Back to Forum

FIFA World Cup Canada, USA and Mexico 2026

615 replies · 34,792 views

5 days ago

I think all momentum has been lost mostly with ties being decided head-to-head, seemingly very little to play for. Also too complicated to understand the permutations for 3rd place teams. So no one really understands what's necessary.

If the 48 games are here to stay (as opposed to expanding to 64...) might have to consider some kind of triple elimination knockout / swiss system. But I just woke up and can't think through whether that'd actually work.

Permalink

4 days ago

martinb wrote:
Even with the knockouts soon, it’s already becoming a long, endurance event.

The group stage has been the same length as any of the previous 32 team tournaments. There have just been more games each day.

Knockouts are when the tournament really begins anyway.

Three for me, and two for them.

Permalink

Endorsed by

4 days ago

Buffon II wrote:
martinb wrote:
Even with the knockouts soon, it’s already becoming a long, endurance event.

The group stage has been the same length as any of the previous 32 team tournaments. There have just been more games each day.

Knockouts are when the tournament really begins anyway.

Lot more games. Lot fewer meaningful games. Fewer meaningful group eliminations. Annoying time it’s being played too!

I guess I’m further away from the Fox or SPE (RIP) than I’ve been for any other cup since 2006…no that can’t be true…could just be the timing…DAZN refusing to HDMI to the tele.

I enjoyed having meaningful games as an NZ fan, but as a fan of a WC experience we shouldn’t be there.

Maybe they need an interim pre-tournament tournament the way cricket did for non-test level nations.

Permalink

4 days ago

Buffon II wrote:
martinb wrote:
Even with the knockouts soon, it’s already becoming a long, endurance event.

The group stage has been the same length as any of the previous 32 team tournaments. There have just been more games each day.

Knockouts are when the tournament really begins anyway.

Agree, as a 32 knockout tournament has room to cause surprises.

In the pool stage, the only team that you would think would progress but didn't so far is Uruguay so this stage has diminished a bit imo.

They need to 8 pools of 6 teams next time so 5 pool games each and a round of 16.

Permalink

4 days ago

US and NZ to co host 2038?!?

Permalink

3 days ago

Absurd idea. Surely CONMEBOL will just agrue 3 games in 2030 is not being a real host, more just recognition of hosting the 1st WC in 1930

The only practical way NZ is ever a co host is joint Aussie and Indonesia

Permalink

Endorsed by

3 days ago · edited 3 days ago · History

observerfromuh wrote:
Buffon II wrote:
martinb wrote:
Even with the knockouts soon, it’s already becoming a long, endurance event.

The group stage has been the same length as any of the previous 32 team tournaments. There have just been more games each day.

Knockouts are when the tournament really begins anyway.
Agree, as a 32 knockout tournament has room to cause surprises.

In the pool stage, the only team that you would think would progress but didn't so far is Uruguay so this stage has diminished a bit imo.

They need to 8 pools of 6 teams next time so 5 pool games each and a round of 16.

Yeah mostly true. Though Algeria or Doctor Congo may yet push disappointing Sth Korea out of the R32. Nervous few hours in Seoul

Turkey also came into the WC favoured and a total squad value from memory 4-5x that of their vanquishers the Socceroos

Permalink

3 days ago

I remember watching Argentina scoring 5 in a group game. It was a real statement.

There’s too many glorified friendlies/exhibition games snuck into groups. Us v Belgium is a good example. Shouldn’t be happening while we’re this weak.

There’s too many should be good teams who play well and still get eliminated at the group stage. There should be ‘groups of death’ . There should be games as intense as this Portugal v Colombia from the get go.

Without a confederations cup or inter continental playoff I’m glad to have some tournament games. But they make the WC a worse tournament.

Permalink

3 days ago

martinb wrote:
I remember watching Argentina scoring 5 in a group game. It was a real statement.

There’s too many glorified friendlies/exhibition games snuck into groups. Us v Belgium is a good example. Shouldn’t be happening while we’re this weak.

There’s too many should be good teams who play well and still get eliminated at the group stage. There should be ‘groups of death’ . There should be games as intense as this Portugal v Colombia from the get go.

