TSB
Captain Hindsight
Good for Iran.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] WC: Morocco v Iran
- Thread starter smillie's garden
- Start date
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
I see NSC has turned into a bunch of football snobs now that we're in the big time league. 
studio150
Well-known member
Steady
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
Provided their husbands will let them watch it on the telly back home. And then they can see lots of their female ex-pats, many with their heads uncovered, in the stadia. Spread that freedom!
Don't confuse the Iranian leadership with the Iranian people. The younger generation in particular want change.
And the current leadership can trace its routes to UK/US intervention.
smillie's garden
Am I evil?
- Aug 11, 2003
- 2,595
- Thread starter
- #45
Entertaining first half, but an abysmal second. I was aligning myself with Morocco at first, but found myself happy for the Persians in the end, mostly due to Morocco's cynical play.
The qualification system is absurd. Imagine what the FA cup would be like if all the EFL and EPL teams went into the mix with all the villiage teams at the equivalent of the 5th qualifying round? The FA cup is seeded for a reason. WC qulification should be based on seeding as well as geography (for reasons of costs). South America does it quite well (albeit too many games) by having one qualifying pot. But the anti European bias of FIFA is stupid. Widening participation is a good thing, but not when done at the expense of the competition and the better nations. I'm surprised FIFA haven't made the Germans play with a man short, or wearing big hats when they play lesser nations. In all the years of the WC I see no evidence that partcipation has widened. In the US, socca is the biggest participation sport in schools, yet it doesn't translate to the man's game, despite yet another world cup finals there. Participation is what it is. I don't mind it if a championship side makes it to the FA cup final, on merit, but reserving them a special place, or a shoe-in to the last 32 would be bollocks. Europe is awash with soccer mad nations and top players. That should be reflected in the WC. If I wanted to watch a freak show I'd go to the circus. I'm getting more and more annoyed just trying to not think about it.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,892
Should be remembered that since the fall of the Shah, forward progress has been slow.....
studio150
Well-known member
The qualification system is absurd. Imagine what the FA cup would be like if all the EFL and EPL teams went into the mix with all the villiage teams at the equivalent of the 5th qualifying round? The FA cup is seeded for a reason. WC qulification should be based on seeding as well as geography (for reasons of costs). South America does it quite well (albeit too many games) by having one qualifying pot. But the anti European bias of FIFA is stupid. Widening participation is a good thing, but not when done at the expense of the competition and the better nations. I'm surprised FIFA haven't made the Germans play with a man short, or wearing big hats when they play lesser nations. In all the years of the WC I see no evidence that partcipation has widened. In the US, socca is the biggest participation sport in schools, yet it doesn't translate to the man's game, despite yet another world cup finals there. Participation is what it is. I don't mind it if a championship side makes it to the FA cup final, on merit, but reserving them a special place, or a shoe-in to the last 32 would be bollocks. Europe is awash with soccer mad nations and top players. That should be reflected in the WC. If I wanted to watch a freak show I'd go to the circus. I'm getting more and more annoyed just trying to not think about it.
They could still allow the likes of Iran and Morocco to go the WCF, but the 8 lowest ranked teams play in 2 groups before the higher seeds start, and the ground winners (or top 2) from the minnows groups progress into the in the higher ranked groups.
Won't happen though, as FIFA just want to spread the gravy train
CorgiRegisteredFriend
Well-known member
Just made it home in time to see the goal. Ouch!
I would not argue with that. But I would argue that rewarding nations that block 'widened participation' at home with easy access to the finals, with no sanction for their restrictive access at home, in the name of 'widening access', is perverse. It is like giving an alcoholic unrestricted access to the drinks cabinet in the hope that this will encourage them to drink less.
The qualification system is absurd. Imagine what the FA cup would be like if all the EFL and EPL teams went into the mix with all the villiage teams at the equivalent of the 5th qualifying round? The FA cup is seeded for a reason. WC qulification should be based on seeding as well as geography (for reasons of costs). South America does it quite well (albeit too many games) by having one qualifying pot. But the anti European bias of FIFA is stupid. Widening participation is a good thing, but not when done at the expense of the competition and the better nations. I'm surprised FIFA haven't made the Germans play with a man short, or wearing big hats when they play lesser nations. In all the years of the WC I see no evidence that partcipation has widened. In the US, socca is the biggest participation sport in schools, yet it doesn't translate to the man's game, despite yet another world cup finals there. Participation is what it is. I don't mind it if a championship side makes it to the FA cup final, on merit, but reserving them a special place, or a shoe-in to the last 32 would be bollocks. Europe is awash with soccer mad nations and top players. That should be reflected in the WC. If I wanted to watch a freak show I'd go to the circus. I'm getting more and more annoyed just trying to not think about it.
