With the tournament starting next month, who will watching? What is everyone looking forward to? And will anyone boycott watching it?
The Thunderdome
Everything about your favorite sports and teams.
Share
Stats
Football (soccer) World Cup 2022 Thoughts
I’m watching the Ghana and Senegal matches.
Senegal is matched with the Netherlands who has a better record and is the favorite +450 but Senegal is no sleeper. Under no circumstance can Senegal let Netherlands get in a rhythm or else they’ll be unstoppable. Louis Van Gaal has had that put down 32 goals in 10 matches and you add un the chip on the shoulder from failing to qualify before, it can get ugly quickly.
Senegal is matched with the Netherlands who has a better record and is the favorite +450 but Senegal is no sleeper. Under no circumstance can Senegal let Netherlands get in a rhythm or else they’ll be unstoppable. Louis Van Gaal has had that put down 32 goals in 10 matches and you add un the chip on the shoulder from failing to qualify before, it can get ugly quickly.
Netherlands can beat anyone at anytime. Traditionally a touch country to beat. The west African sides have great athletes and once in a while do well, but considering the fact their best stars in the best leagues in Europe, they grossly under perform. Don't know if its the coaching or what, but they under perform. Nigeria has a huge population pool and really should be a football power but aren't. Ghana and Senegal have great athletes. These countries struggle to win the African Nations Cup against the north African arabs. These countries in north Africa don't even do well when they get to the world cup but beat the sub-Saharan black countries regularly. I don't understand it.
Senegal have the confidence from winning Africa Cup of Nations. But they will have to stop the Netherlands from getting a rhythm otherwise they may get rolled over.
Thats something that has also baffled me. Maybe it is a mental block.
Yeah, Van Gaal have done a great job with the team. He flopped at Manchester United after labelling it a commercial club but what he's done with Netherlands 🇳🇱 National Team is incredible.
It seemed that he might have lost his edge following the Manchester United role. But taking on the Dutch role seems to be doing wonders for them both.
Some coaches aren't a fit for a team or country. I don't think Arsene Wenger could be successful in many places for example. The planets aligned at Arsenal. But I am not sure if he was say...hmm...French national team manager he would be successful, even with the immense talent.
The Dutch have always been going going back to the early 70s. I'd consider them the most talented country that has under performed compared to their collective talent the most. They really should have had at least 2 or 3 World Cups by now. "Only" 3 finals, losing all three.
I also think people over estimate how good the England side is. England gets a rep because it invented the sport and has the most popular league but I never thought they were as good as people thought. If the WC wasn't in London in '66, they'd have lost despite having a good team. Semi final at best. '90s, the great Euro side was their best team I thought, the one with Gazza but the players have a party culture and would rather party than play. Brazil has too many players like that as well. The England side a few years ago was very good but happened to be good at a time when the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium were good.
The surprise is that South Africa isn't better. I'm thinking lack of infrastructure. Its a Rugby and Cricket country and maybe that's the problem.
Nigeria has 200 million people and I've always said physiologically the most athletic humans on earth. West Africa period as a collective are the most genetically gifted. Strongest, fastest, jump the highest, which is why England, Canada, US and Jamaica do so well in the Olympics. USA, Canada and Jamaica specifically have a large mixture of all west African tribes/bloods.
I've always thought if Nigeria had the infrastructure they'd dominate anything from the 400m down and would be a perennially top 5 ranked football country. Basically the 'Brazil' of Africa.
The Dutch have always been going going back to the early 70s. I'd consider them the most talented country that has under performed compared to their collective talent the most. They really should have had at least 2 or 3 World Cups by now. "Only" 3 finals, losing all three.
I also think people over estimate how good the England side is. England gets a rep because it invented the sport and has the most popular league but I never thought they were as good as people thought. If the WC wasn't in London in '66, they'd have lost despite having a good team. Semi final at best. '90s, the great Euro side was their best team I thought, the one with Gazza but the players have a party culture and would rather party than play. Brazil has too many players like that as well. The England side a few years ago was very good but happened to be good at a time when the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium were good.
The surprise is that South Africa isn't better. I'm thinking lack of infrastructure. Its a Rugby and Cricket country and maybe that's the problem.
