Tier 1: France, England, Argentina, Brazil Tier 2: Spain, Belgium, Portugal, Germany, Netherlands. Tier 3: Denmark, Uruguay, Croatia, Mexico, USA, Senegal, Switzerland.
Nah bro, respect is earned not given. Why demand *respect* for an entire confederation when only 20% of its members actually win things? If you want respect for either BRA or ARG, then we can have a chat. But please spare us from having to give the time of day to the likes of BOL/CHI/COL/ECU/PAR/PER/VEN . This is the world stage now, where the big boys play for keeps. Hopefully, ARG and BRA fans will start to disassociate themselves from the shambles that is Conmebol. Belly-aching for Conmebol certainly does not suit the achievements of ARG/BRA federations.
*30% you mean, forgot Uruguay. And by that logic, then no confederation “deserves respect” as there’s a much smaller percentage than 30% of footballing countries in those nations that “actually win things”. If you think UEFA is overall stronger than CONMEBOL that’s fine (and expected due to the greater number of countries). But if you think there are any other confederations that are stronger, that’s pretty silly.
Nope. The greater number of countries means the potential pool to fish in delutes. The comparable number of people in European and in South American countries, gives far more potential contenders for SA than in reality. Venezuela, Peru, Colombia should be powerhouses on the WC stage too with populations over 29 million together with Argentina and Brasil. Europe has 9 countries with over 29 million people. So 5 vs 9. The more people live in a country, the bigger the pond is to fish in, the stronger the national team should be.
I could have elaborated beyond simply the number of countries. Should’ve said numbers of countries that qualify I guess (13 vs 4-5), as that proves my point the easiest. The top European countries have infinitely better resources, the best leagues, etc. It’s much more than simply population size. At any rate, only 8 countries have won the WC and I’d be absolutely shocked if that changed this time around.
A bit pedantic I suppose but I just want to point out that the United Kingdom doesn't have a football team.
Nah, we are willing to give URU the time of the day, but they ain't winning anything either in the world stage. T-Rex_holding_a_rusted_trophy.jpg Nobody is asking you to pay homage to UEFA or any other confederation, therefore stop asking for respect for an entire confederation riding on the coattails of ARG and BRA. Reality-check a) if Conmebol qualifiers are so tough, then why is your confederation planning to scrap your round-robin format for 2026 WC? b) why is Conmebol desperate to be inserted into UEFA Nations League games? Plain and simple. ARG and BRA are no longer willing to be pulled down by deadwood floating around in Conmebol.
England is in Tier 2 for me. They benefitted from a lot of luck at World Cup 2018 (getting an R16 match against a team from Group G, winning a PK shootout), which made them appear better than they are. And at Euro 2020, they got to play six out of their seven matches at home at Wembley. They don't have a really dynamic attack, and those are the teams that can end up drawing winnable games at a World Cup.
That's because they havenot played the guy yet I predict to become the heir of Arjen Robben, Madueke. With him up front the English should become a nightmare team for all other teams.
Your Reality-check is a little off. a) The 2026 World Cup will have 48 teams, 6 of which from CONMEBOL. The confederation only has 10 affiliated members. It doesn't make sense to play 18 rounds of qualifying matches when only 4 teams will be left out. The decision has more to do with minimizing fatigue and logistics than actual competitiveness on the field. Still, expect resistance on this one. The current format is very lucrative to the individual federations as well as the media companies. They will try to protect that. b) Again, nothing to do with competitiveness on the field. It's a defensive move, and pure politics. Both UEFA and CONMEBOL agree that FIFA's proposal to have a world cup every two years is not beneficial to the sport. This is their way of saying that they will have their own "world cup" if the two-year plan moves forward.
All of a sudden Portugal are now joint fourth in the poll with 11 votes. Spain didn't convince me yesterday. In this form they are not favourites to go all the way. They need their wonderkids Pedri and Ansu Fati back firing on all cylinders.
Friendlys (particularly after a long club season) tell you next to nothing. And yes, Nations League matches are still basically friendlys. I watched Norway beat Serbia. If there was such a thing as 1/2 gear, Serbia was playing in it yesterday.
The Spain vs Portugal game had a few things people could take away from it while also realizing it shouldn't change anything about how people feel about either team. My main takeaway was that Gavi looks like he's going to be a phenomenal player.
Belgium 1-4 Netherlands I said that loss to France in the last edition in the Nations League marked the beginning of the end for Belgium's golden generation and we would witness a fast decline that would get highlighted at the World Cup in Qatar. Well, my theory got new food tonight. Granted Courtois didn't play and Lukaku was subbed out injured in the first half we saw a very lame Belgium without any creativity whatsoever. Very low energy level also. You couldn't tell that it was a Netherlands - Belgium derby. Is it time to hedge your bets on a group stage exit for Belgium in Qatar? Not yet but if things continue this way Belgium will have a hard time to get any sort of results in Qatar. Quick round up - First loss for Belgium to their neighbours after 25 years - First time Belgium loses at home after a run of 32 unbeaten games
Regardless of what you might think about the Nations League, the results we see underscore my view there are no real favorites anymore. That football has progressed to the point that many teams have players who are good enough to win games if they are clicking, in form, and the coincidental things which affect results go one way as opposed to another. Today, France lost 2:1 to Denmark at home. Croatia were thrashed by Austria and Belgium were thrashed worse by Holland. Yet, some of the big winners today can be big losers the next. And that means all the prognostications, pedigree and history IMO will play no role in determining the winners in Qatar. The actual winner IMO can even emerge from outside the small circle of past winners.
Very impressed with Denmark, they are a bit limited technically but manage their resources perfectly. And this despite they still don't have their best CBs and that Eriksen did not have a good match. France... half-assed it completely. Some players like Theo or Mbappe looked like they just want to go on vacations now.
That's wishful thinking. It's not smart to use some NL results on the night in order to make conclusions on that. Assumptions yes. Conclusions no. The winner will come from the usual cycle. It will be business as usual with some minor surprises.
Well since 1992 there has been a new winner of a Euro/World Cup after 3 tournaments. Denmark 1992 first time France 1998 first time Greece 2004 first time Spain 2010 first time Portugal 2016 first time so its very possible we could see a new winner of the world cup this year. France lost the final in 2006 and won in 2018 .Germany lost the final in 2002 and won in 2014.Maybe the Netherlands can win the World cup this year for the first time.However a new wc winner happens after 12 -20 periods. 1966 Engand 1978 Argentina 1998 France 2010 spain. 2030 new winner or 2022 ???