From: Raja, The Great on 1 Jul 2010 10:00 On Jul 1, 8:47 am, JCQ <zelig9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 1, 12:07 am, Starcade <darkstar7...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Oh dear God, no... > > > If anything, that's 24 too many. > > > Mike > > They should lower it to 24 and keep the same amount of teams from > South America. I also like how it was in 1982 where only the > semifinals on had any chance of penalties deciding the matches. There > are only about 6 or 7 good teams in the world. 24 is more than enough > for a world cup. Swiss beat Spain and they didnt even make it to 2nd round. Serbs beat Germany and they didn't even make it to 2nd round. So I think you are wrong here.
From: JCQ on 1 Jul 2010 10:05 On Jul 1, 7:00 am, "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Swiss beat Spain and they didnt even make it to 2nd round. Serbs beat > Germany and they didn't even make it to 2nd round. So I think you are > wrong here. I don't think so. There will always be upsets. I also didn't say that the Swiss and Serbs shouldn't be there. 24 teams is plenty of room for them. I wouldn't even mind 32 that much. Just don't like the knockout stage starting at 16 and I see no practical way of changing that when you have 32 teams.
From: Raja, The Great on 1 Jul 2010 10:08
On Jul 1, 9:05 am, JCQ <zelig9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 1, 7:00 am, "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Swiss beat Spain and they didnt even make it to 2nd round. Serbs beat > > Germany and they didn't even make it to 2nd round. So I think you are > > wrong here. > > I don't think so. There will always be upsets. I also didn't say that > the Swiss and Serbs shouldn't be there. 24 teams is plenty of room for > them. I wouldn't even mind 32 that much. Just don't like the knockout > stage starting at 16 and I see no practical way of changing that when > you have 32 teams. You can always change that. Just the teams which top the 8 groups advance. This way you might have more interesting group games with no goal-less draws. |