Was this the best World Cup ever?

[c9777666]

It had everything!

We had a lack of boring games (Only 1 0-0 tie all tourney)

We had a lot of goals

We had drama

We had upheaval (Germany didn't get past the group stage, no Argentina/Brazil/Spain in the round of 4, Sweden got to the round of 8).

We had an all-time upset (South Korea over Germany)

We had a surprise showing from Russia (Yes, I know, host country, but they didn't puul a 7-1 before they got knocked out).

We had gutsy Croatia (back-to-back extra time and PK wins).

We had a passing of the torch moment (Mbappe/Messi).

I thought it was as good a WC as you can ask for.

Click to read more...

 

[MaxV]

Teams played tight for the most part in the first 2 rounds of group stages, but then it opened up.

Spain-Russia was the only boring game in the playoffs, but obviously PKs helped.

 

[Suiteness]

Imo, this was the worst WC since Italia 90, although this is more a reflection of the state of International football nowadays. Flair and creativity has been stripped out of the game and most teams now rely on set-pieces and counters to score goals.

 

[MaxV]

Imo, this was the worst WC since Italia 90, although this is more a reflection of the state of International football nowadays. Flair and creativity has been stripped out of the game and most teams now rely on set-pieces and counters to score goals.

I don’t think flair and creativity has been stripped as much as teams play far more of “trap and counter” game. As a result there is far less open space on the pitch. That obviously makes set pieces very valuable.

 

[Corto]

Nope.
1998 was better for me, so many teams had great generations.

 

[Evilo]

1986 is still my favourite. IMO best game of all time in the QF, spectacular games, fantastic teams crashing early, legendary cheating,
Disagree with it being the worst since 90. It had lots of great moments and lots of great games.
2010 was a bore to me, especially after Ghana crashed.
2002 was awful. Germany was a snooze fest.
1994 was awful as well. Defense all around. Disgusting final.
And not because France crashed in all of them (though I'm sure it played a part). Lack of ambition, lack of goals, boring winner/finalist.

 

[bottomofthefoodchain]

Nah it was very average imo

 

[Havre]

It was OK, but definitely nothing special.

I do believe that is partly down to how club football has developed though. Now we got a dozen “super teams” that are distancing themselves from the rest in a way never seen before. We only have to go back to the 80-90s to find Scandinavian teams doing well in Europe. Obviously down to the opposition not being as good as it is today. Quality of individual players were distributed among more teams. Then the big national teams would be an improvement on most club teams. Today that is not the case. Partly also down to the tactical development of course. Before it was much more throw 11 players on a pitch and see what happens (exaggeration of couraw). Today that is different. National teams can therefore never have the same tactical cohesion as club teams. And I think there is a trend that national teams prioritize defensive organization in the weeks they have together for the little tactical work they can do (which tends to make the games less entertaining).

I believe the WC these days is much more about emotions than good football. People that normally don’t watch much football gathers in squares, pubs, parks etc all over the world dressed up in team colors to drink beer. It is cool, but I believe the days of “best ever” are long gone.

 

[NyQuil]

I would have liked to see more teams playing to their potential.

I like upsets but I think a lot of the more skilled teams underperformed.

The fact that there was no legitimate Golden Boot winner (no offence to Kane) and the rivalries between guys like Messi and Ronaldo didn’t really materialize kind of put a damper on things.

That being said, I watched nearly all the matches and had a great time!

Ultimately it’s good for the sport to see some teams progress a bit further than expected. Euro is only two years away anyway.

 

[Elliman]

Americans, Italians & Dutch fans say no!

 

[NyQuil]

1986 is still my favourite. IMO best game of all time in the QF, spectacular games, fantastic teams crashing early, legendary cheating,
Disagree with it being the worst since 90. It had lots of great moments and lots of great games.
2010 was a bore to me, especially after Ghana crashed.
2002 was awful. Germany was a snooze fest.
1994 was awful as well. Defense all around. Disgusting final.
And not because France crashed in all of them (though I'm sure it played a part). Lack of ambition, lack of goals, boring winner/finalist.

86 is my favourite as well.

1. Canada was in it! (briefly)

2. There was a great intersection of top teams with star players in their prime - Brazil with Zico and Socrates, Italy as defending champs with Altobelli, France with Platini, England with Lineker, Argentina with Maradonna, Spain with Butragueno, West Germany with Matthaus and Rummenigge (well slightly past), Denmark with Larsen and Laudrup, Belgium with Scifo etc.

