I thonk with blanket tv cubberidge of the big leagues it is essy too b 100% focus on them with no thyme 4 other leagues etc
Yeah but you can watch plenty of foreign leagues. To many it’s prem or nothing. Though I know season ticket holders that only watch their live games and have no interest outside of those games.
comment by #4zA - Oje ne, Napule ‘ncoppa! (U22472)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by BruceAndPally (U8201)
posted 12 minutes ago
Not particularly, started betting on corners, cards, throw-ins etc to make it interesting
It still feels like an extended Nations League or something for me, the timing of it has really thrown me off.
Qatar not being a footballing nation, the fact they couldn’t really host a proper tournament, the stadiums seem a bit dead, the way “won” the tournament and all the politics has taken the edge of I think, it’s been a waste of World Cup cycle, imo.
Maybe it’ll feel like a “proper” World Cup when the knockout rounds start.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1994 US did not have a nationwide professional league n that tournament was grate.
The games in Qatar seam like normal wc events.
It is strange 4 Europeans too have tournament during club season butt that has bean an ussue 4 many nations at every single previus tournament sew cannot rly complane.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not against expanding the game to new territories, be it the Middle East, North Africa and or anywhere else as long as they can actually host the event.
The average attendance at USA ‘94 was nearly 70,000 though, they really came out and got behind their World Cup, also the South American countries and Mexico bought a lot of fans too.
Not too fussed that other nations have had to deal with mid-season World Cups tbh, it’s definitely taken something away by having it in the middle of a European season, imo.
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
Yeah but you can watch plenty of foreign leagues. To many it’s prem or nothing. Though I know season ticket holders that only watch their live games and have no interest outside of those games.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
U can watch uther keagues butt who has the thyme 4 that? (Uther than reeturds like DJ n Gunter obvs). Also, fireign leagues r birin as u r not emishanully invested in it. I have EPL games on Saturday mornins butt am bored 2 deth ss halve no intetest or much nolledge of whut is hapoenin.
Yeah but I’m not saying you have to be invested in it. It’s more that you can watch it and football fans will. Some just don’t because they only have a specific interest in football. It’s why so many don’t like international football. The point is if you can only enjoy the elite of the elite and the prem is what you deem to be that, or the latter stages of the cl, then you aren’t really a fan of football.
Yup thats tru
If u cannot enjoy the freakin Wurld Cuppa u r not a luvver of the game
It’s the gratest spectacle in sport along with the Olympics.
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 33 seconds ago
It’s the gratest spectacle in sport along with the Olympics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
n the Hotdog eatin contest at Coney Island on July 4
Feels like when the F1 is in Bahrain. You can still enjoy the sport when it's really good but the event itself is kind of sanitized and weird. I think a big part of what makes a World Cup fun is the home team doing well or at least getting the locals excited.. Qatar will go out of the group likely with 0 points and no one will care.
To answer the post....Yes, I like the WC.
But I don't watch all the games...I choose.
So far.. Brazil v Serbia was a very good game.
Spain V Germany was interesting, very technical, showed 3 teen age players. Manuel Neuer can still keep goal.
Argentina v Mexico was also very strategic but showed Messi can still play.
Have not watched anything else.
OP
I could have told you it would be boring before a ball was kicked. International football is pretty sub standard in the modern era, due to the fact practically everyone that can kick a football gets capped.
Watched a bit, and only Croatia and France have really impressed me. I will be very surprised if France do not retain the trophy.
Cannot wait for the Prem to restart.
I’m not against expanding the game to new territories, be it the Middle East, North Africa and or anywhere else as long as they can actually host the event.
———
Some of countries can only safely hold event in Winter, through no fault of their own.
I guess that it depends. If you are a Morroco, Saudi or Japan fan then you'd be loving it.
England had a great start, but I don't think that we will see the atmosphere and hype build until the knock out rounds.
We have also seen some high level football too. Mbappe has been great. Spain have played well too.
Early days, I'd say give it a chance.
Next World Cup will have 48 teams competing, which will be an even bigger Yawn Fest and even lower in quality. 16 teams maximum is needed.
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 14 seconds ago
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it feels like a lot, however when you look at how hard it is for African teams to qualify compared to European teams, then I think it is the right decision.
In Africa, you have to firstly win your group and then play a 2 legged play off! Whereas in Europe group winners qualify automatically and if you come 2nd and still have a chance to qualify via a playoff.
I think that a lot of us only look at the World Cup from a European perspective, but it is the World's game and hence we should see more teams qualify from all parts of it.
It will be a tough balancing act though, because you really want to keep the standard high and this could see some trash teams qualify.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 5 minutes ago
Next World Cup will have 48 teams competing, which will be an even bigger Yawn Fest and even lower in quality. 16 teams maximum is needed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a very western/european view of things. Football is the world's game and just because it doesn't fully cater to you doesn't make it wrong.
I think that you can make it work for you though. You just have to ignore the tournament until the last 16. That way everybody is a winner.
