XuluBak

Undoubtedly deserved.

Romero booked.

How/why is he even playing?

I'm actually getting a fair amount of work done while "watching" this match. Basically just look over at the game when comms says Messi... Like that. Something happened!

Kick it hard and pray?

Couldn't watch. Seems like someone got FMd though.

Byes* > 3rd place qualifiers, but just about anything would be better than groups of three. * - I have no expectation this would actually happen, but it would ensure everyone has something to play for throughout the group stage and avoid watering down the knockout rounds.

There's no such thing as a bad lead. Such an utterly nonsensical idea. All things being equal, the team with the lead has all the advantages, at least until the moment where the trailing side acknowledges defeat is probably the most likely outcome, throws caution to the wind, and goes all-in to score the equalizer in the final moments. Even then, it's a low scoring sport for a reason. Random tangent to that point, the aggressiveness of pulling goalies in Hockey has changed drastically in recent years, and I wonder if that will follow in football. Not necessarily in WC knockouts, where the stakes are so high, but the sport as a whole is shockingly conservative at times. Maybe the analytics just haven't caught up yet? IDK. Quick Googling tells me the team that scores first wins somewhere between 60-70% of the time. That's a pretty damn good advantage.

That's good.

WTF does "bog standard burglary" even mean?

Brazil, Netherlands, Morocco. Croatia's midfield gives them a chance, but unless they score on an early set piece, and Brazil crumble under the pressure, it just seems like Brazil have too much quality. Messi gives Argentina more than a puncher's chance, but their midfield has been nonexistent, and the Netherlands have looked opportunistic on the counter. Morocco. If they frustrate Portugal, even half as much as they did Spain, someone will get sent off. A Portuguese meltdown in the World Cup is on par with a PSG meltdown in UCL.

On paper, out of context (player vs player), I think France are comfortably the stronger side; however, both are considerably less than the sum of their parts. England, frankly, because of Southgate. France, I don't know if I'd call it a lack of leadership (although, maybe it's a bit that too), but there's an arrogance and lack of discipline. It cost them against Denmark in Euros. And it probably should've cost them against Denmark in the group stage as well. It's a team full of superstars that acts like a team full of superstars. There's no "glue guy," no one running through walls to help the other guy out. If they win, it's strictly on talent and execution. I'd say Spain and Belgium have a similar "feel." I don't question the individual commitment, but their team dynamics are lacking. That said, based on current rosters and what both sides have shown, I'd take France 6 out of 10. If Southgate changes how the midfield operates (i.e., Rice isn't isolated and hiding) and Walker is closer to fit than he looked against Senegal, then it's closer to 5-5, might even give England a slight advantage.

Defender should've taken him out. Two birds, one stone situation.

Most predictable thing that's happened the entire world cup.

Lolz.

Swiss have been so poor, but the ref letting Portugal foul Embolo with impunity hasn't helped the qualify of this match.

It's absurd that Dias hasn't been booked yet, which is fairly significant, cause he'd miss the next match with a booking.

And it doesn't matter.

It didn't go in, so I guess that's a great defensive header...

What's Dias gotta do for a booking?

They're both extremely talented young players, but don't think Gavi would get anywhere near the hype of Pedri if they were both still at clubs not named Barcelona.

It was both. Theo moved to Real, but he was at Atleti first.

Did Spain not want him (curious if so), or did he choose Morocco?

Double coinflip might be the dumbest thing ever.