A lot of these players would phase out by 1990.

3. The final eight was comprised of likely the best 7 teams in the world AND the host, Mexico.

4. I had just moved to Germany so it was my introduction to international football and Panini sticker books.

5. The top scorers list is a who’s who of international stars.

This is the World Cup that came to mind when thinking about the OPs question. It’s pretty much the opposite of what happened this year.

 

[Stray Wasp]

It was OK, but definitely nothing special.

I do believe that is partly down to how club football has developed though. Now we got a dozen “super teams” that are distancing themselves from the rest in a way never seen before. We only have to go back to the 80-90s to find Scandinavian teams doing well in Europe. Obviously down to the opposition not being as good as it is today. Quality of individual players were distributed among more teams. Then the big national teams would be an improvement on most club teams. Today that is not the case. Partly also down to the tactical development of course. Before it was much more throw 11 players on a pitch and see what happens (exaggeration of couraw). Today that is different. National teams can therefore never have the same tactical cohesion as club teams. And I think there is a trend that national teams prioritize defensive organization in the weeks they have together for the little tactical work they can do (which tends to make the games less entertaining).

I believe the WC these days is much more about emotions than good football. People that normally don’t watch much football gathers in squares, pubs, parks etc all over the world dressed up in team colors to drink beer. It is cool, but I believe the days of “best ever” are long gone.

I think the international game isn't helped by its difficulty in attracting coaches of the highest quality.

With regards to the bolded part that's emphatically the case with England- aside from the dressing up in the team colours part. Annoyingly, so much of people's behaviour appears self-conscious, pre-planned and ritualistic that the genuine sincerity of the emotion strikes me as debatable.

 

[NyQuil]

It’s worth it just for the introductory music.

 

[John Pedro]

Nah. It's was one of the worst WC ever, imo. Most dead ball goals ever. Not a single really good team. Both finalists are very average sides, France didn't play a single really good game (could argue for their performance against Argentina, but again, Argentina was a mess and still had a shot to win if not for that once in a lifetime strike by Pavard) and won it all with luck, crucial goals and a solid defense. Even in the final they opened the score with an own goal out of a dive by Griezmann then a deflection that end ups being a penalty to make 2-1, their first shot in the first half was the penalty kick.

It was like an NHL season, lots of upsets and with most smaller teams being able to challenge any contender but the overall quality of the game wasn't as good as it used to be.

 

[Evilo]

Disagree, France scored 11 goals in the KO stage and was not only a very solid team, but hardly an average side. They dominated Uruguay, and were in full control over Belgium.
All in all, they were a class above Argentina too, and Pavard's goal can be neglected by Di Maria's wonder goal as well.

This french team had more offensive game than the 98 team for instance. And who are we kidding when we compare to 94 Brazil, 10 Spain, etc....?
Germany were hardly dominant except for the semis as well 4 years ago.

 

[NyQuil]

I think France was really the only consistently good side.

Yes, they didn’t dominate for 90 minutes of every game but that’s not realistic.

Belgium, Croatia were strong at times and England won a bunch of matches, but they clearly were not at the same level.

Meanwhile, Spain, Germany, Portugal and Argentina exposed critical weaknesses.

 

[John Pedro]

Disagree, France scored 11 goals in the KO stage and was not only a very solid team, but hardly an average side. They dominated Uruguay, and were in full control over Belgium.
All in all, they were a class above Argentina too, and Pavard's goal can be neglected by Di Maria's wonder goal as well.

This french team had more offensive game than the 98 team for instance. And who are we kidding when we compare to 94 Brazil, 10 Spain, etc....?
Germany were hardly dominant except for the semis as well 4 years ago.

I agree they're better than the teams they beat, but they got some luck goals in almost all KO matches. Pavard strike, Muslera blunder (against a Cavaniless Uruguay), Umtiti v Belgium, Mandzukic and Griezmann PK goals when Croatia was much better in the match in the final, etc. They deserved to win cause they played a more complete game and they had more talent up front than most teams but overall this France side was just good almost meh. I see them as similar to Portugal's Euro winning side, France has more individual talent in all positions but the style of play and performance were similar.

Belgium, France and Brazil were the top 3 teams in this WC, imo and all three end up in the same side of the bracket that also was a bit frustrating, imo as Croatia hd a cupcake walk to the final (and almost didn't make it).

