The 2018 World Cup Superthread

yourdeadwright

MD1990 wrote: »

World Cup has been intriguing & I have still enjoyed it.

But the quality has been poor.Top level Club football as expected is much better considering there train all year together.

Apart from some long range goals I can't think of barely any good passing movements that resulted in goals from open play or many good counter attacks.

Fitness levels seem lower too very little high pressing.

The passing movements will come , the longer teams are there plus the way small teams are approaching games makes it much harder to play nice football against,
Very few teams play at high press at all in football plus to be done properly takes a hell of a lot of work, I'm not surprised we haven't seen it .

rob316

The introduction of a 48 team world cup is going to throw up some awful matches. Competition does not need more Morocco, Irans and Tunisia's.

ERG89

rob316 wrote: »

The introduction of a 48 team world cup is going to throw up some awful matches. Competition does not need more Morocco, Irans and Tunisia's.

I'd prefer 24 as there is a few poor sides who play poor football on top of it.

Ferris_Bueller

rob316 wrote: »

The introduction of a 48 team world cup is going to throw up some awful matches. Competition does not need more Morocco, Irans and Tunisia's.

Meh, will probably dilute the quality a bit but I don't think dramatically.. If you were to hypothetically pick the extra 16 teams who didn't qualify this year you could say:

Europe - Italy, Netherlands, Ireland
South America - Chile
Oceania - New Zealand
North & Central America - USA, Canada, Honduras
Africa - Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Algeria
Asia - China, UAE, Uzbekistan (this is the one that really dilutes the quality IMO)

Overall not the worst, and the really bad teams will only get 2 games and they will be gone then. If it means Ireland get there I'm happy with it..

sligeach

Gueye didn't score that, despite what the commentator said. It's an own goal.

Loafing Oaf

rob316 wrote: »

The introduction of a 48 team world cup is going to throw up some awful matches. Competition does not need more Morocco, Irans and Tunisia's.

Think of the CONACAF teams coming through in 2026, assuming that USA, Canada and Mexico will qualify automatically, and there will be possibly five more under the expanded format. When you consider that Panama and Costa Rica have qualified under the current system...

The Backwards Man

The Hispaniola derby on the world stage.

Stephen15

rob316 wrote: »

The introduction of a 48 team world cup is going to throw up some awful matches. Competition does not need more Morocco, Irans and Tunisia's.

True but what's even worse is the 3 teams per group idea it creates a very imbalanced group especially that 2 out of the three teams gets through. The 32 team tournament works well as it is to me anyway if they really wanted to increase the number of teams should have made it 40 teams with 8 groups of 5 similar to the rugby world cup.

sligeach

Poland, what were you thinking?

rob316

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Meh, will probably dilute the quality a bit but I don't think dramatically.. If you were to hypothetically pick the extra 16 teams who didn't qualify this year you could say:

Europe - Italy, Netherlands, Ireland
South America - Chile
Oceania - New Zealand
North & Central America - USA, Canada, Honduras
Africa - Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Algeria
Asia - China, UAE, Uzbekistan (this is the one that really dilutes the quality IMO)

Overall not the worst, and the really bad teams will only get 2 games and they will be gone then. If it means Ireland get there I'm happy with it..

Its the middle eastern and African sides that dilute the quality, some are horrendous. The cynical side of me think the expanded competition is to safe guard the likes of Italy and Holland do get to the World Cup. Like FFP to stop the English/Spanish over spending but once PSG starting throwing money around, no one cared anymore.

DJIMI TRARORE

How bad are Poland,yet again at a major final they haven't turned up after pissing thru the group

rob316

Salah starts

Loafing Oaf

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I have a lot of respect for Brian Kerr because you can tell he actually does this. He may drone on a bit, and his accent is hard on my culchie ears, but you're not thinking "pretty much anyone on the boards.ie soccer forum knows more than this guy" when he opines.

Contrast Dunphy: "Senegal have never been to the World Cup before.":rolleyes:

namloc1980

More direct free kicks have been scored in this World Cup so far than in the whole of the 2014 one.

764dak

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

rob316 wrote: »

The introduction of a 48 team world cup is going to throw up some awful matches. Competition does not need more Morocco, Irans and Tunisia's.

