World Cup 2026

TheBeautifulGame said:
Lets compare the highest (3rd place) finishers in UEFA who didn't qualify, on the merits. You seem to be arguing that World Ranking matters more than evaluating each nation's WCQ campaign. That sounds like a corrupt scheme to use FIFA's corrupt rankings to exclude Israel from the conversation. WCQ isn't about what your ranking is. It's about how you perform on the pitch throughout the campaign.
Click to expand...

You were literally arguing that Israel’s ranking was a reason they should be picked 2 hours ago.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Now we're choosing WC spots based on World Rankings? How about prioritizing results and performance of WCQ? Logistically you can't stage a separate playoff between teams already in the normal playoff. You can only stage another playoff between 3rd place teams who didn't make the playoff as an emergency replacement. The nations that qualified for the playoff already have their opportunity to qualify in front of them this month. The question is, should a playoff loser then get a 3rd chance, or should the best 3rd place teams have a chance?

If your idea is to give the replacement spot to the loser of a playoff this month, in the same Fed as the team being replacement, OK, but that goes against your own FIFA World Ranking argument. Iraq and UAE are lower ranked than other non-Israel UEFA nations who didn't qualify. In that case, what's the point of playing in a AFC playoff if you'll get in even if you lose? As you can see, no matter what they do, they're stuck between a rock and a hard place. But they gotta do something, and I'm saying that putting Israel into a 3-team playoff so they have to earn it is better than just handing them the spot. (or anyone else for that matter) They know how selecting Israel to replace Iran out of the blue would be received. On the other hand, it is also problematic to give another AFC nation a spot who already lost their playoff, and had an easier qualifcation to begin with than any UEFA nation.

While there are higher ranked squads than Israel who didn't qualify, I don't know how many of them historically have been ranked as high as Israel has (#15 in the World in 2008). But if we compare stictly WCQ performance, Israel has what would seem to be the best case. Scoring 4 goals on Italy, scoring more goals in WCQ than any other 3rd place nation.

It's also important to point out that Israel has more Asian Cup Titles than UAE and they have the same number as Iraq (1) despite not playing in the AFC for over half a century.. Israel was a founding member of AFC and Israel reached the podium in every one of their Asian Cup appearance.


I find it humorous that you're basing your arguments based on FIFA World Rankings. If it were about FIfa Rankings, then there would be no point in WCQ. They would just choose who made the WC based on rankings.

We need to evaluate who did the best in WCQ. Who had the tougher group, who scored more goals, who came closest to beating top teams, etc.
Click to expand...
Why the fuck are you talking about WC places on this thread? We could be on the cusp of a global conflict and you're talking about WC places, have words.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
I'm not. I'm saying it would make more sense than the bullshit you're spouting. You can't just make up new rules at the end of a competition to suit what's happened during it. There are already rules about who gets a spot and it's not and never would be Israel (or any UEFA team). It goes to the next best team from the same qualifying route (yes, even the playoff losers, as happened when Russia were expelled). Israel have already been excluded by their own performance, I don't need to exclude them using rankings.
Click to expand...
Probably not worth replying again. Have a look at his MO in the VAR thread. He might only have 700 posts, but he’s probably typed more words than anyone else on the forum.

Israel aren’t going to the World Cup.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Probably not worth replying again. Have a look at his MO in the VAR thread. He might only have 700 posts, but he’s probably typed more words than anyone else on the forum.
Click to expand...
In the past I was criticized for only posting in the VAR topic. I'm trying to find some balance around here, i.e. posting in other topics. I know the Iran situation is tense, and trying to separate Iran's WC issues with the war is difficult. I'm trying to communicate my thoughts in an effective and entertaining way, being as mindful as I can to any sensitivities involved. It is not easy sometimes but it does help to talk about it.

Alan Harper's Tash said:
Israel aren’t going to the World Cup.
Click to expand...
Maybe not but I have every right to make the argument that they should at least be in the conversation.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
In the past I was criticized for only posting in the VAR topic. I'm trying to find some balance around here, i.e. posting in other topics. I know the Iran situation is tense, and trying to separate Iran's WC issues with the war is difficult. I'm trying to communicate my thoughts in an effective and entertaining way, being as mindful as I can to any sensitivities involved. It is not easy sometimes but it does help to talk about it.


