Andy Goldstein - What do you think of this

[oche balboa]

He said on Talksport yesterday that "The World Cup would be devalued if an underdog won it. I like to see Favourites winning"

What are your thoughts? 

Will the World Cup be devalued if Morocco won it, I would suggest not 

[kpain16]

Never heard of the guy, but if he really said that he said more about himself than anything else. I get it that not everyone supports the underdog, and that's fine. But saying that the competition would be devalued is elitist, broad-minded and borderline racist.

[Sons FC]

31 minutes ago, kpain16 said:

Never heard of the guy, but if he really said that he said more about himself than anything else. I get it that not everyone supports the underdog, and that's fine. But saying that the competition would be devalued is elitist, broad-minded and borderline racist.

I think borderline racist is a bit much on a conceptual issue.

On the general point - absolute nonsense - it shouldn't matter who wins it as long as football wins.

[Rafalution]

Yeah, you could say the same about the league or a domestic cup. I don't think its racist. Just stupid. 

[kpain16]

Well, I'm not really the "that's racist" guy, but this screams like latent racism to me. According to him, only certain European and South American countries are allowed to win the WC. African countries can not only **** off, but they devalue the competition. So interesting...

If he just said he likes the big guys winning, that would have been just an opition. This sounds more than that.

Edited December 13, 2022 by kpain16

[Wiggins Top Boys]

you are reading too much into a radio station where the presenters are trying to whip up as much false controversy as possible to get callers in

[Ackter]

Literally no idea who this is, but I assume right wing leanings for obvious reasons.

[SC00P0NE]

Silly comment, if anything, it motivates more people to watch random cup matches.. Andy is prolly just salty over the england elimination.. Move on, just imagine Mbappe's tears after the Morocco match

[kpain16]

Probably.

Let's look at it objectively. Since he's obviously talking about Morocco and Croatia, let's imagine that happened.

To win it, Morocco needed to get through a group that had Belgium and another semi finalist, win against Spain, Portugal, France, Argentina/Croatia.

Wo win it, Croatia needed to get through a group that had Belgium and another semi finalist, win against Japan (that won against Germany and Spain), Brazil, Argentina and France/Morocco.

I mean, how is that now deserving a title, if it happens?

 

[Rob1981]

"Racist"

As a neutral, you can accept that Morocco or Croatia would "deserve" the win if they won it.

While also preferring to see a real showpiece final with two heavyweight teams like France v Argentina

These things aren't mutually exclusive.

[Rob1981]

But it's Talksport ffs, they'll say whatever they need to say to get stupid people to ring in and disagree with them... basically the business model for every radio phone in, ever.

[The_jagster]

Some presenter said cycling and rowing aren't sports because they involve sitting down, Talksport is intentionally full of controversial takes

[Weezer]

I sort of see his point, you want to see the best players and teams competing against each other at the highest level. A Ronaldo v Messi final, for example, would certainly be a better spectacle for me than watching Morocco or Croatia play for penalties against a stronger opponent but that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy that also.

[oche balboa]

31 minutes ago, The_jagster said:

Some presenter said cycling and rowing aren't sports because they involve sitting down, Talksport is intentionally full of controversial takes

Very true. Bent said that Foden is better then Gascoigne the other day. He might be but not yet 

[PMLF]

Whoever wins will have deserved it and won’t devalue the tournament, unless there is some massive robbery by the referee or something, but that kind of very biased refereeing is not likely to happen.

Edited December 13, 2022 by PMLF

[TM]

saw the title, knew where the person worked and instantly knew this would be clickbait to try and drive people to phone-in

there isn't anything that says teams have to play the way you want them to, Greece in 2004 showed that being defensive can lead to glory and if you can't be all guns blazing attacking, then you play to your strengths, even if I thought Morocco were more positive in the game V Portugal.  Would I like to see France V Argentina in the final? of course I would, Messi V Mbappe, probably what all the casuals would want but if it's Croatia V Morocco, I'll still watch it

[silentwars]

He recently had to do a show from Portman Road (Ipswich) for TalkSport & refused to stay for the match which was 45 minutes after his show finished. He said football outside the top flight is non existent to him. 

[Coulthard's Jaw]

I swear Goldstein used to be OK? I guess working for Talksport melts your brain.

[mrw072]

Persoanlly in competitions like the World Cup, I much prefer to see the best teams compete and win.  Simply because I think they can go on and create a legacy for themselves.  And go down in history as a great era of players for whichever nation it may be.  I think that's why Brazil and Germany are regarded in such high esteem, as they've done that.  France could do that if they win this time around as they'll be champions twice in a row.

Having said that I do think that whoever wins the WC will have thoroughly deserved it as it's not easy to win.  I'm hoping Argentina do it for Messi, as I think it'll be a great accomplishment for him and also his team-mates.