Yep a way to get more African teams in is good. Some strong teams have missed out while teams like Wales and Australia make it with squads full of Championship level players.
Been good so far, and all groups go into game 3 with something to play for. At least 3 groups have all teams still with some chance of progression.
48 teams won't be too bad. Less group games, with a dimished chance of dead rubbers, bigger knock out stage.
It happens every major tournament. I never really get why some are so keen to announce about how boring they find a World Cup or Euros and start comparing it to others particularly at such an early stage. We’re not even onto third game of groups! Been fine so far in any case.
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 24 minutes ago
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think three countries are hosting it. USA, Canada and Mexico. It really is going to be a joke competition.
comment by add912 (U9189)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 14 seconds ago
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it feels like a lot, however when you look at how hard it is for African teams to qualify compared to European teams, then I think it is the right decision.
In Africa, you have to firstly win your group and then play a 2 legged play off! Whereas in Europe group winners qualify automatically and if you come 2nd and still have a chance to qualify via a playoff.
I think that a lot of us only look at the World Cup from a European perspective, but it is the World's game and hence we should see more teams qualify from all parts of it.
It will be a tough balancing act though, because you really want to keep the standard high and this could see some trash teams qualify.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe because the quality of football is not that good in Africa, Asia, Australasia etc. Just bringing in more countries will surely make the competition even worse than it currently is.
Would you make the Winter Olympics better by bringing in countries that have never seen a snowflake in their history, just so they could be included. Would it make sense to include countries like Nigeria, Chad, Congo in a Winter Olympics just for inclusivity?
comment by add912 (U9189)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 5 minutes ago
Next World Cup will have 48 teams competing, which will be an even bigger Yawn Fest and even lower in quality. 16 teams maximum is needed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a very western/european view of things. Football is the world's game and just because it doesn't fully cater to you doesn't make it wrong.
I think that you can make it work for you though. You just have to ignore the tournament until the last 16. That way everybody is a winner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit hard to ignore it until the last 16, when there are hours and hours of football being blasted at you on the mainstream viewing channels 24/7.
Sign in if you want to comment
Are we enjoying the WC?
Page 2 of 5
posted on 28/11/22
I thonk with blanket tv cubberidge of the big leagues it is essy too b 100% focus on them with no thyme 4 other leagues etc
posted on 28/11/22
Yeah but you can watch plenty of foreign leagues. To many it’s prem or nothing. Though I know season ticket holders that only watch their live games and have no interest outside of those games.
posted on 28/11/22
comment by #4zA - Oje ne, Napule ‘ncoppa! (U22472)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by BruceAndPally (U8201)
posted 12 minutes ago
Not particularly, started betting on corners, cards, throw-ins etc to make it interesting
It still feels like an extended Nations League or something for me, the timing of it has really thrown me off.
Qatar not being a footballing nation, the fact they couldn’t really host a proper tournament, the stadiums seem a bit dead, the way “won” the tournament and all the politics has taken the edge of I think, it’s been a waste of World Cup cycle, imo.
Maybe it’ll feel like a “proper” World Cup when the knockout rounds start.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1994 US did not have a nationwide professional league n that tournament was grate.
The games in Qatar seam like normal wc events.
It is strange 4 Europeans too have tournament during club season butt that has bean an ussue 4 many nations at every single previus tournament sew cannot rly complane.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not against expanding the game to new territories, be it the Middle East, North Africa and or anywhere else as long as they can actually host the event.
The average attendance at USA ‘94 was nearly 70,000 though, they really came out and got behind their World Cup, also the South American countries and Mexico bought a lot of fans too.
Not too fussed that other nations have had to deal with mid-season World Cups tbh, it’s definitely taken something away by having it in the middle of a European season, imo.
posted on 28/11/22
Pour u
posted on 28/11/22
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
Yeah but you can watch plenty of foreign leagues. To many it’s prem or nothing. Though I know season ticket holders that only watch their live games and have no interest outside of those games.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
U can watch uther keagues butt who has the thyme 4 that? (Uther than reeturds like DJ n Gunter obvs). Also, fireign leagues r birin as u r not emishanully invested in it. I have EPL games on Saturday mornins butt am bored 2 deth ss halve no intetest or much nolledge of whut is hapoenin.
posted on 28/11/22
Yeah but I’m not saying you have to be invested in it. It’s more that you can watch it and football fans will. Some just don’t because they only have a specific interest in football. It’s why so many don’t like international football. The point is if you can only enjoy the elite of the elite and the prem is what you deem to be that, or the latter stages of the cl, then you aren’t really a fan of football.
posted on 28/11/22
Yup thats tru
If u cannot enjoy the freakin Wurld Cuppa u r not a luvver of the game
posted on 28/11/22
It’s the gratest spectacle in sport along with the Olympics.
posted on 28/11/22
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 33 seconds ago
It’s the gratest spectacle in sport along with the Olympics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
n the Hotdog eatin contest at Coney Island on July 4
posted on 28/11/22
posted on 28/11/22
Feels like when the F1 is in Bahrain. You can still enjoy the sport when it's really good but the event itself is kind of sanitized and weird. I think a big part of what makes a World Cup fun is the home team doing well or at least getting the locals excited.. Qatar will go out of the group likely with 0 points and no one will care.
posted on 28/11/22
To answer the post....Yes, I like the WC.
