World Cup 71 Host Bid - H.R.E. and RK of Québec

[The Royal Kingdom of Quebec]

Thanks to Red Blackiland for the logo

World Cup 71 Bid: Noburu Taiyou (H.R.E.) & Royal Kingdom of Québec

Football Taiyou, on behalf of the "Free Republics" and funded by a sizable donation from Nicholls Enterprises and Royal Québec Football Association, on behalf of the Royal Kingdom of Québec, submit the following host bid for the 71st edition of the World Cup:

I. World Cup Hosts

About Noburu Taiyou

Noburu Taiyou is a mostly autonomous colony of the Holy Republican Empire, located in the region of Esportiva. Formerly an independent nation, the Taiyouese military made an ill-advised attack on the Republican naval base at Charm Harbor several decades ago and were conquered by the nation then known as the Federation Free Republics. Whether the attack was partially instigated by the Republicans is a subject of debate among historians, with most Taiyouese historians saying that it was and most Republican historians denying any such claims. Regardless, Noburu Taiyou is mostly autonomous, though a substantial and increasing number of Taiyouese desire their independence from the nation that now styles itself the "Holy" Republican Empire. Historians on both sides generally agree that Taiyou was made an autonomous colony so that they could set their tax rates high enough to be able to afford the reparations that they were forced to pay for the war against their now colonial masters, reparations that the Taiyouese government still has to pay, decades later.

Taiyou has entered several Campionato Esportiva tournaments in the past, without much success. They have not done much of note at the international level in sports, but their colonial masters, the Holy Republicans, are an accomplished nation that reached the final of World Cup 68 and qualified for World Cup 69 before their shocking failure to qualify for World Cup 70 amid intra-squad turmoil. While Consul Kulseth and the Imperial Government are not particularly happy about their colony's decision to bid for the World Cup on their behalf, they have nonetheless agreed to permit Taiyou to submit a bid on behalf of the Holy Republican Empire due to their lack of confidence in their National Team's ability to qualify for the World Cup on their own merits, even with disgraced former manager Rule Theriault (who turned a blind eye as his team committed felonies, caused international incidents, conspired with gamblers to throw WCC matches and feuded with one another) no longer around. Given the lack of nations interested in bidding for the World Cup with a Church of Saintland-aligned government, Kulseth was faced with the choice between permitting Taiyou to bid on his nation's behalf or sending his new National Team, purified of immoral elements, into the crapshoot that is World Cup Qualifying. Kulseth chose the former option.

About Royal Kingdom of Québec

Located in Northern AO, Royal Kingdom of Québec is a nation known for its environment, rich cultural diversity and claims one of its region's most educated and cultured population. Led by His Imperial Majesty the Jacques IX, the country is a semi-constitutional monarchy, with both the royalty and the democracy playing a huge role in Quebecois politics. With a high HDI rating and affluent economy, Royal Kingdom of Québec is an advanced nation with long years of peace and stability within the nation, while still allowing for societal and economic progress over the course of its history. With a beautiful environment, advanced economy, state-of-art infrastructure and love of football, Royal Kingdom of Québec is your place to go for your once-in-a-lifetime voyage that welcomes every traveler with smile and cheer.

In terms of international football, Royal Kingdom of Québec is an emerging force. First making its appearance in World Cup 62, the Grim Reapers, after years of gradual development, have made some nice, growing presence in the international footballing community since then. In World Cup 69 the Quebecois qualified for its first ever World Cup proper, and was able to place their footprint in Apox. The National Team, in spite of longtime manager Ji Choon Kim's retirement and team corps in transitions, was able to continue their ascent in World Cup 70 when they once again made it to the World Cup proper. In spite of being unable to get past the group stage, the Grim Reapers nonetheless were able to show the Multiverse that they could contend among the best, and are currently ranked 21st in Multiverse. With fairly modest but recent success in World Cups, Royal Kingdom of Québec looks to have a bright future in international football.

II. Qualifying Format

The qualifying format will consist of 2 group stages. However, unlike World Cup 54 (the previous World Cup to feature 2 group stages for Qualifying), we will not be eliminating any nations between the group stages. Instead, we will utilize a format similar to the one that the Equestrian States (Those dastardly talking ponies!) will be utilizing for the upcoming World Bowl XXV.