Agree with all that.
It's probably not anti-European, but more pro votes. There are so many nations in Africa, Asia and Oceania, that all FIFA officials and candidates to be officials, offer the earth to mop up juicy votes.
The standard of football from Saudi, Morocco, Iran and Egypt has been shocking.
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
And who suffers if you block them? The Iranian footballers and the Iranian people. It's a big deal for them to be in the World Cup.
Bollocks. Just realised I am watching ITV+1
I have been watching a replay of watching paint dry.
I suspect that some of you knew, and decided to not say anything.
Don't blame you, really. More fun than the match.
I have been watching a replay of watching paint dry.
I suspect that some of you knew, and decided to not say anything.
Don't blame you, really. More fun than the match.
pasty
A different kind of pasty
I've just had a look at how the 48 team tournament will work, and it looks shite.
Initially there will be 16 groups of three teams, with the top two in each going through to an extra knock-out round.
That is so very wrong. It means in a three team group, one team will play their first match against a team that has already played, therefore knowing what they need to do to qualify. For example, a team winning their first match will know that a draw in their second will guarantee qualification for the round of 32, putting them at a huge advantage over the team playing their first match. That completely SUCKS!
Initially there will be 16 groups of three teams, with the top two in each going through to an extra knock-out round.
That is so very wrong. It means in a three team group, one team will play their first match against a team that has already played, therefore knowing what they need to do to qualify. For example, a team winning their first match will know that a draw in their second will guarantee qualification for the round of 32, putting them at a huge advantage over the team playing their first match. That completely SUCKS!
Geestar
New member
Was hoping Iran were going to come last and get my money back in the sweepstake!
Sent from my TA-1020 using Tapatalk
Sent from my TA-1020 using Tapatalk
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
This was never going to be a high scoring game. Both teams had qualified on the back of excellent defensive records.
Question, will it not go to groups of 4 in the second round?
The qualification system is absurd. Imagine what the FA cup would be like if all the EFL and EPL teams went into the mix with all the villiage teams at the equivalent of the 5th qualifying round? The FA cup is seeded for a reason. WC qulification should be based on seeding as well as geography (for reasons of costs). South America does it quite well (albeit too many games) by having one qualifying pot. But the anti European bias of FIFA is stupid. Widening participation is a good thing, but not when done at the expense of the competition and the better nations. I'm surprised FIFA haven't made the Germans play with a man short, or wearing big hats when they play lesser nations. In all the years of the WC I see no evidence that partcipation has widened. In the US, socca is the biggest participation sport in schools, yet it doesn't translate to the man's game, despite yet another world cup finals there. Participation is what it is. I don't mind it if a championship side makes it to the FA cup final, on merit, but reserving them a special place, or a shoe-in to the last 32 would be bollocks. Europe is awash with soccer mad nations and top players. That should be reflected in the WC. If I wanted to watch a freak show I'd go to the circus. I'm getting more and more annoyed just trying to not think about it.
I don't think I could agree less. Italy and the Netherland's did not qualify because they were not good enough. Basically a totally shithouse Sweden denied both of them. This is the World Cup, not the Euro's.
Asia represents 60% of the earth's population, they get 4/5 qualifiers. Africa another 16% of the World's population with 5 qualifiers. So in total 75% of the world's population represented by 9/10 places. That is not fair. Yes, European sides are better at football at the moment but I really cannot think of anything more boring than playing three teams from Europe in the group stages, that is basically what you are advocating. Wait until you have seen the likes of Iceland, Sweden, Serbia and Switzerland stinking the place out before you draw your conclusions on the quality of European football.
And finally, last World Cup 7 out of 13 European qualifiers were knocked out in the Group Stage, so more than 50% out. I would say, if anything, there is a case for reducing European participation rather than increasing it.
Last edited:
afters
Well-known member
It's not about quality in the early rounds, it's about global inclusion.
So what if the quality isn't great? Try telling that to the 50,000 Peruvians who have travelled.
Come back in 10 days if that's what you want?
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
Seriously though...two completely shite games this afternoon. I found it offensive to our football