It's all bent!

[ed skull murphy]

I wouldn't bet on the World Cup if it were the last game in town.

There is a lot of politics involved in who gets to host it, but more to the point, who gets to win it.

Do you really think that France were a superior team to Brazil in 1998?

Do you believe that England were a superior team to West Germany in 1966? Brazil were again denied a fair shot in that tournament.

How is it done? From what I have heard, the FIFA game officials are members of the funny handshake brigade, and are obliged to follow orders.

I am sorry if that ruffles a few feathers, but that is my surmisation of the psychological operation that is the FIFA World Cup.

 

[Cyclops]

Rugby

It's the only way for me don't enjoy football

 

[goatwack]

The 'best' team in tournaments is subjective, as there are many good teams competing.

France '98 wasn't a surprise as Brazil were over-reliant on Ronaldo (the proper one) and he was blatantly unwell for the big occasion.

England beating W. Germany, that could have gone either way, and you forget how partisan support can drive a team, much like France in, well, France '98.

If we were to analyze teams based on individual players and skills then Holland would have won about four WCs by now, not to mention Spain, Argentina etc.

There is certainly corruption at the higher levels of the game, namely in 'voting' for upcoming host nations and so forth, I mean Qatar 2022? Yeah sure, not politically or money- motivated rigging at all

And of course you'll have the odd player or even teams take the odd bung, that facet will never go away as long as there are humans....

But I don't believe actual WC games are rigged as such, personally. Just boring as hell....except watching England cock up in another spectacular Keystone Cops, Benny Hill sort of way

 

[Jono777]

Suppose its a refreshing change from another "slots are rigged" thread eh?

Talking of which............

 

[ed skull murphy]

Not saying it necessarily proves anything, but an interesting read, nonetheless.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[geordiecolin]

I wouldn't bet on the World Cup if it were the last game in town.

There is a lot of politics involved in who gets to host it, but more to the point, who gets to win it.

Do you really think that France were a superior team to Brazil in 1998?

Do you believe that England were a superior team to West Germany in 1966? Brazil were again denied a fair shot in that tournament.

How is it done? From what I have heard, the FIFA game officials are members of the funny handshake brigade, and are obliged to follow orders.

I am sorry if that ruffles a few feathers, but that is my surmisation of the psychological operation that is the FIFA World Cup.

There is no doubt that there is a lot of corruption and politics in football but I can not recall ever thinking "That game was rigged" in my adulthood. If I remember correctly there was a World Cup qualifier years ago where the group was already won but the team they played last in their group needed to win by something like 5 goals. Sure enough they managed to do it. Maybe someone older will remind me of which teams they where?
As for England winning the World Cup in 66 goes,I don't know because I was still in liquid form then

 

[ed skull murphy]

There is no doubt that there is a lot of corruption and politics in football but I can not recall ever thinking "That game was rigged" in my adulthood. If I remember correctly there was a World Cup qualifier years ago where the group was already won but the team they played last in their group needed to win by something like 5 goals. Sure enough they managed to do it. Maybe someone older will remind me of which teams they where?
As for England winning the World Cup in 66 goes,I don't know because I was still in liquid form then

I don't know about your first question, I gave up on the World Cup after the '98 final, which I watched at the home of a Brazilian (as one does... ), but it was just such a freakin' farce, I could no longer take any of it seriously.

In '66 I was gurgling in my crib, but having read the Guardian article, and knowing what I now know about the machinations of global politics and freemasonry, I wouldn't touch the World Cup with a barge pole.

I would neither risk my money on it nor waste my time watching it.

Of course, if you have the inside scoop from one of the funny handshake brigade, it might be worth a punt.

 

[goatwack]

I don't know about your first question, I gave up on the World Cup after the '98 final, which I watched at the home of a Brazilian (as one does... ), but it was just such a freakin' farce, I could no longer take any of it seriously.

In '66 I was gurgling in my crib, but having read the Guardian article, and knowing what I now know about the machinations of global politics and freemasonry, I wouldn't touch the World Cup with a barge pole.

I would neither risk my money on it nor waste my time watching it.

Of course, if you have the inside scoop from one of the funny handshake brigade, it might be worth a punt.

You need to get over Brazil's loss at WC '98 they don't have a God-given right to win everything just because they're the Canarinho!

Again, if you looked at France's squad they had many good players that year, and completely outplayed Brazil. It can happen

Brazil fluked their way to many a final themselves, and if you'd watched USA '94 you would have witnessed the most turgid Final I can remember, boring the pants off everyone with a 0-0 stalemate.

Apart from perhaps fleeting eyebrow raisers in the '70s + '80s where teams would eg play out draws to both qualify, there's not terribly much of that anymore, it's from a bygone era.

The games are just boring on the whole, and too many teams play defensively these days and rely on set-pieces. Just look at Greece's heroics a few years ago for reference!

