World Cup Final
- Thread starter Fk_Pitt
- Start date
Croatia vs Brazil was the upset of the tournament or maybe biggest upset at the world cup in maybe 20 years or so. Went to PK's. and 2 goals in the final 10 minutes of the 2nd overtime was a huge game of emotions. Both goals were great plays.
Argentina vs Holland, went to pk's, very thrilling. 2 Dutch goals to tie it up late. Great goals and game.
Japan winning their group and stealing the group over Spain. Saudi Arabia beating Argentina. Germany going out early. Morocco the first african team in the final 4, ever.
England / France was good too.
I thought it was a great world cup to be honest.
And you have just named all of the good games.
If at the end of the tournament you name all the good games and the list comes to about a half a dozen that not only isn't great, it's not really all that good.
Maybe, but Brazil was the heavy favorite going into this tournament. And going into this tournament they were ranked #1 in the world and were blowing teams away on the field the way a #1 ranked team should look.
I’m not mr soccer by any stretch but I thought Argentina was actually #1. Whether they were the betting favorite I haven’t a clue.
And don’t get me wrong I know Brazil is an absolute powerhouse and absolutely nobody would have been the least bit surprised had they won. But I’m pretty sure there was a discussion on this board of how Arg was #1 and that they’d been on a lengthy winning streak.
In the octos you had the US game, Argentina's win, Brazil's win, England's, France's and Portugal's that were all relatively boring. Only two good games, Japan-Croatia and Morocco-Spain. The quarters were all good games. The semis were completely uninteresting. The final was great. Even the 3rd place game was kind of a snooze, especially the second half.
So 15 games in the knockouts and seven of them were good, or if you prefer, seven of 16.
By the pretournament betting favorites, 14 of the 16 teams that made the knockout rounds were favored to do so. This tournament was great if you love chalk. If you like upsets you got a couple big ones, and then not a whole lot else.
So 15 games in the knockouts and seven of them were good, or if you prefer, seven of 16.
By the pretournament betting favorites, 14 of the 16 teams that made the knockout rounds were favored to do so. This tournament was great if you love chalk. If you like upsets you got a couple big ones, and then not a whole lot else.
Brazil was #1 followed by Belgium. Argentina was #3. Those are Fifa rankings and outdated as anyone that follows soccer just a little knew Belgium really wasn't a strong #2 going into this tournament.
In terms of going back to the last world cup in every international match before this world cup started, meaning, between the last world cup in 2018 all the way to the start date of this world cup, I think Brazil lost once out of all matches total which is a ridiculous run. Argentina was strong too, they only lost a few times I believe.
The difference is, Brazil was repeatedly beating people 3-0, 4-1, 4-0 etc.. going into this tournament. They were the betting favorite and the most feared team by a considerable margin, with all due respect to Messi and Argentina.
Ok thanks I guess I had that wrong. I’m still fairly clueless although I’ve learned some stuff. But what I know at this point could probably stil fit in the proverbial thimble.
I haven’t followed much of the international stuff until the last few months so I’m especially out of my league there.
Argentina entered the world cup on something like a 34 or 36 match unbeaten streak. Several of those were games against Brazil.
I'm crediting the victory to my Maradona votive candle. I had it at the bar all game but put it on the bar when the game went to extra time and another Argentina fan suggested we light it for good luck. Guess it worked.
Because they don't play in Europe, people underestimated Argentina. The Saudi Arabia loss was their only loss in the last three years. They didn't have as many big names as in the past but Scaloni did a great job of putting the pieces together around Messi. He also wasn't afraid to play young guys like Alvarez, Fernandez, and Mac Allister who aren't far removed from the Argentina league.
Lost in a lot of the late game drama was how good Di Maria was early on. He wasn't 100 percent going in so he just went all out in the first half, knowing he could get subbed out later on. He also had the goal in the Copa America which gave Messi his first Argentina trophy
Because they don't play in Europe, people underestimated Argentina. The Saudi Arabia loss was their only loss in the last three years. They didn't have as many big names as in the past but Scaloni did a great job of putting the pieces together around Messi. He also wasn't afraid to play young guys like Alvarez, Fernandez, and Mac Allister who aren't far removed from the Argentina league.
Lost in a lot of the late game drama was how good Di Maria was early on. He wasn't 100 percent going in so he just went all out in the first half, knowing he could get subbed out later on. He also had the goal in the Copa America which gave Messi his first Argentina trophy
I looked it up.
Brazil has lost twice since the last world cup. Both games were against Argentina. Brazil lost 1 game since 2019.
