Official FIFA atrocity World Cup thread

[Lobby]

Top of the group mind you. We got to the final of the euros after a similarly soporific draw against Scotland, and it's not like we lost to Iran or Japan or something.

We seem a worse team than the last two tournaments and I'd really like it if Harry Kane's shit twin would stop turning up at major tournaments. England really missed James on the right and Foden will probably spend too much time kicking his heels. Fuck knows what Jordan Henderson is supposed to bring to the party at this stage as well.

I'd say England are better than the last two tournaments. World cup 2018 they didn't beat anyone half decent and were ultimately poor Vs Croatia, Belgium and Colombia. I think people remember them as good because they were young and lacking expectations so it was fun. The Euros they were far too defence focused which kind of works but at international level teams often underperform their xG as they don't have time to work on patterns in attack and individual brilliant strikers are lacking at this level. Let Saka, Rashford, Foden, Grealish, Sterling run at people rather than have 5 at the back and Rice/Phillips in midfield. If you think about the Italy and Croatia games they attacked and scored early then sat back and allowed elite midfielders on the other team to control the game and the more focus that is on defending the more your weak defence are involved and the more chances are there for them to make mistakes which they will eventually. Vs France for instance you can't play on a defensive masterclass Vs Mbappe you have to plan on stressing France"s weak midfield and fullbacks - I also think Upamecano is a bit suspect at best so there's goals to be scored there too. Win a 3-2 rather than lose a 2-1 by playing 8 defensive players. I'd be quietly confident in the "we have better attacker's than you" strategy but Kane does need to pick it up.

Tunisia 1 France 0

[tc27]

Agree with JM in that football is very competitive at international level.

I do not pretend to know much about it as a sport, but it has always struck me that upsets are much more common because it's easier to defend a narrow lead.

[JM2K6]

I'd say England are better than the last two tournaments. World cup 2018 they didn't beat anyone half decent and were ultimately poor Vs Croatia, Belgium and Colombia. I think people remember them as good because they were young and lacking expectations so it was fun. The Euros they were far too defence focused which kind of works but at international level teams often underperform their xG as they don't have time to work on patterns in attack and individual brilliant strikers are lacking at this level. Let Saka, Rashford, Foden, Grealish, Sterling run at people rather than have 5 at the back and Rice/Phillips in midfield. If you think about the Italy and Croatia games they attacked and scored early then sat back and allowed elite midfielders on the other team to control the game and the more focus that is on defending the more your weak defence are involved and the more chances are there for them to make mistakes which they will eventually. Vs France for instance you can't play on a defensive masterclass Vs Mbappe you have to plan on stressing France"s weak midfield and fullbacks - I also think Upamecano is a bit suspect at best so there's goals to be scored there too. Win a 3-2 rather than lose a 2-1 by playing 8 defensive players. I'd be quietly confident in the "we have better attacker's than you" strategy but Kane does need to pick it up.

England were better organised at WC2018 and people underrate any team England beats at football. The half decent teams were the ones that got to the knockout stages. What you really mean is we didn't beat any of the recognised major teams in a run of form. Which is fair, but ultimately irrelevant.

So we comfortably beat Sweden (who thumped Germany and beat South Korea), beat Colombia on pens (a huge problem for England - and given the reaction to Italy beating us on pens it means we were far superior to them), lost in extra time against Croatia who were worthy finalists (remember they absolutely thumped Argentina in the groups.) Yeah, we lost to Belgium. They beat Brazil, who beat Mexico, etc.

That's just international football these days. It's much closer and anyone can lose to anyone. It's great, frankly. Especially as we do still get the one or two outstanding teams at every tournament. These teams don't get to the business end of the tournament by accident, England included.

No, it's because England didn't beat anyone good. Sweden weren't good, doesn't matter they beat Germany's worst ever world cup side or South Korea who also aren't good. Look at the lineup Sweden put out ffs it was awful! A load of has beens who had never been.

I didn't say England got there by accident and they won't when they go far this year either. It's just to beat teams they should be beating (Croatia, Italy) they should attack rather than have 10 men behind the ball as their strength is the attack and not the defence.

Why should they be beating those sides? Italy are the European champions and England pushed them all the way.

FFS, Italy in Euro 2020:

Thrashed Turkey 3-0
Thrashed Switzerland 3-0
Beat Wales 1-0
Beat Austria 2-1 (AET)
Beat everyone's favourites Belgium 2-1
Beat everyone's second favourites Spain on pens
Beat England on pens

there is no sane way to say that England should be beating Italy. They could have beaten Italy, but Italy were fantastic in that tournament. There's no "should" there, especially given Italy's tournament pedigree.