Think of the CONACAF teams coming through in 2026, assuming that USA, Canada and Mexico will qualify automatically, and there will be possibly five more under the expanded format. When you consider that Panama and Costa Rica have qualified under the current system...

You could just avoid watching those matches if you hate the teams.

The Talking Bread

rob316 wrote: »

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Meh, will probably dilute the quality a bit but I don't think dramatically.. If you were to hypothetically pick the extra 16 teams who didn't qualify this year you could say:

Europe - Italy, Netherlands, Ireland
South America - Chile
Oceania - New Zealand
North & Central America - USA, Canada, Honduras
Africa - Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Algeria
Asia - China, UAE, Uzbekistan (this is the one that really dilutes the quality IMO)

Overall not the worst, and the really bad teams will only get 2 games and they will be gone then. If it means Ireland get there I'm happy with it..

Its the middle eastern and African sides that dilute the quality, some are horrendous. The cynical side of me think the expanded competition is to safe guard the likes of Italy and Holland do get to the World Cup. Like FFP to stop the English/Spanish over spending but once PSG starting throwing money around, no one cared anymore.

FIFA would more concerned with teams like China, USA etc qualifying they would be with safeguarding The Netherlands

sligeach

Curse you Russia. Horrible way for them to take the lead.

Sloppy goal

brianregan09

Neither of these sides are really any good

Too easy for Russia

Trigger

No marking whatsoever

sligeach

Egypt have defended terribly for all 3 of Russia's goals.

brianregan09

Liverpool fans will be delighted Salah is going home early I reckon

yabadabado

brianregan09 wrote: »

Neither of these sides are really any good

Way too easy for Russia, Egypt defending is comically bad.

Son Of A Vidic

Fcuk ya, come on Russia! Man, they know how to put a team to the sword. Great to see the host nation delivering.

theoneeyedman

Russia delivering a Pharaoh beating.......

crushproof

It's all coming together.

yabadabado

titan18 wrote: »

They're better than you think. Hegazi and Elneny would be known in PL and neither are bad, and of course Salah, but they've another winger Trezeguet who's excellent aswell. Also Cuper has the team very well organised and extremely defensive relying on Trezeguet and Salah on counter attacks.

Uruguay should be too good but Egypt arent as bad as people might think.

They are actually worse than I expected and my expectations of them weren't particularly high.
Clueless at the back and Salah gets little or no help in attack and they won't play to his strengths.
Their WC is over now bwfore the tournament has barely started.

Always like to see the hosts do well

sligeach

Nice to see Salah score even if it is likely inconsequential.

~Rebel~

Ok - how many penalties is that already that VAR has given, when a ref wouldn't have?

Speaks fairly poorly for the refs that they've needed to be rescued so many times in only 6 days!

Nunu

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Ok - how many penalties is that already that VAR has given, when a ref wouldn't have?

Speaks fairly poorly for the refs that they've needed to be rescued so many times in only 6 days!

To be fair to the ref there he was 100% it was a foul but not whether it was inside or out so let VAR guide him. Thought it was very good refereeing

~Rebel~

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Ok - how many penalties is that already that VAR has given, when a ref wouldn't have?

Speaks fairly poorly for the refs that they've needed to be rescued so many times in only 6 days!

Or it just shows how badly is was needed.

That one wasn't obvious in real time. Where the foul had taken place that is.

~Rebel~

Nunu wrote: »

To be fair to the ref there he was 100% it was a foul but not whether it was inside or out so let VAR guide him. Thought it was very good refereeing

I'm not picking on any one incident - this one was one where the ref used the technology to give him the right answer when not 100% sure - but just in general, only 6 days in it would have already been a totally different world cup without VAR spotting pens.

Does it speak to refs legitimately just missing things, or now knowing that they have VAR in the background just letting play run on even when they suspect there might have been one?

Dick phelan

Thought England were decent last night especially in the first half, I actually rate them going forward with Kane, Rashford, Sterling ect. The lack of a playmaker in MF and imo a dodgy back 4 will be what kills them. The way this tournament has gone could be a few big guns out early doors so maybe England can go further then expected. Although worth saying that had they not got the late winner it would have been seen as another performance where England fail to breakdown a workmanlike defense, they needed that to boost confidence, a draw and they go into the Panama game under pressure.