[GunmaN1905]

2 minutes ago, mrw072 said:

Persoanlly in competitions like the World Cup, I much prefer to see the best teams compete and win. 

Best team to compete and win? That's exactly what happens in football.

Best teams always win. The scoreboard never lies. Everything else is arbitrary.

People can complain about possession, number of shots, xG or whatever, but the best team wins.

Quote

Simply because I think they can go on and create a legacy for themselves. 

Legacy? Let's take England and Argentina for example. What are your legacies from tournaments you won?

England won the only trophy as a host, with a goal that obviously shouldn't have stood.

Argentina won their first trophy while shamelessly rigging matches, first in the group when they needed to win with a ton of GD and actual Argentinian in the goal for Peru, then they just robbed Netherlands in the final. The final which was played during a serious conflict and a lot of players refused to come to Argentina. Crujiff being the big one, best player in the world at the time.

Then they win the second World Cup with the most blatant robbery in history of football against England. I'm not saying they wouldn't have won it without that goal, but the point still stands. Their entire legacy from two World Cups they won is based on cheating.

Quote

I think that's why Brazil and Germany are regarded in such high esteem, as they've done that.

Every winning team is regarded in high esteem and rightfully so.

Honestly, I don't even know what you tried to say with your post.

[mrw072]

6 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Best team to compete and win? That's exactly what happens in football.

Best teams always win. The scoreboard never lies. Everything else is arbitrary.

People can complain about possession, number of shots, xG or whatever, but the best team wins.

Legacy? Let's take England and Argentina for example. What are your legacies from tournaments you won?

England won the only trophy as a host, with a goal that obviously shouldn't have stood.

Argentina won their first trophy while shamelessly rigging matches, first in the group when they needed to win with a ton of GD and actual Argentinian in the goal for Peru, then they just robbed Netherlands in the final. The final which was played during a serious conflict and a lot of players refused to come to Argentina. Crujiff being the big one, best player in the world at the time.

Then they win the second World Cup with the most blatant robbery in history of football against England. I'm not saying they wouldn't have won it without that goal, but the point still stands. Their entire legacy from two World Cups they won is based on cheating.

Every winning team is regarded in high esteem and rightfully so.

Honestly, I don't even know what you tried to say with your post.

I don't think the best teams always win Cup competitions - there's a lot of luck involved.  Whereas in a league format its very different.  In Cups I think a lot depends on the draw.  

I don't really think you've read what I was trying to say - or maybe slightly misunderstood it.  Basically I like it when a team can win a competition such as a World Cup or Euros and go on from there to demonstrate that they're the best.  I think it adds credence to the competition.  So if France get to the Final and win it I think it cements their standing in the game.  If they lose the Final, they'll have passed the baton onto someone else.  I'm hoping that's Argentina because i'd like to see Messi add to his legacy also.  

I don't think all 'winning' teams are regarded in high esteem really - just my opinion.  I remember Greece winning the Euros for example.  Great achievment for them, but they received a lot of criticism as to the football they played to do that.

I'm hoping for a France - Argentina final, but if either of the others win it - i'll certainly think they will have deserved it.

[GunmaN1905]

Just now, mrw072 said:

I don't think the best teams always win Cup competitions - there's a lot of luck involved.  Whereas in a league format its very different.  In Cups I think a lot depends on the draw.  

Obviously, a lot of falls down to just "daily form" of each player, especially the stars.

But that's how legacies are made, as you said.

The league also isn't the definitive proof of who's the better team. It's just about grinding games against weaker opposition and having squad depth.

How could someone say City is the best team in the world when they regularly got eliminated over two matches against teams that were either from weaker leagues and had way less individual quality or by teams from EPL that were 20+ points behind them?

Quote

I don't really think you've read what I was trying to say - or maybe slightly misunderstood it.  Basically I like it when a team can win a competition such as a World Cup or Euros and go on from there to demonstrate that they're the best.  I think it adds credence to the competition.  So if France get to the Final and win it I think it cements their standing in the game.  If they lose the Final, they'll have passed the baton onto someone else.  I'm hoping that's Argentina because i'd like to see Messi add to his legacy also.  

I've always looked it paired with EUROs because 4 years is a long period. Spain cemented their legacy in 2008-12.
France did it in 98-00, Italy basically had a period of contending from 94 to 2006.

Other than Morocco, it's not like these teams don't have legacies already. France is obviously the current champion, Argentina won the last Copa at Maracana, this Croatian generation has been one of the top teams since '16 EURO.
Morocco is also current AFCON winner.

Quote

I don't think all 'winning' teams are regarded in high esteem really - just my opinion.  I remember Greece winning the Euros for example.  Great achievment for them, but they received a lot of criticism as to the football they played to do that.