The draw for the first group stage will be conducted just like the draw for any past World Cup group stage, with teams placed into pots based upon the current KPB rankings and one team from each pot drawn into each group. In this case, there will be 6 pots, meaning 6 teams per group.

After the first group stage concludes, teams will be drawn into a second group of 6. The pots for the second group stage would be determined by finishing position in the first group stage (teams that finish first in their group go into Pot 1, teams that finish second into Pot 2 and so on). The draw for the second group stage will be conducted with a rule prohibiting any rematches from the first group stage. Thus, every team will be drawn into a second group stage group with a 1st place, 2nd place, 3rd place, 4th place, 5th place and last place team from the first group stage and no 2 teams from the same group in the first group stage can be drawn into the same group for the second group stage.

Both group stages will be single round-robin and will be held at neutral sites. We have decided that this is necessary to ensure that all matches can be played without any intimidation of officials or visiting players, in light of the numerous high-profile and rather ugly incidents that have taken place in recent editions of World Cup Qualifying. We feel that this will provide a more exciting atmosphere during World Cup qualifying and a more fair and level playing field.

We recognize that many nations can end up worn-out from the heavy fixture congestion that is common in World Cup qualifying. Therefore, we are also proposing to increase the amount of time between World Cup matches, something which is possible due to our decision to go with a format that only requires 10 matchdays of World Cup Qualifying. In an OOC sense, this means that there will be at least 48 hours between each cutoff, for the duration of the entire tournament.

Following both group stages, all of the results, across both group stages, will be utilized to produce an overall table. The top 30 nations in this overall table will qualify for World Cup 71. However, if any nations are tied on points with the team in 30th place in the overall table, all of the nations tied on points will be placed into a playoff. These playoffs (if necessary) will consist of single matches and will be held in the mainland Holy Republican Empire as part of the deal (in addition to an automatic spot in the World Cup for the Holy Republican National Team) that permitted Football Taiyou to place a bid on their half. Once the playoffs have concluded, 30 nations will join the Republican and Quebecois teams in Taiyou and/or Quebec.

III. Finals Format

The finals format will be the same World Cup Finals format as it has always been. 32 national teams, 2 host nations, 8 groups of 4, single round-robin with the top 2 in each group advancing to the usual 16-team knockout round. Teams will be sorted into pots for the Finals based upon their position in the mid-cycle KPB rankings, with the exception of the 2 host delegations (which will, per convention, be placed into Pot 1).

IV. Scorination/RP Bonus

We have contracted with the respected Xkoranate and SQIS firms for scorination services. We specifically requested that SQIS provide us with their traditional services. In an OOC sense, that means that SQIS will not be modified in any way for this edition of the World Cup.

The so-called RP Bonus, whatever that is, will be cumulative, non-degrading and will emphasize quality over quantity while remaining fair to all styles. There will be a small carryover of RP Bonus to the finals. Style modifiers will also be in use, from -5 to +5.

V. Tiebreakers

To break ties, we will rely first upon HTH (when it is applicable to the situation). After HTH, the other tiebreakers will be goal difference and goals for. Should those fail to break a tie in the Finals, position in the overall table for Qualifying will be utilized as the 4th tiebreaker. Failing that, we will conduct a coin flip (KPB+Bonus or, if that is also even, a neutral site match will be scorinated between the 2 nations with the result counting as the coin flip).

VI. Site Bids

While it is necessary, under our format, to eliminate the tradition of home-and-away double round-robins in Qualifying, we feel that World Cup Qualifying should still be a truly international event, just as it has always been, but without the matches played in empty stadiums in nations that will never be heard from again once Qualifying concludes with a home team whose identity is a mystery. Therefore, we have elected to use a system of site bidding, similar to the one used by Schiavonia and San José Guayabal for the 56th Baptism of Fire. Nations that apply will host qualifying matches in an IC sense, but not in an OOC sense. We hope that a multitude of nations, both new and familiar, will elect to put in a bid to host a World Cup Qualifying group.

Should we not have enough applicants, the nations that do apply might be permitted to host multiple Qualifying groups and, as a last resort, the host nations may step in to host portions of Qualifying.

