World Cup 2026 - USA/Canada/Mexico

Chris_from_Sidcup · June 2

Mametz said:

fenaddick said:

Mametz said:

Normally I look forward to the World Cup finals but not this time. Why has the USA got it again so soon after having it before? Why has it been expanded to so many teams? Extended half times, so as to pack in as much advertising revenue as possible. Etc, etc, etc.

I really can’t be arsed to watch this overblown farce.

So soon? It's been 32 years!! For reference, the shortest gap is 16 years (Mexico 1970 & 1986). Germany was also 32 years

Algarveaddick said:

Mametz said:

Normally I look forward to the World Cup finals but not this time. Why has the USA got it again so soon after having it before? Why has it been expanded to so many teams? Extended half times, so as to pack in as much advertising revenue as possible. Etc, etc, etc.

I really can’t be arsed to watch this overblown farce.

Much as I disagree with another totalitarian 😉 state like the USA being given most of the world cup, it's Mexico's third bite of the apple, the last being only sixteen years after the first.

Thanks for both of your replies.

I can accept that the America’s have right to host the World Cup, given the enthusiasm of the fans and the success of teams such as Brazil, Argentina and Uruguayan in previous World Cups. But the USA? It is not one of the two most popular sports in that country. It may be 32 years since The USA hosted the tournament but it is 36 years since Italy, three times winners, hosted the tournament, 44 years since Spain, former winners, have hosted the tournament and 60 years since England, former winners, hosted the tournament. In all of those countries there is greater enthusiasm for football than the USA.

I get your point but they rotate the tournament across different continents and you can't host a world cup in North America without the US involved.

The last 5 world cups have been Africa, South America, Europe, Asia and now North America.

follett · June 2

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

Chris_from_Sidcup · June 2

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 16 awful teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

ElfsborgAddick · June 2

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 8 (probably awful) teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

Even a minnow like Scotland should get to the next stage.

follett · June 2

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 8 (probably awful) teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

I totally agree. Removes any real jeopardy from single games in the group stage. Wouldn’t be wholly surprised if they eventually expand to a 64 team World Cup.

Swindon_Addick · June 2

follett said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 8 (probably awful) teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

I totally agree. Removes any real jeopardy from single games in the group stage. Wouldn’t be wholly surprised if they eventually expand to a 64 team World Cup.

I think that's the plan, and part of the reason for having the frustrating lack of jeopardy for bigger teams in the group stages is that people's complaints about it will be used to justify a move to 64 teams where there will be plenty of jeopardy for the 17th to 32nd best teams if perhaps not for the top 16.

se9addick · June 2

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 8 (probably awful) teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

16 teams are eliminated in the group stage.

Chris_from_Sidcup · June 2

se9addick said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 8 (probably awful) teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

16 teams are eliminated in the group stage.

Yes, i've edited my original post now.

Valley Ant · June 2

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mametz said:

fenaddick said:

Mametz said:

Normally I look forward to the World Cup finals but not this time. Why has the USA got it again so soon after having it before? Why has it been expanded to so many teams? Extended half times, so as to pack in as much advertising revenue as possible. Etc, etc, etc.

I really can’t be arsed to watch this overblown farce.

So soon? It's been 32 years!! For reference, the shortest gap is 16 years (Mexico 1970 & 1986). Germany was also 32 years

Algarveaddick said:

Mametz said:

Normally I look forward to the World Cup finals but not this time. Why has the USA got it again so soon after having it before? Why has it been expanded to so many teams? Extended half times, so as to pack in as much advertising revenue as possible. Etc, etc, etc.

I really can’t be arsed to watch this overblown farce.

Much as I disagree with another totalitarian 😉 state like the USA being given most of the world cup, it's Mexico's third bite of the apple, the last being only sixteen years after the first.

Thanks for both of your replies.

I can accept that the America’s have right to host the World Cup, given the enthusiasm of the fans and the success of teams such as Brazil, Argentina and Uruguayan in previous World Cups. But the USA? It is not one of the two most popular sports in that country. It may be 32 years since The USA hosted the tournament but it is 36 years since Italy, three times winners, hosted the tournament, 44 years since Spain, former winners, have hosted the tournament and 60 years since England, former winners, hosted the tournament. In all of those countries there is greater enthusiasm for football than the USA.

I get your point but they rotate the tournament across different continents and you can't host a world cup in North America without the US involved.

The last 5 world cups have been Africa, South America, Europe, Asia and now North America.

I get your point, but North America has 3 counties that are capable of holding the event, so they are each going to get a disproportionate share of the spoils.
But then it's all about money nowadays.