DM_7

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I'm not picking on any one incident - this one was one where the ref used the technology to give him the right answer when not 100% sure - but just in general, only 6 days in it would have already been a totally different world cup without VAR spotting pens.

Does it speak to refs legitimately just missing things, or now knowing that they have VAR in the background just letting play run on even when they suspect there might have been one?

They are letting VAR help, much better than awarding and then having to overturn it.

Son Of A Vidic

Lineker just mentioned on BBC that it's the best start by a host nation in WC history. Great result for Russia, very impressive.

eagle eye

It's time to take Russia seriously in this World Cup I think. Serious contenders based on those two games. Uruguay vs Russia will obviously tell us more but I'd fancy them against Uruguay based on what I've seen so far.

Luck has played a part of course. We might not have seen very much of Cheryshev only for the injury to Dzagoev.

The Talking Bread

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Ok - how many penalties is that already that VAR has given, when a ref wouldn't have?

Speaks fairly poorly for the refs that they've needed to be rescued so many times in only 6 days!

Referees are human, they don't have the advantage of twenty angles, slow motion replays and zoom in proximity.

Drumpot

eagle eye wrote: »

It's time to take Russia seriously in this World Cup I think. Serious contenders based on those two games. Uruguay vs Russia will obviously tell us more but I'd fancy them against Uruguay based on what I've seen so far.

Luck has played a part of course. We might not have seen very much of Cheryshev only for the injury to Dzagoev.

The Uruguay game is a free pass so I wouldn’t take the result of that seriously. It’s the knockouts against either Spain or Portugal that will tell us what they are made of. Momentum is great but what if they concede first in the knockouts with no second chances? My guess is the old Russia might come back and their true form could be brutally exposed kind of like Brazil in 2014.

~Rebel~

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Referees are human, they don't have the advantage of twenty angles, slow motion replays and zoom in proximity.

Of course, obviously, thats sort of neither here nor there - the question isn't about that, but rather specifically about the sheer volume of massively important, game deciding changes that have been made.

Like, could one follow that to the somewhat logical conclusion that given how much the outcome has been affected over just a sample of 17 games, how different would a premier league table look after a full season of 380 games with VAR?

I'm inclined to agree with DM_7's comment though, that ref's are consciously not awarding pen's when they normally might, knowing the safety net of VAR is checking anyway, so they're guaranteed the right result either way. Allow play to continue, and if VAR says no pen, you've already allowed the game to progress naturally. If they pull it back, great, right result is reached in the end.

Interesting one though, seeing how refs adapt to its presence so quickly.

~Rebel~

eagle eye wrote: »

It's time to take Russia seriously in this World Cup I think. Serious contenders based on those two games. Uruguay vs Russia will obviously tell us more but I'd fancy them against Uruguay based on what I've seen so far.

Luck has played a part of course. We might not have seen very much of Cheryshev only for the injury to Dzagoev.

Still very much outsiders for the tournament, but in with a great shout against anyone outside the top 5 or 6 teams.

It has to count too, that only a handful of teams have had good support (England only have 2500 traveling fans for instance, which is pretty abysmal), so in a lot of ties, their fans will outnumber the opposition even more than is normal for a host team. 98% of a stadium screaming against you, on the world cup stage, has got to be tough to play in for opposition teams.

pleas advice

https://twitter.com/GrantWahl/status/1009149902214098946

5star02707

pleas advice wrote: »

https://twitter.com/GrantWahl/status/1009149902214098946

Leading goal scorer, I'd even put Penalty infront OG 😂

D.Q

*Eoin Goal

Corholio

Despite scoring plenty of goals I still don't rate Russia all that much. If Egypt had anything about them they'd have scored a few of their own, especially when they were dominating the ball. I think a half decent side will take them apart, possibly Uruguay will.

elefant

Corholio wrote: »

Despite scoring plenty of goals I still don't rate Russia all that much. If Egypt had anything about them they'd have scored a few of their own, especially when they were dominating the ball. I think a half decent side will take them apart, possibly Uruguay will.

Same. I'd expect Ireland to get results against Saudi Arabia and Egypt at home.

Loafing Oaf

A female commentator on the Beeb:eek:

sligeach

What the **** kind of defending was that from Morocco? Another easy goal from the A hole. 6 yards out, free header. Didn't have to even leave the ground. Dreadful.

C Ronaldo
Nothing player bill