosting, and avoid having stadiums becoming white elephants once the event is over.
For mine that is the real issue here, rather then the system to cater for 40 teams.
There are positives in an expanded World Cup if it’s done with good intentions. I do believe that countries joint hosting a World Cup is the way of the future.
Are you the ultimate team manager? Pick your own superstar team and go head to head with other football fans for glory and cash prizes on Draftstars. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.
Arsenal fans were outraged that Chelsea striker Nicolas Jackson got off scot-free for this challenge in the Gunners' 5-0 win.
Kai Havertz has scored twice against his former team and Ben White also got a brace as Arsenal brushed aside a dismal Chelsea side…
Goalkeeper Jamie Young: 2-1 win for Melbourne City against Western Sydney Wanderers. Full game played, seven saves, 29/47 passing. Young had a very strong…
Central Coast Mariners' star striker Angel Torres has been stood down from playing in the A-League Men after he was charged with sexual assault. …
There are few more positive, hopeful and less cynical of the game of football in Australia than me. At times, it can be a…
The FA Cup. Football’s oldest competition. Once viewed as the pinnacle of football in England. The magic of the cup. Where did it all…
