World Cup 2018 | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

World Cup 2018

Luckiest 4 2 win I've seen. Outplayed for the whole game, an own goal after a free paid for a dive, var penalty decision, then 2 more goals from really the only 2 decent attacking moves. France were lucky against the aussies in their opening game and took it all the way to the final.
 
That typified everything I don’t like about the world game.

Croatia dominated the play for such little return.

That France could lack any kind of real possession and still come away speaks volumes about this flukey game.

That wasn’t an intentional hand ball either.
 
Harry said:
Luckiest 4 2 win I've seen. Outplayed for the whole game, an own goal after a free paid for a dive, var penalty decision, then 2 more goals from really the only 2 decent attacking moves. France were lucky against the aussies in their opening game and took it all the way to the final.

Not sure the French were outplayed. The Coats were playing at a frenzy without much form or tactics other than cross it in for a header or have a shot from any scoring distance. The Croats were out of their depth but they refused to accept that so kept pushing hard. The Frogs soaked it up and worked on counter attacks.

Classic Đavid vs Goliath type game where the underdog keeps taking it up to the favorites. But that doesn't mean the favorites were outplayed or played badly.

MmmBop is going to be a real generational player.
 
Lol. The counter attack is Frances game.

They played a conservative style all tournament.

Croatia played a good 30 minutes and that was all.
 
mad_tiggy911 said:
Lol. The counter attack is Frances game.

They played a conservative style all tournament.

Croatia played a good 30 minutes and that was all.

Croatia could easily have been 1-0 at the break. That wasn’t an intentional hand ball and the own goal was unlucky. France was not as enterprising.
 
Harry said:
Luckiest 4 2 win I've seen. Outplayed for the whole game, an own goal after a free paid for a dive, var penalty decision, then 2 more goals from really the only 2 decent attacking moves. France were lucky against the aussies in their opening game and took it all the way to the final.

That is the way France has played all tournament and it has worked. Its a tactical choice not a sign they were being outplayed. They were basically the best team and deserved to win. Its almost rope a dope in soccer terms.
 
IanG said:
That is the way France has played all tournament and it has worked. Its a tactical choice not a sign they were being outplayed. They were basically the best team and deserved to win. Its almost rope a dope in soccer terms.
Interestingly, France were accused by Belgian team management of playing boring 'anti-football'. Very much a style of play that characterises Italian football, that France have decided to encompass into their style of play. However, the French coach did have a good comeback to that. While he acknowledged that, when the situation arose, this style of defensive play is something they do employ. He suggested that they are more versatile than this and can switch modes to more attacking style. He highlighted the game vs Argentina as an example.
 
Agree. France were the best team all tournament and have more gears. Their depth is embarrassing too.

Shame Australia couldn't get a point off them though.
 
22nd Man said:
Do France give out passports to elite soccer people like we do in Olympic sports?

Was good to see an African side win the World Cup for a change ;D

If it wasnt for all the good Africans in the side would they have even made the World Cup ;D
 
interesting to note that Qatar 2022 will be 5 days shorter than Russia (Nov 21 - Dec 18). I'm guessing because of the minimal distance between the host cities?

mad_tiggy911 said:
Lol. The counter attack is Frances game.

They played a conservative style all tournament.

Croatia played a good 30 minutes and that was all.

spot on. France and Belgium especially were devastating on the counter with their amazing pace. Croatia were probably stiff to be down at half time, but were not the better team overall
 
Ian4 said:
interesting to note that Qatar 2022 will be 5 days shorter than Russia (Nov 21 - Dec 18). I'm guessing because of the minimal distance between the host cities?

it is reported to be shorted because of the timing. the big leagues, and clubs, wouldnt cop a longer break in December.
 
Brodders17 said:
it is reported to be shorted because of the timing. the big leagues, and clubs, wouldnt cop a longer break in December.

Either way I'm happy with it. I could probably do all 3 group games in 7-8 days
 
craig said:
Was good to see an African side win the World Cup for a change ;D

If it wasnt for all the good Africans in the side would they have even made the World Cup ;D

How many generations need to be born in France before they are considered French players instead of African players?
 
agree Baloo, from someone living in France their team is a fair reflection of this nation. havent heard any complaints or slights either.