 

[ed skull murphy]

I don't need to get over it, I was over it immediately in '98, that was the final straw.

Like I said, I would not waste another minute of my precious life on the FIFA World Cup.

What did you think of the Guardian piece, btw?

 

[goatwack]

Why was it the final straw? I really don't understand your disdain for that result or the actual World Cup games themselves o_O

 

[ed skull murphy]

There is more to it than a fair and square game of football, in my opinion, so what is the point of investing any more time in it? That is the reason for my abstinence, I wouldn't use the word disdain, that implies that I care.

What did you think of the Guardian article?

 

[mcgameboy]

There have been some very unsavoury episodes. Argentina v Peru in '78 (which cost Brazil a place in the final), West Germany v Austria in '82 (which cost Algeria a place in the second round), West Germany v France in '82 (the game where a French player got knocked out cold by Schumacher, the German goalie (does Schumacher mean "unsportmanlike" in German?) and Argentina v England in '86 (hand of Diego). So the first three WCs I ever saw, there was a team in the final who got there "by foul means". At least, that's how I saw it. Jesus, I've just realised I became a cynic at the age of 6.

 

[ed skull murphy]

There have been some very unsavoury episodes. Argentina v Peru in '78 (which cost Brazil a place in the final), West Germany v Austria in '82 (which cost Algeria a place in the second round), West Germany v France in '82 (the game where a French player got knocked out cold by Schumacher, the German goalie (does Schumacher mean "unsportmanlike" in German?) and Argentina v England in '86 (hand of Diego). So the first three WCs I ever saw, there was a team in the final who got there "by foul means". At least, that's how I saw it. Jesus, I've just realised I became a cynic at the age of 6.

No 'Schumacher' means 'Cobbler', or should that be Cobblers!

Yeah, i know, I can't be arsed with it anymore, there are more important things in this life.

 

[JamberWakar]

I'm really enjoying reading these comments. Thank you guys for spreading some of your knowledge.

 

[geordiecolin]

I'll predict that Nigeria will make the Semi Finals and the winners will be European. Either Germany or England. I don't see any outstanding South american teams competing this year and the climate will not suit them so much

 

[geordiecolin]

Huh? I posted my World Cup predictions and they didn't post?

Edit. This thread is not showing up on the forum admin

 

[goatwack]

I'll predict that Nigeria will make the Semi Finals and the winners will be European. Either Germany or England. I don't see any outstanding South american teams competing this year and the climate will not suit them so much

What? What?

Nigeria? England to win?????????????

It'll be the usual suspects like it is every time. Actually come to think of it, maybe Ed Skull had a point........

Brazil should be fine as many of their players compete in European leagues, Argentina should be the same, but that defence of theirs

 

[GamblingQueen]

What? What?

Nigeria? England to win?????????????

It'll be the usual suspects like it is every time. Actually come to think of it, maybe Ed Skull had a point........

Brazil should be fine as many of their players compete in European leagues, Argentina should be the same, but that defence of theirs

Yeah, I really don't see England or Nigeria getting very far. A safer bet is Brazil/Spain/Germany.

 

[Biti]

We here those talks about Nigeria and England every four year, but they fail every tournament.

If France, Germany, Brazil and Spain win their groups (or become all 2nd), they can meet each other at earliest in the QF. I would bet on those 4 in the semi finals. Sure, some countries might surprise, but surprising 5 matches is very difficult.

For other teams it's a bit about form, how their key players perform and if they can keep all their stars happy with just 11 places on the field.

Outsiders?
If CR7 is good, Portugal might be a challenger for the semi finals. If not, I do not see them coming any further than QF. Argentina and Messi doesn't seem to be a good combination. He's still waiting for the first World Cup he's accelerating. Argentina lacks the quality that the four top favourtes are having, however it's a tough team. But, it's also possible that they fail to qualify in their group.

Colombia? A bit over-rated in my opinion. They have the luck of a not too heavy group, but next round against Engeland or Belgium is already a coin flip for them. 2nd round, max QF.

Talking about England and Belgium. Belgium perhaps got the best squad if you look just to the names. But the problem seem to be the same as in Euro 2016 and Brazil 2014. It's still no team, but a bunch of individuals. I don't see them beating any of the four top teams. Engeland has an average squad, game against Colombia would already be a coin flip. I don't see them beating Brazil, Germany of Spain.

Hosts Russia have the luck of being head of the weakest group. However they have a very average team, they could qualify. Don't see them winning against Spain or Portugal in the 2nd round.

Teams like Nigeria, Croatia, Switzerland, Mexico, Poland... they could surprise in one or two matches, but that's it. They need a bit of luck. Peru for example, if they qualify and somehow avoid Argentina it's QF already. With a surprise against f.e. Portugal, they could reach the semi final. But it means that they need to surprise against the head of the group, win two coin flips, avoid the head of the other group and surprise in another match.