The actual I am watching the World Cup thread. No, non World Cup watchers please. Spoilers.

1…1112141617…40

Comments

  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 9,108
    So Senegal next up then most likely France.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • crescent
    crescent Posts: 1,201
    MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

    It felt like it would likely be a case of battle bravely


    With the lack of quality players, they are really going to struggle to qualify for future tournaments unfortunately.
    I have to agree. As a Scot, the current Wales situation all looks very familiar i.e. qualifying for a major tournament is basically the target and anything beyond that is a very unlikely bonus due to a lack of genuine world class players.
    I thought England played very well last night but Wales were as poor a team as I've seen in this WC. Apart from a 10mins flurry after they went 2-0 down they showed very little to worry England. I turned over to the USA/Iran game for the last half hour just because it seemed a bit more exciting as they both had something to play for.

    I think England are in the top four teams at the WC based on what I've seen so far. I would not be surprised if they go very close this year. Up there with France and Spain and possibly just ahead of Brazil who I think have been a bit lacklustre overall.




    Bianchi ImpulsoBMC Teammachine SLR02 01Trek Domane AL3“When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. “ ~H.G. Wells Edit - "Unless it's a BMX"
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    crescent said:

    MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

    It felt like it would likely be a case of battle bravely


    With the lack of quality players, they are really going to struggle to qualify for future tournaments unfortunately.
    I have to agree. As a Scot, the current Wales situation all looks very familiar i.e. qualifying for a major tournament is basically the target and anything beyond that is a very unlikely bonus due to a lack of genuine world class players.
    I thought England played very well last night but Wales were as poor a team as I've seen in this WC. Apart from a 10mins flurry after they went 2-0 down they showed very little to worry England. I turned over to the USA/Iran game for the last half hour just because it seemed a bit more exciting as they both had something to play for.

    I think England are in the top four teams at the WC based on what I've seen so far. I would not be surprised if they go very close this year. Up there with France and Spain and possibly just ahead of Brazil who I think have been a bit lacklustre overall.




    my own thought is that a country with a population of 3 million is doing very well to qualify for the WC and as other countries develop it will get increasingly difficult.

    For me Wales's problem was a lack of Premier League level players and as far as I know that does not look likely to change.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,593
    They get to pick from a bit more than the population though. There will always be Ashley Williams type players around - decent Premiership / Championship level players that have enough of a link to Wales but aren't good enough to get into an England squad. I'm not seeing the next player of the standard of Bale / Giggs / Hughes / Rush coming through though. Most of those who are actually on the books of a Premier League side seem to be loaned out at a lower level.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Pross said:

    They get to pick from a bit more than the population though. There will always be Ashley Williams type players around - decent Premiership / Championship level players that have enough of a link to Wales but aren't good enough to get into an England squad. I'm not seeing the next player of the standard of Bale / Giggs / Hughes / Rush coming through though. Most of those who are actually on the books of a Premier League side seem to be loaned out at a lower level.

    your first point is a double edged sword as if they are good enough they could use a tenuous link to play for England.

    I think you are looking at life through rose tinted specs as two of those players hung their boots up more than 20 years ago.

    My point was that to have a good national team they would need the bulk of the team playing in the top leagues in Europe. With a population of 3 million and other sports competing for the best atheletes this is a big ask.
  • Dorset_Boy
    Dorset_Boy Posts: 7,610
    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,227
    edited November 2022
    Dorset_Boy said:

    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.

    Both of Wales' best players of the last few years have played abroad.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Dorset_Boy said:

    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.

    And Brazil is 200 million, Germany 80 million, France/Italy 60 million. By my reckoning the smallest countries to win are England/Spain Argentina on 45 million.

    If we competed as UK (rather than England) do you think we would have done better same or worse in major tournaments since 2000?
  • secretsqirrel
    secretsqirrel Posts: 2,143
    surrey_commuter said:

    Dorset_Boy said:

    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.

    And Brazil is 200 million, Germany 80 million, France/Italy 60 million. By my reckoning the smallest countries to win are England/Spain Argentina on 45 million.

    If we competed as UK (rather than England) do you think we would have done better same or worse in major tournaments since 2000?
    UK would have done the same as England I suspect ….

  • secretsqirrel
    secretsqirrel Posts: 2,143
    Although Wales and USA were evenly matched last week.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    secretsqirrel said:

    Although Wales and USA were evenly matched last week.

    I can’t be bothered to look up participation stats
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    secretsqirrel said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Dorset_Boy said:

    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.

    And Brazil is 200 million, Germany 80 million, France/Italy 60 million. By my reckoning the smallest countries to win are England/Spain Argentina on 45 million.