Argentina lost 3 times since the last world cup. 1 loss was to Brazil. Argentina's last loss was also in 2019.
So, both were quite impressive
Argentina caught a big break with Brazil losing. Not that they couldn't have beaten them but it would have been a lot more taxing than their win against a spent Croatia team. Also prevented us from what may have been an epic semi
I had France winning until we realized that they wouldn’t have Kante and benzema.
We all knew Belgium was only #2 on paper and were 4 years past their window.
So I had Argentina and Brazil as my favorites, and I stupidly picked Brazil because of their star power.
What we learned is the most talented teams don’t always win and the better coached ones often do. Or maybe the teams that have a little something more to play for. And that team was Argentina.
And why would that be? In reality the NFL does a good job selling the game around the world, but most of the world isn’t buying it. They don’t understand all the stoppages. It’s too slow for everyone else. Although Germany and England seem to be places where the sport has a chance to grow.
I dont follow soccer all that close but I do keep up with the 2 major tournaments of the world cup and European Championship and do know what teams are doing going into these tournaments.
My final 4 prediction before the knockout bracket was completed was the same exact final 4 as 1998 with Holland, Brazil, France, Croatia and it was actually pretty close. Croatia was red hot going into this world cup as evidence of what they did to France and Denmark earlier this summer. Why everyone underestimated them once again is beyond me.
The team I underestimated was Argentina. I really thought they would get upset early again and it almost happened in group play.
Yeah I would not call Argentina better coached. A better coached team doesnt twice give up 2-0 leads.
1. The cost of gear to begin organized teams is high. 2. Culture plays a large part in it, kids in __________ want to play soccer, their fathers, grandfathers, played soccer 3. No coaches to teach the game at the middle-high /school level.
Now I would submit to you, these are good reasons. Also number 2 and 3 above are the reasons that Men's soccer in the USA finds itself undistinguished on the world stage, IMO. Of course time may change this, but I know of at least three rural PA schools that have dropped boys soccer in the last 8 years or so. I am sure in more affluent areas the kids actually have people who played soccer coaching but not so in the areas I am familiar with.......
The World Cup final was absolutely riveting, btw, one(more) thing I don't understand is why all the teams don't play as aggressively as Argentina did when they controlled the ball, it made for an exciting game.
“The World Cup final was absolutely riveting, btw, one(more) thing I don't understand is why all the teams don't play as aggressively as Argentina did when they controlled the ball, it made for an exciting game.”
Because they are prone to run out of gas late, just like Argentina did yesterday.
Because they are prone to run out of gas late, just like Argentina did yesterday.
Then this tells me that soccer / futbol would be a far more exciting sport if there were more liberal substitution rules..
They’re liberal now.
Because of the World Cup being held mid club season, they changed the substitution rule to 5 subs per game instead of 3. Decades ago there were no subs, or 1 sub per game. So you can see how the game has evolved.
The problem with 5 subs is that it’s a significant advantage for the deeper teams. So it’s a way that the big teams continue to win more often and less upsets occur.
Soccer is known as the most "democratic" of sports. Meaning, keep it close, those without the resources and talents can keep themselves in the game moreso than most sports. I mean, remember the Dream Team in hoops, the opponents never had a chance even if the US was playing with 4 guys.
You always have close games and some weird "results". But I always find it fascinating that like most sports, the cream usually rises in the end and the champs are as much blue blood, or even moreso, than any other sport champion.
There! Look at Owt with the big brain soccer observation!!!
You always have close games and some weird "results". But I always find it fascinating that like most sports, the cream usually rises in the end and the champs are as much blue blood, or even moreso, than any other sport champion.
There! Look at Owt with the big brain soccer observation!!!
How do you decide "the biggest game in the world" with a shoot out? If you're not going to do sudden death with an OT goal, keep playing. At least hockey has the sense to put away the gimmick for the playoffs. It's a let down after 2-hours of pretty entertaining game play.
And I know the soccer guys will have an explanation as to why that's okay but I think having one of the best players on the planet winning the game with the OT goal would have been a hell of a walk-off type of moment.
And I know the soccer guys will have an explanation as to why that's okay but I think having one of the best players on the planet winning the game with the OT goal would have been a hell of a walk-off type of moment.
I’d say having the two best on the field doing what they did in regulation, overtime, and PKs does all that and more. The 2-0 lead turns into 2-2, Messi takes it to 3-2 and Mbappe tied it up 3-3. I mean you can’t script that at all and it happened. Would it have been awesome to see Messi dribble through the entire team, pass it off and receive a cross and score on a bicycle kick with 1 second left, sure, but what these teams did was take it to the absolute last second and left it all on the pitch. You then put it on the 1 v 1 goalie vs shooter. It’s drama you can never match in any other sport. There is no equivalent because of what is at stake and the history of the sport. The only thing close would be extra innings of the world series if the World Series was held once every 4 years and one game per round. And fairly even teams from every continent competing with Joe DiMaggio at bat and roger Clemons pitching.