Same story with England's run in Euro 2020. One poor game v Scotland - which they drew - but they beat teams they'd normally lose to (Croatia, who took Spain to extra time and had beaten England to make the final 2 years earlier; Czech Republic, who thrashed the Dutch), thumped Germany, smashed Ukraine, beat Denmark AET and then lost on pens in the final.

Their only problem is that other teams beat the ones that presumably you would call good, though if England had beaten them they'd be magically downgraded to bad I'm sure. Again, these sides rarely fluke these wins. I doubt anyone slags off the Danes for losing to England in the semis after extra time.

Sweden weren't good, doesn't matter they beat Germany's worst ever world cup side or South Korea who also aren't good. Look at the lineup Sweden put out ffs it was awful! A load of has beens who had never been.

Who gives a shit about the lineup? How did they play?

2018, Sweden:

Group winners in a difficult group (Mexico, South Korea, Germany) where they lost to Germany but thumped Mexico
Beat Swizterland in the ro16 who had been unbeaten in the group stage
Lost to England in the qf

2020, Sweden:

Group winners in a difficult group (Spain, Slovakia, Poland)
Lost to Ukraine in the ro16 (a bad result)

So two tournaments in a row they won their group, and both times those groups were much harder than England's group in this world cup. Maybe in hindsight they were actually pretty good and worthy of some praise?

[Paddington Bear]

Agree with JM in that football is very competitive at international level.

I do not pretend to know much about it as a sport, but it has always struck me that upsets are much more common because it's easier to defend a narrow lead.

Scrums and mauls kill off minnows in rugby, it is easier to not run out of gas in football.

[I like neeps]

England were better organised at WC2018 and people underrate any team England beats at football. The half decent teams were the ones that got to the knockout stages. What you really mean is we didn't beat any of the recognised major teams in a run of form. Which is fair, but ultimately irrelevant.

So we comfortably beat Sweden (who thumped Germany and beat South Korea), beat Colombia on pens (a huge problem for England - and given the reaction to Italy beating us on pens it means we were far superior to them), lost in extra time against Croatia who were worthy finalists (remember they absolutely thumped Argentina in the groups.) Yeah, we lost to Belgium. They beat Brazil, who beat Mexico, etc.

That's just international football these days. It's much closer and anyone can lose to anyone. It's great, frankly. Especially as we do still get the one or two outstanding teams at every tournament. These teams don't get to the business end of the tournament by accident, England included.

No, it's because England didn't beat anyone good. Sweden weren't good, doesn't matter they beat Germany's worst ever world cup side or South Korea who also aren't good. Look at the lineup Sweden put out ffs it was awful! A load of has beens who had never been.

I didn't say England got there by accident and they won't when they go far this year either. It's just to beat teams they should be beating (Croatia, Italy) they should attack rather than have 10 men behind the ball as their strength is the attack and not the defence.

Why should they be beating those sides? Italy are the European champions and England pushed them all the way.

FFS, Italy in Euro 2020:

Thrashed Turkey 3-0
Thrashed Switzerland 3-0
Beat Wales 1-0
Beat Austria 2-1 (AET)
Beat everyone's favourites Belgium 2-1
Beat everyone's second favourites Spain on pens
Beat England on pens

there is no sane way to say that England should be beating Italy. They could have beaten Italy, but Italy were fantastic in that tournament. There's no "should" there, especially given Italy's tournament pedigree.

Same story with England's run in Euro 2020. One poor game v Scotland - which they drew - but they beat teams they'd normally lose to (Croatia, who took Spain to extra time and had beaten England to make the final 2 years earlier; Czech Republic, who thrashed the Dutch), thumped Germany, smashed Ukraine, beat Denmark AET and then lost on pens in the final.

Their only problem is that other teams beat the ones that presumably you would call good, though if England had beaten them they'd be magically downgraded to bad I'm sure. Again, these sides rarely fluke these wins. I doubt anyone slags off the Danes for losing to England in the semis after extra time.

Sweden weren't good, doesn't matter they beat Germany's worst ever world cup side or South Korea who also aren't good. Look at the lineup Sweden put out ffs it was awful! A load of has beens who had never been.

Who gives a shit about the lineup? How did they play?