Maybe not but I have every right to make the argument that they should at least be in the conversation.
Click to expand...
Knock yourself out. I’ve learned not to debate with you.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Here's what I propose. A 3-team playoff between Israel and the best two other nations who failed to qualify and failed to make the playoff. Each squad plays the other two squads once, so each play two matches. The squad who finishes with the highest points over their 2 matches replaces Iran. I think it's important that if Iran is replaced, that they stage a 3-team playoff over 2 matches, so that the team that replaces them has to "earn it" on the pitch.

To your point, if Israel were just "chosen" to replace Iran, well that wouldn't go over too well. But if Israel were forced to earn their way by playing in a 3-team playoff for the last spot, then if they emerged it would be more acceptable.

My question to you is which 3 nations in your view should be in this hypothetical 3-team playoff?
Click to expand...
The ref would be B.Netanyahu

FIFA doing Trumps bidding if that occured.
 
bluejon said:
I hope the UK doesn't go to the world cup after this shit show. Boycott the cunts.
Click to expand...
Bellingham and the other selfish cunts with personal sponsorship deals on the back of being there wouldn't allow it.

IF Engerland won it they'd probably give Trump the reacharound on the podium if it meant more 'likes' for their brand.
 
Blue and true said:
Why the fuck are you talking about WC places on this thread? We could be on the cusp of a global conflict and you're talking about WC places, have words.
Click to expand...
It's the World Cup 2026 thread. Why would he be talking about a 'global conflict'?
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
In making the case for Israel, it's a compelling case, and Iran would have to pull out first. I just think the longer this war goes on for, it would presumably force a decision this month one way or the other.

I'm asking, if Iran does pull out, who is the most deserving replacement? Would it be, in your view, playoff losers or the best 3rd place team from Europe? How does Israel's WCQ campaign compare to others who failed to qualify? Who would be most deserving in your view? Israel as a special case of a former AFC squad who now competes in Europe would make logical sense, especially with the WC being in America. If it was anywhere else, I would give it no chance. But With Trump and with the WC in America, I would say it's a distinct possibility, but we will see.
Click to expand...
How can a 3rd place team be more deserving than a team that finished 2nd? Are you really suggesting a team that is beat in the play offs after finishing 2nd is less deserving than a team that finished 3rd?
 
bluesmith said:
How can a 3rd place team be more deserving than a team that finished 2nd? Are you really suggesting a team that is beat in the play offs after finishing 2nd is less deserving than a team that finished 3rd?
Click to expand...
If you take a close look this new WCQ via UEFA. It is completely different to anything that's ever occurred. For example, in this insane format, WCQ consisted of 6 4-team groups and 6 5-team groups. So we don't even have the same number of teams in each group. So it's now unbalanced to begin with, before we even get into the new qualifying process. In this format, we have a situation in which a 3rd place finisher in a 4-team group (Northern Ireland) has advanced to the playoff over multiple 3rd place finishers in both other 4-team groups and in many 5-team groups due to their pre-WCQ Nations League ranking.

You seem to be under the impression that 3rd place nations haven't already advanced to the playoff over arguably more deserving 3rd place finishers in other groups, many in larger groups, where it's even harder to finish in the Top 2 than in a 4-team group. This new WCQ unbalanced "selection" process is completely unlike anything we're ever seen. It's the first time anything like this has ever happened due the larger World Cup, but the way they've gone about only compounds the problem. On top of this brand new format, we have a situation in which they now need to find a replacement!

So we already have a situation in which multiple 3rd place finishers (some in 5-team groups, 1 in a 4-team group - NI) are in the playoff based on their Nations League ranking. So these members finished 3rd and have an opportunity to make the World Cup. Ask yourself, in a situation in which a replacement is needed, why shouldn't other 3rd place finishes (the next best finishers) get an opportunity now that Iran will not be competing? We now face the possibility of an additional 1 or 2 slots (Iran and possibly Iraq) will open up. No one seems to have any clue how FIFA will decide these replacement spots.

If your argument is that the replacement nation should come from a loser of a playoff, is that really what you want, and how would you decide which playoff loser to choose and why would you choose any playoff loser over another 3rd place nations who didn't get a playoff opportunity? Why would put the loser of the playoff in over another 3rd place finisher who didn't get that opportunity but may have done as well or better in WCQ? They already have their opportunity, other 3rd places finishers have not gotten this opportunity so they should now get one.