I get everything you're saying but having the world series come down to a HR derby type of format would be a terrible way to pick the winner. Drama and all aside, it's not a great way to decide such a big game.
They have to end it. 130 minutes of soccer has to come to an end at some point or the players would be dropping over dead or open themselves up to injuries.
I understand we as Americans want to change it. We think we know best. But the game is what it is
You have 26 players on a roster. Besides, you had a goal in OT that could have ended it. Why keep playing?
It’s just the way it is. Managers would continue to play their best players til they dropped. Plus, teams would probably put all 10 of their outfield players inside the defending third of the field and play for the counter attacking goal. That could go on for hours.
Why not sudden death though? "extra time" should be divided into 15 minute periods until the "Golden Goal". Sometimes, you know this, an inferior team will just sit back and pack it in and try to survive until penalties because there it is more of a coinflip. (this was obviously not the case yesterday) With a Golden Goal, a team has to score, at some point they have to at least try and that would eliminate just 30 minutes of extra time turtling.
All you soccer experts, a question. What did you think about the way the additional time was added throughout the tourney? I have never seen such time added. Maybe 5-6 minutes, but never 8-9 which seemed to run into 10 minutes or more. I am not complaining, just wondering your thoughts?
I like it because if they stay consistent with it, you might see less blatant stalling tactics.
Again though, we think we know best as Americans, and you know what, we probably do. But they should keep the time on the scoreboard and not let the referee be the arbiter of time. But that’s another world football thing that they’re likely never gonna change.
Btw that referee yesterday was phenomenal. Best example was the yellow card in the box he issued to the player who tried to draw a penalty. In real time I swore it was a foul. Then on replay you see the player leave his leg hanging out there hoping for contact. The ref made the right call. It needs to be called more often by refs. But at the same time, for him to see it at full speed…wow. He was on his game.
I do not know because you cannot tell why time is added. In all timed sports there are legit ways to stall. In soccer I do not have a clue when a ref is adding time. All of that being said most time that is added is because of VAR.
It was well officiated. What always worries me about the US if it ever gets its act together and gets into these type of situations, because so much is on the whim of a referee and I know most of the world does not want the US to do well in soccer as we tend to influence everything and this is truly "their game", I am worried about officiating that would make the match in the movie Victory with Sly Stallone and Michael Caine look fair in comparison.
Hah. I never thought of that. The world truly does hate soccer. Lol.
It was a great game and all that but I hate to see a final end in PKs. So for me, I cant rank it among the best. What PKs says to me is "ok, the match has ended in a tie but we have to give one of you the trophy so we're going to flip a coin." I could see doing that in the earlier rounds because someone has to advance and you cant have them play for 6 hours and then play again 3 days later. But, for the final at least, I think it has to be Golden Goal, no PKs, perhaps unlimited subs after 30 minutes. Maybe even allow earlier subs like Giroud to come back in after 30 or so minutes. People talk about the excitement of OT hockey in the playoffs, and it certainly is exciting, there's a reason they dont settle playoff games in shootouts. I want to see the WC won on a real goal. Imagine the scenes you'd see forever if Messi or Mbappe scored the golden goal yesterday?
Very fair points. Because it is a final, I could see that. I don’t know how influential the clubs are…but I’m sure PSG wouldn’t want Messi and Mbappe or any other player they pay 500K per week salary to to be playing an Extra time international match that goes on for 4 hours.
Well normally, the next club game would be in 6 weeks. You could devise a set of rules to ensure no one plays for 4 hours.
First off, knowing its golden goal and knowing there arent no PKs, teams cannot "play for penalties." So teams would be incented to be more offensive. Also, once the game hits 120 minutes, maybe you take like a 20 minute break, take 1 player off the field, allow everyone back in (unless red-carded) and you're essentially playing a new game. 10v10. First one to score wins. Unlimited subs, players can come out and go back in. Maybe Messi sits for 10 minutes and comes back in. That would be a more just way to end a final.
Last edited:
And in very European fashion, several French black players have been receiving racial remarks to their social media accounts. Europe has a significant racial issue and many soccer players get racial attacks during games. Far worse behavior then what we get here towards athletes.
Everyone should be verified on social media. These euro punks wouldn’t say sh!t if their name was attached to it.
