World Cup 2018...it's gonna look a little different

Sad USA is out.

A USA-Germany game was running the day I (American) married my German husband in Germany. So of course between the civil ceremony and the church, the guests had a peek at the game. I didn't mind!

Definitely agree US players need to play in Europe or elsewhere at the moment to pick up some high level skills.

I'm Scottish. What is a 'World Cup'?

Also old enough to remember some half-decent Scottish teams getting there in the past, but by the time it rolls round in 2022 it'll be 24 years since we last qualified. It tends to lead to a certain loss of interest in the whole thing

Italy's my guilty pleasure, ever since I bet on them to beat Australia in that one penalty shootout in 2006. I'll be a little wistful about this.

Two interesting stories today that are going to have a bearing on how this tournament plays out (and it's getting close now! Always my favourite years: Winter Olympics + World Cup).

First is this piece out of ESPN, that the combined North American bid for 2026 could be in doubt because of both FIFA geopolitics and Trump geopolitics (hard to pick which I like less there, to be honest). The report is heavy on unnamed confederational sources, so I'd take the actual "doubts" that headline it with a massive grain of salt. To an extent, this bid has always had doubts, for the same geopolitical reasons every US bid has doubts--a problem exacerbated within FIFA by the US leading the corruption investigation that took out a lot of high-up people. Until federations start going on record with voting intentions, this kind of speculation is fairly meaningless.

What stood out to me is this:

The ballots will be cast just days before the opening match of the 2018 World Cup between Russia and Saudi Arabia in Moscow -- with the 2026 hosts expected to be announced on June 13.

Click to expand...

This seems awfully dicey on FIFA's part. The whole appeal of the US-led bid was that it was a nice, clean, easy-to-accept bid after the fiasco of Russia and Qatar. So announcing what could be a close hosting decision (they're always close) right as Russia 2018 gets underway... them's some very strange optics. Some group of people is going to be very angry. Which, coming from FIFA, maybe isn't surprising....

Second story is this, from the Guardian, on an absolute mess involving VAR (video assistant referees, which will be in use in Russia) in the FA Cup.

UEFA also announced this week that they won't use VAR in the Champion's League next year. Increasingly, leagues, particularly in Europe, seem to hate it. The Tottenham mess is hardly even the worst VAR howler I've seen--they have been legion in Australia, Germany, Italy, and Portugal. The English FA, or at least the English press, which may as well be the same thing, is getting very frothy about it. Most of the problems so far are issues of consistency and the press is mostly just doing what it does. It wouldn't be such a problem if FIFA had actually used the system in advance of the World Cup, but it largely hasn't.

VAR was used at last summer's U-20s, where it went relatively smoothly; at last summer's Confederations Cup, where it didn't; and at the 2017 Club World Cup, where I didn't hear anything one way or the other because there are only about six matches. That's a massively low amount of prep for any major tournament use of anything, much less a system that is technologically fiddly (having used the RefTalk systems, they have an amazing tendency to either fail or fall out at the worst time), much less at a tournament that brings together players and referees from vastly different cultures with vastly different levels of experience.

The foul that ruled out Tottenham's goal today isn't and shouldn't be a foul. But, by the letter of the law, it can be. So you take, say, a Spanish or Mexican referee, who regularly works in a league that's typically more strict. You add an English or Nigerian VAR, who regularly works in a very physical league. Honduras are playing Uruguay . How does that call play out, in the pressure cooker of the World Cup? The referees are under massive pressure to get "match critical" calls correct--penalties, red cards, offside leading to goals. They basically compete for knock-out round games, the Final, and for standing domestically, at future tournaments, and post-retirement. The pressure to call the by-the-book foul, or penalty, or red card, is immense. Adding a second set of eyes actually reduces the likelihood of a referee making a "common sense" managerial decision, because more weight is placed on the process rather than individual management decisions.

I give it about 2-3 matches before a VAR controversy erupts (here's a good example of what that looks like--note, some NSFW langauge from angry coach). Given FIFA have, bizarrely, decided to operate the system remotely from Moscow rather than in-stadium like usual, I'd even bet we'll get a nice politically-motivated smear job early on: a "FIFA's secret VAR room made sure [insert "smaller" nation here] didn't win!" This should land just as the brouhaha from whatever comes of the hosting decision is blowing over.