Chris_from_Sidcup · June 2

Valley Ant said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mametz said:

fenaddick said:

Mametz said:

Normally I look forward to the World Cup finals but not this time. Why has the USA got it again so soon after having it before? Why has it been expanded to so many teams? Extended half times, so as to pack in as much advertising revenue as possible. Etc, etc, etc.

I really can’t be arsed to watch this overblown farce.

So soon? It's been 32 years!! For reference, the shortest gap is 16 years (Mexico 1970 & 1986). Germany was also 32 years

Algarveaddick said:

Mametz said:

Normally I look forward to the World Cup finals but not this time. Why has the USA got it again so soon after having it before? Why has it been expanded to so many teams? Extended half times, so as to pack in as much advertising revenue as possible. Etc, etc, etc.

I really can’t be arsed to watch this overblown farce.

Much as I disagree with another totalitarian 😉 state like the USA being given most of the world cup, it's Mexico's third bite of the apple, the last being only sixteen years after the first.

Thanks for both of your replies.

I can accept that the America’s have right to host the World Cup, given the enthusiasm of the fans and the success of teams such as Brazil, Argentina and Uruguayan in previous World Cups. But the USA? It is not one of the two most popular sports in that country. It may be 32 years since The USA hosted the tournament but it is 36 years since Italy, three times winners, hosted the tournament, 44 years since Spain, former winners, have hosted the tournament and 60 years since England, former winners, hosted the tournament. In all of those countries there is greater enthusiasm for football than the USA.

I get your point but they rotate the tournament across different continents and you can't host a world cup in North America without the US involved.

The last 5 world cups have been Africa, South America, Europe, Asia and now North America.

I get your point, but North America has 3 counties that are capable of holding the event, so they are each going to get a disproportionate share of the spoils.
But then it's all about money nowadays.

It doesn't though.

Mexico only has one stadium bigger than 60k and Canada doesn't have any. So it can only be held in North America if the US are involved.

cafcnick1992 · June 2

The stadium (BMO Field) in Toronto is genuinely shite

Chris_from_Sidcup · June 2

cafcnick1992 said:

The stadium (BMO Field) in Toronto is genuinely shite

Yeah they've added 17k temporary seats (basically seats on scaffolding) to bring capacity up to just over 45k so it can host games.

fenaddick · June 2

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

cafcnick1992 said:

The stadium (BMO Field) in Toronto is genuinely shite

Yeah they've added 17k temporary seats (basically seats on scaffolding) to bring capacity up to just over 45k so it can host games.

Organisers are clearly Gillingham fans

carly burn · June 2

Croatia v Belgium on Amazon prime at 5pm today if anyone wants to cast an eye over England's group opposition.

cafctom · June 2

ElfsborgAddick said:

cafctom said:

I’m flying to America next week, starting in Chicago…the first of ten cities on my trip.

Yes, there will be parts of it that will be a ballache, too expensive, too hot, too corporate etc.

But it’s an event that comes around every four years, and life’s too short to find the negative in everything.

Bring it on.

For the amount of dough it's costing you I hope you have a bloody good time.

It’s an expensive trip, but genuinely could be a lot worse.

Tickets, accommodation, flights all in this is setting me back about £5-6k for a three week trip.

If we get to the Final and I end up going back out for it then that number doubles. Even as a member of the England Supporters Club. Thats the part that I find is really disgusting from a price perspective, because they actually take the money off of you (£3k for a ticket) before the tournament and hold onto it!

But that factor aside, it is doable to make the rest of it seem reasonable. I literally pressed the pause button on my TV when Englands name came out the hat so I could start booking flights, hotels etc on free cancellation before anything surged too much.

Alwaysneil · June 2

Thats about half what i thought it would cost you for what you have booked. Good effort

Callumcafc · June 2

England will play in white/white against Croatia (blue/blue) & Ghana (yellow/black) and will play in red/navy against Panama (white/white).

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/5000498/uploads/editor/03/o66jary4l6fp.jpeg

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/5000498/uploads/editor/vi/c1tgtujwdp65.jpeg

se9addick · June 2

Callumcafc said:

England will play in white/white against Croatia (blue/blue) & Ghana (yellow/black) and will play in red/navy against Panama (white/white).

“Ball kid” - think that name needs some work!

Oh_Yoni_Boy · June 2

follett said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

follett said:

I’m really excited for it and happy to see some of the less known countries qualify for it. The 8 best placed 3rd placed teams in the group going through to the knockout is a farce but not a new concept.

