2018 World Cup

[bugylibicska]

England fans concentrate on the long game after defeat by Belgium
by Shaun Walker in Kaliningrad Today
It is not just the quality of opposition down the line that made second place appear attractive – England have reduced their travel time in the case of a successful run

England supporters will no doubt be plotting their way to the final, despite the result against Belgium. With the pre-match talk dominated by the suspicion that finishing second in Group G would be beneficial, fans could shrug off defeat by focusing on the long game.

http://www.footytube.com/news/england-f ... p_trendian

[Vickzq]

With James Rodriguez injured, England are heavy favorites over Colombia. He's the key player there, I'd say Colombia are 30% weaker without him. Turns out losing to Belgium was a good "turn of events" for England.

That's exactly the mentality that will send England home : if they think Colombia=James, we are far better, let's already think the semis etc.

And we still don't know if James will play.

Fans can think whatever they want. The players and the coaching staff will not underestimate Colombia, they're not that stupid after everything that has happened to their team in recent history. England win this comfortably.

Usually I would agree with you on that one (atleast 90%). But the way England played... that was quite a statement of favoring the path with Colombia. Why else would they miss the first ever chance at a world cup to finally test how good their team would do in a real duel with another team that could go far?
And it's not just fans, it's probably even more the media than the fans... and this for years. That's probably not without mental impact

[bugylibicska]

World Cup 2018: looking ahead to the last 16 plus England reaction – live!
by Paul MacInnes (now), Mike Hytner, Will Unwin and Tom Davies (ear Today

A couple more emails from you the public: on the bookies’ prices, from Jordan Devine: “As much as I dislike Ronaldo, Pepe et al, I’m baffled that they’re 25-1 for the outright win. This is the same team that won a major tournament two years ago. With a proven goalscoring talisman (who may or may not have sold his soul to the devil). I wonder if someone might explain to me how England are 7-1 in comparison?” A reflection of where the money’s going isn’t it? And The Market is never wrong. Ever.

“Expecting England to win a world cup is like eating a bowl of soup with a fork,” writes JohnTest below the line, channeling The Day Today’s Jacques ‘Jacques’ Liverot. “And every 4 years, we rock up with a fork. The fork in question of course is the players, schooled from a very young age using coaching methods that were rejected 40 years ago by most of the continent.”

Brussels newspaper Le Soir was a tad more forthright. “In a non-game that was hard to watch at times, England came out looking cynical and Belgium in the end decided not to sully their image,” it wrote.

Morning from that London, where everywhere is abuzz with the raging argument about whether losing a football match is better than winning one. What do we reckon? Does the World Cup really only contain England, 14 beatable teams, plus completely unbeatable Brazil, as some of today’s headlines seem excitedly to imply?

[jmf]

Belgium just realized the huge mistake to have scored! And now they are making everything possible for England to tie the game!

This is the world championship of stupid quotes today...

C'mon...let's be serious...they give praires to england players but they could not take advantage...there's no space for false naivety in football...belgium has a semi-final in his hands...and they wasted it all...I'm not saying that I support this kind of mentality...it's an unsportsmanlike conduct, but so the world goes...sad, but true...

They wasted nothing : they've played to win the game. If it was a remake of Germany-Austria 82 scandal, it could be a "unsportsmanlike conduct" but in this match, one team clearly wanted to win the match.
Belgian players are stupid ? Maybe but fair-play. I don't see what is it "sad" or "false naïvety" there. Except from England which clearly refuse to win.

So, it's still a stupid quote.

[Lorric]

It surprises me people think neither team was trying to win. Sure, you're right if you mean they weren't trying hard to win, but they were trying. No one was not trying, or even worse, deliberately trying to lose. But it was a match without much incentive to try, between two B teams who both know the plan is to play the A team in the last 16, who if they win would surely continue to be used, so they don't have a great opportunity to play into the team.

[Lorric]

I have a dream, which I don't expect to last beyond the match with Colombia, of seeing the World Cup in the England trophy cabinet, flanked by the U20 and U17 World Cups. It would be so beautiful...

[EarlofBug]

1966:
Real Madrid won European Cup 1.
Burnley achieved a european place.
Man City champion.
Chelsea ended 5th.

That's a nice one

[Ambro2000]

1966:
Real Madrid won European Cup 1.
Burnley achieved a european place.
Man City champion.
Chelsea ended 5th.

Manchester City champion?
Are you implying Russia will win the World Cup?

[EarlofBug]

It surprises me people think neither team was trying to win. Sure, you're right if you mean they weren't trying hard to win, but they were trying. No one was not trying, or even worse, deliberately trying to lose. But it was a match without much incentive to try, between two B teams who both know the plan is to play the A team in the last 16, who if they win would surely continue to be used, so they don't have a great opportunity to play into the team.

