AuthorJeffEyesRimmer The inevitable has happened and the new FIFA president has asserted his authority and we now have an expanded World Cup to enjoy/deal with. While FIFAs official line is that it is a sporting decision to expand the competition we are not so daft and see it for what it really is: a political based decision to increase the bottom line on the balance sheet. FIFA can spout all the sporting merit reasons it wants (there aren’t many) but at the end of the day the clubs, players and fans are left with an increased World Cup to 48 teams. Yes you read that right, 48 teams! FIFA have already admitted that they haven’t worked out all the details yet. We are unsure how you can make a decision like this for ‘sporting reasons’ if all the details have not been worked out but there you go. The increase in teams increases FIFAs revenue by an estimated £500 million. Hence our scepticism when the sporting merits comment is used.
The main opposition to the expansion came from the big European clubs; they are rightly concerned with fixture congestion and player burnout. FIFA has looked to appease the heavy weights here; you don’t want to harm the golden goose that is the Champions League after all. FIFA have indicated that the World Cup would stick to the current 32 day timeframe and the winner will still only play a maximum of 7 games. As stated by FIFA president Gianni Infantino this would most likely take the form of 16 groups of 3 teams, with the top 2 teams going through to a standard knockout competition of 32 teams. One win would see you into the knockout stages. One loss will put you out, we foresee teams parking the bus to prevent this and so expect plenty of drawn games. We have been quite vocal in our opposition to an expanded World Cup. However, even though we all know that it is just a money grab, what are these sporting merits that FIFA can use to justify for the increase in the number of teams at the World Cup? Well we had a think and it is not easy but we have given it a go. One sporting reason that we can think of is that it gives smaller nations more hope of getting to the World Cup, allowing players and fans a potential chance to enjoy the World Cup. Would an expanded tournament historically have enabled the likes of George Weah of Liberia to compete, or maybe Ryan Giggs of Wales, George Best of Northern Ireland or Jari Litmanen of Finland? Imagine seeing those players and more strut their stuff on the biggest stage and what a shame that it never happened. How many great players in the future will we now get to see play thanks to the expanded format? The expansion gives more opportunity for those with ability to flourish. A knock on affect is that there is also the joy of unearthing new talent. While there is caution in buying players purely on the back of good cup form, seeing new players play, learning about them and then hoping against hope in signing them for you club is a great joy of being a fan. More places available mean that teams that we haven’t seen before or in a long time could make an appearance and surprise us (we miss Scotland, please come back). The main advocate of this has been how the smaller nations contributed to the recent Euro 2016 tournament. Iceland, Wales and Northern Ireland not only qualified for the competition but went far and caused a few upsets along the way and we loved it. Going back a little further and Costa Rica knocked England and Italy out of the last World Cup. There is potential for these sorts of ‘giant killings’ in an expanded format. Seeing countries and players we haven’t seen before keeps the tournament fresh. The reason why the Champions League has become boring is because the same teams make it through to the latter stages. More teams with the potential for more upsets keeps us guessing and the enjoyment level up. New fans bring new experiences to the World Cup and bring more diverse enjoyment in the stands. Seeing how other countries fans support their team is a great way to learn, who didn’t love the Viking chant the Iceland players and fans had at Euro 2016. We may get more great moments like that with new countries being involved. With the expansion countries that may have not thought in their wildest dreams they could qualify for the World Cup potentially now can. This could result in an increase in grassroots spending and increase in spending on domestic leagues and coaches to attempt to qualify for the competition. The World Cup generates plenty of money for all those involved which could improve the countries academies and infrastructure. It’s easy to think that to European countries the prize money would be a drop in the ocean but to smaller nations around the world qualifying for the World Cup could provide great injections of cash into the countries football association but potentially have a flow on into the society as a whole too. So this final one is probably clutching at straws but there is a sense of national pride when your country does well at these major tournaments. The bragging rights over rivals and the pride you feel when your country is doing well tend to generate a bit of a happy vibe within the community. We are going to admit that it was hard to find good reasons for this expansion and we welcome other opinions on this. What do you think? Will the expansion dilute the quality and spectacle of the World Cup? Or will the expansion only be a good thing? |
AuthorsJust Some Fans Writing About Football. Archives
June 2018
Categories
All
|