World Cup last 8.
- Thread starter sambaDTR
- Start date
Ebor
Well-known member
I think UEFA just need the South Americans on board
A WC without Us, Spain, France, Germany etc, and Brasil and Argentina would be a non event
I really hope something changes after this tournament. Won't hold my breath
Corcaigh_the_Cat
Well-known member
A load of b***ks, an African side reached the last 4 last time and they've been unlucky not to have a couple of quarter finalists this time....with South America completely wiped out.
The Card Cheat
Well-known member
African teams have been great, Morocco and Egypt the obvious ones but also teams like Cape Verde, Congo, Senegal.
I do think though the only way we can get rid of the grifter “Johnny” Infantino (he even sounds like a mafia character) is to breakaway from FIFA. If you can’t beat them leave them.
Abel Tasman
Well-known member
They will increase the number of teams to 64 for the next World Cup meaning no one single country could ever host as they do not have enough sizeable venues - except UK Saudi Arabia ( who will just build them), Germany, USA
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
What do you prefer in a WC?
Traditional powers (France, Italy Spain England Germany Holland Brazil and Argentina) dominating, or a few unexpected teams in there?
Just listened to Robbie Savage saying England have had an easy path, citing Norway in the quarters.
We wouldn't say it was easy if it were Brazil, but Norway are better than Brazil as they just demonstrated.
I think there's a general mistaken belief that the quality is higher if those traditional nations get through.
Traditional powers (France, Italy Spain England Germany Holland Brazil and Argentina) dominating, or a few unexpected teams in there?
Just listened to Robbie Savage saying England have had an easy path, citing Norway in the quarters.
We wouldn't say it was easy if it were Brazil, but Norway are better than Brazil as they just demonstrated.
I think there's a general mistaken belief that the quality is higher if those traditional nations get through.
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
If only New Zealand had reached the knock out phase...
Last edited:
I prefer watching he best teams play each other. I like the individual matches where a team defies the odds but really I want to see the best teams battling it out.
Norway were better than Brazil on the day but the best team doesn't always win. I think Brazil are better than Norway and have more quality throughout the squad than Norway do. Knockout football is unpredictable and it isn't definitive that the best team is the one that won. When smaller teams like Norway have a match winner like Haaland it means they always have a chance.
England have had an easy path. We have been incredibly lucky with the path in 4 of the last 5 tournaments now. There's no guarantee of beating easier teams of course. Argentina have had an even easier path and they've been fortunate not to get beat by Cape Verde and Egypt.
The semi finals could still be France, Spain, England and Argentina who I think were the 4 favourites pre-tournament and are the top 4 in the world ranking although I wouldn't be shocked if there were a few upsets because there are no poor teams left.
No wonder Robbie Savage is so bitter, it would have been Wales' to lose
I think you get the best in almost all world cups.
Granted this new format made the groups much more predictable, in fact the best part of the groups was keeping tabs on the 3rd place mini league, especially seeing Scotland drop game by game. But the knockouts have provided a couple of upsets, we had the suprise package in Cape Verde who almost stopped the Argies.
Ultimately, though the World Cup Final is contested by the best two teams.
Plenty of nations rely on history. Germany and Italy for example are simply not as good as Morocco but people from the outside would still class Morocco as an easier prospect than playing Germany in a quarter because of the history. Norway and Robbie Savage comment prove that. Brazil would be a fair challenge but not Norway who beat Brazil and outplayed them?
Alan_Breck
Well-known member
I much prefer the Euros to the World Cup as we know more of the players, the tavelling isn't as long haul, and the game times are much more favourable. The carbon footprint for this WC must be astonomical and must cancel out our parthetic argument for CO2 reduction initiatives. I do believe in climate change and the need for green energy but what's the point when only a few small countries recognise it and prepared to act. China, India and the US pale our efforts into insignificance as they "Drill Baby Drill" and "Dig Baby Dig"
Last edited:
Laughing
Well-known member
we have alot of sheep. I will avoid the obvious joke
FishofContemplation
Well-known member
Is there any actual evidence of a desire within the UEFA countries to get rid of Infantino? He was a UEFA official before he was a FIFA official, he was in effect their nominee for president and they* pretty much all voted for him, and he’s never been opposed since. He’s UEFA’s placeman.
* - or if you prefer, we, since he had the support of all five associations from these islands.
GroveHillWanderer
Well-known member
This Guardian article seems to provide indirect evidence. According to it, UEFA is 'on a war footing with FIFA' and there is absolutely no love lost between them, especially between UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin and Infantino, who the article says:
It goes on to state that:
Uefa has put European football on war footing with Fifa over Balogun decision | Matt Hughes
European governing body’s dramatic move could have major implications for the future of the sport
www.theguardian.com
Last edited:
FishofContemplation
Well-known member
Fair enough. if UEFA is having buyers’ remorse, there are plenty of options to do something about it short of the nuclear one though. Most obviously, to have an alternative candidate for the presidency.This Guardian article seems to provide ample evidence. According to it, UEFA is 'on a war footing with FIFA' and there is absolutely no love lost between them, especially between UEFA president Alexander Ceferin and Infantino, who the article says:
It goes on to state that:
Uefa has put European football on war footing with Fifa over Balogun decision | Matt Hughes
European governing body’s dramatic move could have major implications for the future of the sport
UEFA and CONMEBOL collectively have huge financial muscle. They don’t have a majority of the votes, but they have a majority of the clout. That’s why the president has always been a European or South American (apart from the brief period Hayatou filled in when Blatter was first suspended). It’s basically why Infantino won last time despite having a credible challenger supported by the AFC.
I suppose there would be a certain irony though if the main fallout of the US World Cup was to produce the most American thing imaginable. A tournament sold as a World Championship set up as invitation only by a few countries in a single continent.
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
I think that's my perspective too: we play the matches to find out who is best. What Brazil did in 1970, or Germany in 1990 is irrelevant to how good they are now, but we all have a tendency to judge them wit the filter of memory on.
Thinking back to the Brazil vs Norway match, it's fair to say Norway's keeper had a blinder, but even taking the goals out of it, I'd argue Norway played the better football in the second half. I also believe the nation would be more apprehensive about playing Brazil, even though this isn't a great Brazil side. Second best to Morocco; were outplayed by Japan in the first half, and only put 3 past Scotland. But, they're still Brazil.
Good point that. With 12 groups, the second ranked team in a group is quite a lot lower than the first ranked.
Only 1 of 12 groups were won by a team who wasn't the highest ranked pre-tournament; that was won by Colombia who were actually one of the 12 highest ranked teams there, but were shunted into pot 2 to make room for the hosts.
By contrast, only 6 out of 8 groups were won by the highest ranked seeds last time, 4 out of 8 is 2018, and 5 out of 8 in 2014. When there was outcry about "scripting" the tournament so England, Spain, France and Argentina would be on course to meet in the semis, I was dismissive of the chances of that actually happening, but there's a good chance it will now.
I don't feel there's been any massive upsets: the big shocks have ended in draws rather than defeats.
Last edited:
Alan_Breck
Well-known member
All cracking games on paper and looking forward to France v Morocco tonight at 9.00 on ITV
I think tonight's is an excellent match up. Really looking forward to it. It is a shame that Morocco have a couple of key players missing but interested to see the French tested - especially the midfield. I think Morocco have the beating of the French in the middle, interesting to see if the attacking four do their bit to support.