But I don't watch all the games...I choose.
So far.. Brazil v Serbia was a very good game.
Spain V Germany was interesting, very technical, showed 3 teen age players. Manuel Neuer can still keep goal.
Argentina v Mexico was also very strategic but showed Messi can still play.
Have not watched anything else.
posted on 28/11/22
OP
I could have told you it would be boring before a ball was kicked. International football is pretty sub standard in the modern era, due to the fact practically everyone that can kick a football gets capped.
Watched a bit, and only Croatia and France have really impressed me. I will be very surprised if France do not retain the trophy.
Cannot wait for the Prem to restart.
posted on 28/11/22
I’m not against expanding the game to new territories, be it the Middle East, North Africa and or anywhere else as long as they can actually host the event.
———
Some of countries can only safely hold event in Winter, through no fault of their own.
posted on 28/11/22
I guess that it depends. If you are a Morroco, Saudi or Japan fan then you'd be loving it.
England had a great start, but I don't think that we will see the atmosphere and hype build until the knock out rounds.
We have also seen some high level football too. Mbappe has been great. Spain have played well too.
Early days, I'd say give it a chance.
posted on 28/11/22
Next World Cup will have 48 teams competing, which will be an even bigger Yawn Fest and even lower in quality. 16 teams maximum is needed.
posted on 28/11/22
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
posted on 28/11/22
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 14 seconds ago
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it feels like a lot, however when you look at how hard it is for African teams to qualify compared to European teams, then I think it is the right decision.
In Africa, you have to firstly win your group and then play a 2 legged play off! Whereas in Europe group winners qualify automatically and if you come 2nd and still have a chance to qualify via a playoff.
I think that a lot of us only look at the World Cup from a European perspective, but it is the World's game and hence we should see more teams qualify from all parts of it.
It will be a tough balancing act though, because you really want to keep the standard high and this could see some trash teams qualify.
posted on 28/11/22
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 5 minutes ago
Next World Cup will have 48 teams competing, which will be an even bigger Yawn Fest and even lower in quality. 16 teams maximum is needed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a very western/european view of things. Football is the world's game and just because it doesn't fully cater to you doesn't make it wrong.
I think that you can make it work for you though. You just have to ignore the tournament until the last 16. That way everybody is a winner.
posted on 28/11/22
Yep a way to get more African teams in is good. Some strong teams have missed out while teams like Wales and Australia make it with squads full of Championship level players.
posted on 28/11/22
Been good so far, and all groups go into game 3 with something to play for. At least 3 groups have all teams still with some chance of progression.
48 teams won't be too bad. Less group games, with a dimished chance of dead rubbers, bigger knock out stage.
posted on 28/11/22
It happens every major tournament. I never really get why some are so keen to announce about how boring they find a World Cup or Euros and start comparing it to others particularly at such an early stage. We’re not even onto third game of groups! Been fine so far in any case.
posted on 28/11/22
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 24 minutes ago
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think three countries are hosting it. USA, Canada and Mexico. It really is going to be a joke competition.
posted on 28/11/22
comment by add912 (U9189)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 14 seconds ago
48 teams? Sh!t. No point with qualifying at this rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it feels like a lot, however when you look at how hard it is for African teams to qualify compared to European teams, then I think it is the right decision.
In Africa, you have to firstly win your group and then play a 2 legged play off! Whereas in Europe group winners qualify automatically and if you come 2nd and still have a chance to qualify via a playoff.
I think that a lot of us only look at the World Cup from a European perspective, but it is the World's game and hence we should see more teams qualify from all parts of it.
It will be a tough balancing act though, because you really want to keep the standard high and this could see some trash teams qualify.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe because the quality of football is not that good in Africa, Asia, Australasia etc. Just bringing in more countries will surely make the competition even worse than it currently is.
Would you make the Winter Olympics better by bringing in countries that have never seen a snowflake in their history, just so they could be included. Would it make sense to include countries like Nigeria, Chad, Congo in a Winter Olympics just for inclusivity?
posted on 28/11/22
comment by add912 (U9189)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 5 minutes ago
Next World Cup will have 48 teams competing, which will be an even bigger Yawn Fest and even lower in quality. 16 teams maximum is needed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a very western/european view of things. Football is the world's game and just because it doesn't fully cater to you doesn't make it wrong.
I think that you can make it work for you though. You just have to ignore the tournament until the last 16. That way everybody is a winner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit hard to ignore it until the last 16, when there are hours and hours of football being blasted at you on the mainstream viewing channels 24/7.
Page 2 of 5