    If we competed as UK (rather than England) do you think we would have done better same or worse in major tournaments since 2000?
    UK would have done the same as England I suspect ….

    Even the current team would benefit from having Andy Robertson and I am pretty sure Giggs and Bale would have improved the team
  • secretsqirrel
    secretsqirrel Posts: 2,143
    surrey_commuter said:

    secretsqirrel said:

    Although Wales and USA were evenly matched last week.

    I can’t be bothered to look up participation stats
    I hear English rugby fans say that a lot.

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    edited November 2022
    surrey_commuter said:

    Dorset_Boy said:

    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.

    And Brazil is 200 million, Germany 80 million, France/Italy 60 million. By my reckoning the smallest countries to win are England/Spain Argentina on 45 million.

    If we competed as UK (rather than England) do you think we would have done better same or worse in major tournaments since 2000?
    If you count finalists or the Euros the Dutch look very good at 17m

    You’re also forgetting the Danes in the Euros 😬
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,813
    surrey_commuter said:

    Dorset_Boy said:

    Slovakia has a population of 5 million, but has made semis and finals of major tournaments. But then, unlike English speakers, their top atheletes are more than happy to play abroad.

    And Brazil is 200 million, Germany 80 million, France/Italy 60 million. By my reckoning the smallest countries to win are England/Spain Argentina on 45 million.

    If we competed as UK (rather than England) do you think we would have done better same or worse in major tournaments since 2000?
    Not sure there would be much difference between the England squad and a UK squad.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,593
    surrey_commuter said:

    Pross said:

    They get to pick from a bit more than the population though. There will always be Ashley Williams type players around - decent Premiership / Championship level players that have enough of a link to Wales but aren't good enough to get into an England squad. I'm not seeing the next player of the standard of Bale / Giggs / Hughes / Rush coming through though. Most of those who are actually on the books of a Premier League side seem to be loaned out at a lower level.

    your first point is a double edged sword as if they are good enough they could use a tenuous link to play for England.

    I think you are looking at life through rose tinted specs as two of those players hung their boots up more than 20 years ago.

    My point was that to have a good national team they would need the bulk of the team playing in the top leagues in Europe. With a population of 3 million and other sports competing for the best atheletes this is a big ask.
    First point generally doesn’t happen. Giggs could have had a huge number of England caps and played in numerous major championships but wasn’t eligible under the rules back then. It would be interesting to see what he would have done if the current rules were in place at the time of his debut.

    On the second point there was continuity from Rush / Hughes to Giggs and then Giggs to Bale so if Bale retires this will be the first time in my memory where Wales haven’t had a world class player.
  • crescent
    crescent Posts: 1,201
    Looks like the real Argentina turned up tonight. Quite impressive, albeit Poland were absolutely woeful.

    Does anyone else think the standard of shooting seems poor in this tournament? I can't believe the number of times I've seen the ball ballooned over the bar. Not just near misses, miles away. Strange.
    Bianchi ImpulsoBMC Teammachine SLR02 01Trek Domane AL3“When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. “ ~H.G. Wells Edit - "Unless it's a BMX"
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    crescent said:

    Looks like the real Argentina turned up tonight. Quite impressive, albeit Poland were absolutely woeful.

    Does anyone else think the standard of shooting seems poor in this tournament? I can't believe the number of times I've seen the ball ballooned over the bar. Not just near misses, miles away. Strange.

    Heard some complaints about the ball
    _
  • drhaggis
    drhaggis Posts: 1,150
    rick_chasey said:

    crescent said:

    Looks like the real Argentina turned up tonight. Quite impressive, albeit Poland were absolutely woeful.

    Does anyone else think the standard of shooting seems poor in this tournament? I can't believe the number of times I've seen the ball ballooned over the bar. Not just near misses, miles away. Strange.

    Heard some complaints about the ball
    Could this be related?

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/11/the-world-cup-ball-has-the-aerodynamics-of-a-champion/2/
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 9,108
    I bought a Pro level football once - it was a Bundesliga winter ball (probably Adidas) which was a second due to errors with the graphics so it was ~£45 instead of well over £100. The thing flew noticeably faster than a standard £15-£20 Sunday league match ball, I wasn't expecting to notice it but just kicking it backwards and forwards between two of you you had to get used to the speed it was on you.

