Still think this has been the best World Cup?

[TM]

I've seen 10 and out of those there's only 1 I'd bother to watch again.

Argentina V West Germany in Mexico 86? not sure if it was that good a game, just the 3-2 scoreline that sounds like it might have been decent

[Boltman]

It wasn't that great a game, but after the first German goal went in it was a pretty tense last twenty minutes.

I only have patchy memories of the '78 game, but I remember thinking Kempes looked like a right knob and praying Argentina got gubbed. Oh aye, and wee bits of paper absolutely everywhere.

[Orzelek]

As for personal favourite teams doing well, this has been by miles the best tournament I've ever seen! But if I shall be a bit more objective, then France 98 was a bit better probably

So generally for me, when it comes to quality of tournament:

1998>2014>>2006>>>>>>2010>>2002

[Pukey]

7 World Cup Finals and I still haven't seen a good one

I thought this final was pretty decent tbh. Decent is as far as I'd go though, there were several periods of meh.

[Flabarama]

I thought 2002 was the best tbh, 1998, 2014 and 2006 also good.

2010 was crap.

[swooperproop]

No. *bleep*ing Nishimura ruined it for me. 2006 was the best by me.

[Dagenham_Dave]

People will generally vote for either the first or second proper world cup they remember as the best one.

If the tournament just passed had happened 20-30 years ago, people would still be talking about it today as the best ever by some way. However, it's being played in an era of wall-to-wall football on television, where the majority of the big players are watched week in-week out. Be honest, apart from the World Cup and the odd European game, how often did anyone really see Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Rummenigge, etc. That's what elevated them to mythical status. People saying that Messi's tournament was average. Well, compared to the amazing performances we sometimes see from him in a Barcelona shirt, maybe. But imagine if you'd never watched any of his club football. Would he still have had an average tournament?

Perception in football has changed irrevocably over the last 10 years, to the point where as a viewer, we can become jaded unless something really exceptional happens.

[ringwoodrob]

People will generally vote for either the first or second proper world cup they remember as the best one.

If the tournament just passed had happened 20-30 years ago, people would still be talking about it today as the best ever by some way. However, it's being played in an era of wall-to-wall football on television, where the majority of the big players are watched week in-week out. Be honest, apart from the World Cup and the odd European game, how often did anyone really see Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Rummenigge, etc. That's what elevated them to mythical status. People saying that Messi's tournament was average. Well, compared to the amazing performances we sometimes see from him in a Barcelona shirt, maybe. But imagine if you'd never watched any of his club football. Would he still have had an average tournament?

Perception in football has changed irrevocably over the last 10 years, to the point where as a viewer, we can become jaded unless something really exceptional happens.

:)The only long term memories from this world cup for me will be the collapse of Brazil in a 1-7 thrashing and Spain being donked 1-5!

I can still see Messi's 2/3 goals(quality)he scored early on in my head but after that he vanished,James Rod goals also,other than those not mutch flair in this one which probably explains why Germany won it,i'm jaded lol

My first one was 1966 and for some reason the 1978 one impressed me over the years!

[Pangaea]

People will generally vote for either the first or second proper world cup they remember as the best one.

If the tournament just passed had happened 20-30 years ago, people would still be talking about it today as the best ever by some way.

I really don't think so. The great football in this world cup was in the group stage, and after that it got a bit stale, apart from Germany dicking Brazil in the semi final.

[JD nawrat]

I really don't think so. The great football in this world cup was in the group stage, and after that it got a bit stale, apart from Germany dicking Brazil in the semi final.

Not at all.

A lot of the L16 ties were great. Not to mention that Colombia/Brazil was fun and Holland/Costa Rica was arguably the game of the knockouts, despite being a 0-0. As you say one of the semi-finals was great and the final was pretty good for a WCF.

'Stale' is a mile off tbh.

[Rikulec]

Only extra time of Holland vs Costa Rica was really good.

[JD nawrat]

The last half hour of the first 90 was great too. Costa Rica could have actually won the game and if it wasn't for Navas there was a chance that it wouldn't have gone past the 90.

[swooperproop]

People will generally vote for either the first or second proper world cup they remember as the best one.

If the tournament just passed had happened 20-30 years ago, people would still be talking about it today as the best ever by some way. However, it's being played in an era of wall-to-wall football on television, where the majority of the big players are watched week in-week out. Be honest, apart from the World Cup and the odd European game, how often did anyone really see Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Rummenigge, etc. That's what elevated them to mythical status. People saying that Messi's tournament was average. Well, compared to the amazing performances we sometimes see from him in a Barcelona shirt, maybe. But imagine if you'd never watched any of his club football. Would he still have had an average tournament?

Perception in football has changed irrevocably over the last 10 years, to the point where as a viewer, we can become jaded unless something really exceptional happens.

Well, 2006 wasn't my first, but it was the first I really sat down and really wanted to watch. (My first was 2002 but I only really watched the Croatia games and the final.)

[PMLF]

As mentioned before, I think for many people many goals means good game.

I thought the group stage pretty poor, with too many teams that didn't have good defenses.

The playoffs were more interesting as the quality gap between teams were smaller (Germany/Holland vs Brazil aside).

[Pangaea]

Not at all.

A lot of the L16 ties were great. Not to mention that Colombia/Brazil was fun and Holland/Costa Rica was arguably the game of the knockouts, despite being a 0-0. As you say one of the semi-finals was great and the final was pretty good for a WCF.

'Stale' is a mile off tbh.

Annoyingly, I actually missed both those games due to other commitments. But the point I tried to make is that I don't think this was the best World Cup ever. 1994 and 1998 were better in my opinion.

[av3ry]

Holland vs Costa Rica was one of those weird games that was not a good game but you couldnt take your eyes off it.

[JD nawrat]

Annoyingly, I actually missed both those games due to other commitments. But the point I tried to make is that I don't think this was the best World Cup ever. 1994 and 1998 were better in my opinion.

Fair enough if you don't think it's the best ever, it's entirely subjective. Just think 'stale' was the wrong word is all

@Avery - it turned into an end-to-end game by the end of 120 minutes. It turned into an exciting game after the first hour or so being a borefest Definitely turned into a good game imo and you're right about being unable to take your eyes off of it.