2018, Sweden:

Group winners in a difficult group (Mexico, South Korea, Germany) where they lost to Germany but thumped Mexico
Beat Swizterland in the ro16 who had been unbeaten in the group stage
Lost to England in the qf

2020, Sweden:

Group winners in a difficult group (Spain, Slovakia, Poland)
Lost to Ukraine in the ro16 (a bad result)

So two tournaments in a row they won their group, and both times those groups were much harder than England's group in this world cup. Maybe in hindsight they were actually pretty good and worthy of some praise?

Look at Italy post euros - don't look so good. England had better players, they had home advantage, the dominated the first half on the front foot then played scared.

This whole - X team beat y team is no measure of anything. Especially when you reference historically poor Dutch and German sides. The Netherlands didn't qualify for major tournaments and Germany flop at all of them since the euros 2016 .

The Sweden players were bad, let's be real here:

1 R Olsen
16 E Krafth 85'85th minute
3 V Lindelöf
4 A Granqvist (c)
6 L Augustinsson
17 V Claesson
7 S Larsson 90+4'94th minute
8 A Ekdal 10bE Forsberg 65'65th minute
9 M Berg
20 O Toivonen

Not one player in that side would've got into England's squad (maybe Lindelof) and the rest wouldn't play for England in a friendly. They absolutely sucked.

I am praising England - I'm saying they have better players than most, they should be beating most and it's just the tactics they didn't get quite right by playing to their weakness (the defence) and allowing other teams to play to their strengths (central midfield) which they've now changed by playing more attacking football. They had Croatia and Italy rattled and then they decided to play defensive. It was wrong and Southgate seems to have learned.

[JM2K6]

It's pointless looking at how teams play outside of the tournament. You play the side that exists at that point in time.

England didn't "decide" to play more defensive football. They couldn't keep hold of the ball and their opponents worked them out, got on top of the English midfield and started keeping the ball far better themselves. As a result it spiralled and England were pushed further and further back.

Should there have been more aggressive substitutions? Yup. But Southgate is a conservative manager and England a conservative team.

It remains to be seen if Southgate keeps his nerve for selection in the knockout stages but England have played about 1.5 good games out of 3 so far, and looked pretty hopeless for the other 1.5. Miles off the previous tournament performances so far. But when you qualify top it doesn't matter, the first job is done.

[Torquemada 1420]

Agree with JM in that football is very competitive at international level.

I do not pretend to know much about it as a sport, but it has always struck me that upsets are much more common because it's easier to defend a narrow lead.

It is......... but not necessarily for good reasons. IMHO, intl football has become so samey and defensive minded first and foremost that with the current levels of fitness, it's really hard
to beat anyone. Whilst that has levelled the playing field, it's generally dull as ditch water.

And yes, your last point is spot on. The corollary being it's also damned hard to get a lead. Witness Serbia v Brazil where the Serbs basically stuck 11 men behind the ball (as Poland did last night v Arg).
It's only where teams are forced to throw the kitchen sink and/or have nothing to lose that you get some decent entertainment e.g. Mexico v Saudis.

[petej]

Agree with JM in that football is very competitive at international level.

I do not pretend to know much about it as a sport, but it has always struck me that upsets are much more common because it's easier to defend a narrow lead.

Scrums and mauls kill off minnows in rugby, it is easier to not run out of gas in football.

Yep. First goal is really important. Dominance isn't rewarded to the same extent. Easy to find matches where the winning team had less ball, territory and shots.

[JM2K6]

Torq, it is barely a year or two since everyone was bemoaning the inability of teams to defend at international and top club level.

[Biffer]

Looks like the last two World Cups are proving Europe is still the dominant force in football, regardless of what anyone else might say. Looks like 9 of the last 16 will be European teams, after 10 of them in 2018. A lot of people thought there'd been some kind of permanent change after Europe only had 6 representatives in that round in 2010 and 2014, but it seems the old order has been re-established (although it was still an all European final in 2010 and Germany won it in 2014).

[Gumboot]

Japan has just scored 2 quick goals to go 2-1 up against Spain...

[Torquemada 1420]

Torq, it is barely a year or two since everyone was bemoaning the inability of teams to defend at international and top club level.

I have no idea why. It's not like there was an avalanche of goals.

Meantime, the Krauts look like they are going home. Please make these 25 minutes last forever

[Gumboot]

Fantastic Japan!

Germany GOOONE!

[Insane_Homer]

Wonderful chaos.

[Torquemada 1420]

Auf Wiedersehen krauts.

