Knockout Stages - Round of 32

[JonnyZeroFox]

That’s a shame, hits his hand, otherwise it looked wide 

Edited 15 hours ago by JonnyZeroFox

[JonnyZeroFox]

Martinez with a good save 

[RoboFox]

They so don’t deserve to go out here. This is bollocks.

[CPepFox]

1 minute ago, JonnyZeroFox said:

Martinez with a good save 

Quite the save... 

[JonnyZeroFox]

Cape Verde are giving it a go, close again ffs 

[MPH]

Sign that keeper

[FoxesWalk]

Why was Tagliafico allowed to play on? He should be off for a min 

[KingsX]

This unfancied match will turn out to be the emotional (albeit not the football) highlight of this WC. 

[bovril]

What a performance

[JonnyZeroFox]

Argentina so jammy 

[VLC86]

Really sad for Cape Verde but that’s an insane effort. It’ll be massively damaging for Argentina.

[spacemunky]

Cabo Verde 

[MPH]

It’s called the beautiful game for a reason

[urban.spaceman]

Absolutely phenomenal performance that should go down in World Cup folklore. They fully deserved to go through. 

[FoxesWalk]

Lopes Cabral and Vozinha in team of the tournament? 
 

Never been so invested in a game as a neutral, so good.

[Amin]

This is why the World Cup is the best tournament in sport. 

[filbertway]

What a game! Fair play Cape Verde. If youre gonna lose, do it in that manner

 

 

[Kitchandro]

13 minutes ago, VLC86 said:

How many have genuinely stunk the place out though? Some of them, Tunisia/Turkey, have been there plenty of times.

Saudi, South Africa, Scotland, Jordan, Qatar, Iraq.

 

Again, it’s not that some teams don’t deserve to be here because they are weaker. It’s that there are too many teams, too many games, too much dilution of quality and entertainment. Too much nonsense with 3rd place teams going through.

 

If the argument is 48 teams is good because Cape Verde are good - why not 100 teams?

We had good underdogs when the World Cup had 16 teams, it’s not a good argument.

[FoxesWalk]

Some questionable refereeing in favour of Argentina again here though, to go with no red for Messi in the opener. Their players apparently immune from sitting out after receiving physio treatment, and as Wright pointed out, Romero very lucky to still be on the pitch, and he scores the winner. 

[FoxesWalk]

6 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

Saudi, South Africa, Scotland, Jordan, Qatar, Iraq.

 

Again, it’s not that some teams don’t deserve to be here because they are weaker. It’s that there are too many teams, too many games, too much dilution of quality and entertainment. Too much nonsense with 3rd place teams going through.

 

If the argument is 48 teams is good because Cape Verde are good - why not 100 teams?

We had good underdogs when the World Cup had 16 teams, it’s not a good argument.

Qatar vs Swiss was good ending, Nobody expected SA to knockout South Korea, Scotland… well yeah that’s where it ends. You can’t just pick the good underdogs though. 
 

For all the shite fifa gets, deservedly, the reason smaller teams are getting better is their investment in coaching and equipment in these countries. They have to be given a chance to succeed, or fail, at a World Cup. 

Edited 15 hours ago by FoxesWalk

[FoxesDeb]

It's amazing what football does to you, if you'd told me 2 weeks ago that I'd be genuinely upset to see Cape Verde go out I'd have laughed 

[Dan]

Nothing I can't say about Cape Verde that won't already have been said a hundred times. Genuinely unbelievable effort.

[Jattdogg]

Cabo Verde are already the winners of this tournament. Brilliant!

 

Well done lads!

[Sunbury Fox]

Gutted they're out. An absolute breath of fresh air. Tonight has reminded me why I love football so much after a dreadful couple of years supporting the Foxes when I started to feel more and more disconnected from the game. 

[PhillippaT]

23 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

Saudi, South Africa, Scotland, Jordan, Qatar, Iraq.

 

Again, it’s not that some teams don’t deserve to be here because they are weaker. It’s that there are too many teams, too many games, too much dilution of quality and entertainment. Too much nonsense with 3rd place teams going through.

 

If the argument is 48 teams is good because Cape Verde are good - why not 100 teams?

We had good underdogs when the World Cup had 16 teams, it’s not a good argument.

No.  This argument is based on a foundation that happens to be WRONG/INCORRECT/INACCURATE, and that's a problem, considering how common it is, from many people, including some football players and managers that should know better.

 

The Football World Cup does NOT exist to be the limited elite of the elite tournament for football according to, and on behalf of, FIFA itself.  It was created specifically to be a greater, more inclusive tournament from the original that WAS such a thing, and is still considered by FIFA to be so: The Olympics.

 

As such, the MAIN goal of the football world cup for FIFA, is to increase the level and amount of professionalism of world football, and give more opportunites for such players at national level.  David vs Goliath matches are SPECIFICALLY the type of thing FIFA is after.

 

As such, increasing the number of teams at the Football World Cup has always been a goal of theirs once enough professional players and teams are ready for it, unlike the Olympics.

 

As such, the only things FIFA has ever taken into account for zise and scope of the tournmanet has been the professionalism of the teams and logistics.

 

EDIT: Of course, problems caused by having multiple host countries that then automatically qualify is a matter all to itself.

Edited 15 hours ago by PhillippaT