So please think about this deeply - We already have multiple 3rd place finishers (1 in a smaller 4-team group) who made the playoff based on a pre-WCQ ranking through a brand new unbalanced group WCQ system consisting of half 4-team groups and half 5-team groups. Ask yourself, why should some 3rd place nations have made it into a playoff while others not? Not based on WCQ but a pre-WCQ ranking. With some nations competing under a different set of criteria and in different sized groups we have a completely nonsensical selection process.

Now we're looking at 1 and possibly 2 openings. Really think about what would be the fair thing to do - wouldn't it be important to give the 3rd place finishers who did not receive a playoff opportunity despite in some cases performing better in WCQ with more difficult competition within the group than the 3rd place finishers who are in the playoff.

If it matters to you where you finish, in the Group, lets say Italy defeats Northern Ireland in the playoff. In that scenario are you more willing to give another 3rd place group finisher an opportunity over Northern Ireland since NI was a 3rd place finisher? The fact is they finished 3rd in a 4-team group over others who finished 3rd in a 5-team group. But what if Italy lost, since they finished 2nd, then what? Then you wouldn't replace them?

To replace Iran, I would favour an additional playoff between the best of the 3rd place UEFA finishers who did not advance to the playoff normally, and UAE the next best AFC. That said, I have no idea what's going to happen but I have no confidence in FIFA for making a good decision because they've already shown us how disorganized they are with this crazy new WCQ system that has "chosen" certain 3rd place teams (often in easier or smaller groups) than other more deserving 3rd place teams. And now you're saying we can't take any 3rd place team over a 2nd place team, even one already in a playoff?

No one seems to have any flipping clue what is going to happen to replace Iran and I would like to see some clarity from FIFA about what is going to happen. I think the best thing you do is you put the best 3rd place teams who didn't make the playoff in with each other and UAE and play it out for the final spot(s), unless you have a better idea - in which case make your case and lets have a reasoned discussion about it please.
 
I mentioned how Northern Ireland was a 3rd place finisher in a 4-team group that advanced to the playoff. Guess who else advanced to the playoff in this crazy new format. Sweden despite finishing LAST in a 4-team group! Sweden with 2 points advanced to the playoff over multiple 3rd place finishers with 12 or more points in other much harder 5-team groups!

So @bluesmith do you understand how mad it is in this new format that Sweden (who finished LAST in a 4-team group) got in over multiple 3rd place finishers in 5-team groups. So given this reality, what happens if Sweden loses to Ukraine in the playoff? Then would you have a problem with another 3rd place nation who didn't make the playoff playing in a playoff for the vacated Iran spot? Sweden was in with Switzerland Kosovo and Slovenia, did not win a single match in group play. They're in a playoff, yet nations in other harder 5-team groups who won 4 matches aren't.

Please think about this, I'm having a very hard time trying to work out how best to deal with this situation. Knowing that FIFA is probably going to do the stupidest dumbest thing possible, lets still discuss what is the best way to go about this unprecedented situation
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
If you take a close look this new WCQ via UEFA. It is completely different to anything that's ever occurred. For example, in this insane format, WCQ consisted of 6 4-team groups and 6 5-team groups. So we don't even have the same number of teams in each group. So it's now unbalanced to begin with, before we even get into the new qualifying process. In this format, we have a situation in which a 3rd place finisher in a 4-team group (Northern Ireland) has advanced to the playoff over multiple 3rd place finishers in both other 4-team groups and in many 5-team groups due to their pre-WCQ Nations League ranking.

You seem to be under the impression that 3rd place nations haven't already advanced to the playoff over arguably more deserving 3rd place finishers in other groups, many in larger groups, where it's even harder to finish in the Top 2 than in a 4-team group. This new WCQ unbalanced "selection" process is completely unlike anything we're ever seen. It's the first time anything like this has ever happened due the larger World Cup, but the way they've gone about only compounds the problem. On top of this brand new format, we have a situation in which they now need to find a replacement!

So we already have a situation in which multiple 3rd place finishers (some in 5-team groups, 1 in a 4-team group - NI) are in the playoff based on their Nations League ranking. So these members finished 3rd and have an opportunity to make the World Cup. Ask yourself, in a situation in which a replacement is needed, why shouldn't other 3rd place finishes (the next best finishers) get an opportunity now that Iran will not be competing? We now face the possibility of an additional 1 or 2 slots (Iran and possibly Iraq) will open up. No one seems to have any clue how FIFA will decide these replacement spots.

