Surprised me it being Messi's first game against England RLC. You would have thought, with the number of games he has played for Argentina, at least one of them would have been against England.
We havnt played Argentina since 2005.
When a Brilliant player 'fires' up during a World cup with consistency, their team tends to go a long way. This is England, so we all expect some inconsistency and wobbles, but the results here are probably the best run we've put together at any tournament I can remember. Until this Tournament for instance, we hadn't won a World Cup knockout game after going behind since the 66 Final. We haven't always played the best football but have found a way to win, and that's what World Cup winning teams need to do. I think we certainly don't need to fear Argentina, though perhaps will need to play somewhat better to win with a degree more comfort. When you add Kane into the mix, if one or two others can also play with more consistency and/or at their best and we can absolutely go on and win this.
Surprised me that bigmart.
My team depending on fitness would be - Pickford, James, Stones, Guehi, O'Reilly, Rice, Anderson, Bellingham, Saka, Kane, Gordon.
Why stop there? Why bother with qualifying? Why not just have every team in the World Cup? Cancel the close season and run it over the three months. Run it over a whole continent just to make life difficult and expensive for fans. Who cares about them - or the players for that matter?
It's going to be held in several countries and on 3 continents.
Just the next one, because it's the Centenary, with only three special Centenary games held in South America, one in each of Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina, otherwise it's hosted between Portugal, Spain and Morocco, so not that different from this one.
Unbelievable, surely even FIFA, is not that stupid or corrupt to even contemplate it.
There will be more than 3 games in south America as there will be 64 teams involved
Infantino has confirmed it and with 64 teams there's plenty of gsmes to go around
Correct. Although Infantino has said FIFA will be reviewing the possibility of 64 teams after this WC has finished, any proposed changes would need to be approved by FIFA Council. That is not imminent, not least because there isn’t yet a formal proposition for them to vote on.
Nope, the three in South America are special celebration games, one offs due to it being the Centenary tournament, expanding the entry list wouldn't change that. The Tournament has been awarded to Portugal, Spain and Morocco which is where any extra games due to increased number of participants would be held.
The South American countries have been lobbying for more than the 3 games and I fully expect Infantino will agree to it.
Infantino, like Trump, just does what he wants. He didn't consult over the FIFA "Peace Prize". He has fixed it so Saudi Arabia will get the 2034 World Cup. Any voting is a farce as Infantino does so much lobbying/bribing in advance behind closed doors.
No, his executive powers are limited. However, as in most membership organisations, the executive will usually only present a formal proposal to council if they believe it would pass. Lobbying, horse-trading and compromise in order to build consensus is certainly part of that, otherwise things would never get done!
This is spot on. People can talk about Councils like they talk about the US Congress. Infantino has surrounded himself with a spineless lot quite happy to take the financial rewards on offer. Infantino makes Blatter look like a choir boy. All the stroking of Trump reminds me of how Netanyahu used to operate. No doubt they are not as friendly now.