Hopefully they’ll set up the groups so that they are regionalised in some way to reduce the travel each team and their fanbase.
I would guess that’s exactly what they are hinting towards by announcing the 16 stadiums in three regions (West, Central and East).
With 16 groups and 16 stadiums, it’d be easy to assume that each group is tied to a stadium but I think that’s unlikely.
I would imagine that the USA and Mexico would want to spread their two group matches across different venues (this might be more problematic for Canada who have Vancouver in the West and Toronto in the East).
What I could see happening is five groups being assigned the five West venues, six groups assigned the six stadiums in the Central region and the remaining five groups paired to the East. From there, the games will be mixed up as much as possible.
So distance travelled in the worst case for example would be playing in Vancouver & Guadalajara in the West, Kansas City & Mexico City in Central and Boston & Miami in the East.
I'd imagine one group per stadium and the first 2 knockout stages being similarly regionalised. Quarters I'd imagine will be one West Coast, one East Coast with the other 2 in Canada and Mexico
GD will definitely come into it. One team wins both games, the others draw with each other. Points: 6 1 1 Who lost by the least to the Pot A team goes through. Looks crap to me.
GD will definitely come into it. One team wins both games, the others draw with each other. Points: 6 1 1 Who lost by the least to the Pot A team goes through. Looks crap to me.
Happened to Northern Ireland in 1982.
France 1-0 Austria France 4-1 Northern Ireland Northern Ireland 2-2 Austria
GD will definitely come into it. One team wins both games, the others draw with each other. Points: 6 1 1 Who lost by the least to the Pot A team goes through. Looks crap to me.
Happened to Northern Ireland in 1982.
France 1-0 Austria France 4-1 Northern Ireland Northern Ireland 2-2 Austria
It was different back in 1982. These days teams will be shutting up shop from the first second of the first match.
Also imagine if the last game were that France v Northern Ireland fixture. Both teams would be happy to play out a 0-0 draw. Northern Ireland wouldn't dream of taking a risk to finish top and France would already be resting players for the second round.
We will have at least one more Germany v Austria - Disgrace of Gijon - match.
GD will definitely come into it. One team wins both games, the others draw with each other. Points: 6 1 1 Who lost by the least to the Pot A team goes through. Looks crap to me.
Happened to Northern Ireland in 1982.
France 1-0 Austria France 4-1 Northern Ireland Northern Ireland 2-2 Austria
It was different back in 1982. These days teams will be shutting up shop from the first second of the first match.
Also imagine if the last game were that France v Northern Ireland fixture. Both teams would be happy to play out a 0-0 draw. Northern Ireland wouldn't dream of taking a risk to finish top and France would already be resting players for the second round.
We will have at least one more Germany v Austria - Disgrace of Gijon - match.
France v Northern Ireland was the last fixture, I didn’t type them up in chronological order.
Why would teams play any different in 2026 than they would in 1982? Was playing for a draw as an underdog not considered?
It obviously opens the door to that kind of situation but I suspect it likely won’t play out in 2026 - especially if some motivation for group winners can be implemented.
I've only been to the Vancouver stadium on that list but it's a great venue and right in the downtown area.
I think it's relatively close to the alarming homeless drugged up crowd.
Lol BC Place is not that close to East Hastings (the awful street in question) and there's loads of bars around the stadium.
There really is very little excitement about football here so it will be nice for the little Vancouverites to experience a proper atmosphere for once.
Yet another poster spouting from their rear end. Great interest in football at all levels. And as for 'little vancouverites' - what a condescending prick.
Cheers for that lol.
It's fair to say that Vancourites do not show up in great numbers for sporting events. The Rogers Arena is not famous for it's atmosphere when the Canucks are playing.
The Whitecaps average 16k a game in a 50k stadium with no competing football clubs nearby (below the MLS average).
The BC Lions have the second lowest average attendance in the CFL.
Thinking forward to the 2026 tournament, the 48 team competition is going to feel very odd after not seeing groups of three since the early 80s. There's also the issue of encouraging collusion when the two teams playing last will know what result might benefit them both.
