Football (World Cup 26)

[Skip997]

[charlierc]

22 minutes ago, lost said:

Yep

 

 

I'm more bemused how the preferred back-up option was Livramento, who spent most of last season injured. I know people have doubts on Alexander-Arnold's defensive nous, but surely its asking for trouble for those two to be your first choice options.

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, Skip997 said:

so it's anyone but England, because England are bunch of evil racist imperial bastards? Even Bukayo Saka?

[Skip997]

17 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

so it's anyone but England, because England are bunch of evil racist imperial bastards? Even Bukayo Saka?

1. I’m Irish, so yea anyone but England 

2. Seem the state of the average travelling English fan 

3. There’s no way I could support the likes of Pickford, Rice or Kane. Rooney, Terry etc in the past 

[steviewevie]

27 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

1. I’m Irish, so yea anyone but England 

2. Seem the state of the average travelling English fan 

3. There’s no way I could support the likes of Pickford, Rice or Kane. Rooney, Terry etc in the past 

Only 1. is reasonable..and even then not that much when you live here.

[steviewevie]

But I'm Australian so come on Panama.

[charlierc]

1 hour ago, Skip997 said:

1. I’m Irish, so yea anyone but England 

2. Seem the state of the average travelling English fan 

3. There’s no way I could support the likes of Pickford, Rice or Kane. Rooney, Terry etc in the past 

This diatribe made me think Pickford could've played for Ireland and that the third point was about Irish-eligible players choosing England instead... My bad. I know Rice and Grealish both did turn their back on Ireland after receiving caps and that Kane had Irish ancestry. 

Edited June 27 by charlierc

[lost]

Weren't Liverpool founded by a conservative and unionist MP with an unoffical ban on Irish catholics  till Ronnie Whelan signed in 1979?

 

Seema bit strange to do the whole I'm irish thing then support the Glasgow rangers of England.

Edited June 27 by lost

[lost]

42 minutes ago, charlierc said:

This diatribe made me think Pickford could've played for Ireland and that the third point was about Irish-eligible players choosing England instead... My bad. I know Rice and Grealish both did turn their back on Ireland after receiving caps and that Kane had Irish ancestry. 

 

Wayne Rooney too. Some of Englands best have been Irish Catholic desent. 

Edited June 27 by lost

[charlierc]

16 minutes ago, lost said:

 

Wayne Rooney too. Some of Englands best have been Irish Catholic desent. 

The reverse is true as well though, right? Several Irish players in the teams that qualified for major tournaments in the 80s/90s could've played for England.

[thetime]

25 minutes ago, charlierc said:

The reverse is true as well though, right? Several Irish players in the teams that qualified for major tournaments in the 80s/90s could've played for England.

 

I am sure Townshend, cascarino and co would of chosen England if they had the chance. 

[steviewevie]

England are sh*t.

[steviewevie]

England are going to win the World Cup 

[charlierc]

On 25/06/2026 at 09:43, balti-pie said:

Scotland have been a bit hard done by, but they've also been really short of quality - obviously up front, No squad with Lyndon Dykes in it deserves to progress - but also defensively, they're just not technically good enough to keep the ball. No shame in it, they just plain dont have good enough footballers. I wont throw stones at them, Ireland have exactly the same problem at the mo. Some decent players here and there, and a whole lot of nothing alas. Getting to a tournament is a kind of success in itself, i know thats small time. But countries of under 7m population are quite small. 

 

Ive long thought it was mega harsh that they have both Andy Robertson and Kieran Tierney at left back - they're both very much good enough, why cant one be right footed?  That'd be an excellent pair of full backs. But no, two left backs and a gaping chasm at right back . . . . unfair! 

Just seen Steve Clarke has resigned as manager, having only signed a new contract through to the next World Cup the week this tournament started.

 

I think history will be kind on the fact he got them to 3 in the last 4 tournaments, even if it's the case that it looks like it all just ran out of steam and its time for a change. Whether anyone else could've got more with this bunch of players in a group that featured 2 of the top 10 in the current world rankings (for what the FIFA World Rankings actually mean) is another matter.

[charlierc]

9 hours ago, steviewevie said:

England are going to win the World Cup 

I'm not convinced myself. Reasonable enough going forward but the defence has a flimsy vibe to it.

 

The path is very interesting tbf - DR Congo in the next round is certainly an easier-on-paper test than Portugal, which would've been the opponent in the group had England drew with Panama and finished second. But assuming Mexico beat Ecuador, a following round tie against Mexico in Mexico City is going to be intense. Mexico aren't the best on paper but high altitude with most of the 70,000+ crowd being against England will be quite an experience as it's a proper away game. And the reward for that will probably be a quarter final against one of Brazil, Japan or Norway (well unless Ivory Coast rug-pull all of them). Those all look like being a hurdle and a half.

[steviewevie]

Heartbreak for Iran

[pink_triangle]

44 minutes ago, charlierc said:

Just seen Steve Clarke has resigned as manager, having only signed a new contract through to the next World Cup the week this tournament started.

