Which Teams Will Surprise and Which Teams Will Disappoint in Russia?

The list by Sports Illustrated:
https://www.si.com/soccer/2018/07/17/world-cup-expectation-rankings-2018-russia
World Cup Expectation Rankings: Who Over- and Under-Performed in Russia?

Not surprisingly, the Germans ranked 32/32 in terms of the expectations ranking. I don't think anyone can seriously dispute that they did worst compared to expectations. Some might disagree that Croatia should rank 1/32 on the list, but few would dispute the fact that they achieved more than they would have been expected to. The rest of the choices can be quibbled about. Anyway, I thought the list and comments were interesting.

 

I guess I am surprised that Panama is #4 in your list? You expected a lot better from them?

 

Now that the World Cup is over, the most surprising (in terms of achieving better than expected) and the most disappointing (doing worse than expected) for me would be the following:

8 Most Surprising (Positive)

1- Croatia -- while Croatia had enough talent to be considered a dark horse candidate, they clearly were not a side slated to make the World Cup final. They achieved more than would have been expected from them. In fact, short of winning the World Cup, its tough to achieve more than they did finishing runner up.
2- Russia -- the Russians came to the tournament with low expectations, after failing to look good in their friendlies. They started the World Cup with a 5:0 demolition of Saudi Arabia and finished as a quarter-finalist.
3- Belgium -- everyone knew Belgium had the talent, but no one could be sure they could put it all together to come so close to making the final. Belgium finished 3rd in the World Cup and they deserved no less.
4- Japan -- what Japan did in 2018 was what many might have expected from them in 2014 when they disappointed. Besides advancing from their group this time around, they gave us the most exciting match of the tournament when they met Belgium in the knock out rounds.
5- Sweden -- they didn't impress with playing fluid and entertaining football, but a quarterfinal finish for a side with such limited talent is pretty good. Better than expected.
6- Iran -- few gave us a chance to advance from our group and while we didn't advance, few would have believed Iran would finish with 4 points and fail to advance by a chance missed by inches in the last seconds of its game against Portugal.
7- Peru -- they didn't surprise with their results, which were probably less than expected, but they surprised me by the quality of their attacking play and their positive, even audacious, attitude in their first 2 games and, in particular against Denmark.
8- Morocco -- they are both in the most surprising and most disappointing list. I knew Morocco were good but they truly surprised by just how good they were. Portugal didn't deserve beating them and frankly neither did Iran nor Spain (which only drew them).

8 Most Disappointing

1- Germany - no need for any explanations!
2- Spain -- I am no sure explanation will be necessary either.
3- Poland -- at least compared to their ranking, they did very poorly finishing bottom of their group. But that group was always between 4 teams of similar caliber.
4- Egypt - without Salah, I didn't rate Egypt much. But to lose to Saudi Arabia with Salah was even worse than I had predicted and I had predicted them to draw the Saudis.
5- Portugal -- as suspected, they proved overly reliant on Ronaldo. One he stopped scoring for them, they began to falter.
6- Tunisia -- they had the team and talent to do much better, if they hadn't chosen such naive and retarded tactics.
7- Nigeria -- I expected better from them and, frankly, they have no one to blame but themselves given up how things were set up for them by the time they faced Argentina.
8- Morocco -- while they were impressive and audacious, they ended up last in their group. And for a side that I believe rated among the top 10-15 at the World Cup, and was unlucky against all of Iran, Portugal and Morocco, that is definitely disappointing.

 

What you mentioned isn't a referee error so much as a different approach you would have preferred by the referee towards an event that turned out to hurt Poland. I sympathize enough with all perspectives on this particular point so I won't get to the specifics you allude to.

As in life more generally, however, there are moments and incidents in football when a decision, a move, a mistake (by a player, referee, etc), can have momentous consequences for what unfolds afterwards. But while no one can deny the influence of incidents here or there on the final outcome in football, the game is ultimately akin to a story built on such incidents, including some that sometimes veer from the preceding narrative in dramatic fashion. Incidents which give it the twists and turns that make the game interesting and occasionally thrilling and sometimes tragic.

In the case with Poland, however, even the incident you mention didn't work to totally disrupt the preceding narrative. For a side whose ranking as a top seed was always in question, Poland showed absolutely nothing to help answer those questions. At best, if they weren't the 4th worst team in their group, they were basically on par with everyone else and maybe worse than some of the others. I didn't put Poland as the 2nd most disappointing team in the tournament as many have since my expectation of them was a bit lower to begin with. I consider Spain a greater disappointment in context and while I have Poland 3rd in my list, I would understand if others found some of the other sides to have been bigger disappointments still.

 

As I said, I sympathize with all sides of the argument on that play. That was a long back pass and while something done often enough, I believe these kind of back passes are always fraught with risk. As someone who saw a hitherto promising Iranian game against Mexico (in WC2006) ruined by an ill timed back pass and the comedy of errors that ensued, I have grown to be alarmed when I see back passes to the goalie if there is even the slightest indication of risk. Usually my alarm proves unwarranted, but I have also seen quite a few instances when even if disaster is averted, it is averted by hair's thin margin.

On the other hand, I do find it inherently unfair for a player who has been out of the field to be able to run into the field and intercept a back pass like that. A sensible rule change regarding these kind of things might indeed be in order. But absent such a rule change, I don't think the referee was any more at fault in that incident than anyone else. To expect the referee to come up with a solution to a problem that few have encountered before on his own in the middle of a match like that is too much. Referees calling games to stop because of extra balls affecting the play and such are, on the other hand, quite typical and not all that sui generis. Incidentally, I think you are referring to the England-Colombia match (maybe not, but I don't remember the Brazil-Belgium example), where a Colombia goal was disallowed - although that "goal" was scored when the whistle had been blown already and everyone had stopped anyway.