I was messing around with double elimination brackets that Americans use often in their amateur competitions (baseball and softball in particular) and think it would be an interesting solution for the World Cup. We'd still lose the traditional group of four as we know it and replace it with eight double elimination brackets of six teams.
As the name suggests, the idea of 'double elimination' is that you have to lose twice to be eliminated. Once every team but two have lost twice, the two teams would progress to a round of 16 and the tournament would continue as a traditional World Cup from that point forward.
Assume a group of six consisting of England, USA, Wales, Iran, Scotland and Ireland.
Game 1: Iran v Scotland - Iran win, Scotland lose.
Game 2: Wales v Ireland - Wales win, Ireland lose.
Game 3: England v (#1 winner) Iran - England win, Iran lose.
Game 4: USA v (#2 winner) Wales - USA win, Wales lose.
Game 5: (#1 loser) Scotland v (#4 loser) Wales - Wales win, Scotland lose. (Scotland eliminated)
Game 6: (#2 loser) Ireland v (#3 loser) Iran - Iran win, Ireland lose. (Ireland eliminated)
Game 7: (#3 winner) England v (#4 winner) USA - England win (and qualify), USA lose.
Game 8: (#5 winner) Wales v (#6 winner) Iran - Wales win, Iran lose. (Iran eliminated)
Game 9: (#7 loser) USA v (#8 winner) Wales - USA win (and qualify), Wales lose. (Wales eliminated)
The elegant thing about this solution is the symmetry vs. what we are used to seeing today. With the current round-robin groups of four setup, two losses effectively ends your tournament whereas a lot of teams will progress in second place with a single loss. Double elimination mimics that effect. It also increases the number of matches per group from six across four teams to nine across six teams (88 games played overall) so FIFA and the sponsors will be happy.
An interesting side effect is that every game would require a winner and loser so all group games would go to extra time and penalties if needed. There is also guaranteed to be something on the line (either qualification or elimination) for five out of the nine games, increasing jeopardy and viewing figures.
Potential downsides are the best teams are likely to only play twice (if they win both games) during a nine game group stage, whereas other teams might play as many as five games to force their way through. The extra games also add roughly an extra 7-8 days to the tournament.
It might be hard to get your head around at first but if you still to the simple rule of two losses and you're out, it makes it a lot easier to follow.
FIFA are reconsidering the 16 groups of 3 format for 12 groups of 4 instead. For the groups of 3 they probably would have penalty shoot outs for drawn matches.
Wow there's going to be some poor sides at the next WC then.
New Zealand will be poor. The 3 extra CONCACAF sides will be poor. Given that USA/Mexico/Canada qualify anyway this almost certainly means it will be Costa Rica, Panama and one other (maybe Jamaica?). 4 extra Asian teams are not going to be great. Based on the last qualifiers it will be the likes of Oman, UAE, Iraq and maybe China. No idea how they give 6 spots to CONMEBOL. There's only 10 teams anyway so 60% of all nations will qualify.
Wow there's going to be some poor sides at the next WC then.
New Zealand will be poor. The 3 extra CONCACAF sides will be poor. Given that USA/Mexico/Canada qualify anyway this almost certainly means it will be Costa Rica, Panama and one other (maybe Jamaica?). 4 extra Asian teams are not going to be great. Based on the last qualifiers it will be the likes of Oman, UAE, Iraq and maybe China. No idea how they give 6 spots to CONMEBOL. There's only 10 teams anyway so 60% of all nations will qualify.
It’s all about the money, and making sure teams like Italy do not miss out again.
Wow there's going to be some poor sides at the next WC then.
New Zealand will be poor. The 3 extra CONCACAF sides will be poor. Given that USA/Mexico/Canada qualify anyway this almost certainly means it will be Costa Rica, Panama and one other (maybe Jamaica?). 4 extra Asian teams are not going to be great. Based on the last qualifiers it will be the likes of Oman, UAE, Iraq and maybe China. No idea how they give 6 spots to CONMEBOL. There's only 10 teams anyway so 60% of all nations will qualify.
It’s all about the money, and making sure teams like Italy do not miss out again.
