Counties who lose their first two games are knocked out of the All-Ireland Football Championship.

At the current World Cup, 8 of 9 countries who have lost their first two games are out of contention to win the tournament and have a dead rubber to complete.

An open group stage isn't going to make much of a difference in that regard.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7846 - 25/06/2018 09:06:00    2114505

Yes, Sir - that's why I have argued against 4-team groups. Also, the higher likelihood of soccer draws means more teams can stay alive going into their 3rd match and may even pick up a 'soft win' against a dead team. For me, that last point - call it the 'half dead rubber' - is one of the worst aspects of round robin play, with the soft winner given a privilege denied to other group participants. The GPA idea was better - 8x 2nds v 8x 3rds to join 8 group winners in the KO Last 16.

To counter the problem - maybe teams could carry over their points into the Rd of 16 games - e.g. after 1st in A v 2nd in B (and vice versa), the top team with the best 4-match record advances to the QFs. Now those 3rd match results matter more.

Or, after 2 matches per team in the 4-team group (seeds 1v2 and 3v4 avoided), the crossover Rd of 24 games could be 1st in A v 3rd in B (and vice versa) and 2nd v 2nd. Now you could have top 2 with best 3-match record (game count kept down as well) advancing to KO Rd of 16.

These debates are endless.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2592 - 25/06/2018 20:15:11    2114926

I do not agree with 3 team groups. I saw merits in it as mentioned and suggested but it's not something I am overly in favour of.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7846 - 25/06/2018 22:13:28    2115035

Just to be clear - I did not bring 3-team groups into my last post - maybe you are making a general statement outside this.

You know its funny how FIFA is discussing their intended 16 groups of 3 for 2026 (and under consideration for 2022) - how they might eliminate draws via penalties at the end of all group matches. I think the GAA is one step ahead here - to guarantee all 2 matches - better to have a World Cup 'back door', although it works better with 44 rather than 48 teams.

World Cup could have 28 '1st class' qualifiers and 16 '2nd class' via playoffs.
The 28 get two chances to play 2 rds - 7 unbeaten to 'KO Rd of 16', with 14 and 7 losers to last chance stream rds 2 and 3.
The 16 (Playoff winners) get one chance, need to win 3 rds (Rds of 16, 22 and 18) - with 9 Rd 3 winners completing the 'KO Rd of 16'.

Prior to Rd of 16 - 49 matches are needed, 1 more than now - but a dozen more teams are accomodated !

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2592 - 25/06/2018 22:47:17    2115066

In 4-team groups, is it better to have a 'Rd of 24' after 2 matches, so a Rd of 24 can be played in lieu of the 3rd group games. The latter is a bit of a lottery, even with the absence of dead rubbers - as the teams involved have varying levels of motivation - from resting players, to producing an 'untargetted' result that benefits a team from the 'other' group match, to trying really hard to get the result needed against a team that is also trying or not trying.
At least in a Rd of 24, both teams in each match want to win - better ?

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2592 - 27/06/2018 01:56:05    2115693