World Cup Qatar 2022 - Desert Strike

[Loik V credern]

Yeah i saw that then read about stuff i didn't know about the children he refuses he see and give money towards (and worse).

[Gotters]

well this sucks, as a non working old person I love daytime KOs and it all being done by 9pm, I've also quite liked it being on this time of year but will whisper that bit.

 

 

[Fry Crayola]

While that could happen if matches were kicking off no earlier than 2pm on the east coast and as late as 10pm on the west, that is very unlikely to be the case - the kick off times are generally chosen to benefit the global audience as much as the country hosting it.

 

The 1994 World Cup spanned the same time zones as 2026 (the Canadian and Mexican venues all lie within the US range), and games kicked off between 4.30 pm and 12.30 am, UK time. Another 16 matches do need to be squeezed in to facilitate the expansion (and more if they decide to switch back to 4 team groups), but even playing four games a day, there's wiggle room to stagger the games to suit both the travelling fans and the global audience.

[Gotters]

The 1994 US world cup had half the teams and likely half the games that 2026 will.

 

Agree that above is worst case but there will be a lot more broadcasters and timezones to accomodate next time

[Fry Crayola]

You're still not going to see more than four matches a day, though - it's the games per day that matters, not the number of teams in the tournament. They did three in the times listed above for '94, there's plenty of wiggle room for a fourth game without extremely late kick offs, and they'll extend the tournament rather than push for five.

 

I will be totally wrong though if Australia end up in the same group as New Zealand.

[Nick R]

Here's an idea...

 

 

I don't think it would take that much work to bring this stadium up to the required standard to host international games, would it?

[Gotters]

 

[Fry Crayola]

Oh, good note - I missed that there were only two west coast venues. 2026 will have four (Vancouver, Seattle, SF and LA). The three Mexican venues in Guadalajara, Monterrey and Mexico City share the same time zone as Dallas, which is the next eastern-most host city in the US. 

 

I should also be taking into account that the Asian markets will be much, much bigger than in '94, or even back in '88 when the US was awarded the tournament. So yeah, perhaps we will see some kick offs creeping into the small hours from our perspective. And I think I'd rather matches finish at 8am than start at 4...

[Fry Crayola]

23 minutes ago, Nick R said:

Here's an idea...

 

 

I don't think it would take that much work to bring this stadium up to the required standard to host international games, would it?

 

Hey, if Qatar can build seven new stadia and an entire city, America could redevelop that one. They might even do it without anybody dying.

[The Fox]

15 hours ago, Loik V credern said:

Never thought about Alli. The similiar frame, footwork and eagerness to get forward into the box, but Alli never excelled in centre mid did he, or did he, i dunno, and Bellingham's mentality seems more certain. But still when pundits look ahead to the future with these players, we've done it before with others and they don't progress or are replaced. 

 

Aside from anything else, Bellingham is technically in a different stratosphere to Dele Alli.

[Fry Crayola]

Seen some stuff about Portugal denying Ronaldo has threatened to leave.

 

I hope they ask Roy Keane about that. There's a fair chance Graeme Souness might be killed.

[The Fox]

 

Did anyone see these yesterday? Loving Zidane as left wing-back I have to say.

 

Also a shocking amount of pundits and journalists picking Cristiano Ronaldo for some reason, despite him having the same amount of World Cup knockout goals as me.

 

Anyway you're only allowed one player from each country basically, and should be based solely on World Cup performances.

 

I would go Yashin; Moore, Beckenbauer, Cannavaro; Deschamps; Modric, Puskas, Cruyff; Maradona, Pele, Eusebio

 

Considered Iniesta over Modric but I think I was placing too much weight on that winning goal, also the pathetic team showing in 2014 has to count against him a little bit whereas Modric has excelled in multiple tournaments.

 

Went for Deschamps over Zidane/Platini/Fontaine for balance reasons really, and I guess maybe you can factor in winning it as a player and manager too (same with Beckenbauer).

[Loik V credern]

53 minutes ago, The Fox said:

Aside from anything else, Bellingham is technically in a different stratosphere to Dele Alli.

 

Is he? In what sense? I don't see any difference in their balance and footwork, they're both similar in how they can lure in opposition, nutmeg them, accelerate past, but Alli has scored some exquisite technically sublime goals that Bellingham hasn't yet shown he's capable of the same. He has that dribbling goal against Bielsefeld but that was more composure and determination than dribbling accuracy as he just does a feint twice to get through. He's got a wonderful goal against Stuttgart where he receives it back to goal outside the box, dribbles towards a player, spins back, dribbles towards goal and on the edge of the box curles it into the bttom corner. But nothing close to what Alli has shown:

 

 

The leap chest and volley for no.9 is incredibly difficult. Of course his breakout goal against Palace of knee, flick, spin, volley was maybe overated at the time but then probably not as you don't see goals like it. The curler against Watford is one of the best curlers you could see. The goal against Chelsea, to take a long ball as fast as that from behind is something he seems to find easy. The goal against United was Bergkamp like. The delicate lob against Brighton. This goal:

 

 

 

'technically in a different stratosphere to Alli'? How? Bellingham's mentality, composure and leadership matter more at the highest level i know, he doesn't need to score worldies to get where he is. Do people forget Alli was linked to Real Madrid early on, his wikipedia has 'In 2018, Alli was considered the world's most expensive midfielder from a transfer value perspective by the CIES.[117]' on it. Alli, even with the years of decline has a goal every 4 games in his career, Bellingham every 6.7 games.