VII. Experience

Noburu Taiyou has previously hosted the 6th International Baseball Slam. The Holy Republican Empire, while known as the Federation of Free Republics, hosted or co-hosted the 3rd World Korfball Classic, Cup of Harmony 58, World Bowl 22 and World Cup 68. The H.R.E. is currently hosting the X Winter Olympics. Saintland has hosted or co-hosted numerous events in the past, including the Saintland Triple Crown, the 9th Beach Cup, the 27th World Baseball Classic, the 22nd World Bowl, the 23rd World Cup of Hockey and the King Paulus XV Memorial Games. The user behind these nations is the current commissioner of NSCF and the current Vice President of the World Bowl Assembly and currently maintains or has previously maintained the rankings for numerous tournaments.

When it comes to hosting, Royal Kingdom of Québec is no stranger as well. Royal Kingdom of Québec has hosted or co-hosted the Baptism of Iron XIV and XV, World Junior Hockey Championships VI and VIII, World Bowl XXIV, World Cup of Hockey XXV and Baptism of Fire LVII. He also is in charge of Royal Alexandre Hockey Invitationals. The user behind the nation is currently the President for the World Cup of Hockey Federation and a longtime member in many sporting committees, as well as formerly organising the NSCAA Ice Hockey Competitions. He also has hosted many seasons of domestic hockey and football leagues, and intends to restart Champions Hockey League, the hockey equivalent of UICA, soon.

We are open to your questions. Feel free to ask!

[Vjaalsburg]

Will non-participant nations be allowed to place site bids?

[San Jose Guayabal]

Guys, solid bid, but do you think that a two group stages qualifier will work "smoothly" as an ordinary qualifier, sincerely I have some doubts about this. "In this case, there will be 6 pots, meaning 6 teams per group" that part (imo) implies a total of 36 teams, or does that includes more? If there's 36 teams in that stage, how will be the criteria of team choosing?

And with the second round of qualifiers, that's like a Casaran format?

[Gregoryisgodistan]

Has Noburu Taiyou ever participated in a World Cup before? If not, it is ineligible to bid itself, though the Holy Republican Empire could certainly bid on behalf of Noburu Taiyou and take the automatic qualifying spot.

Also, Saintland, HRE, and NT can't all enter regardless.

[Blouman Empire]

What's the point in having two group stages in qualifying? Apart from being an attempt at being different?

You said something about it being fairer and more even but you haven't exactly shown how and I'm not seeing it.

Certainly goes against convention of following RL WCQ as much as possible.

[The Royal Kingdom of Quebec]

Will non-participant nations be allowed to place site bids?

I've just discussed with my partner about it and we agreed that the non-participant nations are allowed to place site bids. However, there will be preference given to participating nations.

Has Noburu Taiyou ever participated in a World Cup before? If not, it is ineligible to bid itself, though the Holy Republican Empire could certainly bid on behalf of Noburu Taiyou and take the automatic qualifying spot.

Also, Saintland, HRE, and NT can't all enter regardless.

My partner will answer this more clearly than I can about it right now, but if I recall correctly, Noburu Taiyou is part of many nations consisting of the H.R.E. In spite of being mostly autonomous, it's still a colony and therefore is part of the H.R.E. As a result, it is to say that the H.R.E is bidding on behalf of Noburu Taiyou.

[Gregoryisgodistan]

Will qualifying hosts automatically be placed in the group they are hosting? If not, will they automatically not be placed in the group they are hosting?

[Free Republics]

Guys, solid bid, but do you think that a two group stages qualifier will work "smoothly" as an ordinary qualifier, sincerely I have some doubts about this. "In this case, there will be 6 pots, meaning 6 teams per group" that part (imo) implies a total of 36 teams, or does that includes more? If there's 36 teams in that stage, how will be the criteria of team choosing?

And with the second round of qualifiers, that's like a Casaran format?

1) That means that 1 team from each pot will be drawn into each group, just like in the conventional format. The pots in the first group stage are the same as they would be in the conventional format. In the second group stage, the pots are based on the tables following MD5 rather than the pre-qualifying KPB rankings.

2) Not really. 2 group stages were used in World Cup 54 (which was not a Casaran tournament) and were not used in BoF 42 or BoF 52 (the Casaran BoFs).

Has Noburu Taiyou ever participated in a World Cup before? If not, it is ineligible to bid itself, though the Holy Republican Empire could certainly bid on behalf of Noburu Taiyou and take the automatic qualifying spot.