Without a confederations cup or inter continental playoff I’m glad to have some tournament games. But they make the WC a worse tournament.

I’m not sure people will feel like this by the end of the tournament, by which point there will have been plenty of heavyweight clashes. On the other hand some of the games featuring minnows which didn’t finish 5-0 will live long in the memory. Cabo Verde, Curaçao, South Africa, Congo etc all gave a good account of themselves this World Cup. The 48 team format is here to stay, even aside from the financial benefits for FIFA (which are obviously the actual driver).

Permalink

Endorsed by

3 days ago

Fitzy wrote:
martinb wrote:
I remember watching Argentina scoring 5 in a group game. It was a real statement.

There’s too many glorified friendlies/exhibition games snuck into groups. Us v Belgium is a good example. Shouldn’t be happening while we’re this weak.

There’s too many should be good teams who play well and still get eliminated at the group stage. There should be ‘groups of death’ . There should be games as intense as this Portugal v Colombia from the get go.

Without a confederations cup or inter continental playoff I’m glad to have some tournament games. But they make the WC a worse tournament.
I’m not sure people will feel like this by the end of the tournament, by which point there will have been plenty of heavyweight clashes. On the other hand some of the games featuring minnows which didn’t finish 5-0 will live long in the memory. Cabo Verde, Curaçao, South Africa, Congo etc all gave a good account of themselves this World Cup. The 48 team format is here to stay, even aside from the financial benefits for FIFA (which are obviously the actual driver).

Maybe for the knock out rounds, they can have a ranking system so then teams in the groups won't know who they'll play until the group stages finish...then they can't play reserve teams etc because getting the highest points you can would help you. They do this now in the Under 17s World Cup with the 48 teams.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_FIFA_U-17_World_Cup

Permalink

3 days ago

not sure its needed, even the games where a draw would have seen both teams qualify were fun, Algeria v Austria finished 3-3!
the 48 teams worked as far as FIFA is concerned,

Queenslander 3x a year.

Permalink

Endorsed by

1 day ago

observerfromuh wrote:
Buffon II wrote:
martinb wrote:
Even with the knockouts soon, it’s already becoming a long, endurance event.

The group stage has been the same length as any of the previous 32 team tournaments. There have just been more games each day.

Knockouts are when the tournament really begins anyway.
Agree, as a 32 knockout tournament has room to cause surprises.

In the pool stage, the only team that you would think would progress but didn't so far is Uruguay so this stage has diminished a bit imo.

They need to 8 pools of 6 teams next time so 5 pool games each and a round of 16.

South Korea would like a word.

Permalink

Endorsed by

about 5 hours ago

90 odd million Turks may also be a little pissed.

Auckland will rise once more

Permalink

Endorsed by

about 4 hours ago · edited about 4 hours ago · History

AucklandPhoenix wrote:
90 odd million Turks may also be a little pissed.

They played poorly. They never played in a manner that suggested they deserved to get out of group…
Compare that with the Netherlands or Japan. These would have been the kind of teams eliminated in the third group game…

South Korea also performed poorly.

I mean Morocco Netherlands was a game. Two teams went at it, and only one was left.

Japan Brazil was in parts and should have been longer.

Both the Canada and Norway games needed late goals.

Good teams playing well are now being eliminated.

Ecuador- did you see their hotel? Oh my gosh

Permalink

about 3 hours ago

Japan and Holland are a bit unlucky though that they ran in to such strong opposition in the first knockout round.

I'd back both of them to have beaten either Canada or South Africa had they been drawn in that particular matchup.

Few other teams I'd have backed them against in the last 32 as well.

Three for me, and two for them.

Permalink

Endorsed by

about 3 hours ago · edited about 3 hours ago · History

Got nervous when so many picked Japan as their dark horse. It’s not been a great tag for Turkey for a decade…

And Holland were sensational in that game. Somebody said they were parking the bus, but it didn’t seem like that!

Permalink

Back to FIFA Men's World Cup 2026 Forum Home Back to top