Now that we're at the business end of the tournament it is absolutely not shocking that 6 of the 8 quarter-finalists were from UEFA (Europe for you unwashed) and now 3 of the 4 semi-finalists are as well. The winner will be from Europe. Argentina are the weakest of the final four.

As others have said, France have to be the overwhelming favorites now. They've never trailed, never been truly tested. It will be interesting to see how they react if they go down against Spain. Spain hasn't looked like the flowing, positive squad of old but are the best defensive team in the WC and have a puncher's chance if they get ahead.

For the other semi, I expect England to muddle through, and eventually get their moments of brilliance from either Kane or Bellingham to advance. Having two players on 6 goals is luxury no other team has. Argentina won't be able to shut down both.

FIFA, in another moment of greed and stupidity is now saying they will look at expanding future World Cups to 68 teams to offer more teams the opportunity to qualify. Sorry, but this is dumb. Monumentally dumb. And if they go there I hope this will backfire. There is already an extensive qualifying tournament in every regional football association. If a country isn't already one of the 48 qualifiers why would having the 49th to 68th best countries participate make the tournament better? The combined record of every team at this year's WC ranked 50th or below is 3W - 11T - 29L. That's right. They won a grand total of 7% of their games and one of those games features both teams ranked worse than 50th.

There is no need to bring 68 teams together for an even longer summer tournament just to crown another European or South American team the champion.

If FIFA pursues this, I expect UEFA will be opposed. As will the big club teams in Europe. Why would they want their prized assets toiling away, risking injury in an expanded tournament format against minnows? Especially when these lesser teams with little chance of winning will try to employ soccer's dark arts (go watch the Paraguay - France game if you don't know what that means). This will open more players up to potential injuries. The players may also start to push back. They make very little from their participation in FIFA's circus. If their paymasters at the club level tell them not risk injuries (and their enormous salaries) in the WC they will have to listen. There are already too many fixtures on the top club teams' schedules. The owners won't want to be adding more strain on their assets. I don't blame them.

Go ahead FIFA. Go to 68 teams. And when UEFA pulls their teams you will kill the golden goose. Honestly, at this point I think if Greg Sankey were the head of UEFA, he'd call Brazil, Argentina and Morocco, convince them to join UEFA and make Euro 2028 the true World Cup. Better teams, fewer and more competitive games. Sign me up.

(no message)

(no message)

well.

Many Americans are unaware of how great the Euro tournament is. For sports entertainment, it's on par with the World Cup. Terrific drama. Highly competitive. Crazy fans.

Euros are all meat, no filler. WC is half hamburger helper. Cuts the quality.

their players tend to be based near the homelands. The best players from the rest of the world play in Europe and rarely play together.

The US will not be a power until the game is played by folks who need it to escape poverty.

That Europe's best club teams are better than national teams isn't even up for debate.

(no message)

Link: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/txvT3vpJrUc

Definitely they've had the easiest path and looked the shakiest getting here.

Don't get me started on refs favoring Argentina. I still want the Hand of God goal litigated and Argentina forced to return its 1986 WC trophy.

It is a money grab, and the players will want their fair share.

Argentina "are" the weakest...

I don't know why everyone uses British English when talking about soccer teams. They don't have collective nouns, so they say "England have the ball." Even American commentators do this.

England HAS the ball. Argentina IS the weakest.

Enjoying the tournament. Not enjoying the grammar surrender. USA! USA!

(no message)

(no message)

yes, the grammar is hideous. but, then, american broadcasters say really stupid things like, "that was a miscommunication between he and his receiver". grammar is not a u.s. strong point.

i personally think the tournament is rigged to have a france - argentina final (messi vs. mbappe). there have been some very sketchy fouls called to make sure both of those teams get an advantage they wouldn't otherwise have. imho.

you're right, rooney - going to a larger tournament field would make the tournament more than twice as boring as it already is.

(no message)

Link: https://www.englishgrammar.org/collective-nouns-british-english-singular-plural/

(no message)

"England" can function as a collective noun when referring to a group, such as a national sports team. That is not debatable.

My link explained it. You ignored it.

Thanks Professor Iverson!