Also, Saintland, HRE, and NT can't all enter regardless.

Noburu Taiyou is part of the Holy Republican Empire (even though most Taiyouese wish they weren't). ICly, the Taiyouese government is bidding in the name of the H.R.E., with funding from Nicholls Enterprises (the same corporation that funds Feministvs Sanctvsterra and operates the Legion of Lucifer as a subsidiary). The Republican government, which now runs the National Team, is permitting this to happen because they desperately want the automatic qualifying spot (due to a lack of confidence in the team's ability to qualify on their own merits) and have no hope whatsoever of finding a bidding partner. Taiyou will not be entering a team in the tournament and would be "represented" by the now-"purified" Holy Republican National Team.

Will qualifying hosts automatically be placed in the group they are hosting? If not, will they automatically not be placed in the group they are hosting?

In terms of the WC finals, the format would be exactly as it has always been. In terms of the qualifying site bids, it would be the latter, to ICly explain the absence of home field advantage.

What's the point in having two group stages in qualifying? Apart from being an attempt at being different?

You said something about it being fairer and more even but you haven't exactly shown how and I'm not seeing it.

Certainly goes against convention of following RL WCQ as much as possible.

Its not really going against RL WCQs to use 2 group stages. For the 2014 RL WC, the qualifying formats were:

AFC: 2 rounds of home-and-away playoffs. 2 double round robin group stages. 4 teams qualified from the second group stage. 2 more teams competed in a playoff to advance to a playoff against a team from CONMEBOL
CAF: A round of home-and-away playoffs. A double round robin group stage. Another round of home-and-away playoffs. Winners of the second round of playoffs qualified.
CONCACAF: A round of home-and-away playoffs. 3 double round robin group stages. The top 3 teams from the final group stage (a single group of 6) qualified. The 4th place team moved into a home-and-away playoff against a team from OFC.
CONMEBOL: A single double round robin group. Top 4 qualified. 5th team played a home-and-away playoff against a team from AFC
OFC: 2 neutral site single round robin group stages. A home-and-away double round robin single group. Winner of the single group advanced to a playoff against a team from CONCACAF.
UEFA: Basically the conventional NSWC format.

The upside of this format, compared to the 30x6 format used for WC66:

1) No home advantage will be used in scorination. Thus, CTEinGroupStageistan will likely perform worse without the benefit of home advantage in 50% of their matches (caveat: Margaret can be unpredictable).
2) This format works with any multiple of 6. We do not have to have 180 nations (not counting the hosts) to be able to host the tournament. That number is a workable number for this format, but not the only workable number. 150, 156, 162, 168, 174, 186, 192, 198, 204 and 210 (all not counting the hosts) are also workable numbers.
3) More than 1 team can qualify out of the same qualifying group. If you end up drawn in the same group as Osarius (I'm pretty sure he's #1 in the ranks these days, anyways), you would still have a shot to qualify even if Osarius doesn't falter like the Holy Republican Empire in World Cup 70 Qualifying. Plus, you'll only have to face Osarius in 1 out of 10 matches, not 2 out of 10 matches since you cannot face the same team in both group stages.

The format was inspired by (and is very similar to) the format that Equestrian States will be using for the upcoming World Bowl XXV.

[Blouman Empire]

Its not really going against RL WCQs to use 2 group stages. For the 2014 RL WC, the qualifying formats were:

AFC: 2 rounds of home-and-away playoffs. 2 double round robin group stages. 4 teams qualified from the second group stage. 2 more teams competed in a playoff to advance to a playoff against a team from CONMEBOL
CAF: A round of home-and-away playoffs. A double round robin group stage. Another round of home-and-away playoffs. Winners of the second round of playoffs qualified.
CONCACAF: A round of home-and-away playoffs. 3 double round robin group stages. The top 3 teams from the final group stage (a single group of 6) qualified. The 4th place team moved into a home-and-away playoff against a team from OFC.
CONMEBOL: A single double round robin group. Top 4 qualified. 5th team played a home-and-away playoff against a team from AFC
OFC: 2 neutral site single round robin group stages. A home-and-away double round robin single group. Winner of the single group advanced to a playoff against a team from CONCACAF.
UEFA: Basically the conventional NSWC format.

I'll concede this bit even though I still not a fan of the whole group stage then group stage again.

