World Cup

[Cristo Meyers]

And thus the Russian fairy tale ends. Live by the PK, die by the PK.

I thought they might pull it out near the end, they may not have gotten a lot of attacking opportunities but it sure seemed like they made better use of them. Croatia was better on the ball by far, but that only gets you to the net. Still have to finish.

I wonder if the Croatian players are going to be 100% for their match against England. It looked like about three players all dropped right when they went into extra time. Going into a match against England with their backup goalkeeper would be a blow.

[Mordokai]

And thus the Russian fairy tale ends. Live by the PK, die by the PK.

I thought they might pull it out near the end, they may not have gotten a lot of attacking opportunities but it sure seemed like they made better use of them. Croatia was better on the ball by far, but that only gets you to the net. Still have to finish.

I wonder if the Croatian players are going to be 100% for their match against England. It looked like about three players all dropped right when they went into extra time. Going into a match against England with their backup goalkeeper would be a blow.

I, for one, hope Croatia blows it in the next match.

While I don't care for politics one way or the other, they have been insufferable as neighbors so far... imagine what will happen if they actually win WC.

[Scarlet Knight]

Right, so how does this go again... *consults notes and clears throat*

TWO-NIL, TO THE ENGER-LAND, TWO-NIL, TO THE ENGER-LAND (repeat indefinitely).

*The following statement is based on fictional movies and television shows. Any resemblence to real people (living, dead, or dying) is purely coincidental.*

If England does win, I suggest you don't take the trophy without checking it first with a Geiger counter.

[Tentreto]

I've kept off any optimism until now, as its England, but come on England! We actually have a good enough team to have a chance.

I am kinda hoping the final is England Belgium though, just so we can see what happens when both teams decide to play.



As for Russia, they got far further than anyone expected. Beating Spain and reaching the top 8 is certainly something to be proud of. And they pushed Croatia hard enough that England might have an easier time.

[Aedilred]

Not at all sorry to see Russia go out, personally. I think they made it further than they deserved, even.

I can see England beating Croatia. Two games going to penalties in a row is tough on the players and they look knackered, plus they're a bit older than England's anyway. Both teams have ridden their luck quite a bit and I think it will be tight.

This is also the stage in the tournament where strength in depth tends to become a bit more important and England's subs bench is poor. They have managed to avoid suspensions, but niggles or injuries do take their toll and I worry as soon as England have to start making substitutions. Other than Rashford's cameo in the first game, since which he's been a disappointment, only Loftus-Cheek outside the starting XI has really had any impact. I think Croatia are better-equipped in that department.

I can't see either side beating France or Belgium as things stand, but both those teams appear capable of melting down.

[farothel]

Drinks: check
food: check
TV: double check
Ready for Belgium-France

[GloatingSwine]

Dammit, Belgium let me down, they've let their mums down, and they've let themselves down.

[farothel]

And the referee let them down as well. There was one foul just outside the 16 they should have gotten.

[LeSwordfish]

So who is the smart money on for England/Croatia tomorrow?

[Rogar Demonblud]

The 'smart money' would've said England would lose in the quarters once it went to PKs.

Much as it might be fun to watch yet another Anglo-French War, I'm hoping for Croatia to keep up their winning ways.

[comicshorse]

Much as it might be fun to watch yet another Anglo-French War, I'm hoping for Croatia to keep up their winning ways.

A chance to best the 'Auld Enemy' without blood being spilled

Well only a little

[Tentreto]

Welp, so much for the rematch in the final, but France had such a good backline that Belgium couldn't do much.

As for England Croatia, it depends which teams turn up. If its the Croatia who beat Argentina and maybe Russia, it will be too close to call. Anything else, England should win.

But this is England here...

[Gwynfrid]

Well, now there's a chance of the final being a rematch of the epic France-Croatia semifinal in '98.

[otakuryoga]

damnit Belgium you were supposed to send those frogs packing
o well, i was going to be rooting for the winner of Croatia/England in the Final either way

[Cristo Meyers]

damnit Belgium you were supposed to send those frogs packing
o well, i was going to be rooting for the winner of Croatia/England in the Final either way

*Gribbit, in tones of victory*

Though I find myself drawn to the possibility of an England win, too, honestly.

[Rogar Demonblud]

And for the third game in a row, Croatia is headed for extra time.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Croatia may have the better score, but the real winners today were Belgium and France. The players look like they couldn't summon the pep to get out of the way of a geriatric tortoise.

[GloatingSwine]

Yeah, I don't see Croatia beating France.

Then again I don't think England would have beaten France either, and at least this means we don't have to lose to France.

[Tentreto]

Well, this was not unexpected, but it is brutal to lose when you're leading at half time. England were brilliant first half, but beyond that, it was amost all Croatia.
At the very least, we get a true rematch with Belgium, to prove who is actually better when they try, and England fans can at least support Croatia to win.

And lets be honest, most of us were thinking we wouldn't make it out of the group stage...

[Aedilred]

A chance to best the 'Auld Enemy' without blood being spilled

Well only a little

The Auld Enemy is Scotland, surely? Or rather, England is Scotland's "Auld Enemy". Scotland is England's annoying little brother.