[The Fox]

I'm not saying Dele Alli had shit technique, but it was never on Bellingham's level and was not a particularly strong point comparative to other attributes. Obviously his main issue though has been attitude/application, along with never really fitting into most formations and systems.

[Loik V credern]

3 minutes ago, The Fox said:

I'm not saying Dele Alli had shit technique, but it was never on Bellingham's level and was not a particularly strong point comparative to other attributes. Obviously his main issue though has been attitude/application, along with never really fitting into most formations and systems.

 

Well i'm genuinely asking because i don't know what i'm missing, like i'd get Iniesta or Modric being 'technically in a different stratosphere to Dele Alli', but what is Bellingham doing that marks him out as being so much better.

 

Does anyone else think that?

[Art Vandelay]

I think Alli was just a moments player, whereas Bellingham has the ability to take over a match and force it into his rhythm. Part of that is technique, but that's mostly football intelligence. It's the same thing with Saka in that if you only see his goals or assists you'd probably think he's an exciting player, but when you watch him every week you see how he elevates the whole team. I don't think you can capture those things on highlights reels.

[The Fox]

Yeah I dunno what else to say on that really, to me it shouldn't really need illustrating that Bellingham had better technique than Dele Alli because it's really obvious when you watch them both on the ball or playing long passes, but also this is the World Cup thread and I don't think anyone is that arsed.

[glb]

[Loik V credern]

2 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

I think Alli was just a moments player, whereas Bellingham has the ability to take over a match and force it into his rhythm. Part of that is technique, but that's mostly football intelligence. It's the same thing with Saka in that if you only see his goals or assists you'd probably think he's an exciting player, but when you watch him every week you see how he elevates the whole team. I don't think you can capture those things on highlights reels.

 

Yeah I get that, the difference between skill and technique to me being skill is something you pull out to beat a player whereas technique is so embedded in your play in how you react to the ball in every moment, like how Ozil could always adjust to score a goal however the ball came to him in the box or how David Silva would always move the ball in a way that it's far enough from the opposition player to try to dispossess, I think players eventually get tired of trying. I always think as much as technique it's composure, so you're not high and low through a game and can just keep play moving in a simple way.

 

Whenever top players talk about the best they played against, it's always 'I couldn't get near him'. No specific moment, just overall being elusive in a game. 

 

I don't doubt Bellingham has better awareness and positioning, Alli is more head down introverted. Pogba's technique is incredible but he couldn't consistently run a game for United, I'd have that down to an awareness and positioning thing than technique, like when he's dispossessed it's because he's in his own world indulging himself and forgetting what action he should be taking than any failure to control the ball. But yeah it doesn't matter. 

[Fry Crayola]

I would just consider skill and technique as synonyms, for the most part. Perhaps a distinction I'd make is that I'd never refer to a defender's positioning or whatnot as "technique", but it's definitely skilled. But describing on the ball play, they're the same thing to me.

[Loik V credern]

51 minutes ago, Fry Crayola said:

I would just consider skill and technique as synonyms, for the most part. Perhaps a distinction I'd make is that I'd never refer to a defender's positioning or whatnot as "technique", but it's definitely skilled. But describing on the ball play, they're the same thing to me.

 

I still think of someone like Rashford as more occassionly skilful than technically brilliant as say Wilshire was. It was just obvious whenever Wilshere moved with the ball his technique was different to most other players, he'd have those one twos with Cazorla in the middle of the pitch just improvising, shaping his body however to continue the play, just always reacting. Same as in the Norwich goal. 

 

Rashford has a good touch when he can bring a long ball down on his toe, and skilful in doing elasticos, he needs quick feet to do them but I think things like that can be practised and perfected whereas technique can't. Technique just comes out naturally so there ends up being loads of moments where a player will show what they can do when others won't, as though they don't get the same opportunity to impress. Like how Zidane and Bergkamp seem to have a number of examples of them leaping to catch the ball in mid air. 

 

A few players who joined up with England for the first time who were asked who impressed them most said Rashford surprised them, like 'he ripped me so many times' kind of stuff, they talked about him like anyone would who sees a professional footballer up close and is amazed by them, rather than it just being 'yeah he doesn't score enough, is he a centre forward of United's level'. 