The upside of this format, compared to the 30x6 format used for WC66:

Is there a reason why you and the other current bid are using WC66 as a benchmark?

1) No home advantage will be used in scorination. Thus, CTEinGroupStageistan will likely perform worse without the benefit of home advantage in 50% of their matches (caveat: Margaret can be unpredictable).
2) This format works with any multiple of 6. We do not have to have 180 nations (not counting the hosts) to be able to host the tournament. That number is a workable number for this format, but not the only workable number. 150, 156, 162, 168, 174, 186, 192, 198, 204 and 210 (all not counting the hosts) are also workable numbers.
3) More than 1 team can qualify out of the same qualifying group. If you end up drawn in the same group as Osarius (I'm pretty sure he's #1 in the ranks these days, anyways), you would still have a shot to qualify even if Osarius doesn't falter like the Holy Republican Empire in World Cup 70 Qualifying. Plus, you'll only have to face Osarius in 1 out of 10 matches, not 2 out of 10 matches since you cannot face the same team in both group stages.

1) I saw this as a good idea for RP and ICly my federation is going to blast the WCC and the hosts (after their bid has been accepted of course) and any losses to games we should've won will be blamed on this. But OOCly does it have that big of an effect on the result? If this will knock this out meaning the team with the best 3R will win then yes it will be fairer.

2) Why does it have to be six? I know it works becuase you want six again where is this fascination over groups of 6 coming from with this and the current other bid.

3) It does also mean that other nations from other groups may not make it especially in groups that have nations with similar rank and RP when under normal circumstances at least one would go through and with playoffs (that has been in the past 4 WCs and other times) it allows another and we definitely have more than one nation from a group qualifying.

[Apox]

I was dubious at first, but I am partial to a bit of change. I also like the fact how you've managed to make progression to the Finals possible without finishing first in your group (my main problem with WC66).

[Kernansquillec]

IC: the Kernansquillec FA would raise concerns over the atmosphere at games if all are held on neutral sides, as well as the cost to football fans who will effectively be travelling for every single qualifier instead of having half of all games at home.

OOC: while mixing it up a bit can be fun, I don't really fancy having an overall table at the end of it. If I'm not mistaken, it could mean that winning a second phase group could not actually guarantee qualifying? Fair's fair for these sort of tables for 2nd/3rd place teams but I really don't fancy not actually having the fate of my team within my hands in the sense that we don't get to play the teams we could be in contest with.

But then again, if we win we'll be fine with it and if we lose we'll get a good couple of RPs in about how the WCC are thinking about the money rather than the fans...

[Buyan]

I'm a bit dubious on this bid. It has some novel ideas, tries to do something about the size of the qualifying stages and the issue I posed in the other bid thread (upon the wide gap between possible and impossible draws - but not exactly sure if it will work adequatly), but the overarching table... Doesn't get me thrilled to be fair. The 'direct match', having to beat a direct opponent to qualify, has gone lost and that's a pity I feel.

Besides - and I think Blouman raises a fair point here - if you're stuck in an RPing group in stage 2, it gets harder for you. As in 'extra hard than usual' as you not just have to beat your groupmates, but gather more points than those in groups with a fair number of non-RPers.

One thing I've wondered about, because it sounds interesting to me, is why the idea of two group stages has never been used since WC54. It has some useful elements, imho, both on the issue of qualifying size and on fair chances.

[Eura]

I can understand the need for not playing it like WC66, though why you've singled that one out as something to model your tournament against rather than taking into account other recent tournaments is a bit confusing to me (EDIT - Ok, having looked through the Felix Yttribia bid, this now makes sense). It is unfair that only the qualifying group winner should go through.The ideal set up for me has always been the group winner goes through, and the second placed side goes into a playoff or something along those lines, or even the third place side; though with how things are these days with signup numbers I guess it would have to be most group runners up. I also get that with the increasing size of sign ups, there has to be some evolution in order to meet demand and especially so if the number of signups is awkward, which is why its good that this bid permits for basically any number of signups that is a multiple of 6.

While I understand some of your reasoning in favour of it, I don't agree with the idea that this double group stage is some sort of necessity, and maybe I'm old fashioned but the ideas of head to head triumphing over goal difference and the overall table don't appeal to me whatsoever. I can understand that both of you want to level the playing field and that with more signups the portion of people qualifying will get lower, but like the WC68 playoff system which was unfair on teams that won their group in my opinion, a lot of this seems like making the qualifying system more complicated than it needs to be for either the sake of making qualifying more random or balanced, or just to be different.