I really hope Spain deliberately walked those last 20 minutes and someone reminds the krauts of the Disgrace of Gijon.

[Kiwias]

I checked the half-time score and confidently told my wife that Japan would reverse it and win 3 - 1. Close!

[I like neeps]

I remember when Germany won it and everyone wet the bed about how they got football right and were going to piss international football forever. And now, 2 group stage exits in a row, their international team is just bad and their league is the biggest one horse race in Europe and a total joke. Life comes at you fast.

[boere wors]

I remember when Germany won it and everyone wet the bed about how they got football right and were going to piss international football forever. And now, 2 group stage exits in a row, their international team is just bad and their league is the biggest one horse race in Europe and a total joke. Life comes at you fast.

After the 1990 win, beckenbauer, who was then the successfull coach , said that the German team would be unbeatable for years to come (sic). Mainly due to the reunification and the inceased resources of players. Turned out they crushed out in 1994 in the quarters after a dull campaign with not one single player from the ex GDR in the starting lineup. Only 2 in the whole squad.
2014 was different, a settled team which has been building since 2006, finally had their swan song. After that it went downhill. Coach should have quit. They fell in the same trap as many teams that have won the world cup. All the passion and will is gone and they crush out early.
Hence I always say, start new after a world cup win, clear out players and coach, the winners won’t get you anywhere. The All Blacks 2011-2015 are the absolut exemption to that, makes their title defend even more so impressive. But admittedly, they were a team of goats.

[I like neeps]

I remember when Germany won it and everyone wet the bed about how they got football right and were going to piss international football forever. And now, 2 group stage exits in a row, their international team is just bad and their league is the biggest one horse race in Europe and a total joke. Life comes at you fast.

After the 1990 win, beckenbauer, who was then the successfull coach , said that the German team would be unbeatable for years to come (sic). Mainly due to the reunification and the inceased resources of players. Turned out they crushed out in 1994 in the quarters after a dull campaign with not one single player from the ex GDR in the starting lineup. Only 2 in the whole squad.
2014 was different, a settled team which has been building since 2006, finally had their swan song. After that it went downhill. Coach should have quit. They fell in the same trap as many teams that have won the world cup. All the passion and will is gone and they crush out early.
Hence I always say, start new after a world cup win, clear out players and coach, the winners won’t get you anywhere. The All Blacks 2011-2015 are the absolut exemption to that, makes their title defend even more so impressive. But admittedly, they were a team of goats.

They did have a clear out mostly after the last WC, the squad they took to this world cup is quite young and inexperienced. They just have a dreadful domestic league and so can't develop anyone.

[boere wors]

I remember when Germany won it and everyone wet the bed about how they got football right and were going to piss international football forever. And now, 2 group stage exits in a row, their international team is just bad and their league is the biggest one horse race in Europe and a total joke. Life comes at you fast.

After the 1990 win, beckenbauer, who was then the successfull coach , said that the German team would be unbeatable for years to come (sic). Mainly due to the reunification and the inceased resources of players. Turned out they crushed out in 1994 in the quarters after a dull campaign with not one single player from the ex GDR in the starting lineup. Only 2 in the whole squad.
2014 was different, a settled team which has been building since 2006, finally had their swan song. After that it went downhill. Coach should have quit. They fell in the same trap as many teams that have won the world cup. All the passion and will is gone and they crush out early.
Hence I always say, start new after a world cup win, clear out players and coach, the winners won’t get you anywhere. The All Blacks 2011-2015 are the absolut exemption to that, makes their title defend even more so impressive. But admittedly, they were a team of goats.

They did have a clear out mostly after the last WC, the squad they took to this world cup is quite young and inexperienced. They just have a dreadful domestic league and so can't develop anyone.

Yeah, it was 4 years too late. They should have cleared out after their win in 2014. They would have been more competitive by now.
Bayern Munich has won the domestic league for 10 years in a row now i think. It‘s no competition really.

[JM2K6]

I remember when Germany won it and everyone wet the bed about how they got football right and were going to piss international football forever. And now, 2 group stage exits in a row, their international team is just bad and their league is the biggest one horse race in Europe and a total joke. Life comes at you fast.