Will try and watch as many games as possible but may struggle to stay awake for the ones past my bedtime

This is the part that is a bit stupid. Two and a half weeks of group games just to eliminate 8 (probably awful) teams.

Would be far more interesting if they did away with the round of 32 and just had the 12 group winners and 4 best runners up going through to the last 16. One poor result by a 'big' nation and they'd be in trouble.

As it stands it's harder not to qualify for the knockouts, although with some 3rd placed teams going through i guess it makes it more competitive as even if you lose your first 2 games you still have a chance of going through by winning your last game.

I totally agree. Removes any real jeopardy from single games in the group stage. Wouldn’t be wholly surprised if they eventually expand to a 64 team World Cup.

Would be happier with a 64 team World Cup if half of the teams got knocked out at the group stage - hopefully this model where 2/3 of teams go through is just a stop gap because it does remove so much excitement when there's very little jeopardy

ElfsborgAddick · June 2

I would not be surprised if you saw somebody score 10 in a game.

There will possibly be games where teams could almost reach 85% possession. The group stages could be more interesting when the minnows are playing each other.

Lincsaddick · June 2

England squad numbers .. seems Tuchel has set his first choices ?

England squad numbers: Jude Bellingham gets No 10 shirt for World Cup - BBC Sport

Swindon_Addick · June 2

ElfsborgAddick said:

I would not be surprised if you saw somebody score 10 in a game.
There will possibly be games where teams could almost reach 85% possession. The group stages could be more interesting when the minnows are playing each other.

Some of the playoff winners will be relatively strong compared to the pot 3 teams, so in a few groups there may be some risk for the pot 2 teams not just the third seeds. But yes, the way it's set up there could be some games where the third and fourth seeds in a group are relatively evenly matched and the winner of the game is likely to reach the knock-out rounds for the first time.

ValleyGary · June 2

Whilst i agree some of the games will be a dead cert, the heat does strange things. Remember Costa Rica in the humidity of Brazil winning a group consisting of England, Italy and Uruguay...

MrOneLung · June 2

pot 1&2 slightly distorted as well by USA Canada and Mexico all being top seeds

ElfsborgAddick · June 2

ValleyGary said:

Whilst i agree some of the games will be a dead cert, the heat does strange things. Remember Costa Rica in the humidity of Brazil winning a group consisting of England, Italy and Uruguay...

Fair point, on that basis hopefully there will be some shocks.

SDAddick · June 2

Callumcafc said:

England will play in white/white against Croatia (blue/blue) & Ghana (yellow/black) and will play in red/navy against Panama (white/white).

Thanks Callum, this is the kind of wonkery I come to this thread for!

Glad that beautiful red kit gets a run out. I can't believe we're just over a week away!

Shag · June 2

carly burn said:

Croatia v Belgium on Amazon prime at 5pm today if anyone wants to cast an eye over England's group opposition.

On pay per view, for a friendly, on a subscription channel you already pay for. Ridiculous

Shag · June 2

cafctom said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

cafctom said:

I’m flying to America next week, starting in Chicago…the first of ten cities on my trip.

Yes, there will be parts of it that will be a ballache, too expensive, too hot, too corporate etc.

But it’s an event that comes around every four years, and life’s too short to find the negative in everything.

Bring it on.

For the amount of dough it's costing you I hope you have a bloody good time.

It’s an expensive trip, but genuinely could be a lot worse.

Tickets, accommodation, flights all in this is setting me back about £5-6k for a three week trip.

If we get to the Final and I end up going back out for it then that number doubles. Even as a member of the England Supporters Club. Thats the part that I find is really disgusting from a price perspective, because they actually take the money off of you (£3k for a ticket) before the tournament and hold onto it!

But that factor aside, it is doable to make the rest of it seem reasonable. I literally pressed the pause button on my TV when Englands name came out the hat so I could start booking flights, hotels etc on free cancellation before anything surged too much.

Dont forget the ‘refund fee’ FIFA will charge to get your own money back that they’ve had for the last 6 months!

enjoy it Tom

MrOneLung · June 2

Callumcafc said:

England will play in white/white against Croatia (blue/blue) & Ghana (yellow/black) and will play in red/navy against Panama (white/white).

Strong Bib game from FIFA - respect

Leroy Ambrose · June 2

cafcnick1992 said:

The stadium (BMO Field) in Toronto is genuinely shite

The Canadian bird i was seeing a few years ago lived on Lakeshore Boulevard, so you could see the stadium whenever we went into town on the Gardiner Expressway. Stunned to hear it was hosting world cup games - from memory it looked about the size of Loftus Road 🤣

World Cup 2026 - USA/Canada/Mexico

Comments

Categories