While I understand why you want to remove home advantage as well, I don't support it for both IC and practical reasons. On the latter, as someone with a fair bit of experience of being a top seed now - but having also taken a while to qualify for my first World Cup, seven cycles - I don't see how doing away with the double round robin in favour of a single round robin, and therefore replacing home and its benefits and away games, with one game on neutral ground, is beneficial. I must be missing something because I don't see how this makes it fairer for lower seeds. In previous cycles, having home and away games has given lower ranked teams than me a fighting chance because even if I beat them at home they can still get a result against me at their home. If you're using a scorinator with home advantage, then this evens the playing field for them surely on the return journey as well. It also means that they're not fucked on head to head if they don't get a result first time.

If I just play them once, then given that I am always more likely to win due to my rank and because I am active basically every cycle, surely it means that if I beat them then they're fairly buggered in the first group section? I guess this is where the second section comes in, but then the second section seems fairly pointless when all it seems to do is punish the winners of the first section and rejig the groups. As for the IC reasons, this is just something that doesn't appeal to me whatsoever; why on earth should the games just be sporadically hosted either in the hosts countries or all over the place? Home and away makes sense. Home and away gives competitors an equal opportunity to play in their own stadium and RP away days. It isn't something I can really quantify, its just...better. Yes, RPing an away game at Cantbearsedistan, ranked 938 with no roster, does suck. But it will also suck that you can't RP yourself playing at your own stadium like normal. If you want to do the site bid thing then fine, but it sucks for those of us who would like to RP playing home games without having to hope we can do a successful site bid that will then be linked to our games.

I've not hosted a lot despite being here a few years and some of my understanding of scorinators etc isn't phenomenal, but I hope I've articulated my misgivings about this bid in a not too shit way.

[Jeckland]

I'm not sure on this bid, mostly for reasons that other people have already raised, so I won't bother to raise again. The main issue I have is with the size of the groups. For a format like this, I would prefer larger groups. Your current format proposes 6 team groups. This means that there are only 5 matchdays in the first phase, leaving a very high chance of teams ending up being allocated to second groups which they don't "deserve" to be in. Obviously a bit of randomness is all well and good, but unless something can be done to prove my fears wrong, I'm erring towards the other bid at the moment.

[Star United States]

... and here is the usual question when there is more than one bid...

Why should this bid be considered over the other? Why should this bid win the hosting rights?

[Chiata]

I don't see the point in reshuffling the groups, as that would hurt group winners. Also, if a good team does poorly in the first half, then they could be drawn in with another good team in the second stage, creating a group with two really good teams. Why not have the first groups be a first stage for qualifying? For example, bottom two teams are eliminated while a number of top teams overall qualify directly. The second group stage would have less participants and thus less match days, opening the door for a two leg system across the cup.

[Vilita]

I don't see the point in reshuffling the groups, as that would hurt group winners. Also, if a good team does poorly in the first half, then they could be drawn in with another good team in the second stage, creating a group with two really good teams. Why not have the first groups be a first stage for qualifying? For example, bottom two teams are eliminated while a number of top teams overall qualify directly. The second group stage would have less participants and thus less match days, opening the door for a two leg system across the cup.

We tend not to do stuff like that because it complicates the rankings.

[Free Republics]

... and here is the usual question when there is more than one bid...

Why should this bid be considered over the other? Why should this bid win the hosting rights?

The 2 major differences between the bids are the format and the difference in experience.

Like any other method to ascertain the 30 teams most deserving of a spot in the World Cup Finals from the 160-200 (or more) that enter Qualifying, it is not perfect. The format that we are proposing offers the same 10 MD length as the 30x6 format with the benefits of added flexibility and the possibility for teams to qualify, even if they draw a top-10 team in that group (and said top-10 team doesn't under-perform). Other aspects of our bid that separate us from the other bid, in my opinion, are the elimination of home field advantage (which is much larger than most realize and causes a substantial share of the fluke results) and the use of 48 hour gaps between scorinations in Qualifying.

I will attempt to answer the rest of your questions at a later point as I need to set up tomorrow's Olympic scorination at the moment.