Nigeria has 200 million people and I've always said physiologically the most athletic humans on earth. West Africa period as a collective are the most genetically gifted. Strongest, fastest, jump the highest, which is why England, Canada, US and Jamaica do so well in the Olympics. USA, Canada and Jamaica specifically have a large mixture of all west African tribes/bloods.
I've always thought if Nigeria had the infrastructure they'd dominate anything from the 400m down and would be a perennially top 5 ranked football country. Basically the 'Brazil' of Africa.
They have had some talented players in very good teams. Thinking of the likes of Seedorf, Davids, Bergkamp through to Sneijder, Robben and now van Dijk.
None more so than the English themselves. Not to say that England havent had good teams in the past or even currently. However, Englands traditional style of play doesnt lend itself well to tournament football.
If Nigeria had the infrastructure and got its act together, they might dominate more than just football and other sports.
If I was to put money on it, I would say France are looking most likely to win. They have great attackers (Nkunku, Coman, Mbappe, Benzema) and what is looking like a straight forward group. Australia will probably be an easy first game, but Denmark may be tricky.
Manchester United is a very difficult team to coach is what I can tell you. There's a lot of politics in the club that even the new coach would find it very difficult to deal with. Ever since Sir Alex Ferguson retired, no new manager have found it easy with United.
So much politics involved. Ferguson still goes to home matches, his influence is still felt at the club making it difficult for new managers.
Ferguson reportedly wanted Wenger to take over. If true, it would have been a disaster. Moyes was a disaster but I think it was more than him stepping up from Everton at the time. Man Utd needs a coach with a great reputation as a winner and a big personality.
About Nigeria. Totally agree. The biggest untapped potential and disappointment in the world period. They will never prosper in their current state. The three main tribes and areas were forced together by the UK. They really do need to be 3 separate countries split between the Hausa/Fula moslems in the north and Yoruba and Ibgo get their own nation. The oil is the big issue. Its in one area largely. I read that all blacks in America have up to 20% Nigerian DNA from the tribes there. Bahia in Brazil is pretty much Yoruba in Brazil. The Portuguese sent most of their Yoruba slaves there.
Anyway, France as you know has been good since the late 90s, but their problem is teamwork. They have massive talent all over the pitch. The coach and the teamwork is what has cost them. I've heard that the biggest problem with the Dutch traditionally is there are 2 factions. One is racial. The black players largely from former Dutch colonies originally and the white native players and the coaches favoring the whites and also club related. I've been told by Dutch fans that its Ajax players vs everyone else. As for Bergkamp he is fantastic. One of my favorite players ever. Man Utd fans used to say Cantona was better but for me, I'd say Bergkamp could do anything Cantona could do with the one exception Bergkamp lacked much pace but Cantona was no Usain Bolt eithr, Cantona couldn't do everything Bergkamp could do. Both could score any type of goal. Bergkamp took as much joy from making a beautiful pass as he did from making a beautiful goal. Bergkamp was the far superior passer and was as good in free kicks. Cantona better at penalties is the only thing I can think of.
I think Newcastle will be a top 4 team within 2 years and win the title within 5. Anytime an EPL team gets unlimited funds it usually takes half a dozen years or less to get a title (Chelsea, City and if we want to go back, Man Utd in '92).
About Nigeria. Totally agree. The biggest untapped potential and disappointment in the world period. They will never prosper in their current state. The three main tribes and areas were forced together by the UK. They really do need to be 3 separate countries split between the Hausa/Fula moslems in the north and Yoruba and Ibgo get their own nation. The oil is the big issue. Its in one area largely. I read that all blacks in America have up to 20% Nigerian DNA from the tribes there. Bahia in Brazil is pretty much Yoruba in Brazil. The Portuguese sent most of their Yoruba slaves there.
Anyway, France as you know has been good since the late 90s, but their problem is teamwork. They have massive talent all over the pitch. The coach and the teamwork is what has cost them. I've heard that the biggest problem with the Dutch traditionally is there are 2 factions. One is racial. The black players largely from former Dutch colonies originally and the white native players and the coaches favoring the whites and also club related. I've been told by Dutch fans that its Ajax players vs everyone else. As for Bergkamp he is fantastic. One of my favorite players ever. Man Utd fans used to say Cantona was better but for me, I'd say Bergkamp could do anything Cantona could do with the one exception Bergkamp lacked much pace but Cantona was no Usain Bolt eithr, Cantona couldn't do everything Bergkamp could do. Both could score any type of goal. Bergkamp took as much joy from making a beautiful pass as he did from making a beautiful goal. Bergkamp was the far superior passer and was as good in free kicks. Cantona better at penalties is the only thing I can think of.