Plus ça, plus c'est la même chose, FIFA.

Main problem with the current use of VAR seems to be the time taken for the definitive verdict to be reached. I'm in favour of the principle because I've seen way too many bad decisions.

BBC reporting that Morocco's bid for the 2026 World Cup has passed its technical inspection.

This is a big deal because it's beginning to look like the Moroccan bid may have a lot more political support. Since that ESPN story in late February, a lot of federations have been announcing their voting intentions and intention to support Morocco. It's hard to handicap this stuff, and intentions can change, but it looks like the US need to make up about a 20 vote spread. Each national FA gets one vote and this year there's not supposed to be bags of cash or anything like that going on.

For the US-led bid, a lot could be riding on the Middle East blocs, particularly any countries Saudi Arabia can convince to back it, and the South American FAs, many of whom want another unified Copa America in 2019 (basically, money). But some of the Caribbean nations have already announced support for Morocco, because CONCACAF.

Morocco's biggest hurdle was that it might well have failed the technical bid inspection. Its stadium plans are probably unfeasible, transportation could be an issue, and there are local laws about homosexuality that you'd think would like to avoid after Russia and Qatar. But, y'know, FIFA.

So what will happen is it will all come to a vote on June 13, on the even of the World Cup, and the US, Mexico, and Canada could well lose. Which will likely set-off more FIFA in-fighting through the World Cup.

williemeikle said:

I'm Scottish. What is a 'World Cup'?

Also old enough to remember some half-decent Scottish teams getting there in the past, but by the time it rolls round in 2022 it'll be 24 years since we last qualified. It tends to lead to a certain loss of interest in the whole thing

Click to expand...

Yeah, Welsh person here, tell me about it. Wales getting through to the Euros was a minor miracle.

I used to love football, and then too much money poisoned the game, and the players started falling over in the penalty area whenever a defender breathed on them.

A few decent games from some of these new teams and maybe I'll climb down off my high horse.

I'd watch--and I'll be watching--Iceland. Small nation, tiny population, built a development system that works, sticks to its identity, and did amazingly well at the Euros. The World Cup is a different beast but I don't think that was a one-off. They're not going to win, but there's a lot Wales and Scotland could learn there.

As a referee, I both get what you're saying about diving and also kind of disagree. It doesn't take a huge amount of contact to bring someone down, and professional players are very, very good at subtle fouls that don't look like much but impede a player just enough. In some ways, that kind of thing--a grab, a heel clip--is almost more unsporting than a legit challenge that just takes the striker down.

And strikers will tell you that if they don't go down they don't get the call. Sadly, there's some truth to this. Penalties are fairly subjective--a lot depends on what meets the definition of "careless" or "trifling" contact. A striker hitting the deck is one way he can communicate that the contact, at least in his opinion, wasn't trifling. Not that this isn't sometimes or even often a con job.

In theory, VAR should help with this. In practice, it's a subjective call. It should correct the really, really flagrant dives, but those only happen once a tournament or so. People are not going to be happy when VAR doesn't correct the foul that looks like a dive, but there's enough contact that it's not a clear and obvious error. Nor will they be happy when VAR intervenes to give a ticky-tacky penalty because, in a classroom, that's the right call. I wouldn't actually be shocked to see strikers go down more because they know they can get a review and once that happens, who knows. And I wouldn't hold your breath on referees retroactively carding those dives. The law standard is fairly high to begin with, and a lot of refs, especially at the higher levels, regard it as a card they don't have to give, and so they don't.

waylander said:

Main problem with the current use of VAR seems to be the time taken for the definitive verdict to be reached. I'm in favour of the principle because I've seen way too many bad decisions.

Click to expand...

We had a lot of problems with long VAR delays during games here in Australia throughout the recently finished season. And in the Grand Final, the system broke down and the winning offside goal was allowed. It's making officials lazy, as in the above case, everyone blamed VAR, but the linesman was in line with the three offside players!

