Not worthy of a thread - 2018 FIFA World Cup edition

[Si]

The article makes no sense, it's all over the shop.

[Fugazi]

"Major league basketball"

 

[Mike]

Meanwhile the best NBA commentator is a woman.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Haven't read the article but that extract makes no sense whatsoever. They've played the same game, so it's not like netball to basketball at all.

 

What I do find a bit annoying mind is that you seemingly can't express a normal like/dislike preference about individual female commentators etc though. I don't like Clive Tyldesley, doesn't mean I hate all male commentators and think they shouldn't be allowed to do it.

It's merely a coincidence that every female commentator I've heard sounds whiney to me. The quality of the content has improved though, the BBC commentator whose name escapes me has improved a lot from her "It's the CHINA CAPTAIN!" days.

[Mole_Toonfan]

Meanwhile the best NBA commentator is a woman.

 

Was thinking that.

[henke]

By the time the next world cup comes around we need to have brought in the 30 minutes each way, stop the clock every time the whistle goes rule.

 

The level of time wasting, injury faking and general douche-baggery is off the scale.

[Mole_Toonfan]

Nob.

 

They actually seem to enjoy what they're doing and try to be professional, which is unusual for people on football TV. They're showing up some of the lazy male pundits IMO.

 

Apart from not matching with me on Tinder Aluko is sound.

 

No idea about commentary but as pundits in the studio they've been miles better than Phil Neville etc etc.

[Hanshithispantz]

I think Scott has been the best pundit tbh. I generally don't care about their analysis (and I don't care about hers either) but she's enthusiastic and doesn't come across as an awkward cringe/isnt boring/isn't weird like Keane etc so wins by default. The only problem is she talks like fucking Alan Pardew.

[Interpolic]

She's absolutely lush.  So smiley

[jdckelly]

wow do I regret reading that since it boiled down to "but they're girls" which is a pretty shit argument.

[Away Toon]

I don't know what the general consensus is and maybe this should be in the unpopular football opinion thread, but IMO most of the games so far have been boring and negative and the overall standard of the teams pretty shite, apart from Belgium and Croatia and Mexico who have shown signs of being good teams. And the next world cup or the one after that will have 48 teams.....

[Kaizero]

This world cup is proving having 32 teams is absolutely perfect for balance of making it a World Cup and ensure competitiveness in most games.

 

It’s literally not, beacaue you don’t have  a 48 team tournament to compare with

[Guest firetotheworks]

This world cup is proving having 32 teams is absolutely perfect for balance of making it a World Cup and ensure competitiveness in most games.

 

It’s literally not, beacaue you don’t have  a 48 team tournament to compare with

You have the quality in the World Cup qualifiers to compare it with, clever dick.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Drogba looked huge when a player, he looks smaller than Jenas and same size as Murphy on the box.

[Deuce]

This world cup is proving having 32 teams is absolutely perfect for balance of making it a World Cup and ensure competitiveness in most games.

 

It’s literally not, beacaue you don’t have  a 48 team tournament to compare with

 

I’m still pulling for a massive fuck off bracket of all FIFA member associations replacing inter-confederation qualifying. First round England vs. Tuvalu, Mexico vs. Tajikistan, Nigeria vs. Argentina, etc. Last 32 standing end up in the WC

[Kaizero]

This world cup is proving having 32 teams is absolutely perfect for balance of making it a World Cup and ensure competitiveness in most games.

 

It’s literally not, beacaue you don’t have  a 48 team tournament to compare with

You have the quality in the World Cup qualifiers to compare it with, clever dick.

 

Also not a great comparison, since as you can tell from the teams in this WC - actually being in the WC has them raising their game and the big teams struggling. Even if there’s more teams, teams being at the WC will in itself make matches clmpetitive because it’s the biggest stage on earth in football.

 

Not saying the quality might not decline, as I’ve not seen it in action yet, but the Euro was significantly more entertaining with more teams, and people kept saying that expansion would ruin things too. Hell, even when the WC expanded to 32 people said it’d ruin the WC.

[Guest firetotheworks]

 

 

This world cup is proving having 32 teams is absolutely perfect for balance of making it a World Cup and ensure competitiveness in most games.

 

It’s literally not, beacaue you don’t have  a 48 team tournament to compare with

You have the quality in the World Cup qualifiers to compare it with, clever dick.

 

Also not a great comparison, since as you can tell from the teams in this WC - actually being in the WC has them raising their game and the big teams struggling. Even if there’s more teams, teams being at the WC will in itself make matches clmpetitive because it’s the biggest stage on earth in football.

 

Not saying the quality might not decline, as I’ve not seen it in action yet, but the Euro was significantly more entertaining with more teams, and people kept saying that expansion would ruin things too. Hell, even when the WC expanded to 32 people said it’d ruin the WC.

 

I'll never be adverse to more football, but I think neesy's point about competitiveness is a very fair one.

[Deuce]

Some of the most entertaining football so far has been played by teams who aren’t expected to accomplish much. Peru, Japan, Costa Rica (in the first game), Senegal. While some of the ugliest football has been played by the more accomplished sides. Not to mention the fact that the the World Cup rarely goes according to plan (I.e. “the big teams always wallop the minnows,” countered by Spain, Portugal, England, and Italy all failing to get out of the groups in 2014).

 

I don’t see much evidence to conclude that expanding it to 48 teams would make for a less competitive tournament. Would love to see those random, uncynical teams getting their shot.

[Bizza]

Keep seeing people drinking beer in the stands, since when was that allowed at football?

[Mole_Toonfan]

Some of the most entertaining football so far has been played by teams who aren’t expected to accomplish much. Peru, Japan, Costa Rica (in the first game), Senegal. While some of the ugliest football has been played by the more accomplished sides. Not to mention the fact that the the World Cup rarely goes according to plan (I.e. “the big teams always wallop the minnows,” countered by Spain, Portugal, England, and Italy all failing to get out of the groups in 2014).

 

I don’t see much evidence to conclude that expanding it to 48 teams would make for a less competitive tournament. Would love to see those random, uncynical teams getting their shot.

 

I've enjoyed the competition of it all tbh, refreshing change from club football. I suppose though it depends what you are looking for.

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

Keep seeing people drinking beer in the stands, since when was that allowed at football?

 

Can confirm it was allowed at Euro 2016 - however what isn't obvious, or wasn't obvious then, was that it was 0.5% shit.

[Deuce]

Already some interesting matchups in round 3. Uruguay-Russia, Nigeria-Argentina, England-Belgium, Portugal-Iran

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Been a goal in every game thus far, the quality hasn’t been of the highest standard, but it’s not a dull tournament. Quite enjoying it, although I’ve not seen any game in full since the England game due to being at work. It’s sad to see how uniform tactics and styles have become mind even among those that clearly have different tactics and styles of play, thee is no distinctive or stand out style.

[cubaricho]

Rare video of Mike:

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/BkTJhS2h-Rs/

 

( sorry dude)

[Mike]

Thought we were steak brothers, man.