I think Newcastle will be a top 4 team within 2 years and win the title within 5. Anytime an EPL team gets unlimited funds it usually takes half a dozen years or less to get a title (Chelsea, City and if we want to go back, Man Utd in '92).
Would be worth exploring in another thread, it would be interesting.
Thats something that I've heard too. The same problem happens in France and England, yet it seems more pronounced in the Netherlands. Maybe its because they are better at lying about it in England than the Netherlands.
My guess, more white British and white French have accepted Blacks (and others, Indians, Pakistanis, in the UK, north Africans, former Algiers, Morocco, etc as French) but in Netherlands, they haven't. More of the whites see Blacks who arrived from their former colonies (Dutch Antilles, Suriname, etc) as not really one of them.
Believe me, we are far from accepted. Not gonna speak on what happens in the Netherlands, but white British are venomous.
It's very discouraging and interesting to see African players play for these European nations and score goals against their own brethren.
In this video Embolo doesn't celebrate after his goal against Cameroon while playing for Switzerland. It's very foolish and traitorous for them to play for the European teams even after knowing history. The future doesn't look good for African nations...
D
Deleted member 231
Guest
I put money on Mexico to beat Argentina tomorrow and for France to draw against the Danes
Very good result for the USA team against England. First time I actually saw the U.S. team and they aren't bad. They are lacking a traditional striker though.
A relative who coaches soccer for a kids team said that the only black kids that play it to that level in America are in one of two categories:
1. Sons of black immigrants who grew up with the sport.
2. Suburban raised black kids.
Inner city kids don't have access to the sport. Wonder if that's true.
Anyway, its a good WC but the problem is the vastly difference in the quality of the refereeing. I think teams need to research the referee as much as the other team.
A relative who coaches soccer for a kids team said that the only black kids that play it to that level in America are in one of two categories:
1. Sons of black immigrants who grew up with the sport.
2. Suburban raised black kids.
Inner city kids don't have access to the sport. Wonder if that's true.
Anyway, its a good WC but the problem is the vastly difference in the quality of the refereeing. I think teams need to research the referee as much as the other team.
Alistair Fannell
Sixer
I will be pulling for USA But if they play against Senegal, Ghana or Cameroon I am pulling for those counties
Alistair Fannell
Sixer
I agree plus Lukako of Belgium is getting death threats from the people from Belgium
Really annoyed Ghana and Cameroon are out. However, with this fresh in the memory, this is for one certain individual:
The agony & the ecstasy - emotional Suarez reacts to South Korea winner
The agony & the ecstasy - emotional Suarez reacts to South Korea winner
Last edited:
Alistair Fannell
Sixer
Oh don’t get me startingReally annoyed Ghana and Cameroon are out. However, will this is fresh in the memory, this is for one certain individual:
The agony & the ecstasy - emotional Suarez reacts to South Korea winner
And now Senegal have been knocked out of the competition. Fell for England team's "rope a dope" tactic, sat back and hit Senegal on the break. Strangely enough, very few racist tropes were used of the coverage of Senegal in the UK. I was very surprised, however, happy to be corrected.
Alistair Fannell
Sixer
Just wish there were more black soccer players that would play for their home country and make them WorldCup contenders Alistair Fannell
Sixer
This is a regular conversation we have here in the UK about it. Was mentioned in another thread, it is assumed that any black player born and/or raised in England will play for the England team. This means once capped for England, scrutiny is increased beyond the levels of their white colleagues. Choose the country of your heritage, insults and abuse abound; case in point Wilf Zaha, Michail Antonio.
Now we have reached the knockout stage, which teams/players has everyone been impressed by? What has been the biggest disappointment?