You play with what you have. Team that deserves most criticism is current Portugal. I'd say maybe even the most stacked squad in the world, but ever since Santos took over, they played like Greece.

France is missing most of their ideal starting lineup, so I guess they have an excuse, but they're also too negative.

Criticising teams like Greece just doesn't make sense, they can't play any other way. Neither can current Morocco.

[Weezer]

24 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Best team to compete and win? That's exactly what happens in football.

Best teams always win. The scoreboard never lies. Everything else is arbitrary.

People can complain about possession, number of shots, xG or whatever, but the best team wins.

Legacy? Let's take England and Argentina for example. What are your legacies from tournaments you won?

England won the only trophy as a host, with a goal that obviously shouldn't have stood.

Argentina won their first trophy while shamelessly rigging matches, first in the group when they needed to win with a ton of GD and actual Argentinian in the goal for Peru, then they just robbed Netherlands in the final. The final which was played during a serious conflict and a lot of players refused to come to Argentina. Crujiff being the big one, best player in the world at the time.

Then they win the second World Cup with the most blatant robbery in history of football against England. I'm not saying they wouldn't have won it without that goal, but the point still stands. Their entire legacy from two World Cups they won is based on cheating.

Every winning team is regarded in high esteem and rightfully so.

Honestly, I don't even know what you tried to say with your post.

You’re arguing that the best team always wins and in the same post arguing that England and Argentina cheated for their wins?

Fairly or not I don’t think that Greek team is held in high regard. People respect the achievement sure, but it was absolutely horrible to watch. It was a great one off story but I wouldn’t want every World Cup finals to be like that, I would much rather see two giants full of world class players going at it in the final. I think it’s fair to say you’d prefer that without also saying ‘little’ countries like Morocco aren’t allowed to compete as well.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

I think Morocco have been really good to watch tbf, better than most of the big countries.

[GunmaN1905]

5 minutes ago, Weezer said:

You’re arguing that the best team always wins and in the same post arguing that England and Argentina cheated for their wins?

My bad, should've said best team always wins if there are no illegal activities or refereeing robberies invovled.

Quote

Fairly or not I don’t think that Greek team is held in high regard. People respect the achievement sure, but it was absolutely horrible to watch. It was a great one off story but I wouldn’t want every World Cup finals to be like that, I would much rather see two giants full of world class players going at it in the final. I think it’s fair to say you’d prefer that without also saying ‘little’ countries like Morocco aren’t allowed to compete as well.

No, when my team isn't playing, I always support the underdogs.

As I've said already, Spain deserves way more criticism for their awful football than teams like Greece or Morocco.

You're not going to see teams going at it during NT tournament finals.

2020 - Bad match, England taking the early lead and bottling it.

2018 - Overmatched and injured Croatia, one-sided.

2016 - Cristiano goes out injured, awful match.

2014 - Awful match, extra time goal.

2012 - Really one sided.

2010 - Awful match, extra time goal. Two teams as stacked as possible.

2008 - Spain boring everyone to death, one-sided.

2006 - Decent watch, still nowhere close to going at it.

2004 - Awful watch.

2002 - Despite it being Germany, they were severely overmatched.

2000 - Maybe even the best match of the bunch when you take number of chances into consideration. Still, it was just France pressuring and Italy playing for the counter.

1998 - Mysterious illness for Ronaldo, one-sided.

1996 - Good match.

1994 - No goals.

1992 - Fairytale, team that didn't qualify winning it all.

1990 - One penalty goal.

Have to go as far back as '86 to get a great match. The stakes are just too high.

Even when there's an amazing opening with two goals, like in 2006, it just stops there.

[Weezer]

1 minute ago, GunmaN1905 said:

No, when my team isn't playing, I always support the underdogs.

Yes, but not everybody thinks the same. For me watching Saudi beat the Argentinians was hilarious and brilliant, but in a showpiece event I’d rather watch the best of the best compete. People would rather watch different things, neither are wrong.

1 minute ago, GunmaN1905 said:

As I've said already, Spain deserves way more criticism for their awful football than teams like Greece or Morocco.

I don’t think I’ve seen anybody not criticise the likes of Spain and Portugal for their terrible boring football.

I’m not criticising a team like Croatia for playing the optimal way for the personnel they have, but I’m also not going to pretend it isn’t a huge grind for the neutral to watch. Greece winning the Euros was a great story but would I ever want to watch any of their matches again, **** no  

[GunmaN1905]

Just now, Weezer said:

I’m not criticising a team like Croatia for playing the optimal way for the personnel they have, but I’m also not going to pretend it isn’t a huge grind for the neutral to watch. Greece winning the Euros was a great story but would I ever want to watch any of their matches again, **** no  

Well, we're more or less in agreement.

The entire argument I was trying to make is that there are very few all-time classics if we talk the number of goals or level of play between top NTs, but people try to make it look like underdogs are ruining touranments.