[Starblaydia]

I really, really don't like this Qualifying proposal.

As I understand it, there's a two-stage Qualification process (which I'm generally against anyway, having not enjoyed it in W54, but appreciate it's a thing that some people like), only the first stage means even less because no-one's eliminated, and the actual groups themselves don't matter because it's essentially a race to the top 30 along with everyone else entered in the qualifiers? Racing every other one of the 180-ish teams for points - not even places in the Group table, but simple points - feels very wrong to me, as well as making the prospect of an upset (why hello, SQIS, who always is screwing someone over) in just a ten game stretch become a world-shatteringly wonderful or awful event, depending on who's on the giving or receiving end of it.

Added to that, even if you do have individual group tables, what is even the point when you're comparing all of the teams in the running, instead of just the ones in your group that you're directly running against? ou don't even get to play against 90% of the teams you're trying to qualify against, so you have absolutely zero chance of affecting the qualifying positions. It's theoretically possible to come top of a tightly-contested group and not qualify for the World Cup, which is a ludicrous proposition.

Lack of 'proper' home and away fixtures bugs the hell out of me, too. I see the need for it based on your single-round-robin-done-twice system, but even the IC justification is awful. You might as well say "We're giving everyone the chance to submit and win a host stadium for some others to come play, but we're also taking away all the actual RP opportunities of having Qualifiers in their own nations!". Yes, CTEinGroupStageistan will theoretically have less-good results in their 'home' matches, but conversely they'll do just as much better in their 'away' matches to balance it out.

I don't have any issues with the hosts or their experience and see this as a fairly solid co-host setup, but I'd even prefer the Casaran system over this set of Qualifying.

[The Babbage Islands]

I've not been involved with the World Cup for several runnings now, and I doubt that I'm quite ready to return in this edition. But I did host three World Cups including the one that featured two-stage qualifying (WC 54). So I'll throw in my $.02.

1. I agree that there's nothing particularly sacrosanct about the format of traditional NS qualifying for the World Cup when viewed against the backdrop of myriad RL practices. (This differs from the situation with the World Cup "proper", which has had a stable format for some time.)

2. Taking a 182-team tournament for discussion purposes (30x6 plus two hosts), it nevertheless stretches credulity to imagine coordinating 900(!) qualifying matches at neutral sites in any RL international football competition.

3. There are good reasons why I didn't bid a two-stage qualifier in World Cup 60 after running one successfully in World Cup 54. One was a maths headache that this bid avoids, created by the eliminations between the zonal (first) and interzonal (second) stages. A second was the significant number of nations that actively disliked the format, advantages notwithstanding. But the compelling difference-maker was that I did not feel the benefits outweighed the costs in time and effort.

Hats off to the bidders for a creative attempt to reduce the number of matches in qualifying--a perennial problem in these days of mega-tournaments. Two of my three World Cup hostings served the largest fields in history at the times they ran, and the issues surrounding elongated qualifying were always on display. But making the majority of the field play every qualifying match on the road seems a raw deal IC, and making group results irrelevant to final qualification even more so. Why bother with groups at all if they mean nothing in the overall scheme?

[Eura]

Added to that, even if you do have individual group tables, what is even the point when you're comparing all of the teams in the running, instead of just the ones in your group that you're directly running against? You don't even get to play against 90% of the teams you're trying to qualify against, so you have absolutely zero chance of affecting the qualifying positions. It's theoretically possible to come top of a tightly-contested group and not qualify for the World Cup, which is a ludicrous proposition.

Well then maybe we should just try the Casaran system rather than beating around the bus- *is shot*

No but seriously, I totally agree with Star's post and it articulates some of the concerns I have in a much better way. This Double Group: Group Harder/Are You Casaran In Disguise format is not something I am a fan of. I agree with Star also that the hosts themselves are fine. Its the format which is a serious problem. TBI's points are also valuable, especially given that TBI hosted the previous attempted at a two part qualifying group stage.