Alistair Fannell
Sixer
The biggest disappointment was Ghana. Very surprised they didn’t make it out of the Group stage
Ghana had a very inexperienced coach, youngest squad in the tournament, and lowest FIFA ranked team there so I wasn't necessarily expecting much. However, after the game against South Korea (Kudus is a baller!), started to become hopeful. Was disappointed with the match against Uruguay. This is a common thought about the Ghana v Uruguay match:
Zaha (Palace is my second team) would definitely 100% have been great for the England team but as you said, he'd have gotten over scrutinized. The first great black player, John Barnes was never as good for the England national team as he was for Liverpool. I wasn't around then so people can say why or why not (I've heard he wasn't used properly or expected too much) but he got racial abuse as well.
All Blacks in England come from either the Caribbean or Africa originally. That's a huge stick to wave at England to either do something or else. The Olympics especially. Britain has a great sprint team. Not a surprise. The genetic make up is ultimately the same as America, west Africa. That's also a huge stick to possible be used. England also has the benefit of having a decent size east African population so their milers are pretty good as well. America is showing that as well.
Anyway, I digress. At some point there will be a straw breaking the camel's back moment for the blacks on the soccer team. The black players missing penalties a year ago may have been that, but it didn't.
All Blacks in England come from either the Caribbean or Africa originally. That's a huge stick to wave at England to either do something or else. The Olympics especially. Britain has a great sprint team. Not a surprise. The genetic make up is ultimately the same as America, west Africa. That's also a huge stick to possible be used. England also has the benefit of having a decent size east African population so their milers are pretty good as well. America is showing that as well.
Anyway, I digress. At some point there will be a straw breaking the camel's back moment for the blacks on the soccer team. The black players missing penalties a year ago may have been that, but it didn't.
My money is on France. They won the tournament last time and Mbappe is in his prime.
That's interesting. I get why black immigrants in the USA would play football. However, only suburban raised black kids play football too? Why is that?
Kinda similar to England and football. Some if not most of the best footballers came from the cockney areas of east London or south London, the coal mines of Newcastle, the factories and mills of Leeds, Sheffield, the rough docks of Liverpool, Manchester, Portsmouth, Southampton.
Similarly, America's best athletes have come from poor and working class areas. Before the modern era when baseball was the number one sport, the best players came from the rural south and midwest (Ty Cobb, Georgia, Hank Aaron, Alabama, Mickey Mantle, Oklahoma) or inner city kids, especially immigrant kids (Lou Gehrig, German, NYC, Babe Ruth, German, Baltimore).
Poor kids don't have as much access to soccer leagues. Soccer leagues are either in Latino neighborhoods or the suburbs. Inner city blacks play basketball mostly, football as well. There are very few youth soccer leagues for us.
Maybe in time. I think if blacks had access to soccer at a younger age, we'd have a top 5 team. I'm hard pressed to think of one sport that blacks in America adopted and we didn't dominate it to a large extent internationally (basketball, athletics, boxing). This works as well for black women (basketball, athletics and now more are having access to gymnastics).
Similarly, America's best athletes have come from poor and working class areas. Before the modern era when baseball was the number one sport, the best players came from the rural south and midwest (Ty Cobb, Georgia, Hank Aaron, Alabama, Mickey Mantle, Oklahoma) or inner city kids, especially immigrant kids (Lou Gehrig, German, NYC, Babe Ruth, German, Baltimore).
Poor kids don't have as much access to soccer leagues. Soccer leagues are either in Latino neighborhoods or the suburbs. Inner city blacks play basketball mostly, football as well. There are very few youth soccer leagues for us.
Maybe in time. I think if blacks had access to soccer at a younger age, we'd have a top 5 team. I'm hard pressed to think of one sport that blacks in America adopted and we didn't dominate it to a large extent internationally (basketball, athletics, boxing). This works as well for black women (basketball, athletics and now more are having access to gymnastics).
Have enough privledge and money to assess that other sports are more strenuous and expensive. I want to say that soccer should be a cheaper sport to get in to and it is definitely less taxing on the body.
Great assessment brother!!! Once we have the access we will once again dominate the sport just as we have all other sports.
I had a discussion about this once. The one thing America lacks in football is continuity from the youth up to professional.
England and all other footballing countries have a semi connected line of progression from youth to pros or a club's youth system.
America doesn't. I suggested that if the USSF (US Soccer Federation) our version of your FA, were really serious, I would suggest the following.