I agree that it has a negative impact on how the referee's decision-making process works. I don't know if it's laziness so much as a sub-optimal protocol, but it amounts to the same thing.

(By and large, referees like VAR because it helps avoid the kind of catastrophic errors that can end a career before it's begun.)

There are some protocols, on offside for instance, that the ARs are supposed to keep the flag down as long as possible, so as to allow review of close decisions. What they don't want is a quick+wrong flag pulling a good goal out, because once the whistle goes the attack stops, and there's no way to remedy that situation. That's a design flaw in the system, caused by it being too flowing a sport.

I don't often get to say this, but wow, England had a great game today.

neandermagnon said:

I don't often get to say this, but wow, England had a great game today.

Click to expand...

Great to watch as they usually struggle to beat poorer sides. Bad defending on the Panama goal though.

neandermagnon said:

I don't often get to say this, but wow, England had a great game today.

Click to expand...

They played well, but Panama were atrocious. Still, a team can only play the opponents they've been given and England swatted them like a bug. The match against Belgium should be interesting to say the least

I thought Germany were lucky to get their win against Sweden and didn't look like champs.

The competition is starting to warm up and develop nicely.

England - Belgium, what a promising match

Blimey! Germany are out.

alkin said:

England - Belgium, what a promising match

Click to expand...

Except that neither side is playing their full first choice XI, coming 2nd in the group offers a potentially easier quarter-final. I doubt under these circumstances that it will be a classic

Yesterday was a crazy day. Who would have thought (before the world cup) that Sweden would win the group with Germany ending up last...

I agree with talktidy, they were lucky to get 3 points against Sweden, it was clear from the from the first half against Mexico that Germany was out of sync this time around.

Germany looked like a team that quit on their manager.

Which I say with all due respect to Jogi Low, who is a genius. But he's been in the role for 14 years and there comes a point where nothing is new any more. Sometimes players need that extra bit of inspiration and energy.

Germany haven't looked quite right since Euro 2016, where they kind of struggled. They won the Confed Cup with a B team, and probably more of those players should have been brought to the World Cup squad, if only to provide extra energy.

They've also lost the chemistry that made them dangerous up top. I like Timo Werner, but he's not Miro Klose and it looks like Muller has some difficulty playing off of him. Germany looked like Spain--all kinds of pressure, no killer finish. Mario Gomez is not what he was even four years ago, and even then I'm not sure he's the solution.

Factor in no more Lahm, Schweinsteiger, or Badstuber and this is very much a team in transition.

VeryBigBeard said:

Factor in no more Lahm, Schweinsteiger, or Badstuber and this is very much a team in transition.

Click to expand...

I agree. Some of the current players are getting up there in age as well. Over the next 8 years, Germany will prove to be far less of a threat I'm certain. They next generation of german players cannot match up with the one we have seen. Then again, where there is great organisation and structure, you can make do with less talent.

Moving on, I am incredibly impressed by Uruguays defense. Combined with counter-attacks and great strikers who can create on their own, they are looking scary. The game against France will be a great one. Hopefully Cavani will be able to play so that they face of at near full strength.

I wouldn't bet against Germany getting themselves sorted by the next World Cup and being their customary threat.

France were a revelation -- made me wonder if the football team were emulating their rugby side, when it's anybody's guess how they will perform. Perhaps it's just that the knock out stage concentrates minds -- and Mbappe was a joy to watch. They let in three, though, so opponents can take heart.

Portugal surprised me. I expected them to win, but Uruguay weren't having any of that. Suarez and Cavani -- hope he's fit -- are going to be a handful. I've gone from meh! World Cup, to can't wait for the next games.

Russia, Croatia, England, Colombia, Sweden and Switzerland are all thinking that they'll never have a better chance than this I'm sure.

I'm impressed by France but will rooting for them to get kicked out next game regardless. Might be difficult without Cavani though.

Oh and what an incredible performance by Russia. Legendary even.

Oh, poor Japan.

Even though Belgium shipped two goals, I had a feeling they would equalise, but I thought the game would be determined on penalties. What do I know? At least Belgium's last goal was a cracker.

Well that was emotionally exhausting and we made hard work of it, but we're through to play Sweden. Even won a penalty shootout!