[Scarlet Knight]

My winner is Croatia

Every 20 years, the cup winner is someone who never one before...mostly.

[paddyfool]

Incidentally, this will be Croatia's first ever world cup final (and France's third).

[Wraith]

The Auld Enemy is Scotland, surely? Or rather, England is Scotland's "Auld Enemy". Scotland is England's annoying little brother.

Especially when it comes to football...

Scotland hate England.
England hate Germany.
Germany hate the Netherlands.
The Netherlands hate Belgium.
Belgium... hasn't ever gotten this far in a tournament before, so I'm not sure about them. It might as well be England too, by Saturday.

[paddyfool]

I think Belgium see the Netherlands and France as their main rivals. And from a little googling, I understand that the French see Italy as their rival, Italy sees Brazil as their rival, and Brazil in turn sees its rivals as being Germany and Argentina...

Finally Argentina, to take us almost full circle, has only one team they might relish beating as much as Brazil, and that's England.

EDIT: incidentally, what do the rest of you make of this analysis?

Reasons to be optimistic about England's men's football team for future tournaments:
- Young team
- Did well this time
- Team play as a team
- They appear to have a decent manager
- England won the world under-20 and world under-17 cups last year, so presumably there are more good players coming up

Reasons to be pessimistic:
- Crushing weight of unrealistic expectation may be expected to restart now
- Perhaps a bit overdependent on (a) Kane or (b) set pieces so far as actually scoring goals
- They were a little lucky in the teams they faced
- They're England

[Rogar Demonblud]

The last point is probably the key one. It's hard to shake a legacy.

[Gwynfrid]

I think Belgium see the Netherlands and France as their main rivals. And from a little googling, I understand that the French see Italy as their rival, Italy sees Brazil as their rival, and Brazil in turn sees its rivals as being Germany and Argentina...

Finally Argentina, to take us almost full circle, has only one team they might relish beating as much as Brazil, and that's England.

The French love to beat Germany too. Problem is, they rarely pull that off.

EDIT: incidentally, what do the rest of you make of this analysis?

Reasons to be optimistic about England's men's football team for future tournaments:
- Young team
- Did well this time
- Team play as a team
- They appear to have a decent manager
- England won the world under-20 and world under-17 cups last year, so presumably there are more good players coming up

Reasons to be pessimistic:
- Crushing weight of unrealistic expectation may be expected to restart now
- Perhaps a bit overdependent on (a) Kane or (b) set pieces so far as actually scoring goals
- They were a little lucky in the teams they faced
- They're England

They didn't beat any serious contender for the top: They met two, and lost both times. Their achievements were performing honorably, avoiding falling apart, and beating incredibly depressed expectations. There's nothing wrong with that, but there's nothing extraordinarily good either. Next time, the bar will be much higher.

[Aedilred]

Every 20 years, the cup winner is someone who never one before...mostly.

Depends when you start the count.

The first World Cup was in 1930 and was won by the de facto defending champions*. Twenty years later was 1950, when they won it again. In 1970 it was won by Brazil, for the third time, and in 1990 by West Germany, also for the third time. 2010 was the first time a new winner appeared on that cycle.

Years ending in 4 started promisingly, with two fresh winners in 34 and 54. But then 74, 94 and 14 saw Brazil and Germany claim more titles each. The same goes for years ending in 6**, which saw England win their title in 66 followed by Argentina in 86 (second title) and Italy in 06 (fourth).

Years ending in 2** are a total washout. Brazil (second), Italy (third), Brazil (fifth).

Now, if we start the count in years ending 8, we've had a new winner every twenty years except in 1938, when Italy won it for the second time.

So the "new winner every twenty years" only works on one twenty-year cycle and isn't wholly reliable there.

We've had first-time winners in 30, 34, 54, 58, 66, 78, 98 and 10. I can't see a pattern there but if anyone can spot one, feel free to flag it up!


There is no flawless barometer for determining winners based on historical precedent but only one team has ever won the World Cup before hosting one (five teams won their first title in a World Cup they were hosting). That was Germany in 54.

Croatia have never hosted and therefore France, having hosted twice, are massive favourites. Also, France are by some measure the better team I think. But that's largely irrelevant compared to historical patterns!


*This is not as silly as it sounds. The 1924 and 1928 Olympics were retrospectively counted as honorary world titles, which is why Uruguay wear four stars despite only having won the World Cup twice.
**Note that there was no WC in 1942 or 1946 so there are fewer tournaments on these cycles.

[Maelstrom]

I know FIFA is shady and all, but if someone is able to come up with a valid algorithm/pattern... well ;)

Anywhoo...glad it's Croatia vs France...makes for a better game with the two contrary styles. Honestly, I think England vs France would have been a bit of a snoozefest (I'm really loving watching Croatia play -- their ball control and movement is gorgeous!!)

[paddyfool]

Plus their strip makes them look like a team of Tardises with little red legs if you squint a little.

[farothel]

Belgium managed to get 3rd place. The highest they ever got. Next time world champion.