No surprise given their history of colonization and exploration that the French community reflects their history.
 
Baron Samedi said:
That wasn’t an intentional hand ball either.

doesnt have to be intentional, just the same as an in the back doesnt have to be intentional. his hands were out, away from the body and the ball clearly hit his hand. seems clear to me.

Besides France played well, absolutely owned the game. Unfortunately its a fundamental problem with soccer, that once a team have a lead it is far easier to hold it than keep attacking. Cant complain about France though, they played to the rules
 
Ian4 said:
interesting to note that Qatar 2022 will be 5 days shorter than Russia (Nov 21 - Dec 18). I'm guessing because of the minimal distance between the host cities?

spot on. France and Belgium especially were devastating on the counter with their amazing pace. Croatia were probably stiff to be down at half time, but were not the better team overall
What do you mean host cities (plural)?

There is only ONE city in Qatar (about the size of Perth WA). So we have four stadiums in Doha (a city of only 2mil). Then the rest of the tournament seems that it will consist of stadiums built in the middle of the dessert in some random spots perhaps inhabited by nomadic Bedouin villages from time to time.

A couple of additional points too. There are only 8 host stadiums, when FIFA has normally stated that a prospective host needs at least 10 stadia (preferably in at least 8 host cities). This was under a 32 team format, let alone 46! And as for the change in dates. FIFA (and it's Confederations) have continuously stated to aspiring hosts, that a Jun-Jul-Aug window is non-negotiable. Yet they've now buckled and allowed for a change.

This (Qatar) was always an outrageously absurd hosting proposal, that never should have even made the shortlist. Shows, if you grease the right palms (and with enough brown paper bags) anything is possible, no matter how comically ridiculous.

*smile*ing joke! I have zero desire to attend such a flawed tournament layout. I'm happy to wait until 2026 for a proper host.
 
Baloo said:
How many generations need to be born in France before they are considered French players instead of African players?
Related to that. How many players in the Belgian side are what we think of as 'Belgian' in the traditional sense? Likewise England these days - a fair chunk of their team are of Afro/Caribbean extraction (or mixed English-Afro/Caribbean ethnicity).

Latin American teams also have a number of players of Afro/Caribbean extraction (or indeed, most of their players are actually of mixed race heritage) - Columbia, Costa Rica, Brazil certainly come to mind. Or the US for that matter always has a number of African-American players.

Look at the teams from the Gulf States. I didn't see that many Arabs in the Saudi team, essentially most of the team are of African extraction. Of course, Africans have lived in the Gulf (originally as slaves and/or indentured labour for the Arabs and more recently as general migrant workers/labourers) for many generations.

So not a dissimilar examples, compared to European countries fielding teams with a strong African/Caribbean influence.
 
Baloo said:
How many generations need to be born in France before they are considered French players instead of African players?

Doesn't have to be even 1 generation. You can qualify through residency (I think 5 years) to play for a country other than your country of birth.

Besides, only 1 of their first team was born outside of France, Um tities was born in the Cameroon.
 
mrposhman said:
Doesn't have to be even 1 generation. You can qualify through residency (I think 5 years) to play for a country other than your country of birth.

Besides, only 1 of their first team was born outside of France, Um tities was born in the Cameroon.

Want talking about qualification, more about people's acceptance
 
Baloo said:
Want talking about qualification, more about people's acceptance
I certainly get where you're coming from Baloo. No one would doubt the legitimacy of an Afro-American playing for the US. Or a player of Afro-Caribbean heritage playing for a Latin American side such as, Colombia, Costa Rica or Brazil. So why does the French team deserve the skepticism? Particularly as you suggest, when all but one the team were born in France!

I suppose though, the word 'indigenous' has been hijacked by a certain political persuasion. The meaning of the word 'indigenous' actually is, "originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native". So in a practical sense, those players born on France, that you speak of, are 'indigenous' to France.

And if we're being consistent, I'm 6th generation Australian. That is, no tangible link to any other part of the world for at least 5 generations! So in every practical sense of the word, I'm certainly 'indigenous' to Australia. So similar to the concept of 2nd generation French soccer players, it's probably why I outright reject the trendy political concept that my inherent sense of belonging to this place is relegated behind certain anointed ones.