If your argument is that the replacement nation should come from a loser of a playoff, is that really what you want, and how would you decide which playoff loser to choose and why would you choose any playoff loser over another 3rd place nations who didn't get a playoff opportunity? Why would put the loser of the playoff in over another 3rd place finisher who didn't get that opportunity but may have done as well or better in WCQ? They already have their opportunity, other 3rd places finishers have not gotten this opportunity so they should now get one.

So please think about this deeply - We already have multiple 3rd place finishers (1 in a smaller 4-team group) who made the playoff based on a pre-WCQ ranking through a brand new unbalanced group WCQ system consisting of half 4-team groups and half 5-team groups. Ask yourself, why should some 3rd place nations have made it into a playoff while others not? Not based on WCQ but a pre-WCQ ranking. With some nations competing under a different set of criteria and in different sized groups we have a completely nonsensical selection process.

Now we're looking at 1 and possibly 2 openings. Really think about what would be the fair thing to do - wouldn't it be important to give the 3rd place finishers who did not receive a playoff opportunity despite in some cases performing better in WCQ with more difficult competition within the group than the 3rd place finishers who are in the playoff.

If it matters to you where you finish, in the Group, lets say Italy defeats Northern Ireland in the playoff. In that scenario are you more willing to give another 3rd place group finisher an opportunity over Northern Ireland since NI was a 3rd place finisher? The fact is they finished 3rd in a 4-team group over others who finished 3rd in a 5-team group. But what if Italy lost, since they finished 2nd, then what? Then you wouldn't replace them?

To replace Iran, I would favour an additional playoff between the best of the 3rd place UEFA finishers who did not advance to the playoff normally, and UAE the next best AFC. That said, I have no idea what's going to happen but I have no confidence in FIFA for making a good decision because they've already shown us how disorganized they are with this crazy new WCQ system that has "chosen" certain 3rd place teams (often in easier or smaller groups) than other more deserving 3rd place teams. And now you're saying we can't take any 3rd place team over a 2nd place team, even one already in a playoff?

No one seems to have any flipping clue what is going to happen to replace Iran and I would like to see some clarity from FIFA about what is going to happen. I think the best thing you do is you put the best 3rd place teams who didn't make the playoff in with each other and UAE and play it out for the final spot(s), unless you have a better idea - in which case make your case and lets have a reasoned discussion about it please.
Click to expand...
Yeah, not reading that.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
I mentioned how Northern Ireland was a 3rd place finisher in a 4-team group that advanced to the playoff. Guess who else advanced to the playoff in this crazy new format. Sweden despite finishing LAST in a 4-team group! Sweden with 2 points advanced to the playoff over multiple 3rd place finishers with 12 or more points in other much harder 5-team groups!

So @bluesmith do you understand how mad it is in this new format that Sweden (who finished LAST in a 4-team group) got in over multiple 3rd place finishers in 5-team groups. So given this reality, what happens if Sweden loses to Ukraine in the playoff? Then would you have a problem with another 3rd place nation who didn't make the playoff playing in a playoff for the vacated Iran spot? Sweden was in with Switzerland Kosovo and Slovenia, did not win a single match in group play. They're in a playoff, yet nations in other harder 5-team groups who won 4 matches aren't.

Please think about this, I'm having a very hard time trying to work out how best to deal with this situation. Knowing that FIFA is probably going to do the stupidest dumbest thing possible, lets still discuss what is the best way to go about this unprecedented situation
Click to expand...
But neither qualified for the play off through the group, they qualified through the Nations league.
 
bluesmith said:
But neither qualified for the play off through the group, they qualified through the Nations league.
Click to expand...
And if they lose their playoff? Who should fill the Iran vacancy? Where should that come from? Lets say Sweden and Northern Ireland lose their playoff. My argument is that you shouldn't take any loser of a playoff, because they already have an opportunity. But if that's what you think should happen, then on what basis do you choose which playoff loser to replace Iran. And why would that be a better choice than giving the next best an opportunity, many of whom had a much better WCQ than some of the teams currently in the playoff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top