After the 1990 win, beckenbauer, who was then the successfull coach , said that the German team would be unbeatable for years to come (sic). Mainly due to the reunification and the inceased resources of players. Turned out they crushed out in 1994 in the quarters after a dull campaign with not one single player from the ex GDR in the starting lineup. Only 2 in the whole squad.
2014 was different, a settled team which has been building since 2006, finally had their swan song. After that it went downhill. Coach should have quit. They fell in the same trap as many teams that have won the world cup. All the passion and will is gone and they crush out early.
Hence I always say, start new after a world cup win, clear out players and coach, the winners won’t get you anywhere. The All Blacks 2011-2015 are the absolut exemption to that, makes their title defend even more so impressive. But admittedly, they were a team of goats.

They did have a clear out mostly after the last WC, the squad they took to this world cup is quite young and inexperienced. They just have a dreadful domestic league and so can't develop anyone.

Ummm

Only 7 of the squad are under 26 - same number as aged 30 or over. 14 players with at least 30 caps, 6 with more than 50 (2 with 100+). They actually have fewer inexperienced players than France (and England!) and fewer youngsters too.

[Insane_Homer]

fucking hell, can't watch Uruguay, just want punch Suarez and his happy band of cunts every fucking play.

thankfully can now switch over and watch Portugal now that their cunt has a been subbed off.

[Insane_Homer]

HA HA, Wonderful! Suarez and his bunch of cunts are out. Good riddance.

[Slick]

HA HA, Wonderful! Suarez and his bunch of cunts are out. Good riddance.

What was all that nonsense about at the end? Just caught the last of it

Do Ghana go through?

[Slick]

HA HA, Wonderful! Suarez and his bunch of cunts are out. Good riddance.

What was all that nonsense about at the end? Just caught the last of it

Do Ghana go through?

Ahh balls, they don’t

[Gumboot]

HA HA, Wonderful! Suarez and his bunch of cunts are out. Good riddance.

Oh dear how sad never mind.

Bye Chewy Luis, ya filthy cheating cunt.

[Insane_Homer]

What was all that nonsense about at the end? Just caught the last of it

A team, hell bent on cheating by diving like Tom Daley at the Olympics at every opportunity, are outraged by ref who then considered a crucial touch in the box to be one of those dives. Glorious karma.

[sturginho]

HA HA, Wonderful! Suarez and his bunch of cunts are out. Good riddance.

Oh dear how sad never mind.

Bye Chewy Luis, ya filthy cheating cunt.

Bit off more than he could chew

[Biffer]

Looks like the last two World Cups are proving Europe is still the dominant force in football, regardless of what anyone else might say. Looks like 9 of the last 16 will be European teams, after 10 of them in 2018. A lot of people thought there'd been some kind of permanent change after Europe only had 6 representatives in that round in 2010 and 2014, but it seems the old order has been re-established (although it was still an all European final in 2010 and Germany won it in 2014).

Turned out to be eight. But again, that’s half of the last sixteen, from 40% of the qualified teams. Likely to be a higher percentage again in the quarter finals.

And yet there’s still wailing about UEFA having too much influence. UEFA generates more money than FIFA and doesn’t get the influence it should.

And when they allocate teams for the expanded tournament next time to 48 teams, uefa gets the smallest increase and ends up with an even lower percentage.

[inactionman]

Not looking good for Pele:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... eports-say

[Torquemada 1420]

Looks like the last two World Cups are proving Europe is still the dominant force in football, regardless of what anyone else might say. Looks like 9 of the last 16 will be European teams, after 10 of them in 2018. A lot of people thought there'd been some kind of permanent change after Europe only had 6 representatives in that round in 2010 and 2014, but it seems the old order has been re-established (although it was still an all European final in 2010 and Germany won it in 2014).

Remind me how many countries there are in Europe v South America? Until the Millennium, when money in Europe really sucked all the best players from around the world, no European side had won a WC outside of Europe (and still only Spain has in SA) and the South Americans has won more tournies in total. So, not sure what old order has been RE-established.

[Biffer]

Remind me how many countries there are in Europe v South America? Until the Millennium, when money in Europe really sucked all the best players from around the world, no European side had won a WC outside of Europe (and still only Spain has in SA) and the South Americans has won more tournies in total. So, not sure what old order has been RE-established.

40% of the countries in South America get a place at the World Cup. The big teams don’t have to put any effort into qualifying. If Europe had the same allocation they would have 22 teams at the tournament. Half of the South American countries that qualified got to the knockout stages. 60% of the UEFA countries that qualified got to the knockout stages. Only one South American team has ever won in europe, same as only one European team has ever won in the Americas. Europe is consistently the meat of the tournament, both in a sporting and financial sense.