    I'm not convinced it makes for a better game - my team didn't like using it because it was harder to control - maybe just because they weren't used to that level of ball. Every tournament though the ball is faster than the previous.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • crescent
    crescent Posts: 1,201
    I daresay it is meant to make the game faster and/or more exciting, but if the best players in the world are struggling to adjust to it then it kind of defeats the purpose. Interesting article above though, I do remember hearing similar complaints about the Jabulani ball, back in 2010 WC I think.
    Need to go back to the days of the old leather bladder with laces. And jerseys for goalposts obviously.
    Bianchi ImpulsoBMC Teammachine SLR02 01Trek Domane AL3“When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. “ ~H.G. Wells Edit - "Unless it's a BMX"
  • MidlandsGrimpeur2
    MidlandsGrimpeur2 Posts: 2,127
    I bought a Pro level football once - it was a Bundesliga winter ball (probably Adidas) which was a second due to errors with the graphics so it was ~£45 instead of well over £100. The thing flew noticeably faster than a standard £15-£20 Sunday league match ball, I wasn't expecting to notice it but just kicking it backwards and forwards between two of you you had to get used to the speed it was on you.


    I did the same years back and took it to a training session. It was like watching a bunch of toddlers chase around after a rubber bouncing ball! It was handy though for seeing who had good technique, the better players got used to the feel and pace of it quickly, the less skilled just couldn't control it accurately.
  • MidlandsGrimpeur2
    MidlandsGrimpeur2 Posts: 2,127
    I have to agree. As a Scot, the current Wales situation all looks very familiar i.e. qualifying for a major tournament is basically the target and anything beyond that is a very unlikely bonus due to a lack of genuine world class players.


    Home nations and Ireland have always had a fair share of good quality Premier League players, which just doesn't seem to happen as much these days. As per the conversations above I wonder why this is? Is youth participation not as high any more so less and less are coming through into the professional game?

    Could also be something around club/academy scouting perhaps? Greater emphasis on looking to Europe and beyond to find talent and less scouting done around the UK.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,593
    MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

    I have to agree. As a Scot, the current Wales situation all looks very familiar i.e. qualifying for a major tournament is basically the target and anything beyond that is a very unlikely bonus due to a lack of genuine world class players.


    Home nations and Ireland have always had a fair share of good quality Premier League players, which just doesn't seem to happen as much these days. As per the conversations above I wonder why this is? Is youth participation not as high any more so less and less are coming through into the professional game?

    Could also be something around club/academy scouting perhaps? Greater emphasis on looking to Europe and beyond to find talent and less scouting done around the UK.
    Easier to bring in players who have been developed abroad.
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,459
    The dorks at US polling aggregator, 538 politics also so sports forecasting

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-our-2022-world-cup-predictions-work/

    Current forecast below



    IIRC when the competition started they had England ranked 8th
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,459
    England have always been a last 8 team (imho).

    Getting to the semis a sucess, getting knocked out in the round of 16 a failure

    If they are going to win it they need to do what the women did - beat teams who are/have been better than they are
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Pross said:

    MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

    I have to agree. As a Scot, the current Wales situation all looks very familiar i.e. qualifying for a major tournament is basically the target and anything beyond that is a very unlikely bonus due to a lack of genuine world class players.


    Home nations and Ireland have always had a fair share of good quality Premier League players, which just doesn't seem to happen as much these days. As per the conversations above I wonder why this is? Is youth participation not as high any more so less and less are coming through into the professional game?

    Could also be something around club/academy scouting perhaps? Greater emphasis on looking to Europe and beyond to find talent and less scouting done around the UK.
    Easier to bring in players who have been developed abroad.
    Exactly, rather than fishing in a UK pool they are now fishing in a worldwide ocean
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    tailwindhome said:

    England have always been a last 8 team (imho).

    Getting to the semis a sucess, getting knocked out in the round of 16 a failure

    If they are going to win it they need to do what the women did - beat teams who are/have been better than they are

    I think worldwide we are 8-16 so I would argue last 16 is playing to par and quarters is us doing well
  • drhaggis
    drhaggis Posts: 1,150
    surrey_commuter said:

    tailwindhome said:

    England have always been a last 8 team (imho).

    Getting to the semis a sucess, getting knocked out in the round of 16 a failure

    If they are going to win it they need to do what the women did - beat teams who are/have been better than they are

    I think worldwide we are 8-16 so I would argue last 16 is playing to par and quarters is us doing well
    I feel the current team is better than a last-16 team. But then, football is life.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    drhaggis said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    tailwindhome said:

    England have always been a last 8 team (imho).

    Getting to the semis a sucess, getting knocked out in the round of 16 a failure

    If they are going to win it they need to do what the women did - beat teams who are/have been better than they are

    I think worldwide we are 8-16 so I would argue last 16 is playing to par and quarters is us doing well
    I feel the current team is better than a last-16 team. But then, football is life.
    That is where I see our long-term trend position but I would agree that currently we are top 8 and nudging top 4

Categories