Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just now, Dandy Man said:

Brutal. Imagine going through all the hard graft to get 5th in SAM qualies and then bottle it and lose on pens to Australia.

 

Shame, but this Peruvian side isn't that good. Peaked in 2019, were excellent despite not making it out of the group stages in 2018. But complete free fall since then, just lucky Colombia crumbled under their previous manager and Chile insisting on playing the 40+ year olds. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Flip said:

 

Shame, but this Peruvian side isn't that good. Peaked in 2019, were excellent despite not making it out of the group stages in 2018. But complete free fall since then, just lucky Colombia crumbled under their previous manager and Chile insisting on playing the 40+ year olds. 

Yeah they're not great but not sure they've ever been that strong under Gareca, all their better players now getting over the hill and for all Lapadula has been something of a revelation he's no Paolo Guerrero, but they have been greater than sum of their parts for a while and definitely a better side than they showed tonight. Massive credit to Gareca's managerial ability either way for what he's achieved there, be a fairly big rebuild on the cards now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One, potentially two Hearts players at the World Cup if Devlin gets a call-up which could happen. Fair play Australia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't think we would make the world cup,  one of the worst squads in decades  with a manager who shouldn't manage anyone other then Sydney fc. Add in that from the 20 games we played in qualification,  only 4 of them were at home, it's been a slog.

 

Arnold's decision to bring on redmayne was either going to be a stroke of genius or sign of a stroke, thankfully it paid off. 

 

Supposedly when Redmayne saw tactics written on the peru keepers water bottle he threw out in to the stand to put them off as well

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tomato Deuce said:

Some interesting clusters where one could conceivably get to games in multiple cities. Northeast, Texas + Monterrey, Pacific NE.


Nah dude. They’re dumb across the board. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gazza ladra said:

How so?  Just the Denver thing?


I mean that’s egregious. We had one of the single best matches in USMNT history in Denver but I guess that’s neither here nor there.

 

Only two venues in Canada, and only three in Mexico, is kind of fucked too. 
 

It should’ve never been three countries either. 
 

Kansas is a wild choice. So, so far away from everything.

 

In the end they chose a lot of these venues in absolutely abject, failing, soccer markets. I think they’ll hope these might create a bounce.

 

The only right choice is/will be the final being in NYC. 

 

 

Edited by cubaricho

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know anything about the quality of the facilities in Kansas City (or Denver for that matter), but it does seem an odd choice. I wonder if completely ignoring the Midwest just wasn’t  politically viable (“flyover country” and all that).
 

Still, I think that KC metro area is pretty small. I would think the smallest of the host cities.  I can’t get over the absence of Chicago.
 

A lot of the 94 host cities were passed over: Chicago, Detroit, Orlando, DC. This will be third World Cup for CDMX and Guadalajara.  I just hope the final isn’t at Azteca. (It’s a bear).

 

 

Edited by gazza ladra

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, cubaricho said:


Nah dude. They’re dumb across the board. 


Would’ve been a cool chance for cities that don’t traditionally get to host. Pittsburgh, San Diego, Minneapolis, Denver, Nashville, Baltimore, Austin, Columbus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gazza ladra said:

I don’t know anything about the quality of the facilities in Kansas City (or Denver for that matter), but it does seem an odd choice. I wonder if completely ignoring the Midwest just wasn’t  politically viable (“flyover country” and all that).
 

Still, I think that KC metro area is pretty small. I would think the smallest of the host cities.  I can’t get over the absence of Chicago.
 

A lot of the 94 host cities were passed over: Chicago, Detroit, Orlando, DC. This will be third World Cup for CDMX and Guadalajara.  I just hope the final isn’t at Azteca. (It’s a bear).

 

 

 


Final will be SoFi or MetLife, I reckon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cubaricho said:


 

Kansas is a wild choice. So, so far away from everything.

 

I am sure Denver is wonderful, but is it not even further from other places than Kansas City? I had to drive from Salt Lake City (which a map says is one of the closer cities to it) to Denver airport after an unfortunate travel incident a while back, and it was roughly 9 hours through an actual mountain. :lol:  Kansas City meanwhile is three hours from Saint Louis. 

 

The hope was for matches in Batimore, but I strongly doubted this after it had to combine with DC. The fact that Baltimore, which has perfectly adequate stadium and facilities, felt the need to attach itself to another city and DC had to abandon the idea of hosting matches in their disgraceful stadium in the boondocks of PG County, meant FIFA likely did not view either favourably. 

 

There is a distinct possibility that Nigeria will again fail to qualify, be banned internationally, or fail to exist in general by 2026, but still I will spend the next four years wishing to have a match in Dallas or Houston. Would be madness and essentially a home match, as long as it is not against a Latin American team or the US. 

 

 

Edited by Segun Oluwaniyi

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Segun Oluwaniyi said:

There is of course the distinct possibility that Nigeria will again fail to qualify, once again be banned internationally, or fail to exist in general by 2026


:lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Segun Oluwaniyi said:

I know people were hoping for Baltimore, but I strongly doubted this after it had to combine with DC. The fact that Baltimore, which has perfectly adequate stadium and facilities, felt the need to attach itself to another city and DC had to abandon the idea of hosting matches in their disgraceful stadium in the boondocks of PG County, meant FIFA likely did not view either one favourably. 

 

I agree. It's ridiculous that D.C. doesn't have a state-of-the-art stadium in the city. And Baltimore gets continually fucked by the perception that we're nothing more than a crime-ridden shit hole. 

 

Bit of a shambles that there won't be matches in two of the U.S.'s five largest combined statistical areas (Chicago - 9,986,960; DC/Baltimore - 9,973,383).

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, gazza ladra said:

I can’t get over the absence of Chicago.


They withdrew their bid so they were not chosen. 
 

33 minutes ago, Segun Oluwaniyi said:

I am sure Denver is wonderful, but is it not even further from other places than Kansas City? I had to drive from Salt Lake City (which a map says is one of the closer cities to it) to Denver airport after an unfortunate travel incident a while back, and it was roughly 9 hours through an actual mountain. :lol: 


That drive in particular is pretty brutal. All my buds in bands do it and fucking hate it, usually tacking on an off-day in Denver just to recover. :lol: 

 

And yeah geographically it is further out but everyone will be flying for this and DIA is the busiest airport in the country, traffic wise, so it makes sense to have it here based on that alone. Most of the planes will literally be landing here at some point anyway. :lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...