Arsene Wenger's Proposed Changes to the World Football Schedule

[when_you're_smiling]

I think this is both about money and masquerades as a power grab by FIFA, not unlike the Super a league in a way.

 

FIFA thinks UEFA has too much power. Getting rid of the Euros would lessen that and have an effect on European football as only a small percentage of nations would qualify every two years for a World Cup while virtually the whole of South America gets in year after year.

 

What’s also not mentioned here is FIFA’s plan for a Club World Cup, again taking power away from the Champions League and ensuring a slice of the top clubs’ money pot. Are they planning that for the years in between a World Cup? 

 

 

[Langston]

It's no doubt been said but surely limited international breaks bugger your hand as an international manager? Players dip in and out of form throughout the course of a *season*. I find international breaks dull as sin, especially when none of our lot are involved in the England set up, but I feel quite proud when they get a nod, and this limits that chance no end. I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with the current set up and think it  needs to be staggered as it is. We can all go the odd weekend without club football, it isn't the disaster LADFOOTBALL will make you think it is, there's a world out there. 

[iancognito]

Changing the Euros or World Cup to every 2 years completely devalues them. They're prestigious because they're rare and if someone gets double figures for tournamaent goals etc or 20+ appearances then you know they've been a great over a long period. Bad enough they're already going up to 32 and 48 teams and some really average dirge getting to play the early rounds.

Not sure quite how you play a 60 game domestic & euro competition, fit in two month long breaks (AND the nonsensical winter break in the middle of those two) and also fit in tournament football at the end of all that and then not sound like a total wally claiming that players play too much football.

[ALC Fox]

3 hours ago, Corky said:

A World Cup every two years would be overkill. They should be infrequent, special events.

Absolutely. Every four years is enough. It's part of what makes them special and exciting. It's what makes players want it more. Their first World Cup could easily be their last. Making them more frequent would just cheapen every World Cup appearance and win from then on.

 

I love World Cups too much for them to be every couple of years. To be honest, it's getting to the point where I might not watch the one in Qatar because of (a) the human rights issues involved in the stadiums being built and (b) harbouring the Taliban leaders for years, which would break my heart.

[DennisNedry]

Can't be doing with international breaks that long; imagine how momentum breaking a month break in October could be.

 

Also fully in agreement that World Cups should stay 4 yearly.

[LaCiudad]

1 hour ago, ThurmastonFox said:

You have a snooker world championship every year…. That’s still special 

Snooker  BAF

[l444ry]

Too many Nations that are such a poor standard playing the major Nations clutter the whole International scene up these days . Don't wish to be too hard on them but when Leicester have to have a week off because England have to play the likes of the Faroe Islands or Gibraltar it tends to p*** me off a little. 

[StanSP]

Not for me. 

[The People's Hero]

14 hours ago, pmcla26 said:

Because there are a lot of countries that qualify for their continents competition like the EURO's and put up a good showing that would never qualify for the World Cup. Even though it was at our countries expense, Iceland (and Wales too) would most likely have never had their 2016 run if they had to qualify for the World Cup instead where there is less representatives from each confederation. 

Good point. True competition is pointless. It won't be fair until there are enough competitions that every nation can win one. Won't someone please think of Trinidad and Tobago? Abolish club competitions, they just get in the way. Forget Wenger; all hail PMCLA26; the true king of football. Long may he reign. Never may his opinio... FACTS be challenged!

[The People's Hero]

11 hours ago, ALC Fox said:

Absolutely. Every four years is enough. It's part of what makes them special and exciting. It's what makes players want it more. Their first World Cup could easily be their last. Making them more frequent would just cheapen every World Cup appearance and win from then on.

 

I love World Cups too much for them to be every couple of years. To be honest, it's getting to the point where I might not watch the one in Qatar because of (a) the human rights issues involved in the stadiums being built and (b) harbouring the Taliban leaders for years, which would break my heart.

You're right. That FA Cup win was really pointless because they play it every year. Who cares about yearly competition anyway? Right? Send the cup back; ALC Fox has spoken!