Yeah, that was quite like a friendly match Both teams knew that they had already progressed to the next stage, and there wasn't a real difference between the two paths. There was a difference in the next opponent in the KO stage, but if you consider yourself as a big team, that can go all the way to the final, there isn't a big difference between the two paths.
I guess that the main issue was not getting hurt or suspended, so it was more like a friendly match.

[Lorric]

It surprises me people think neither team was trying to win. Sure, you're right if you mean they weren't trying hard to win, but they were trying. No one was not trying, or even worse, deliberately trying to lose. But it was a match without much incentive to try, between two B teams who both know the plan is to play the A team in the last 16, who if they win would surely continue to be used, so they don't have a great opportunity to play into the team.

Yeah, that was quite like a friendly match Both teams knew that they had already progressed to the next stage, and there wasn't a real difference between the two paths. There was a difference in the next opponent in the KO stage, but if you consider yourself as a big team, that can go all the way to the final, there isn't a big difference between the two paths.
I guess that the main issue was not getting hurt or suspended, so it was more like a friendly match.

Yes. It was very like a friendly.

[Polak]

It surprises me people think neither team was trying to win. Sure, you're right if you mean they weren't trying hard to win, but they were trying. No one was not trying, or even worse, deliberately trying to lose. But it was a match without much incentive to try, between two B teams who both know the plan is to play the A team in the last 16, who if they win would surely continue to be used, so they don't have a great opportunity to play into the team.

I think the last part is the key. Martinez himself said before the game, that winning isn't the priority. I wouldn't be surprised if he was happy to even take the loss or draw and take the theoretically easier path [i.e avoid the possibility of Brazil in the 1/4 final].

As you said though, B team players were playing for a potential place in the A team, and Januzaj was clearly one of those trying to break in to the starting line up, so he played as well has he could and scored [possibly messing up Martinez's plan?].

[Malko]

So groustage is over :

my prediction:
1) Colombia
2) Poland
3) japan
4) Senegal

Well i just switches Poland and Japan, but am happy about it, cause the goalkeeper of Japan Kawashima plays in metz.

1) Uruguay
2) Russia
3) Egypt
4) Saudi arabia

Uruguay and Russia qualifying

1) Belgium
2) England
3) Tunisia
4) panama

and Malko was again right concerning 1 and 2......

My prediction :
1) Mexico
2) Sweden
3) germany
4) south Korea

it was 1)Sweden and 2) mexico, but i got the 2 qualified teams, even overestimating Germany

1) Brazil
2) Costa Rica
3) Switzerland
4) Serbia

Like in the Japan group, i switches 2 and 3...felicitaions Switzerland

1) argentina
2) croatia
3) Iceland
4) nigeria

the 2 quaified are right, switched...

1) France
2) Australia
3) Denmark
4) peru

my second error with australia, it was finally Denmark

1) Spain
2) Portugal
3) marocco
4) Iran

and again i predicted the 2 qualified teams , not very difficult here.....

so, i only was mistaken with 2 qualifying teams ::::::-)

now for the round of 16 :

30-juin 16:00 France Argentine (60-40) FRANCE
30-juin 20:00 Uruguay Portugal (65-32) URUGUAY
1-juil. 16:00 Espagne.Russie (70-30) SPAIN
1-juil. 20:00 Croatie Danemark (70-30) CROATIA
2-juil. 16:00 Brésil Mexique (80-20) BRASIL
2-juil. 20:00 Belgique Japon (70-30) BELGIUM
3-juil. 16:00 Suède Suisse (50-50) SUISSE
3-juil. 20:00 Colombie Angleterre (40-60) ENGLAND

[subway14]

odds to win WC:


still possible to bet on Brazil-Spain-France-Portugal and win with 99% probability

[Club-Mate]

"Imagine the following scenario:
Winning the match: 3 points
Draw by winning penalties: 2 points
Draw losing penalties: 1 point
Losing: 0 points

This would also make it much less probable for two teams finishing with the same amount of point especially when only playing 3 matches."

they do that in icehockey and in this kind of sport it works really well for decades. After 60 min. 5 min overtime after that penalty killing. BUT in icehockey much more goals happen than in football. How much time will you play overtime after an exhausting 90 min.? and still the possibility to score a goal in overtime is not that much high. If they do penalties after 90 mins. the winner would get 100 % more points than the looser. This does not suit well it's inappropriate. After some time teams with good penalty scorer (plus good penalty killing goalies) would move up in rankings. But this 3 points scenario has to be take into consideration it's much more better than the present system.

[max tre]

Couldn't they play URU-POR right now and FRA-ARG tomorrow night?