Not disagreeing with your point about why the numbers are getting increased, but the way qualification worked out this time round, the additional 3 European qualifiers would have been Ukraine, Sweden and North Macedonia. Italy lost in the play-off semi-finals, which would have been one of six playoffs for six places if there had been 3 extra European slots available.
Since I said on another thread that England losing to Iceland in 2016 was objectively funny if you're not English, it seems fair to admit that Italy getting knocked out by North Macedonia this time was an order of magnitude funnier.
My Dad is putting £50 on the US for the '26 WC, probably each way and outright, based on home advantage, and having another 4 years worth of experience in their youthful side, and the money they're throwing at football ("soccer") right now.
Fucking farce that Mexico have had it 3 times since we did and to a lesser extent, USA will have it twice.
I agree but isn't it more about giving it to the continent rather than the country?
There are quite a few European countries who can host when it comes here, but when it goes to CONCACAF the options are obviously limited.
What i think we'll see more of in future now that it will be a 48 team tournament is multi-nation bids to host it. For example Spain/Portugal i think have bid to host in 2030.
Comments
With 16 groups and 16 stadiums, it’d be easy to assume that each group is tied to a stadium but I think that’s unlikely.
What I could see happening is five groups being assigned the five West venues, six groups assigned the six stadiums in the Central region and the remaining five groups paired to the East. From there, the games will be mixed up as much as possible.
So distance travelled in the worst case for example would be playing in Vancouver & Guadalajara in the West, Kansas City & Mexico City in Central and Boston & Miami in the East.
They can't play 2 group games at once and there aren't many games per group
16 groups....32 teams in the knockout stage?
2 top in each group will go through to the last 32. So it's basically 1 less group game, 1 more knockout game than the current format.
I'm someone who usually hates change of this calibre etc and think its pointless ...but quite like this idea.
I think a lot of the group's may go unsettled between 2nd and 3rd place.
It will mostly depend on goal difference, and that might not always differ.
One team wins both games, the others draw with each other. Points:
6
1
1
Who lost by the least to the Pot A team goes through. Looks crap to me.
France 1-0 Austria
France 4-1 Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland 2-2 Austria
I wonder how it will be resolved.
Shots on target?
"The ref has just knocked England put the world cup by giving maguire a late booking!"
😬
Also imagine if the last game were that France v Northern Ireland fixture. Both teams would be happy to play out a 0-0 draw. Northern Ireland wouldn't dream of taking a risk to finish top and France would already be resting players for the second round.
We will have at least one more Germany v Austria - Disgrace of Gijon - match.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gijón
Why would teams play any different in 2026 than they would in 1982? Was playing for a draw as an underdog not considered?
It obviously opens the door to that kind of situation but I suspect it likely won’t play out in 2026 - especially if some motivation for group winners can be implemented.
It's fair to say that Vancourites do not show up in great numbers for sporting events. The Rogers Arena is not famous for it's atmosphere when the Canucks are playing.
The Whitecaps average 16k a game in a 50k stadium with no competing football clubs nearby (below the MLS average).
The BC Lions have the second lowest average attendance in the CFL.
My point stands.
For the groups of 3 they probably would have penalty shoot outs for drawn matches.
New Zealand will be poor.
The 3 extra CONCACAF sides will be poor. Given that USA/Mexico/Canada qualify anyway this almost certainly means it will be Costa Rica, Panama and one other (maybe Jamaica?).
4 extra Asian teams are not going to be great. Based on the last qualifiers it will be the likes of Oman, UAE, Iraq and maybe China.
No idea how they give 6 spots to CONMEBOL. There's only 10 teams anyway so 60% of all nations will qualify.
Since I said on another thread that England losing to Iceland in 2016 was objectively funny if you're not English, it seems fair to admit that Italy getting knocked out by North Macedonia this time was an order of magnitude funnier.
There are quite a few European countries who can host when it comes here, but when it goes to CONCACAF the options are obviously limited.
What i think we'll see more of in future now that it will be a 48 team tournament is multi-nation bids to host it. For example Spain/Portugal i think have bid to host in 2030.