[Scotch]

16 hours ago, FoxyLeon said:

I'd rather see World Cup qualification for European teams, be based on performances at the Euros.

 

 

That way, we can scrap World Cup Qualifiers, as it's really not necessary to have international breaks every single season.

 

So let's say a team doesn't qualify for the European championship for what ever reason, injuries, bad call by the ref/VAR, fluke result, group of death etc... then that team wouldn't play another competitive match for nearly 4 years? 

 

Also, with how teams are seeded, it means smaller nations will have even less chance of qualifying for either tournament. 

[Hollyfox]

12 hours ago, l444ry said:

Too many Nations that are such a poor standard playing the major Nations clutter the whole International scene up these days . Don't wish to be too hard on them but when Leicester have to have a week off because England have to play the likes of the Faroe Islands or Gibraltar it tends to p*** me off a little. 

The minnows should have to take part in a pre qualifying group stage. 

 

Its a waste of time seeing our top flight leagues stopped,when England have to play utter crap like Andorra, Faroe Islands, Luxembourg, Scotland and Wales

[Golden Fox]

I hate the current international breaks, and the September one is (usually) the killer - just 3 games in and warming up, so this idea of clearer longer international breaks with the first in October would be an improvement. (although it does smack of reinventing the wheel... rugby union did this years ago with the autumn internationals then the spring 6 Nations). 

The bit I don't get it what happens to non-international players. A month with no competitive games and then needing to get match fitness back - twice a year. The first couple of games back after the long breaks could really impact the league. (rugby union switched to end of year play-offs to mitigate this disruption). Lower Championship clubs with no internationals could be resigned to a month of training! 

 

Wenger seems more concerned with the very elite players rather than the majority. Good in principle, but more thought needed. 

[Corky]

14 hours ago, Langston said:

It's no doubt been said but surely limited international breaks bugger your hand as an international manager? Players dip in and out of form throughout the course of a *season*. I find international breaks dull as sin, especially when none of our lot are involved in the England set up, but I feel quite proud when they get a nod, and this limits that chance no end. I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with the current set up and think it  needs to be staggered as it is. We can all go the odd weekend without club football, it isn't the disaster LADFOOTBALL will make you think it is, there's a world out there. 

I'm sure plenty of non-league clubs will benefit from no Premier League and Championship football this weekend as fans give that a go.

 

Given, too, a lot of this place spent last Saturday complaining non-stop you'd think a week off would be welcome. 

[ALC Fox]

2 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

You're right. That FA Cup win was really pointless because they play it every year. Who cares about yearly competition anyway? Right? Send the cup back; ALC Fox has spoken!

Clearly not what I was saying. (Some) yearly competitions are special, such as the FA Cup, but part of the World Cup's prestige is its rarity, which would be devalued if it were to be held more frequently, in my opinion.

[FoxyLeon]

1 hour ago, Scotch said:

So let's say a team doesn't qualify for the European championship for what ever reason, injuries, bad call by the ref/VAR, fluke result, group of death etc... then that team wouldn't play another competitive match for nearly 4 years? 

 

Also, with how teams are seeded, it means smaller nations will have even less chance of qualifying for either tournament. 

 

Sounds fine to me.

 

Smaller nations get too much of a chance to qualify now.

[FoxyLeon]

16 hours ago, Lambert09 said:

It does erk me when people suggest skipping qualifiers. Especially when everyone was in uproar about the lack of merit for a super league. 
 

But I suppose it’s different when you’re one of the entitled 

 

Domestic football and International football comparisons are completely unfair.

 

Can explain to me how a nation such as Andorra or San Marino, can expand their population by at least 10 times, to become competitive?

[Scotch]

4 minutes ago, FoxyLeon said:

 

Sounds fine to me.

 

Smaller nations get too much of a chance to qualify now.

How do you reckon they have any more of an opportunity than the bigger teams? They have the Nations league where the can qualify by playing teams around the same level, yes but in normal qualification groups the larger nations are drawn against teams that are some way below them. 

 

You're essentially just wanting international tournaments to be a closed shop for the bigger, more fashionable nations. 