 

I think history will be kind on the fact he got them to 3 in the last 4 tournaments, even if it's the case that it looks like it all just ran out of steam and its time for a change. Whether anyone else could've got more with this bunch of players in a group that featured 2 of the top 10 in the current world rankings (for what the FIFA World Rankings actually mean) is another matter.

Interesting for all the talk about goal difference, it made no difference to Scotland in the end. Following the 1-0 at Haiti they would have needed a point to get through.

[balti-pie]

I think it’s good that the third placed sides pretty much all needed results in at least two games to go through - it just feels fairer and more of an achievement. Knockout football is always better than the group stages so I’m looking forward to the tournament kicking up a gear now and getting to support some underdogs! 
 

im reasonably neutral on England, not too fussed how they do, sort of wish them well but don’t particularly want them to win the tournament to be completely honest - I just wouldn’t want to deal with the idiots and the media etc after, it would be crapped on about ad nauseum for basically forever. I watch their games in the same way I watch every big European nation - I’d just rather the underdogs go through.
That said I think the spectacle of Mexico v England in the azteca would be amazing in the R16 game so hopefully that comes to fruition 

[lost]

9 minutes ago, balti-pie said:

That said I think the spectacle of Mexico v England in the azteca would be amazing in the R16 game so hopefully that comes to fruition 

 

I think thats looking the most likely game for England to go out as Mexico havbe some crazy record at home. If they get past that Vini J against who ever our make shift right back is doesn't bare thinking about.

[charlierc]

34 minutes ago, balti-pie said:

That said I think the spectacle of Mexico v England in the azteca would be amazing in the R16 game so hopefully that comes to fruition 

That one is unquestionably a massive banana skin. Mexico might not be the best team on paper but their home stadium, a crowd that will be unashamedly making it like a home game and the altitude of Mexico City, which I don't think England have had to play with in a while, are all fascinating factors.

 

Main thing I'm gutted about tbf is that the game will be at 1am UK time on a Monday morning. Possibly one of the most antisocial kick-off times imaginable... though I imagine places are already seeking late licences to open for it.

23 minutes ago, lost said:

I think thats looking the most likely game for England to go out as Mexico havbe some crazy record at home. If they get past that Vini J against who ever our make shift right back is doesn't bare thinking about.

Conversely, imagine what happens if whoever draws the short straw and goes in at right back keeps Vini Jr quiet. That would be a career defining move. As unlikely as it sounds.

 

I actually thought England could give Brazil a game as this is not a vintage Brazil squad who were pretty bad against Morocco and made their own baffling squad selections while currently also readjusting tactics after abandoning plans to go 4-2-4, but I'm really not convinced this is the most watertight defensive unit that England could've brought along.

 

The intriguing part is that Brazil v Argentina is currently a very possible semi-final. The final we could've had in 2014 had Brazil not totally f**ked it against Germany in the semis. Admittedly Brazil have a tougher path than Argentina imo so we'll wait and see if that comes about.

[kaosmark2]

19 hours ago, charlierc said:

I'm more bemused how the preferred back-up option was Livramento, who spent most of last season injured. I know people have doubts on Alexander-Arnold's defensive nous, but surely its asking for trouble for those two to be your first choice options.

The 'surprise' of Reece James and Livramento going down injured, then Spence being left as the only actual full-back for either side is what baffles me as well. And Chalobah being the on-call backup when Livramento went down instead of Hall or TAA or anyone else who actually plays full-back as their main position.

[charlierc]

54 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

The 'surprise' of Reece James and Livramento going down injured, then Spence being left as the only actual full-back for either side is what baffles me as well. And Chalobah being the on-call backup when Livramento went down instead of Hall or TAA or anyone else who actually plays full-back as their main position.

Going into this, I already had question marks over the opposite side - O'Reilly impressed at Man City, but he's still young and raw, so the idea it was either putting Spence or Burn out of position as a back-up rather than bringing Shaw or Hall raised an eyebrow. But yes, right-back is now turning into a cursed position. Maybe Spence will ask to play left against Congo just to avoid getting injured... or at least another injury to go with the broken jaw he's already recovering from.

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, charlierc said:

Going into this, I already had question marks over the opposite side - O'Reilly impressed at Man City, but he's still young and raw, so the idea it was either putting Spence or Burn out of position as a back-up rather than bringing Shaw or Hall raised an eyebrow. But yes, right-back is now turning into a cursed position. Maybe Spence will ask to play left against Congo just to avoid getting injured... or at least another injury to go with the broken jaw he's already recovering from.

I like O'Reilly as a player but he's not really a conventional full-back. He cuts inside and roams into midfield when attacking, which I don't think suits Gordon who likes having a full-back to overlap with him. I think it's perfectly fine having him in the squad and playing some games, I just don't like not having an actual left-back as a different option.

[Punksnotdead]

This Canada v South Africa game is precisely the reason why I don't support the underdogs in the world cup - I don't want to see bang average teams stinking up the latter stages of the biggest tournament. I know there are the occasional underdogs that play good football, but they are a rarity.

 

I want to see France, Spain & Argentina all getting to the semis.

[Ben7amin_]

I predicted Argentina to win - prior to the tournament -  and im doubling down on that now we can see the routes to the final for all teams