[WC] World Cup 2010 - General Talk Thread (44 Viewers)
- Thread starter Tommy
- Start date
Like I said, the World cup should be consisted of European and SA teams. The rest are no good anyway. South Korea's semifinal was a fluke. They played one good match against the Azzurri and cheated their way to the semis against Spain. The rest can't even make the semis while random European teams like Bulgaria, Sweden, Croatia, Turkey or SA teams like Uruguay are doing it.
Make a World Cup for the SA and European teams and a serie B world cup for the others. That way they will at least make the semis in a world cup
P.S: And the winner of the serie B world cup can play a qualification match to make it to the real World Cup.
Make a World Cup for the SA and European teams and a serie B world cup for the others. That way they will at least make the semis in a world cup
P.S: And the winner of the serie B world cup can play a qualification match to make it to the real World Cup.
From Europe we should only take teams like Spain, England, Holland, France, Italy and Portugal. The rest are jokes, teams like Croatia, Switzerland, Denmark and the rest are teams that aren't that interesting to watch and would only make for a more boring WC. Plus, you have teams outside SA that are much better than the latter teams. USA, Mexico, Ivory Coast, Egypt and Ghana are much better than the latter teams to be honest.
That would be a little unfair, as America is better than all European teams barring 5-6. So it would actually be a much less interesting WC with the likes of Sweden, Croatia, Bulgaria or whatever. Those teams are weak and too dull to watch.
So true 
South America deserves easily 6 seats, I just think Fifa is baby sitting UEFA alot and they are giving them more privilege. Ecuador would have put more afford than plenty of teams around.
I knew you were coming back at me with this
, but Egypt is a team that excel in tournaments more than qualifiers were players meets for a short time, and there are plenty of time between each game. This WC qualifiers they came against Algeria which is a great rivalry in North Africa and there was too much violance around the games, in 2006 they had Ivory Coast and Cameroon in their group, in 2002 they had Morocco (Big rivalry) and Sengal which had an amazing 2-3 years during that time. I think Egypt would have a problem agianst the likes of Sweden, Scotland, Turkey, and etc. They are way better. The reason they didn't qualify not because they weren't good enough, but because there was plenty of crazy stuff going on in these games off the pitch, and both governments of Egypt and Algeria had to interrupt.
I knew you were coming back at me with this
, but Egypt is a team that excel in tournaments more than qualifiers were players meets for a short time, and there are plenty of time between each game. This WC qualifiers they came against Algeria which is a great rivalry in North Africa and there was too much violance around the games, in 2006 they had Ivory Coast and Cameroon in their group, in 2002 they had Morocco (Big rivalry) and Sengal which had an amazing 2-3 years during that time. I think Egypt would have a problem agianst the likes of Sweden, Scotland, Turkey, and etc. They are way better. The reason they didn't qualify not because they weren't good enough, but because there was plenty of crazy stuff going on in these games off the pitch, and both governments of Egypt and Algeria had to interrupt.