[Taeshan]

I'd like to add my own concern to all the other concerns that have been expressed. I'm most against the idea of neutral sites in qualifying. While for a single playoff it makes sense, and it does in a single round robin as well...a lot of the appeal in qualifying is the whole facade of a home and away leg against each team. The general real life idea of playing a team in their place and getting stuff done to you and then doing the same to them. Home field advantage is a big thing perhaps as an american, living in a region where pee gets thrown at you in the Azteca, and grass is cut longer in certain places, i feel a need for this more so than the English, where most european teams may not have the problems in qualifying that the rest of the world does...Anyways, i just feel it would diminish the whole thing if your own fans do not get the ability to see your team play...While yes, none of this exists, it all exists in our heads, and in my head i can't comprehend my imaginary citizens being ok with this, and as such that is my main problem with this bid.

[Nephara]

Echoing Eura, Star and others here. Neutral site qualifying in particular sticks out to me as something... utterly unjustifiable in-character. Besides, there's a time somewhere around the third- and fifth-seeds when (if you're RPing regularly) you feel like you can just about take a proper giant on home ground. Home advantage is powerful and necessary - and more than worth the fact that, yes, occasionally Small Oceanic Island will scrape a 0-0 draw against a proper team.

And just as a general thought - complication is generally a bad thing. My personal views on qualification are to keep it simple and keep it clean - that's why 30x6 was a breath of fresh air while still being very palatable, viable and successful as a format. I'm not even sure if I understand this format.

[Free Republics]

After taking in all of the feedback and talking it over with Quebec, we have decided to alter the Qualifying Format for our bid.

In our new format, Qualifying will still consist of 2 group stages. However, the first group stage will now be double round-robin, home-and-away and the second group stage will now consist of either 10 or 15 groups with a total field of either 60 or 90 teams. The top 2 or 3 teams in each group in the second group stage will now qualify directly to the World Cup, without a playoff. This means that we are scrapping the overall table. The second group stage will still be played at neutral sites and will still be a single round-robin. Additionally, matchdays will still be scorinated on an every other day basis and we will only scorinate a single matchday at a time.

The formats we are now aiming for are (excluding hosts):

160 teams: 40 groups of 4 in the first group stage. The group winners would advance directly to the second group stage while the runners-up would play a single leg playoff for a spot in the second group stage. The second group stage would consist of 10 groups of 6, with the top 3 in each group qualifying for the World Cup. Qualifying would consist of a total of 12 matchdays (6 for the first group stage, a playoff between the group stages and 5 for the second group stage).

180 teams: 45 groups of 4 in the first group stage. The top 2 teams from each group would advance directly to the second group stage. The second group stage would consist of 15 groups of 6, with the top 2 qualifying from each group. Qualifying would consist of a total of 11 matchdays (6 for the first group stage and 5 for the second group stage)

200 teams: 40 groups of 5 in the first group stage. As in the 160 team format, group winners would advance directly to the second group stage while the runners-up would advance to a single leg playoff. However, the second group stage would consist of 15 groups of 4, with the top 3 qualifying. The total length of Qualifying would be 14 matchdays (10 for the first group stage, a playoff between group stages and 3 for the second group stage), although the maximum number of matches played by any team would be 12 (due to the 2 bye days during the first group stage).

The rankings would be handled according to the precedent for two-tiered qualifying formats.

Accordingly, the site bidding part of our bid will now only be applicable to the second group stage. The remainder of our bid remains as written.

[Gregoryisgodistan]

Will the playoff in the middle count towards the rankings? I don't believe there has ever been a World Cup Qualifying with a playoff in the middle, as opposed to at the end.

I also don't particularly like the rankings precedent, and wouldn't have supported it if I were around at the time, since it would create too much separation between the teams who advanced and the teams who didn't. But that has nothing to do with the bid itself, and I won't hold it against the bid. I will, however, oppose the following of the precedent in the event this bid wins, and instead support using the maximum points for each team's games, varying depending on whether they made the second stage or not.

Edit: The publicly listed formula on the spreadsheet says the formula for World Cup Qualifying KPB points is "points divided by games played, multiplied by the numbers listed for the relevant WCQ." I would interpret that to explicitly mean you have to divide points by the number of games that team played. The Constitution itself does not specify a formula, but says the formula must be public (it is, in the spreadsheet) and that it can only be changed by WCC vote. So assuming the Constitution was the same then as it is now (and I wasn't here, so I don't know) that precedent was incorrectly applied IMO and we shouldn't continue to follow it. Alternatively, we could vote to change the formula so that would be the correct method, but as I said above, I wouldn't support that.