Fifa World Cup 2026

theratman said:
Not suprised, more teams meaning a bigger gap in quality, hydration breaks etc all play into this.
Click to expand...

I'd say the quality and parity has never been better.

Look at what Cape Verde achieved. Curacao, after getting hammered by Germany in their opening game, were stubborn in their remaining games.

The gap between the European and South American nations (historically the best teams at the WC) relative to everybody else is closer than it has ever been. Africa especially was much improved, and had Senegal and Egypt kept their heads in the game we'd have had a few huge results. All three host nations held their own.

The only federation that disappointed was Asia and then Tunisia, who may have been the worst team in the entire thing given that they are WC regulars. New Zealand was bad as well, but I mean that is Oceania, the weakest of all federations by some margin.
 
thestaggy said:
I'd say the quality and parity has never been better.

Look at what Cape Verde achieved. Curacao, after getting hammered by Germany in their opening game, were stubborn in their remaining games.

The gap between the European and South American nations (historically the best teams at the WC) relative to everybody else is closer than it has ever been. Africa especially was much improved, and had Senegal and Egypt kept their heads in the game we'd have had a few huge results. All three host nations held their own.

The only federation that disappointed was Asia and then Tunisia, who may have been the worst team in the entire thing given that they are WC regulars. New Zealand was bad as well, but I mean that is Oceania, the weakest of all federations by some margin.
Click to expand...
Fair points. I'd argue that those are outliers as most of the newcomers were dumped out (with a massive goal difference) at the group stage, while the traditional stronger sides from Europe and South America didn't.
 
theratman said:
Fair points. I'd argue that those are outliers as most of the newcomers were dumped out (with a massive goal difference) at the group stage, while the traditional stronger sides from Europe and South America didn't.
Click to expand...

No argument, there were a few wooden spoonists in the groups (most from Asia, which I mentioned as being a disappointment as a collective), but only two teams won all 3 group games, which kind of goes against the narrative that the expanded comp would see top teams walking it. Then if you look at the knockout stages; 11 of the 16 games in the Round of 32 were decided by 1 goal or penalties, including Cape Verde taking Argentina to extra time, Senegal capitulating a 2-0 goal lead against Belgium, England having to work to get past DR Congo and Brazil had a game on their hands against Japan.

6 of the 8 games in the Rond of 16 were decided by 1 goal or penalties, which included Egypt blowing it against Argentina and England having to hang on against Mexico. France likewise had to scrap a 1-0 win over Paraguay (granted, Paraguay made that an ugly game).

3 of 4 the quarterfinals were decided by 1 goal and again Argentina were dragged into the deep end by "weaker" opposition in Switzerland. Norway appeared for the first time in 28-years, and while they have a Haaland, they are not an historically powerful team and they made England work.

The traditional heavyweights from Europe and South America made it deep into the competition, but it hasn't been easy for them, which is good to see. Having a fairytale run like Cape Verde and then seeing so many close games in the knockouts has not been bad for football at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X