Jump to content
IGNORED

World Cup 2022 thread (football only)


Super

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, RUSSEL85 said:

If Serbia equalised, Switzerland and Cameroon would be equal on points, goal difference and goals for. It would have come down to fair play and that celebration would have blown it for Cameroon. Immaterial? Yes but would have been hilarious. 

Wow...didn't realise that. That would have been even more of a talking point than the Japanese winter last night!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

Well done England for qualifying with the best record out of all 32 teams

My inclination is Brazil's half of the draw is incredibly weak and ours is much stronger

African nation winners “Senegal” will be our toughest opponents yet and could easily provide another shock in this tournament.  This upcoming fixture reminds me of when we played Cameroon in 1990.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LoyalRed said:

African nation winners “Senegal” will be our toughest opponents yet and could easily provide another shock in this tournament.  This upcoming fixture reminds me of when we played Cameroon in 1990.  

I hate to say this but I have been imagining a Famara 95th minute winner since the fixture was confirmed. It's even more likely with the game being on ITV. :(

Just as well it's not JP doing the commentary because I think his head would explode if that happened!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, 2015 said:

Anyone else think that the Round of 16 should be drawn out of a hat, a bit like how it's done in Champions League and Europa League? It prevents teams from throwing games to get favourable 'paths' and makes things a lot less predictable

Wouldn’t be possible, it’s all planned based on timings between games and fans need to know where the game may take place. If you think the groups finished yesterday and the first round of 16 game is today it’s just not feasible unless the tournament was longer.

Also, has any team really “thrown” a game to get a supposedly better game? It’s a huge risk more often than not

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Rumour is that they are going to ditch the 3 team group idea 

Almost like they didn't think through the 48 team idea and were thinking solely about profit rather than practicalities.  

With a 3 team group, the last games would, more often than not, be ripe for collusion. Draws suiting both sides or a narrow win one way or the other. 

The drama this week has been because there have been 2 games going on and that 2 in each group are eliminated. Loads of jeopardy producing the best kind of football.

The format for the euros where most 3rd place teams qualify is dull.  36 group games that eliminate 8 teams from the tournament. At a WC, it would mean 72 group games to get rid of 16 teams.  Not enough jeopardy. If FIFA do that, the first 18 days of the wc will be terribly dull.  Lots of settling for draws.

We've started to see in the Euros that the standard has dropped off because there aren't 24 good European sides.  You get to the point where Scotland are involved. 

Similar question, are there 48 good teams in the world?  There have been 2 really bad sides in Wales and Qatar at this World Cup. I'd argue the others were up to standard.  

If this had been a 48 team world cup, we'd have probably seen Egypt, Algeria and Nigeria, Ukraine, Columbia, Sweden.  But we'd have also seen UAE, Panama and New Zealand. 

So, to summarise, by going for a 48 team wc, they are creating a tournament that is either going to be dull for 2 weeks with little jeopardy or is going to be likely to see some games resembling the last 5 minutes of that Coventry game in 1977.  

They need a different format.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Bard said:

Almost like they didn't think through the 48 team idea and were thinking solely about profit rather than practicalities.  

With a 3 team group, the last games would, more often than not, be ripe for collusion. Draws suiting both sides or a narrow win one way or the other. 

The drama this week has been because there have been 2 games going on and that 2 in each group are eliminated. Loads of jeopardy producing the best kind of football.

The format for the euros where most 3rd place teams qualify is dull.  36 group games that eliminate 8 teams from the tournament. At a WC, it would mean 72 group games to get rid of 16 teams.  Not enough jeopardy. If FIFA do that, the first 18 days of the wc will be terribly dull.  Lots of settling for draws.

We've started to see in the Euros that the standard has dropped off because there aren't 24 good European sides.  You get to the point where Scotland are involved. 

Similar question, are there 48 good teams in the world?  There have been 2 really bad sides in Wales and Qatar at this World Cup. I'd argue the others were up to standard.  

If this had been a 48 team world cup, we'd have probably seen Egypt, Algeria and Nigeria, Ukraine, Columbia, Sweden.  But we'd have also seen UAE, Panama and New Zealand. 

So, to summarise, by going for a 48 team wc, they are creating a tournament that is either going to be dull for 2 weeks with little jeopardy or is going to be likely to see some games resembling the last 5 minutes of that Coventry game in 1977.  

They need a different format.

There would probably be enough spaces allocated for several European, Central and South American sides that are commonly at World Cups as well though.

Austria, Chile, Columbia, Czech Republic, Italy, Greece, Peru for example. Also with any luck life might be back to some sort of normality and Russia might be brought back into the fold. The quality of the competition will only suffer if too many places are giving the lesser regions, and we end up with the likes of Fiji, Western Samoa or Nepal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the end of the group stages. A refreshing look to the knock outs with a few teams and players I don't like already gone and the likes of South Korea, USA, Aus and Japan in the mix.

Ideally I wouldn't want Ronaldo or Argentina involved but I can't complain, this is a good mix of teams. Potential for some positive football, it will be interesting to see if the teams with less experience will dig in for wins or give it a lash.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suarez has complained about a lack of respect to Uruguay. Well, what do you expect? A history of nasty behaviour, diving, scuffing penalty spots, flapping arms and screaming at officials. Everything I hate about footballers.

VAR has a lot of problems but modern cameras and replays/reviews have cancelled out intimidating tactics by teams like this. It might work in South America but not in a stadium with hundreds of cameras.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

Suarez has complained about a lack of respect to Uruguay. Well, what do you expect? A history of nasty behaviour, diving, scuffing penalty spots, flapping arms and screaming at officials. Everything I hate about footballers.

VAR has a lot of problems but modern cameras and replays/reviews have cancelled out intimidating tactics by teams like this. It might work in South America but not in a stadium with hundreds of cameras.

Suarez could do with studying and understanding the meaning of respect.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

There would probably be enough spaces allocated for several European, Central and South American sides that are commonly at World Cups as well though.

Austria, Chile, Columbia, Czech Republic, Italy, Greece, Peru for example. Also with any luck life might be back to some sort of normality and Russia might be brought back into the fold. The quality of the competition will only suffer if too many places are giving the lesser regions, and we end up with the likes of Fiji, Western Samoa or Nepal.

Greece are rubbish.  Surprised you mention  them.

Only one side would qualify from Oceania which is New Zealand (look at the qualifying results). 

Central American sides commonly at the world cup? Like Panama and Honduras you mean? 

Nepal is in the middle of Asia. If they qualify they deserve to be there. Only poor Asian side at this WC was Qatar who didn't qualify. All the others won at least 1 game. It's a stronger federation than people think.

PLaces for next wc - Europe 16, South America 6, Africa 9, Asia 8, Oceania 1, Central/North America 6.  Plus 2 qualifiers.  Don't think the lesser European sides can complain that countries like Algeria, Egypt, Nigeria and Ivory Coast have a better chance of making a wc.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...