Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

Football 2022/23


charlierc

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I know I'm in the minority, but one odd thing is the timing and I personally think that has benefited the tournament. A lot of the talk about moving it was just because of "this is the way we have always done it" rather than sporting merit. Lack of/ more expensive alcohol has been a good thing. I also get the impression looking at the crowds it's a bit less segregated and why shouldn't fans of other clubs sit next to each other and not fight.

In terms of quality it is to me lacking the top class players in/near their peak and that is why I favour France 98. An example being I would only take Mbappe, Griezmann and Lloris from this team to that one. 

I also am not a fan of the one city thing. I think part of the appeal of the world cup is the culture different cities in one country bring to a tournament. Saying that I wouldn't want to go the route of Euro 2021 which just seemed like random countries with no link.

I imagine that as this has been the first through the gate, we might well see another winter World Cup in our lifetimes. Where is the other question - there's a lot of talk we could get a 2030 Saudi Arabian World Cup but I'm not sure if they'd go back to the Middle East so soon (I thought there was a rule on confederations not being allowed to host the next 2 World Cups after?), to say nothing of the oddity of them co-hosting with Egypt and Greece, which would be FIFA's first multi-confederation World Cup.

I agree that last year's Euros were a bit of a sprawling mess, though the same is there for the 2026 WC - I still think it could be held even with the enlarged number by one of Mexico or the USA. If nothing else, it has proven it can be done, but it has given it a strange unreality, to say nothing of the waste of building up 8 stadiums within 40 miles then tearing them all down straight after. Carbon neutral my arse.

That argument is as much a club football thing tbf. Maybe the emotion that goes into club football is a bit over-wrought and stripped of that, it could be possible for fans of both sides to sit with one another without causing a shitstorm. But that's the world we've built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, charlierc said:

To say nothing of the waste of building up 8 stadiums within 40 miles then tearing them all down straight after. Carbon neutral my arse.

Carbon neutral is bullshit. It's mostly just a way for rich people to buy their way into claiming to be environmentally friendly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kaosmark2 said:

Carbon neutral is bullshit. It's mostly just a way for rich people to buy their way into claiming to be environmentally friendly.

Well I'm aware a lot of how this is being done hangs on carbon offsets or carbon credits, even if the evidence is piling up that these don't work as intended and in some cases make it worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, charlierc said:

Well I'm aware a lot of how this is being done hangs on carbon offsets or carbon credits, even if the evidence is piling up that these don't work as intended and in some cases make it worse.

I definitely think on this case it's made it worse, as FIFA are claiming this is the first Carbon neutral tournament, when literally that just means more money has been spent. 

Offsets can be relevant on the mid size scale, where companies do it as a bridge while working out how to stop paying, but in general, I think it's irrelevant bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

Is all the discussion about whether Maddison would make the England squad or not, a perfect example of how pointless the debate is on the people who make up the numbers in an international squad.

I think with international football and England in particular that there seems to be a constant discussion that whomever isn't in the team at that point must be the silver bullet that'll guarantee success.

Obviously there's no guarantee in what turned out to be a 5 game tournament for England that everyone is gonna get used. I think Maddison was worth a run out at some point given his excellent form at Leicester so far this season, but it is what it is. Certainly, it turned out to be a huge debate for nothing in the end. Same as well with whether to take Conor Gallagher over James Ward-Prowse, given Gallagher went but didn't feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a discussion a few pages ago on the merits of 16x3 or 12x4 for the structure of the 2026 World Cup - turns out FIFA now have their own doubts about pursuing the 3 team group model and are planning to review it but only after the final round of this group stage got so twisty and turny.

Much as it brings back the oddity that is best 3rd place teams going through as we have at the Euros since they expanded to 24, I think it's the lesser of two evils.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

So are people watching BBC or ITV today. I always watched BBC because of lack of adverts, but I think ITV coverage has overtaken them. I jumped to ITV last world cup and will stay with them today.

Deffo ITV - they have a better panel - who wants to hear Lineker, Shearer & Ferdinand droning on? And don't get me started on co-commentator Jermaine fucking Jenas!!!!!! 😬

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Punksnotdead said:

Deffo ITV - they have a better panel - who wants to hear Lineker, Shearer & Ferdinand droning on? And don't get me started on co-commentator Jermaine fucking Jenas!!!!!! 😬

This

Plus ITV have Ian Wright, possibly the best pundit around

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Amazingly France got past England and Morocco who both played better.

You look at France and then were the most hit by injuries before the world cup and possibly the team most hit by injuries and rotation during the world cup. This has resulted in Giroud playing 3 difficult games in 8 days and I think overall the squad has been stretched to breaking point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...