[Weezer]

6 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Well, we're more or less in agreement.

The entire argument I was trying to make is that there are very few all-time classics if we talk the number of goals or level of play between top NTs, but people try to make it look like underdogs are ruining touranments.

The top teams ‘ruin’ tournaments by underperforming more than an underdog does by over performing.

But if you asked me what my dream final would be it would always be a combination of any of the ‘big’ nations and world class names.

Its the World Cup, I want to see the Maradonas, Peles, Messis, Neymars etc lifting the trophy and becoming legends.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Weezer

[GunmaN1905]

6 minutes ago, Weezer said:

Its the World Cup, I want to see the Maradonas, Peles, Messis, Neymars etc lifting the trophy and becoming legends.

They lift it if they deserve so.

Football is probably the last popular sport in the world where actual underdogs with way lower budgets and quality of players have actual chances of winning and that's it's beauty.

[error username in use]

Prefer big nations here myself unless a say smaller nation is fun to watch… loved the 90s Yugos, 94 Romanians, 98 Croatians…

However a lot of them now play so negatively that I hate watching it. Makes me sad to see so many talented footballers being told to do nothing all game and pray for penalties.

I can’t see either Croatia or Morocco making an effort to win the Final, so has to be France Argentina for me as at least they have both shown attacking intent in their meaningful games 

[GunmaN1905]

3 minutes ago, error username in use said:

Prefer big nations here myself unless a say smaller nation is fun to watch… loved the 90s Yugos, 94 Romanians, 98 Croatians…

However a lot of them now play so negatively that I hate watching it. Makes me sad to see so many talented footballers being told to do nothing all game and pray for penalties.

I can’t see either Croatia or Morocco making an effort to win the Final, so has to be France Argentina for me as at least they have both shown attacking intent in their meaningful games 

Not even 200 posts in, but over the past few weeks you cemented your spot as the most clueless poster on the forums, congrats.

[error username in use]

5 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Not even 200 posts in, but over the past few weeks you cemented your spot as the most clueless poster on the forums, congrats.

Thank you, I’m honoured that you have read and reviewed every post by every forum member to come to this conclusion.

Not many would take their time to do this as I’d assume it’s quite laborious, however I suppose it’s more fun than watching Croatia so don’t blame you 

[JD nawrat]

22 minutes ago, error username in use said:

Thank you, I’m honoured that you have read and reviewed every post by every forum member to come to this conclusion.

Not many would take their time to do this as I’d assume it’s quite laborious, however I suppose it’s more fun than watching Croatia so don’t blame you 

 

[GunmaN1905]

35 minutes ago, error username in use said:

Thank you, I’m honoured that you have read and reviewed every post by every forum member to come to this conclusion.

Not many would take their time to do this as I’d assume it’s quite laborious, however I suppose it’s more fun than watching Croatia so don’t blame you 

You literally said Saka deserves a mention for player of the tournament award, based of few fancy dribbles against France and a couple of goals against worst team of the tournament.

[SC00P0NE]

but..but.. what about croatia or morocco conceding first but getting a later equalizer?? Surely, that's good enough for the critics to root for them??

[The_jagster]

I have no problem with teams playing defensively from a moral standpoint and they have every right to play that way.

I just don't want to see them win when they play in that fashion no matter who the opposition is. Doesn't matter whether it's Wolves, Wales or Poland.

[Rafalution]

1 hour ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Not even 200 posts in, but over the past few weeks you cemented your spot as the most clueless poster on the forums, congrats.

Is that better or worse than doing it over 25,232?

[GunmaN1905]

7 minutes ago, Rafalution said:

Is that better or worse than doing it over 25,232?

For each of my horrible takes, I've had a handful of great posts.

He's just one of those clueless people who spews nonsense with zero arguments or logic behind them.

[oche balboa]

1 hour ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Not even 200 posts in, but over the past few weeks you cemented your spot as the most clueless poster on the forums, congrats.

Harsh with better candidates around.

[Astafjevs]

That's an absolute career ender from error username in use. You don't come back from those

[oche balboa]

6 hours ago, error username in use said:

Thank you, I’m honoured that you have read and reviewed every post by every forum member to come to this conclusion.

Not many would take their time to do this as I’d assume it’s quite laborious, however I suppose it’s more fun than watching Croatia so don’t blame you 

Haha proper banter 

[Marc Albrighton]

I've yet to meet or know anyone who actually listens or watches talk sport but yet again something is said on there and achieves exactly what it was supposed to.

[kopsy101]

Talksport? Say no more. He's not as bad as Jason Cundy though.

I used to have Talksport on all the time, I remember discovering it and so happy I'd found a football call in channel. Then I realised they just talk nonsense and I was getting angry listening.