[Torquemada 1420]

Only one South American team has ever won in europe, same as only one European team has ever won in the Americas.

I see you distorted the point. Only 2 European sides has ever won off own continent: as per above, Spain in SA and the Krauts in Braz. South American sides have done it 5 times.

There is no return to an old order because SAm sides dominated until 2000 by the only metric that matters: winners.

[Biffer]

Only one South American team has ever won in europe, same as only one European team has ever won in the Americas.

I see you distorted the point. Only 2 European sides has ever won off own continent: as per above, Spain in SA and the Krauts in Braz. South American sides have done it 5 times.

There is no return to an old order because SAm sides dominated until 2000 by the only metric that matters: winners.

Europe provides the meat of the competition, both in terms of money and football. That’s undeniable.

[Torquemada 1420]

Only one South American team has ever won in europe, same as only one European team has ever won in the Americas.

I see you distorted the point. Only 2 European sides has ever won off own continent: as per above, Spain in SA and the Krauts in Braz. South American sides have done it 5 times.

There is no return to an old order because SAm sides dominated until 2000 by the only metric that matters: winners.

Europe provides the meat of the competition, both in terms of money and football. That’s undeniable.

Not disputing either:
a) There are wayyy more European sides.
b) And it's the money that has tilted the balance with so many players from other nations in Europe. It both damages the local leagues and damages the exiled players: because they all become conditioned to Euro bore fest styles (post the 70s, only the Netherlands has played any likeable football).

[Biffer]

I see you distorted the point. Only 2 European sides has ever won off own continent: as per above, Spain in SA and the Krauts in Braz. South American sides have done it 5 times.

There is no return to an old order because SAm sides dominated until 2000 by the only metric that matters: winners.

Europe provides the meat of the competition, both in terms of money and football. That’s undeniable.

Not disputing either:
a) There are wayyy more European sides.
b) And it's the money that has tilted the balance with so many players from other nations in Europe. It both damages the local leagues and damages the exiled players: because they all become conditioned to Euro bore fest styles (post the 70s, only the Netherlands has played any likeable football).

The European teams don’t get fair representation at the World Cup. Africa, Asia, the Americas are over represented. And next time, with 48 teams in the tournament, they’ll be even more over represented. Out of the 10 South American sides, there will be a guaranteed 6 places, with the possibility of another through the playoff. Yet UEFA gets 16 to represent 55 countries. Asia will have 8 places; the eight ranked Asian team is UAE, ranked 70th. There are 32 European teams ranked higher. Half of them wouldn’t get to go because it’s skewed to Africa, Asia and the Americas. It’s nonsense.

The growing rumours of UEFA disassociating from FIFA are getting more and more justified.

[Enzedder]

Doesn't Europe have the votes to make things more "fair"? Or does the voting go down to regions? (From memory it does because I recall Charlie Dempsey abstaining and costing the Saffers a cup about 4 or 8 years earlier than they got it.)

[Biffer]

Doesn't Europe have the votes to make things more "fair"? Or does the voting go down to regions? (From memory it does because I recall Charlie Dempsey abstaining and costing the Saffers a cup about 4 or 8 years earlier than they got it.)

Nine members of FIFA Council, a president who is elected and can be from anywhere, plus one from each region except UEFA, which has three. The UK used to be guaranteed a seat, then there were two elected by UEFA member associations; this was removed from FIFA regs about ten years ago but has been unofficially maintained by UEFA. So more influence but not a majority. In FIFA congress it’s one country one vote. And it’s congress that decides things like World Cup allocations.

[JM2K6]

I'm not altogether comfortable with this line of argument. European clubs have warped the game financially and I don't think that's a positive for world football. When it comes to world cups, it should be more egalitarian and giving more power to Europe seems counterproductive.

[boere wors]

I think I know partly what is wrong with Germany these days. When I was living here 30 years ago it had a distinct identity. Taciturn but friendly. Popular stuff with the old people was along the lines of Val Doonican type stuff. Lots of cream polo necks and mullet vibes. Arrived here and turned on the telly and what's on? First Dates the German one called First Dates. Not Erste Dates just First Dates. Turned over and it was the Great German Bake off. In a tent with the exact same design. Turned over and it was some dubbed British thing with some Corrie alumni. The Tories really fucked up. They had already won

What are you trying to say exactly? Lack of identity, rather copying the anglo-saxon lifestyle nowadays, likewise in soccer? Whats the part with the Tories about?