 

There's that video of Henderson as a kid doing standing still skills, he looks like a wonderkid, kind of, not someone who'd be best known for his work rate and leadership. He has the occassionl great pass in him 

 

I don't go to games often, I saw Barcelona at the very top of their stadium, the players were virtually dots. I couldn't make Messi out and I was obviously looking. Iniesta though really did stand out, even from that distance. Also I got a ticket to the Manchester derby at Old Trafford in 2019 and was sat quite pretty high, for me Bernardo Silva stood out in just how he moved. 

 

Iniesta has the la croqueta, the Laudrup move because he was his Idol, Zidane did step overs and roulettes, but generally none of the most technical players do tricks. No flamboyant showcases of their skill. 

[Shook]

I’ll be glad when Saturday night is done partly because we won’t have to endure any more ‘How can we stop Mbappe?’’ and ‘But watch out France, we have Bellingham!’.

 

Ad nauseam. What a noise. 
 

That Giroud will prob get a hattrick now. 

[Oh Danny Boy]

9 hours ago, The Fox said:

 

Did anyone see these yesterday? Loving Zidane as left wing-back I have to say.

 

Also a shocking amount of pundits and journalists picking Cristiano Ronaldo for some reason, despite him having the same amount of World Cup knockout goals as me.

 

Anyway you're only allowed one player from each country basically, and should be based solely on World Cup performances.

 

I would go Yashin; Moore, Beckenbauer, Cannavaro; Deschamps; Modric, Puskas, Cruyff; Maradona, Pele, Eusebio

 

Considered Iniesta over Modric but I think I was placing too much weight on that winning goal, also the pathetic team showing in 2014 has to count against him a little bit whereas Modric has excelled in multiple tournaments.

 

Went for Deschamps over Zidane/Platini/Fontaine for balance reasons really, and I guess maybe you can factor in winning it as a player and manager too (same with Beckenbauer).

Beckham? What the hell is he doing there? 

[ryodi]

 

I’d forgotten how good the Kluivert goal was. Beautiful shirts and Barry Davies on commentary.

[Naysonymous]

Much as I love Barry Davies, there's only one way to watch the winning goal from that game and it ain't with him commentating: 

 

Too often these days you get commenters faking this kind of reaction because it’s they think it’s  expected of them or they want to go viral, but to me this one sounds genuine.  It’s a man struggling to comprehend the moment of utter genius he just witnessed. 
 

edit: 

 

It’s odd to think how different the game is a quarter of century on.  What Bergkamp did was incomprehensible, taking that ball on the run while under pressure is something most professionals just can’t do, even the ones deemed good enough to play at the World Cup but would de Boer get that much time on the ball in 2022? He’d be pressed in seconds. 

[Gotters]

You've kind of got to admire the sheer brass neck of it all, even Infantino got in on the act and presented an award

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/8/winners-receive-qatar-emir-sheikh-tamims-anti-corruption-award

[Loik V credern]

I love that Bergkamp video.  Not nearly the same without Dutch commentary for me. I didn't watch that tournament, I was old enough but not into football, i kind of think of it as the most iconic tournament moment though, moreso than the hand of god or Maradona dribble vs England (journalists on one of the pods said that is probably the most famous game of football ever which I probably agree with).

 

Just that the Bergkamp goal was in the final minutes and everyone seems in disbelief at how improbable it is after just launching the ball forward. 

[feltmonkey]

A migrant worker at a resort used as a training base by the Saudi Arabia team has died. This is the response of the World Cup Chief Executive Nasser Al-Khater.

 

"We're in the middle of a World Cup, and we're having a successful World Cup, and this is something that you want to talk about right now? Death is a natural part of life whether it's at work or in your sleep. Of course a worker died, our condolences go to his family <shrugs>, however it's strange that this is what you want to focus on as your first question." 

 

Considering the circumstances surrounding this World Cup, it's hardly a surprise that this is the attitude of the people running it, but it is kind of shocking to hear it straight from the horse's mouth like this. The callous disregard for life laid bare.

 

I've been watching the World Cup of course, I'm not going to claim I had the moral strength to boycott it. I love the World Cup (in general, not this one) - they're my favourite part of football, and I didn't want that to be taken away from me by greedy, currupt FIFA executives and a bloodthirsty, backward regime. However, if they packed the whole thing up now and declared the competition null and void I'd be delighted. That's not going to happen though. Money is more important than human life, after all.

[Boothjan]

9 hours ago, Naysonymous said:

Too often these days you get commenters faking this kind of reaction because it’s they think it’s  expected of them or they want to go viral, but to me this one sounds genuine.  It’s a man struggling to comprehend the moment of utter genius he just witnessed. 

Love the essentially neutral tone he gives out 

 

I do agree re: Barry Davies though - not often I hear commentary that's better than his, but this is a perfect example.

[Fry Crayola]

Van Gelder's commentary is great because it captures that sheer delight at something magical happening that clearly means a great deal to him. It's child-like, and it's beautiful. You can't replicate or force that, you just need hope it happens again some day.