In about 5 cities, hmmm....Houston.....Miami....LA.....and Atlanta. As a suggestion. Start a soccer league for kids 6 or 7 to 12. Make it free or a very nominal fee of $10 to $20, very affordable, and foot the bill for the shoes, etc, and pay for coaches and referees, get the site.
I suggest those cities because they are fairly warm cities, have a fairly decent black population but also a fair number of foreign kids who may come from 'football' backgrounds. But focus on the black kids. You only need a minimum 2 or 3 world class products out of all those 100s of kids. Not even world class but say, good enough for a major club in Europe. If America's soccer team now, decent, not great but decent. Had 3 players a striker, midfielder or winger even a center back who was in the same class as Saka, Zaha, Vieira, in the team at the same time, how good would we be? For a start.
We have money and can get the resources as a nation. We simply lack the will to do something about it.
England and all other footballing countries have a semi connected line of progression from youth to pros or a club's youth system.
America doesn't. I suggested that if the USSF (US Soccer Federation) our version of your FA, were really serious, I would suggest the following.
In about 5 cities, hmmm....Houston.....Miami....LA.....and Atlanta. As a suggestion. Start a soccer league for kids 6 or 7 to 12. Make it free or a very nominal fee of $10 to $20, very affordable, and foot the bill for the shoes, etc, and pay for coaches and referees, get the site.
I suggest those cities because they are fairly warm cities, have a fairly decent black population but also a fair number of foreign kids who may come from 'football' backgrounds. But focus on the black kids. You only need a minimum 2 or 3 world class products out of all those 100s of kids. Not even world class but say, good enough for a major club in Europe. If America's soccer team now, decent, not great but decent. Had 3 players a striker, midfielder or winger even a center back who was in the same class as Saka, Zaha, Vieira, in the team at the same time, how good would we be? For a start.
We have money and can get the resources as a nation. We simply lack the will to do something about it.
England has enough blacks to produce way more top prospects. And the blacks are from football countries in the Caribbean and Africa. The Caribbean may focus a bit more on cricket but 'soccer'/football is still widely played.
We've already seen it in athletics. The English sprinters are basically the cousins of the Jamaican, Barbadon and Trinidad sprinters. And throw in a few west Africans here and there. Same in Canada. We are all more or less from that west African genetic stock in various amounts (mixed in with natives in America, Indian (Caribbean), white, which is without question the most fit, most athletic human product humanity has ever produced.
We've already seen it in athletics. The English sprinters are basically the cousins of the Jamaican, Barbadon and Trinidad sprinters. And throw in a few west Africans here and there. Same in Canada. We are all more or less from that west African genetic stock in various amounts (mixed in with natives in America, Indian (Caribbean), white, which is without question the most fit, most athletic human product humanity has ever produced.
Spot on! In the current England team there is also a hotbed of talent coming through the Birmingham/West Midlands area, case in point Jude Bellingham, Jack Grealish.
I see, starting to get a clearer picture. Thanks.
It generally is inexpensive to play. Shin pads, football boots, and if you play goalkeeper, a pair of gloves. Shouldnt pay more than £70 - £90 ($85 - $110) for the lot. It can be less taxing on the body than other sports, but as someone who has suffered a badly smashed up ankle playing, excuse me while I say
I did notice that the better players in the Canadian team this World Cup were the black players; Davies, Richie Laryea, Tajon Buchanan.
Which means it is definitely a smaller economic barrier to youth entering the sport.It generally is inexpensive to play. Shin pads, football boots, and if you play goalkeeper, a pair of gloves. Shouldnt pay more than £70 - £90 ($85 - $110) for the lot. It can be less taxing on the body than other sports, but as someone who has suffered a badly smashed up ankle playing, excuse me while I say
I feel you brother a bit of an injury means you are working hard but im sure a lot people would prefer a hurt ankle to CTE or a permanent leg injury.
Fr, costs are small. You're good to go.
Its funny you mentioned CTE, as it is increasingly being talked about in regards to soccer: Does heading a football lead to brain damage? It's complicated
also:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62208661
and:
https://www.southwales.ac.uk/research/research-news/new-research-footballers-heading-ball/
The link between heading the ball and CTE is gaining significant traction in the UK.