[FoxyLeon]

3 minutes ago, Scotch said:

How do you reckon they have any more of an opportunity than the bigger teams? They have the Nations league where the can qualify by playing teams around the same level, yes but in normal qualification groups the larger nations are drawn against teams that are some way below them. 

 

You're essentially just wanting international tournaments to be a closed shop for the bigger, more fashionable nations. 

 

Not at all....Ideally for me, International football would be scrapped altogether.

 

The reality is, International football is a 'closed shop'.

Sheikh Mansour could pump his fortune into Andorran Football.....And their Population would still be below 100,000.

 

Maybe we should expand our domestic top flight, to 100 teams?

You know, to give them a 'fair' chance?

[fox_up_north]

Cut down the pointless qualifiers against Faroe Islands, Andorra, etc. I like the idea of six qualifying matches and smaller groups - ideally nations of similar ability. 

 

That alone makes it mean something. Then maybe have 2 tournaments and rotate them - as we have now - but for teams of similar quality. 

 

I want the world cup to be the best of the best. 

[Scotch]

1 hour ago, FoxyLeon said:

 

Not at all....Ideally for me, International football would be scrapped altogether.

 

The reality is, International football is a 'closed shop'.

Sheikh Mansour could pump his fortune into Andorran Football.....And their Population would still be below 100,000.

 

Maybe we should expand our domestic top flight, to 100 teams?

You know, to give them a 'fair' chance?

That's a ludicrous comparrison. Every team has the same opportunity to play top flight football. Every team in the championship play the same games as each other. Qualification for major international tournament is set up to favour teams who shouldn't need it and its all about having the bigger teams included in major competitions to boost viewership and money, which is where the European super league comparrisons come in. 

 

Also, your argument about Andorra and San Marino is completely missing the point. No one is arguing that they could sudenly become amazing teams. What we are saying is they at least deserve the same opportunity to qualify as countries with far greater recourses. 

 

The odds of these teams to qualify are already small, you're essentially wanting to eradicate any possibility completely, just like the CL wanted to do with their coefficient rule which I'm sure you weren't in favour of because it doesn't suit the team you support, unlike your scrapping of qualification suggestion which WOULD suit your international team. 

[Lambert09]

3 hours ago, FoxyLeon said:

 

Domestic football and International football comparisons are completely unfair.

 

Can explain to me how a nation such as Andorra or San Marino, can expand their population by at least 10 times, to become competitive?

It’s not about that. Let’s just say Messi had been born in San Marino and Ronaldo in Andorra. They shouldn’t be given the chance to get their countries into a competition simply because of the population size? 
 

Of course now they don’t compete, but there is always the chance a talented crop of players come through (Albeit unlikely) 

 

I really don’t get how you can think they don’t deserve a chance to compete. 
 

Perhaps there should be early stage qualifiers like the fa cup to limit the games and raise the standard... but there must always be a route in for each country. 

Edited 4 September 2021 by Lambert09

[The Horse's Mouth]

Everything Wenger has said while he's had this FIFA role has made me think he needs to be on a ward gives me proper Julius Nicholson vibes

 

Edited 4 September 2021 by The Horse's Mouth

[NasPb]

Personally the problem imo is european qualifiers. Who on this earth wants to see Gibraltar, san marino, etc. African and aouth American qualifiers are much more competitive and interesting. Sure Europe has the top teams but there is a massive difference between the best and the worst. Europe has too many spots at the world cup anyways. Asia as well. Africa way too few. 

[Golden Fox]

9 minutes ago, NasPb said:

Personally the problem imo is european qualifiers. Who on this earth wants to see Gibraltar, san marino, etc. African and aouth American qualifiers are much more competitive and interesting. Sure Europe has the top teams but there is a massive difference between the best and the worst. Europe has too many spots at the world cup anyways. Asia as well. Africa way too few. 

The answer to this is to have pre-qualifying tournaments so only 1 or 2 of the minnows get to waste the time of the big boys. The bones of this structure are already in place with the league of nations - e.g. make it so only the top teams from those bottom groups can enter the main draw.