 

[John Pedro]

Also, I hated the VAR experience. They missed at least two clear penalties for Brazil (including one in the match against Belgium/Kompany challenge against Jesus).

 

[NyQuil]

Belgium, France and Brazil were the top 3 teams in this WC, imo and all three end up in the same side of the bracket that also was a bit frustrating, imo as Croatia hd a cupcake walk to the final (and almost didn't make it).

Compared with their lead-up campaign and the pre-tournament hype, I can’t help but think that Brazil ended up underperforming like most of the favourites.

 

[Evilo]

I agree they're better than the teams they beat, but they got some luck goals in almost all KO matches. Pavard strike, Muslera blunder (against a Cavaniless Uruguay), Umtiti v Belgium, Mandzukic and Griezmann PK goals when Croatia was much better in the match in the final, etc. They deserved to win cause they played a more complete game and they had more talent up front than most teams but overall this France side was just good almost meh. I see them as similar to Portugal's Euro winning side, France has more individual talent in all positions but the style of play and performance were similar.

Belgium, France and Brazil were the top 3 teams in this WC, imo and all three end up in the same side of the bracket that also was a bit frustrating, imo as Croatia hd a cupcake walk to the final (and almost didn't make it).

Can't see the luck in Umtiti's goal Pavard's strike answered Di Maria's. Uruguay was never in a position to come back, even before Muslera's blunder.

France was lead for a total of 9 minutes in this WC through 7 games.
You have to go back to West Germany 1990 to find a WC that was lead this few minutes.
And again, most goals scored in the KO since 82 Italy. That's pretty much what total domination is.

Comparing this to Portugal not winning a single game in 90 minutes before the semis is.... weird.

 

[John Pedro]

Compared with their lead-up campaign and the pre-tournament hype, I can’t help but think that Brazil ended up underperforming like most of the favourites.

They did most cause Jesus was awful and Dani Alves had no replacement which messed up with Brazil build up that heavily relied on him and Marcelo. Tite also had a bad tournament sticking with Jesus when Firmino clearly was in better form. They still had a great game against Belgium without Casemiro (rating the guy or not, the guy is the glue of Madrid and Brazil midfield + Fernandinho is awful) where the referee denied a stone cold penalty and Courtois made the most saves in the WC.

Douglas Costa being injured also didn't help as when he played he was our most dangerous player.

 

[NyQuil]

Comparing this to Portugal not winning a single game in 90 minutes before the semis is.... weird.

Not to mention France progressed via the “tougher” side of the bracket while with Portugal it was the opposite.

 

[John Pedro]

Can't see the luck in Umtiti's goal Pavard's strike answered Di Maria's. Uruguay was never in a position to come back, even before Muslera's blunder.

France was lead for a total of 9 minutes in this WC through 7 games.
You have to go back to West Germany 1990 to find a WC that was lead this few minutes.
And again, most goals scored in the KO since 82 Italy. That's pretty much what total domination is.

Comparing this to Portugal not winning a single game in 90 minutes before the semis is.... weird.

Di Maria has scored a lot of goals like that one, though. You would expect it from him. Pavard might not score another goal like this one in his career. The comparison was more stylistic, France has so much more talent that it expects better results. Mbappé is a one-man counter-attack while Portugal had nobody close to his talent.

Anyway, not trying to discredit France title, I like the team a lot as I'm a big Mbappé, Pogba and Kanté guy just trying to say I didn't like this WC that much.

 

[NJDevs26]

Nah it was very average imo

Yeah if you were ranking this one it'd be middle of the pack - lack of star power deeper into the tournament, a very poor Final, sporadic action. Yeah you had a lot of dramatic finishes and upsets and mostly close matches in the knockout round till the Final, but like with the NCAA tournament the early upsets of the big teams are exciting at the time but don't help the tournament keep buzz later on.

Ironically probably the two gold standard World Cups on the pitch are '70 and '86 - both the Mexico ones, which were probably the worst from a player perspective with the heat and altitude. So maybe they should play Qatar in the summer then

 

[member 305909]

Is Aime Jacques the only coach who retired after having led his team to a World Cup-victory? I think so. All the others went on to the next one just to humiliate themselves. Menotti, Bearzot, Lippi, Del Bosque, Löw to name a few.